UCONN fans are starting to get real nervous.....

[brewcity77]

Ask yourself this... why hasn't any other high-major conference gone to a 20-game schedule?

Except the ACC is going to 20 games in 2019.

[Benny B]

Except the ACC is going to 20 games in 2019.

Let's revisit two years from now. 

Nevertheless, I will suffix my previous statement with "yet" in its adverbial state.

[brewcity77]

Let's revisit two years from now. 

Nevertheless, I will suffix my previous statement with "yet" in its adverbial state.

I think the key to it all would be that if the Big East added UConn and went to 20, they would have to push member schools to not adjust their NCSOS at the bottom. If you add two games against UConn and take away two home games against Houston Baptist and Western Carolina (and Central Connecticut & Delaware for Seton Hall, and Longwood and Loyola MD for Creighton, etc) then you will improve RPI and benefit as a league. Attendance will likely increase because one game against UConn will result in more sold seats (excluding STHs that have paid a set fee already) than two cupcakes.

However, if Marquette instead dropped the neutral site game with Vandy and the H&H with Georgia, it wouldn't benefit the league because while you are adding commensurate games with UConn on the schedule, there's no actual RPI gain. You would really need everyone on board to continue scheduling tough non-con tournaments and continue scheduling neutral site and H&H games with high-majors.

How would the league do this? I suppose saying you can have no more than 6 buy games on your schedule. That would allow for four an exempt tournament (with the possibility that two would be buy quality, but you take what you get) and require teams to use their other three slots on H&H or neutral site games (with Gavitt Games possibly taking up one). That way, everyone is playing in what should be at least 5 HM games if they want to fill their schedule. I don't know how you'd deal with teams that didn't meet the requirement, or how you'd enforce it with schools like DePaul that might struggle to get H&H series, but that's why the powers that be in the league make more money than I do.

Adding UConn and going to 20 is perfectly viable and doesn't have to be a losing gambit, however it does need to be well-thought out ahead of time. That said, I don't think UConn would be willing to play by the rules our league would require.

[MU82]

Except the ACC is going to 20 games in 2019.

Yep, brew, you beat me to this.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/acc-adding-two-conference-games-to-basketball-schedule-for-incoming-network/

[Herman Cain]

You need to avoid commenting on the business of academia.  Also, the ACC is not taking UCONN, it is a money loser for them.

I have set tuition policies. Have you?

If you took the time to read my prior post I did not say ACC was taking U Conn, I said they would do so when they expand again.

[auburnmarquette]

Longwood is charging 7000 student fee. Ridiculous. I would always support UConn expansion - but was convinced during my post last year that just going to 11 teams is better and if we drop back to 10 again if they leave fine.

Most of the time their pages show no interest though.

[auburnmarquette]

Admit I did not realize they lost their last four games 130-16. That's tough to watch.

[Dawson Rental]

Why are we, the nation as a whole, subsidizing UConn football?  How much of those $3,000.00 a year student fees are being paid by federal grants or federal loans?  How much of the federal loans will be forgiven?

[Benny B]

Why are we, the nation as a whole, subsidizing UConn football?  How much of those $3,000.00 a year student fees are being paid by federal grants or federal loans?  How much of the federal loans will be forgiven?

Back in my day, a Pell Grant was something like $500.  Not sure what it is today, but I'd be willing to bet student fees would continue in their current form even if the Feds ended grants to undergrads.

In 2015, $800B was outstanding and $4.7B in federal student loans were cancelled (0.6%); however, the total dollar amount on the US DOE's financial report of loans forgiven was a big, fat, round $0.00.  I assume this is because federal loans aren't actually "forgiven" (i.e. cancelled by the lender) but rather, they're paid off by separate public, private and NGO programs on the borrower's behalf (loan cancellations are write-offs only for death, disability or bankruptcy).  In other words, when a federal student loan is forgiven, you actually have one government program writing a check to the DOE to pay off the balance... much in the same way that Marquette doesn't simply charge zero for scholarship athlete tuition; a receivable is still generated at the full rate, but instead of the invoice going to the student, it goes to B&G Fund and BGF writes the check.

The point is well-taken, but I think the bottom line is that these student fees would either exist regardless and/or the amount of subsidy going into these student fees is de minimis since the majority of these loans are paid back.

That being said, the projection is student loans will cost the government $17B/year on average over the next ten years.  If you want to do the math, allocating the percentage of student fees compared to the total cost of tuition, room, board, etc. to that $17B, you could come up with a sh|tty estimate, because even if student fees went away, there are still going to be costs associated with the program (administrative) regardless of amount borrowed, and as undergrads, you can't borrow the full cost of attendance from the government, so the argument there is that every $1 increase in student fees, students will have to come out-of-pocket (or seek from alternate sources) an additional $1.

[forgetful]

Back in my day, a Pell Grant was something like $500.  Not sure what it is today, but I'd be willing to bet student fees would continue in their current form even if the Feds ended grants to undergrads.

In 2015, $800B was outstanding and $4.7B in federal student loans were cancelled (0.6%); however, the total dollar amount on the US DOE's financial report of loans forgiven was a big, fat, round $0.00.  I assume this is because federal loans aren't actually "forgiven" (i.e. cancelled by the lender) but rather, they're paid off by separate public, private and NGO programs on the borrower's behalf (loan cancellations are write-offs only for death, disability or bankruptcy).  In other words, when a federal student loan is forgiven, you actually have one government program writing a check to the DOE to pay off the balance... much in the same way that Marquette doesn't simply charge zero for scholarship athlete tuition; a receivable is still generated at the full rate, but instead of the invoice going to the student, it goes to B&G Fund and BGF writes the check.

The point is well-taken, but I think the bottom line is that these student fees would either exist regardless and/or the amount of subsidy going into these student fees is de minimis since the majority of these loans are paid back.

That being said, the projection is student loans will cost the government $17B/year on average over the next ten years.  If you want to do the math, allocating the percentage of student fees compared to the total cost of tuition, room, board, etc. to that $17B, you could come up with a sh|tty estimate, because even if student fees went away, there are still going to be costs associated with the program (administrative) regardless of amount borrowed, and as undergrads, you can't borrow the full cost of attendance from the government, so the argument there is that every $1 increase in student fees, students will have to come out-of-pocket (or seek from alternate sources) an additional $1.

One clarification.  Student loans are never cancelled due to bankruptcy.  They persist through bankruptcy.  You can only get out of them by dying or disability (and the latter is damn near impossible).  For disability, you can be on disability insurance, be designated as permanently disabled by the government and still ineligible for loan forgiveness for student loans.  The burden of proof for student loans is that your disability leaves you unable to EVER work.  If there is any chance of improvement in your entire life that would allow you to work in some form, you are ineligible for loan forgiveness.  There are examples of people who has a stroke and can't speak, but since there is a remote chance they will improve, the loans forgiveness is denied.  Insanity.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

And UConn manages to somehow beat Syracuse last night.

[GoldenWarrior11]

And UConn manages to somehow beat Syracuse last night.

One of the ugliest basketball games I have seen in quite some time.  The game just lacked the usual intrigue and excitement that these two programs brought to the table in the old Big East.  Boeheim clearly didn't care, and Ollie was his usual cry-baby self throughout the game.

[brewcity77]

...And yet Jon Rothstein praised it as evidence that college basketball never fails to deliver.

[bradley center bat]

Crowd was alive. Great finish!