Legislature Panel Recommends Making It Tougher To Admit Out-of-State Athletes

I figure it’s as good a time as any to start turning the page away from basketball and to other topics, namely the coming football spring practices and spring game, as well as other various and sundry items of note and interest.

The State Legislature is in town, so hold on to your wallets, and duck if you are a university.

University of North Carolina schools could have a tougher time attracting out-of-state athletes under a pair of changes proposed in the state Legislature.

A House education subcommittee approved legislation Thursday narrowing a 2005 provision counting out-of-state athletes as in-state students. The law costs taxpayers about $7 million a year. The law helps university booster clubs that provide athletic scholarships, because those athletes are charged in-state tuition even if they’re not North Carolina residents. The changes would keep the tuition savings but count those out-of-state students in a cap that limits out-of-staters to 18 percent of each freshman class.

First of all, it is a red herring to say that out-of-state athletes “taxpayers about $7 million a year” and is shoddy, un-sourced journalism at its worst. Where does this number come from? A hat?  Or made up by a sanctimonious state senator?  WRAL doesn’t bother to tell us where they came up with that number, so make up your mind for yourself.

The important issue is to take a quick look at the income derived from these athletes — and we’ll assume that the bulk of them come from the two revenue sports.  We’ll start by referring you to a good summary and glimpse into the financials of NC State’s Athletics.

SFN: On The Cheap – NCSU’s Athletics Versus The Rest of the ACC

Forbes.com

NC State’s basketball program, ranked 13th, is worth $13.6 million. With expenses of only $3.1 million, the lowest of any team on our list, the NC State Wolfpack earned a profit of $7.9 million last season.

That’s with a dozen scholarship athletes.  That means that each player earned — after expenses, mind you — $658,333.33 for the benefit of NC State University.  “Expenses” surely covers tuition, books, as well as room and board for each of the kids.  Quibble with the numbers however you like, but what remains a solid fact is that each one of those undergraduates bring NC State a lot of net income for their play on the court.  I seriously doubt there are any undergrads anywhere in the entire university that bring in that much money.  And the legislature wants to charge the Wolfpack Club more money for their education?

You have to be kidding me.

Basketball Recruiting Football Recruiting General NCS Basketball NCS Football

29 Responses to Legislature Panel Recommends Making It Tougher To Admit Out-of-State Athletes

  1. BladenWolf 03/13/2009 at 6:11 AM #

    Alpha Wolf-
    Could the “cheapness” of Lee’s Athletics Programs be the reason why he hasn’t been fired?
    From the Meg-Donors point of view, could the $7.9M “profit” be a reason to keep Uncle Jed on for so long in spite of his ineptness?

  2. Pack Leader 03/17/2009 at 7:12 AM #

    This is nothing new…. We are cheap and profitable.

    Didnt you hear the good news???

    Lee Fowler is going to start giving back the State Fan Stimulus Package. Instead of actually using th profit to improve the state of athletics, Good ol’ lee has decided to give back all the extra money made to struggling wolfpack fans.
    It is written off as a long term investment thought, because at this rate soon pack fans will start becoming suicidal and then they cant make any money……

  3. PackMan97 03/17/2009 at 7:14 AM #

    $8,792 Out-of-State Tuition and Fees
    -$2,643 In-State Tuition and Fees
    ————————————–
    $6,149 Government supplement for each out of state athlete

    $7,000,000 / $6,149 = 1,138 out of state athletes

    That number sounds about right if it’s across the entire UNC system.

  4. RickJ 03/17/2009 at 7:32 AM #

    “The changes would keep the tuition savings but count those out-of-state students in a cap that limits out-of-staters to 18 percent of each freshman class.”

    I am pretty sure that UNC-Chapel Hill is the only school that bumps up to this 18 percent figure. NC State was at 11 or 12 percent the last time I saw any figures.

  5. WTNY 03/17/2009 at 7:47 AM #

    This is pretty simple. If a student is from out of state, they get counted as out-of-state.

  6. choppack1 03/17/2009 at 8:22 AM #

    I agree w/ the state legislature.

    The following sports should no longer be allowed to have out of state athletes on scholarship:
    Soccer (men’s and women’s)
    Lacrosse
    Field hockey
    Softball
    gymnastics
    cross country (sorry Lee)
    Track and field
    Swimming
    women’s basketball

    However, since football and basketball actually generate revenue for some schools, they shouldn’t be touched.

