BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

where to watch

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Football

Topic: RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Topic: RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Author

Message

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/18/2014 1:06:46 PM

DFC, I've wondered the same thing at various times. I've even mentioned this to accountant types. They always tell me that it's better to do it the way we are doing it, but I never quite understood the explanations. Maybe Monroe can explain it in a way that makes sense to the non-accountants on this board. IMHO Monroe knows a lot more about accounting than about zone blocking schemes! :-)

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Bobcatbob
General User

Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Coolville, OH
Post Count: 1,341

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/18/2014 1:32:15 PM

Yes, us accountant types will tell you that where costs exist (they do), they have to be identified, assigned, allocated, transferred - take your pick. The tuition is certainly not "free". It costs somebody something and that somebody has to be reimbursed. I could imagine in the case of athletic scholarships that the AD gets a "bill" and the "college" or "colleges" get the "income".

No money is changing hands, of course, but the exercise in accounting makes it appear so.

Paul Graham
General User

Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/18/2014 3:13:47 PM

D.A. wrote:

And one more thing that particularly irks me about Vedder's article: the Academic Center. Do you think he would be pissed if an alumnus wanted to donate funds for a facility for the exclusive use of Economics students? HELL NO!

DA, I know you donated to this cause but here's the issue I have with it.

The case for the academic center is predicated upon the current problem that athletes need a place to study close to the athletic fields. The reason they can't make the trek to Alden or somewhere else is that there are constraints on their time. Lifting till 1pm, film session at 3pm and they'd like somewhere to study for a few hours in between.

Fine. Sounds like a real problem.

The Arms Race folks would like to solve that problem with a multi-million dollar building. Oh, and they'd like to kill two birds by secretly enhancing the football stadium in the process. They can use this nice new space on Fall Saturdays to raise more money for the Arms Race.

The solution to this problem (outlined above) is a quintessential example of everything that is WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG with higher education today.

What is the right solution? Well, seeing as the primary goal of a university is to educate...it would seem that the athletic coaches are over-stepping their bounds and are asking too much from their athletes. If they only get a couple of hours a day to study, then that is ***antithetical*** to the very mission of our university. And it cheapens the value of their education...their only means of compensation for all their hard work.

Basically, less football...more study time.

This solution is what any sane person would conclude upon hearing about this problem.

Last Edited: 12/18/2014 3:19:43 PM by Paul Graham

rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,503

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/18/2014 3:48:44 PM

Paul Graham wrote:

D.A. wrote:

Thing is,and I pointed this out in a letter I sent to the The Post in response to Vedder's Op-Ed piece,O.U. already has an Academic Center for Athletes.

This will just be a larger,more elaborate facility.

I also have no problem with its dual use during football games.
In fact I thought the dual use was creative thinking.

An Academic Center has a big benefit in that it does provide the ability to supervise athletes and make sure they are spending time where they should be studying or being tutored.

In the interest of full disclosure,I was a D1 athlete at O.U.,before they had one and I also donated to it.

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/18/2014 4:39:50 PM

Paul Graham wrote:

...
Basically, less football...more study time.

This solution is what any sane person would conclude upon hearing about this problem.

Paul, your posts on this thread seem inconsistent with your posts on other threads where you have been critical of results. If you reduce practice time, and increase study time, the results on the field will get worse, obviously. That leads to the question of priorities.

Do you think there should be football at all? If yes, what should be the most important goals? Student academics? Winning MAC Championships? Some sort of comprise, with decent results, but without sacrificing academic integrity?

We could also ask an admission-related question. I know you don't favor bringing in people with criminal records, but what about people with marginal academics? Should Ohio hold athletic admissions to the same requirements that apply to all other schools? Should they take anyone that qualifies by meeting NCAA required minimums? Should they go lower than that, as Marshall does, and take non-qualifiers, and let them try earn a spot on the field by doing well in the classroom?

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

Paul Graham
General User

Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 1:02:33 AM

Since when do I have to maintain consistency across threads?! :)

Seriously though, all fair questions.

(1) Should we have football at all? I don't know. Probably not. When I listen to Gladwell on the subject his arguments are pretty compelling.

(1a) A more realistic answer is that we should have football but compete in a way that doesn't lose millions of dollars per year. If that means dropping to FCS or below then so be it.

(2) We should not accept any student (athlete or otherwise) that we don't think will succeed at Ohio. To do anything else (for purposes of profiteering through athletics or just a cash grab) is exploitative.

I should add that I'm really conflicted about all this. On one hand, I've watched Ohio football forever and I love it. And I love posting on BA too. :) But on the other hand, I've also been in academia for the last several years and that side of me finds the whole thing a little gross. Steve Hays on one shoulder, Russ Eisenstein on the other.

