2018 D1 Women's Soccer Talk!!

Glen said:
Poor response. You can do better. Focus on the financial aspect - I'm talking about subsidizing foreign students, I'm not talking about admissions. UCLA excludes also sorts of kids (even international applicants) if they don't have the money. See Dos Equis's post above. Is UCLA fascist for doing so? Those kids in your kid's stem class are paying a ton. I have no problem with that.

Not to put words in your mouth, but it appears that you think it is OK to admit and subsidize an international applicant over a state resident because the international applicant is good at a sport. On the other hand, I think we should subsidize deserving California residents that are stellar students. UCLA seems to generally agree (which I did not know until Dos Equis's post), except apparently there is an exception at UCLA for athletes.
Click to expand...

Poor question based on a terrible premise. Californians aren’t subsidizing anything . You should do more research before waste time asking a question that is based upon flawed facts AND beliefs. What metrics are you using to determine who is deserving? I will bet you anything that you would like that the average GPA among foreign students AND athletes is higher than that if the in state students.
 
MakeAPlay said:
Taxpayers aren’t subsidizing anything. Why is California subsidizing the rest of the US? Our economy is larger than France’s and as a state we pay out more to the federal government than we receive. We could hold the rest of America hostage due to us being by far the largest agricultural state. Although I would want us to annex Nevada and Oregon out of convenience.

Let’s lighten up on the xenophobia....
Click to expand...

I would love to annex the state too. I don't want to be subsidizing Oklahoma and Alabama either. I guess you could say I have Oklaphobia or Alaphobia as well.

At any rate, your comments don't address why we (or other states) subsidize foreigners' education for the purpose of sports.
 
Glen said:
I would love to annex the state too. I don't want to be subsidizing Oklahoma and Alabama either. I guess you could say I have Oklaphobia or Alaphobia as well.

At any rate, your comments don't address why we (or other states) subsidize foreigners' education for the purpose of sports.
Click to expand...

Think of sports in P5 conferences as a job. Just like the doctors at UCSF Medical, you want the best and you have to pay.

You are also working on a flawed premise because the UCLA athletic department pays all of its own bills. They show a net zero on their taxes, which, of course, is a cool accounting trick.
 
@Glen Would you have a problem with the state’s money going to s foreign doctor or engineer or professor or soccer coach or basketball coach or you get the point?
 
Wednesday, August 29, 2018
Like all other UC campuses, UCLA has a robust financial aid program to ensure that students from all economic backgrounds have access to the university.

Approximately 30 percent of all revenue generated from fees and tuition is set aside for financial aid. In addition, the university's Blue and Gold Plan ensures that students with financial need from families with incomes below $80,000 a year pay no tuition at all.

At UCLA, 47 percent of California-resident undergraduates (42 percent of all undergrads) receive enough grant aid to cover all of their system-wide fees and tuition. In fall 2010–11, 41 percent of UCLA undergraduates were low-income Pell Grant recipients. In fact, UCLA enrolls more low-income Pell Grant recipients than all Ivy League schools combined.

Unlike need-based scholarships, athletic scholarships are awarded to students strictly on the basis of their athletic and academic ability — not their financial need. Athletic scholarships, such as those awarded to football or basketball players, do not rely on state funds. Instead, these scholarships are entirely funded through UCLA Athletics ticket sales, corporate partnerships, media contracts and private donations from supporters.

Each year, UCLA awards the equivalent of approximately 285 full athletic scholarships to outstanding student athletes. The scholarships are used by the UCLA Department of Intercollegiate Athletics to pay students' tuition and fees, as well as room and board. In this respect, UCLA is no different from the overwhelming majority of Division I institutions.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ucla-statement-on-athletic-scholarships-234528

Also see:
https://uclabruins.com/news/2016/10...s-philanthropic-giving-within-60-million.aspx
 
Last edited:
MakeAPlay said:
Think of sports in P5 conferences as a job. Just like the doctors at UCSF Medical, you want the best and you have to pay.

You are also working on a flawed premise because the UCLA athletic department pays all of its own bills. They show a net zero on their taxes, which, of course, is a cool accounting trick.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to pick on UCLA. I'm talking generally about pubic schools (and private schools) that are subsidized by tax dollars. UCLA is better than almost all of them.

As for UCLA athletics paying all its bills, I guess. I would love to see the accounting. Most schools include generated revenue and non-generated revenue to claim that their athletic departments are stable. Non-generated revenue are student fees, which is a BS way of "balancing" the budget.

Cal, on the other hand? http://www.dailycal.org/2018/01/17/central-campus-take-chunk-cal-athletics-debt/
 
MakeAPlay said:
@Glen Would you have a problem with the state’s money going to s foreign doctor or engineer or professor or soccer coach or basketball coach or you get the point?
Click to expand...