    Something like this really isn’t too hard to figure out. Not all sports are created equal – and they certainly aren’t attended equally. At a school like NC State – where you have over 30K season ticket holders and you have over 50K attending most home games, the school is coming out ahead on its investment w/ the football player. For basketball – it definitely comes out ahead.

    However, the non-revenue sports are a different story all together – and you think this is a problem – that’s where it should be attacked.

  7. primacyone 03/17/2009 at 8:28 AM #

    It want hurt any of the atletic programs. If a school is bumping into the 18% number, then it will eliminate a non-athlete from out of state from entering.

    The $7 Million is not an actualy expense by the taxpayer, but a lack or additional revenue received due to out of state athletes being considered in-state and not the booster clubs not have to pay out-of-state tuition. It’s like a tax loop hole.

    Expenses of the Basketball program do not include Tuition, Room and Board, etc. Those are paid by the booster club and counted as revenue by the unversity business office.

  8. blackdom 03/17/2009 at 8:32 AM #

    Common sense

  9. Texpack 03/17/2009 at 8:35 AM #

    Just wanted to post the obligatory Texans story since it’s about Frank Bush

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/sports/6314811.html

  10. whitefang 03/17/2009 at 8:43 AM #

    choppack I agree, but Title IX doesn’t.

  11. choppack1 03/17/2009 at 9:00 AM #

    whitefang – quite the pickle, huh? I’ve always thought Title 9 was stupid anyway, not because it’s necessarily a bad thing to have women get scholarship money, but because it was unfair in two ways:
    1) More men play sports than women, so now a woman had a statistically better chance at getting an athletic scholarship.
    2) From a financial pov, it shut men’s sports down.

    *I thought a much better method would be to exclude the #s for football – and go from there, but that would be too common-sensical.

  12. Alpha Wolf 03/17/2009 at 9:16 AM #

    “More men play sports than women, so now a woman had a statistically better chance at getting an athletic scholarship.”

    True dat, gentlemen.

    I know some folks who have spent a lot of time teaching their daughters the joys of golf because full rides for them are plentiful if they can get to a 5-handicap or lower.

  13. reanalyst 03/17/2009 at 9:25 AM #

    Alpha Wolf and choppack1,
    When you say the revenue sports (and athletes) generate money for the school, you need to be clear and specify that the money does not go to the academic side of the university, but to the athletic department. All revenue from basketball and football, the only profitable sports, goes into the athletic department budget. Professor’s salaries, facilities, utilities costs, in other words all the costs of running a university, receive not a penny from the revenue generated by the sports teams. It all goes back into the athletic department to support all the non-revenue sports.

    If out-of-state players cost the Wolfpack Club in-state tuition, the cost to the state to educate each athlete is higher. An education at our state universities is subsidized, costing the student far less than the true cost. If the bill becomes law it will benefit the universities’ general funds, but will adversely affect the booster club’s budgets.

    I doubt the 18% cap on out-of-state students would limit recruiting because the universities know what number of out-of-state athletes they already have, and could work within that number. However, it would be good to have legislation exempting scholarship-athletes from counting against the 18% cap.

  14. Classof89 03/17/2009 at 10:09 AM #

    I haven’t seen the particular provision that cleared the committee, but I know at one point they were proposing eliminating the provision entirely, which would mean out of state students on MERIT or ACADEMIC scholarships (like the Park) would also return to being charged out of state tuition when they were out of state. Will be hard on those non-athletic scholarship endowments as well as the WPC. I heard they had to cut the number of students offered Caldwell Fellowships this year due to declines in the endowment. This provision, if it applies to nonathletic scholarships as well, would give those programs a double whammy…

  15. Clarksa 03/17/2009 at 10:13 AM #

    “The changes would keep the tuition savings but count those out-of-state students in a cap that limits out-of-staters to 18 percent of each freshman class.”

    I am pretty sure that UNC-Chapel Hill is the only school that bumps up to this 18 percent figure. NC State was at 11 or 12 percent the last time I saw any figures.
    ————————

    UNC-Ch is the school who pushed for this just a couple of years ago so they could admit more out of state students…

  16. wolf pack 03/17/2009 at 10:20 AM #

    Alpha Wolf-
    I have to say I love the use of the phrase “red herring”.
    great phrase

  17. beowolf 03/17/2009 at 10:45 AM #

    Alpha, you’re one of my favorite posters, but I really think this is way off base:

    The State Legislature is in town, so hold on to your wallets, and duck if you are a university.