Bcat2
General User

Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 8:58:17 AM

Paul Graham wrote:

"I've also been in academia for the last several years..."

A confused, conflicted academic. Paul, I will have to cut you some slack.

"Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men." JFK

The Optimist
General User

Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,552

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 9:48:19 AM

Paul Graham wrote:

Steve Hays on one shoulder, Russ Eisenstein on the other.

#TeamRuss

I've seen crazier things happen.

MonroeClassmate
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2010
Post Count: 2,000

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 11:34:14 AM

Caveat Emptor

Certainly the market already has options for students ranging from community college to 4 year programs with 4 year programs being divided into with and without athletic programs.

Perhaps a disclosure on the application such as: If you come to OHIO you will pay each semester, an escalating student fee that pays for scholarships of student athletes. If you do not like this fact than you are free to choose to go elsewhere and best wishes in your future endeavors.

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 12:12:36 PM

Paul Graham wrote:

D.A. wrote:

No offense taken brother, we are all entitled to our opinions. You see the academic center as donors spending dollars to keep up with the arms race, and I saw it as an opportunity to provide an upgrade to what are very meager facilities presently in place, and a way to both recognize student athletes commitment to the academic component of that term, and for the donors to make an important statement to the academics that academics are a key component to the student athlete's time in Athens. Hence, my frustration with Vedder that he is not supportive of an amenity that supports the academic mission of the university, regardless of who the target audience is for its use. We can agree to disagree, but my investment has in no way, shape or form to do with wanting to "keep up with the Joneses."

So to your ongoing concern about the escalating cost of education and who is being asked to pay for what, I hear you on that also. My first quarter's tuition in 1985 was $515. And that very affordable rate was enabled by the good millions of taxpayers in Ohio being taxed at a much higher rate to keep state college tuition more affordable than it is today. I graduated from college with more money in my passbook than I had when I started school because I worked while being in school, and also participating as a student athlete.

Today, tax rates are lower, state support is also lower to colleges, and the burden has been shifted more to the families/students who are using the amenity (the college), and away from the many millions that are not using that amenity. Is that unfair? Did I unfairly benefit from millions of taxpayers when I was attending college? Great fodder for debate. Is asking a taxpayer to significantly support an institution from which they derive no direct benefit significantly different than asking students to pay a student fee that will support things like ICA/the 110/arts programming in which many of them choose not to partake? Great question for which I don't have the answer for anyone other than myself.

As it relates to priorities being misplaced by modern society due to their love of sports, I'm not in the business of telling people how they should spend their free time. What I will say is that one of if not the most renowned academic programs at OHIO (Sports Admin) has been able to thrive in part thanks to America's insatiable appetite for sports, and our ICA program has benefited significantly thanks to the vision of James Mason and Walter O'Malley in the '60's.

I would like to see radical change in the model of sports for men and women in their early careers, and I have stated it on BA on several occasions. I completely agree with Cardale Jones that he shouldn't have to "play school". I firmly believe that there is an accepted and enabled form of restraint of trade practiced between universities and professional leagues that is preventing career athletes in major revenue generating sports from being compensated for their trades. I feel that there should be major junior amateur leagues apart from institutions of learning and minor professional leagues, similar to the model for hockey. HOWEVER, the model that is in place has been that way for 120 years, and I don't plan on playing Don Quixote to change the system.

So in the interim, my plan is to enjoy OHIO's product because it brings me joy, not worry about the things that I can't control, and support those programs both academic and athletic to the best of my ability, because that brings me joy also.

Last Edited: 12/19/2014 12:16:24 PM by D.A.

The Few, The Proud, The Bobcats!

And for the record, I hate tOSU, and Ricordati and Torgerson are DB's.

"This isn't just another walkover from the MAC." Kirk Herbstreit, another DB, on College Football Gameday

BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,454

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 2:23:21 PM

Does anyone know with the new tution guarantee, will this also lock in the fee for 12 semesters? If so, look for the fee for next year to be a decently steep increase.

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 4:02:00 PM

BillyTheCat wrote:

Does anyone know with the new tution guarantee, will this also lock in the fee for 12 semesters? If so, look for the fee for next year to be a decently steep increase.

It does: http://www.ohio.edu/guarantee/faq.cfm

"There are no hidden fees! The OHIO Guarantee is a comprehensive program consisting of the following commonly assessed fees (PDF) for students in The OHIO Guarantee:

Instructional Fee
General Fee
Non-Resident Surcharge Fee
Student Information System/Network Fee
Technology Fee
Bobcat Student Orientation (BSO) Fee
Graduation Application Fee
Individual Course Fee"

Are you suggesting the University would increase the General Fee disproportionately to the other fees that are guaranteed, specifically for the exclusive benefit of ICA?