Probably, but that's hard to say. We are talking about admitting kids to school. We can only guess what they will become or where they will end up.

In general, I want tuition to be lower for all California residents. It's too high.
 
Glen said:
Probably, but that's hard to say. We are talking about admitting kids to school. We can only guess what they will become or where they will end up.

In general, I want tuition to be lower for all California residents. It's too high.
Click to expand...


Fair enough about tuition. UCLA however has very generous financial aid for any that needs it and some that are fortunate enough to not need it but get it anyway because they have earned it. Also we do already have foreign citizens who are doctors and engineers that work for public institutions in California. Damn good ones at that!
 
Glen said:
I'm not trying to pick on UCLA. I'm talking generally about pubic schools (and private schools) that are subsidized by tax dollars. UCLA is better than almost all of them.

As for UCLA athletics paying all its bills, I guess. I would love to see the accounting. Most schools include generated revenue and non-generated revenue to claim that their athletic departments are stable. Non-generated revenue are student fees, which is a BS way of "balancing" the budget.

Cal, on the other hand? http://www.dailycal.org/2018/01/17/central-campus-take-chunk-cal-athletics-debt/
Click to expand...

You called out UCLA specifically by mentioning it’s foreign athletes (one of which I take to dinner with us whenever she’s free). No biggie everything is expensive in California. We made the unfortunate mistake of having the best damn state in the union.
 
LASTMAN14 said:
I’ve had this conversation with friends. And it’s a valid and serious conversation. We could create a whole thread on this matter and many others that impact California public colleges/universities.
Click to expand...

Foreign players don’t take scholarships away from California players. That is like say foreign labor steals jobs from Californians. Without foreign labor we would be screwed and if Californians wanted the jobs or were good enough for them then they would have them. Look only 4 players that saw time for the women’s team weren’t from California and yes they were foreign citizens. If there were California players of that birth year with that particular skill set that aren’t already on the team then they probably went to Stanford or are pros on the boys. And in Fleming case there isn’t s female player of any age in North America that can do what she does.
 
I think it is funny when you try to pretend you are smart. Then, when you lose an argument you start with the isms and name calling. You are a tool.
 
MakeAPlay said:
Foreign players don’t take scholarships away from California players. That is like say foreign labor steals jobs from Californians. Without foreign labor we would be screwed and if Californians wanted the jobs or were good enough for them then they would have them. Look only 4 players that saw time for the women’s team weren’t from California and yes they were foreign citizens. If there were California players of that birth year with that particular skill set that aren’t already on the team then they probably went to Stanford or are pros on the boys. And in Fleming case there isn’t s female player of any age in North America that can do what she does.
Click to expand...
Agree foreign players or students is such a small number whose impact is minimal. My discussions primarily were on the inaccessibility or difficulty for Cali kids to attend instate schools. Due to out of state students, cost, and primarily, the competitiveness of trying to attend a UC. College is not like it was when we went to school. Its by far more rigorous and brutal to get in.
 
Last edited:
Thursday games predicted Winners in RED

BYU (1-1-1) vs. Stanford (2-0-0)
Connecticut (1-3-0) vs. Rutgers (3-0-1)
Duke (2-1-1) vs. Marquette (0-2-1)
George Washington (4-0-0) vs. (25) Georgetown (2-0-2)
James Madison (1-3-0) vs. Penn St. (2-1-0)
Notre Dame (3-1-0) vs. Cincinnati (3-1-0)
Ohio St. (1-2-0) vs. Morehead St. (1-3-0) Providence (3-0-0) vs. North Carolina (3-0-1)
Santa Clara (3-0-0) vs. Kansas State (3-0-0)
Tennessee (3-0-1) vs. Wright St. (0-3-1)
Texas (2-0-1) vs. Long Beach St. (3-1-0)
West Virginia (0-1-3) vs. Xavier (1-3-0)
William & Mary (1-3-0) vs. South Carolina (3-1-0)
 
Friday games Winners in RED

Cal St. Fullerton vs. Auburn
Florida vs. UCLA
Florida St. vs. U$C
Penn vs. North Carolina St.
Pepperdine vs. Indiana
Princeton vs. St. Joseph's
Texas A&M vs. Oklahoma
 
I like those Thursday picks

Norte Dame (watched them once) looks okay so far, not what they will be later in season, but they should prevail.

North Carolina should handle Providence but still waiting for the Tarheels to really kick it into high gear. They have some special players for sure.

Stanford at BYU... should be a packed house, Stanford either smokes em 4-0 or BYU feeds off that crowd and wins by getting an early goal lead and bunkering for all their worth.

Will be curious if Long Beach State can get that speed up top in behind on Texas.

James Madison has a great new coach and they will be tested and find out what they have v Penn State.

Should be some great games today and thru the weekend.

Good luck to the Bruins in Florida.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top