    Good heavens, man, the state legislature has been increasing the budget by leaps and bounds over the past few years of surplus growth, not put anything into the rainy day fund, and basically so expanded the state budget that any slowdown was going to necessitate new taxes and possibly even some minor cuts, such as to a scholarship gimmick for out-of-state athletes (mostly for UNC-Chapel Hill’s, really, considering the awfulness of NC State athletics especially in the nonrevenue sports).

    Public universities habitually cry every single year but they are some of the most favored recipients of state dollars year in and out.

  18. PackMan97 03/17/2009 at 10:54 AM #

    primacyone:

    The $7 Million is not an actualy expense by the taxpayer, but a lack or additional revenue received due to out of state athletes being considered in-state and not the booster clubs not have to pay out-of-state tuition. It’s like a tax loop hole.

    Actually, it is an expense. The state of NC subsidizes tuition for in-state students. The out-of-state tuition is the “full cost” of tuition to attend a state university. The in-state tuition is minus the government subsidy. NC State, UNC or any other university receives the full tuition for in-state students, they just get $2,643 from the student and $6,149 from the state. Out-of-state students pay the full amount.

    This is one reason why a lot of states (GA is a great example) run into problems with their college scholarship lotteries. GA, like NC, heavily subsidizes in-state tuition. When you enroll another 1,000 students and pay for their tuition, it’s only a paltry $2.6m but then the government has to find another $6m to subsidize that tuition! Yikes! So, the lottery only pays a small portion of the cost while the rest of the tax payers get stuck with the bill.

    Ah, the joys of hidden costs.

  19. Wolfpack_1995 03/17/2009 at 11:25 AM #

    “BladenWolf
    March 13th, 2009 at 6:11 am
    Alpha Wolf-
    Could the “cheapness” of Lee’s Athletics Programs be the reason why he hasn’t been fired?
    From the Meg-Donors point of view, could the $7.9M “profit” be a reason to keep Uncle Jed on for so long in spite of his ineptness?”

    This seems to be the case. For all that Lee is bad at in running the AD position he makes up for it in $$$. He keeps us in the black where Les struggled. The deals that NC State has with the RBC for basketball and LTRs for football keep NC State’s cash cow growing.

    Who cares about us winning titles when Lee can bring in the money for the Chancellor, BOT, and others?

  20. GAWolf 03/17/2009 at 12:33 PM #

    Known as a “hands-on” director, the 56-year-old Fowler is committed to success in all sports. Fowler’s management approach is to provide the tools, resources and support that the coaches need to succeed, then expect quality programs and positive results.
    “I want all of our teams to aspire to the Top 25; to compete for the top tier of the ACC and for championships. Chancellor Oblinger often says that NC State aspires to excellence across the board—and athletics is included in that vision,” says Fowler.

    His approach and all-out effort the past eight years seems to be working as the Wolfpack has reached new levels with 16 sports qualifying for post-season play in 2000-01, 13 sports in 2004-05, a record 17 in 2005-06, 15 in 2006-07 and 14 in 2007-08.

  21. BoKnowsNCS71 03/17/2009 at 1:21 PM #

    Getting back on subject, this cost saving initiative by the legislature would seem to promote mediocrity in NC schools athletic programs by placing a heavier financial burden on the school’s boosters. Schools who could recruit the better in-state players would get the advantage over those that cannot. Schools who cannot compete in in-state recruiting or who can find better recruits out of state get punished and have to pony up more dollars.

    Let’s exaggerate this a bit. Consider the worst case (and impossible) scenario which would be that only NC schools could recruit NC residents. Bigger schools take the best, other schools stuck with less competitive athletes, and smaller schools hardly competitive at all. overall the State would be barely competitive with any other state with a larger saturation of players and smaller competition from schools — e.g Florida, Texas, etc.

    While the above is completely absurd, to some extent the fact that a State supported school will be penalized with higher costs for trying to get the best athletes (who happen to be from out of state).

    This is akin to a sin tax like that on alcohol on cigarettes — but as a tax on alumni who want and contribute money to see more competitive teams. It also show the short sightedness of our legislatures who seek short term savings when in the end the demise of competitive teams in NC means less tax revenue received as the attendance at games, hotel rentals, tv revenue, meals, etc.. diminish and that continues a downward spiral bringing in less tax money for them to waste on their precious pork projects.