Last Edited: 12/19/2014 4:04:10 PM by D.A.

Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,043

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 7:36:29 PM

Just on a side note, since I lack the erudition to contribute to this discussion in any meaningful way:

MIT competes in NCAA Div. III, so how can they give athletic scholarships? BTW, I think MIT is currently ranked in the top 25 in men's basketball.

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 10:40:03 PM

Jeff McKinney wrote:

Like the Ivies, MIT recruits students as athletes and provide them scholarships and aid under purely an academic funds bucket. Like the Ivies, most students attend MIT with little or no debt or out of pocket incurred. Hence my verbiage academic AND athletic, as both Harvard and MIT do specifically recruit and admit students to play sports, and can occasionally admit recruits under relaxed admission standards versus their standard admission policies. Perhaps better jargon would have been for me to say "athletes are provided financial aid that achieves the same net result as a scholarship at OHIO". Providing relief from debt from a purely academic aid model allows skirting the scholarship issue and really gives well endowed universities a huge recruiting advantage, as you would imagine. The Ivies jointly chose to go to a aid model from a scholarship model a couple of decades ago, however scholarships that are legacies established prior to the present model still exist. MIT has scholarships and clearly promotes those on their website, but to your point a football player would receive "aid" as their debt abeyance, not athletic scholarships.

We have a former Cutler Scholar in our alumni chapter leadership who works in development at Brown, and we have had several long and detailed discussions of aid v scholarship based debt relief, and it is an interesting dichotomy. In his words "aid based debt relief versus scholarships permits the Ivies to maintain a socialistic approach to managing their endowment, allowing the universities to control what they believe is important in the academic mission." He went on to state that it often discourages charitable giving from alumni and corporations who want to direct their giving. He says he preferred Cutler being a scholarship instead of a financial aid model, however admitted that both aid and scholarships achieve the same net result of negating the need to take on debt by the student. A similar comparison would be donating to OBC and the perks we receive: non directed funds receive a higher number of points than directed points. So a donation to a scholarship would be directed in the Ivy model, and non directed would be financial aid donations.

Last Edited: 12/19/2014 11:09:42 PM by D.A.

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/19/2014 10:55:09 PM

Thanks for the answer, Paul. As for me, I have a different perspective. Gladwell's arguments do give me some pause, but Vedder's do not. Before I turn to Gladwell, let me start with a background perspective. Note that the following paragraph is my opinion only. It is not placed here for discussion of the truth of the opinion (which would move the thread to Siberia), but rather just as a background opinion, which forms the base for the opinions in the following paragraphs.

****background only, not for discussion******
In my opinion, most welfare programs are dramatic failures, and they are failures because when you give people stuff, it simply leads to an expectation that they will be given more stuff, and they begin to believe that they can't get ahead without a constant flow of stuff. The result is that the programs become a roach motel, which trap the recipients. Rather than helping people get ahead, the people become trapped.
****** end of opinion that isn't for background only*********

You may or may not agree with the paragraph above. Either is fine. It is there so that you can understand my opinion, not to convince you. As a contrast to the above, Athletics, including football, is an effective affirmative action program precisely because people aren't given stuff, they have to earn it. They get ahead, succeed, get an education, etc, by working hard, and by earning the things they achieve. They learn in the process that the secret to success is through hard work.

The hope for an athletic scholarship clearly motivates youth to stay in school, and to try to qualify. Even those that never earn a scholarship benefit from trying to earn one. Athletic scholarships also enable many who would otherwise not go to college to go there, and through tutoring, to succeed. When I watch a video like the 12 year old Maleek Irons, working in school to try to get achieve his goal of playing football at an American University, or I read that Tim Edmonds will be the first person in his family ever to graduate from college, I feel like football is accomplishing some great things in people's lives.

Is football, or athletics in general, a valid thing for a University to be doing? I don't see any reason why not. Elitists might feel that "big dumb football players" are unworthy to participate in their elite classes, but I think that is pretty petty. I do not favor giving athletes easy classes, or easy majors. To graduate they should have to meet the same requirements as everyone else. I do favor giving them extensive tutoring, as required. That enables the playing ground to be evened, a little, and helps the athletes succeed, but also assures that if they do graduate, they do learn in the process.

Could they accomplish the same thing by awarding 85 scholarships to random people who otherwise would not get in? They could do some of the good, but it would lack the hard work-success relationship that i think is important.

Now, where my nice scenario goes off course is when the win-at-all-costs mentality takes over. That brings an incentive to cut corners or cheat. If you don't give the athlete a real education, there goes my whole argument. If you fudge his transcript, you've taught a lesson, but entirely the wrong one. It also leads you down the crazy path we're on where coaches' salary goes up and up, with no end in sight.