    The Legislature needs to get out of Sports. That includes pressure to play certain teams in state vs. out of state competition.

  22. JVM4PACK 03/17/2009 at 2:27 PM #

    I want to take a stand about the current condition of our athletic department/teams. I want to copy an email I sent to a large group of people on campus today. I am willing to do whatever it takes to fight for our programs/teams…even if some may say I’m chasing the wolf’s tail.

  23. JVM4PACK 03/17/2009 at 2:28 PM #

    To Whom It May Concern,

    I support, love, live and breathe North Carolina State University both academically and athletically. I am sending this to a broad collection of people in hopes that somehow I start an ABSOLUTE FIRESTORM. Do not get me wrong, I am not going to blame any one particluar party that is associated with NC State Athletics but I hope to BROADEN some sentiments and perspectives. This will be a lengthy email, so please continue reading in full if you truly care about the people that PAY and SUPPORT NCSU. Let’s just for simplicity’s sake deal with what I call the big 4 sports…Men’s Basketball, Football, Baseball, Women’s Basketball. The overall inconsistency that has basically made our athletic program SUBPAR in the past approximate 20 years is astounding. If you compare the word Championships (i.e regular season titles, ACC tournament titles, national titles) State is so much better off than most large universities throughout our STORIED history. Now on the other hand, how is it that schools like for example UNC, DUKE, FLORIDA, USC rack up particular championships and some of those schools it is a VARIETY of sports in the past 2 decades…where is State, basically nowhere to be mentioned. Overall, NC State’s performance in most of the major sports has been lacking in some form or another. I listen to various analysts, ALUMNI, CONTRIBUTORS, and words like basement dwellers, underachievers, laughing stocks of the BCS schools are being thrown around more and more in conversations as time passes. I am hearing more contributors talking about relinquishing their annual donations to the atheletic program. My wife and I just recently decided to get LTR seats for football. Based upon our performance in the past 20 years I am truly second guessing my decision. I would like to know WHO is held RESPONSIBLE and what will be done for the depleted state of our programs and how does this ship get turned around. I realize it is not an overnight venture, but for heaven’s sake someone please call out all the major sports championships we’ve won in the past 20 years. Take for example this level of consistency…Gonzaga University has made the NCAAT for 11 straight seasons, when has State made that type of run?? If Carolina and Duke can be ranked in the nation’s top schools academically and athletically, WHY NOT NCSU? NC State has so much to offer with academic programs, research, partnerships, and ATHLETICS…but out of those 4 the last one is not living up to what should be NC STATE’S HIGH STANDARDS. As you can see, I am writing out of sheer frustation, aggravation, anger, resentment and DESIRE FOR SOMETHING BETTER. Please do not get me wrong, I do not expect perfection each and every season from our teams. When your overall major sports groups do not show consistency and do not provide championships then how can we be satisfied. NC State ranks extremely high in the country in monies donated for athletics…but based upon top tier end of season rankings, regular season titles, ACC tournament championships, national titles, tournament appearances…we look like we should be more in last place financially. If anyone does decide to respond to this letter I’ll be pleasantly surprised. I am hoping that I don’t get a politically correct response or a response that is spoken through the proverbial “rose colored glasses” about our athletic program…because if I start comparing consistency and total championships with just UNC and DUKE in the past 20 years, NC State does not deserve to be in the comparison because WE CAN’T. I want to know honestly, what is going to be done to make us the KINGS OF TOBACCO ROAD, the team that is RESPECTED and even FEARED because of our HEART, DESIRE, DETERMINATION, and PASSION to be the BEST.

    Concerned and Wanting More, Jeremy

  24. beowolf 03/17/2009 at 3:52 PM #

    Y’all realize it was only a very few years ago that this tuition exemption was even instituted. It’s not like it has Always Been This Way.

  25. Classof89 03/17/2009 at 6:19 PM #

    I’ve just been told that the budget proposed by the Governor today does not include cutting the tuition exemption (the Gov. and Sen. Tony Rand, mega-UNC booster and widely acknowledged as the power behind the tuition exemption, are good buds). This isn’t the end of the story though–the gov’s budget is a bit short on specifics, as you will probably read in the morning papers (if there are papers left in the state with reporters capable of analysis), and this is the kind of thing the Speaker of the House will be gunning for.

Leave a Reply