A large part of why I became an Ohio fan is that I have no use for the spend-spend-spend-winning-is-what's-important attitude that you see in P5 teams. Sadly it is spreading down, even to the MAC.

What about pro Football? I see it as a bad thing for a couple reasons. One is Gladwell's argument. People that play football only in high school do not have the same kinds of head-injury and other issues that you find in pro football players that play in the NFL for a long time. It also adds little to my positive scenario. There is a lesson that you can make a ton of money in the NFL, but really, that's the wrong lesson. The lesson that I think is the right one is that football isn't the end itself, but rather its a means to an end. If you work hard, you get ahead, and it helps you to get a college degree, after which you go on from there to get a job in your career.

For me, the thing that could convince me that football isn't a good thing aren't things like Vedder's articles. It's along Gladwell's argument. Show me that the injury rate is too high. Show me that these people don't get any good out of the education, and that they don't have a higher success rate than others they grew up with that took a different path. Those are the things that would make me doubt whether it's a good thing or not.

So, in the end, the expenses of football don't faze me, where the expenses are the scholarships themselves, because I think football does a lot of net good. I think it helps the players do well in life. I think it brings economic benefits to the community. I think it helps bridge the town-gown divide. I think it helps advertise the University, and helps connect the University to alumni.

Now that I gave my perspective, perhaps you'll understand why I'm not conflicted, at least until the point where someone gets a serious long term injury. Now to address a couple points you made:

1a - Dropping to FCS won't save money. From what I've seen, they get less benefits, and lose more, which is why so many FCS teams want to move to FBS. Moving to Division II or III would save money, though.

2 - I have sympathy for the argument that they athletes should have to meet the general academic requirements. If you do that, it does decrease the affirmative action somewhat, but it also increases the lesson that "to get ahead, you need to do well in the classroom". As I said above, I'm also comfortable with it the way it is, so long as you only provide tutoring, but still require them to meet the same standards at the end of the day.

Last Edited: 12/19/2014 11:01:17 PM by L.C.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,454

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/20/2014 12:31:49 PM

D.A. wrote:

BillyTheCat wrote:

Does anyone know with the new tution guarantee, will this also lock in the fee for 12 semesters? If so, look for the fee for next year to be a decently steep increase.

No what I am saying is that if the fee for that class is locked in for 12 Semesters, I would venture to believe that there will be an inflation projection built in. In essences I am stating nothing about where the fee money is going.

Last Edited: 12/20/2014 12:34:59 PM by BillyTheCat

BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,454

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/20/2014 12:32:53 PM

And DA, Harvard gives the exact same financial package to athletes that every other student receives.

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/20/2014 4:10:34 PM

BillyTheCat wrote:

D.A. wrote:

BillyTheCat wrote:

Does anyone know with the new tution guarantee, will this also lock in the fee for 12 semesters? If so, look for the fee for next year to be a decently steep increase.

No doubt, all of the above items will need to be projected for inflation in the same manner. Thanks to those who have that unenviable task. And if you click on the like on the FAQ page you can see a definition of the General Fee.

Last Edited: 12/20/2014 4:32:10 PM by D.A.

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/20/2014 4:28:51 PM

BillyTheCat wrote:

And DA, Harvard gives the exact same financial package to athletes that every other student receives.

I feel like you are not understanding that I believe we are in violent agreement on this, and I detailed as much in my post above replying to Jeff in detail regarding the difference between financial aid and scholarships. The two mechanisms produce identical ends, but are different means to that identical end: expense relief for students, regardless of that student being an academic or an athletic recruit.

Where Harvard and OHIO differ is that the funds are derived primarily from the need based endowment funds at Harvard (who also supplements those funds with scholarships, grants and University employment opportunities, with the desired result being that no student incurs out of pocket expenses to attend Harvard), and at OHIO the athletic scholarships are derived to a large extent from student fees, and there are also directed scholarships and general fee funds that contribute to covering the cost of the expense relief at OHIO.

Where do you feel we are not aligned on this? Are you saying that Harvard and MIT are not participating in recruiting student athletes? Clearly Sally Sue the aspiring rocket scientist at Harvard is not going to be recruited once on campus to play men's hockey, so Jean Jacques the Hockey Jock from Quebec is at no risk to lose his spot as first line forward on the Harvard hockey roster, nor his financial aid derived from the endowment fund. And he is not paying full tuition, room or board for the opportunity to play Harvard, either.

Last Edited: 12/20/2014 4:30:19 PM by D.A.

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/20/2014 10:29:31 PM

D.A. wrote:

. . . with the desired result being that no student incurs out of pocket expenses to attend Harvard) . . .

hmm . . . what are you talking about? If my daughter had gone to Harvard we would have had to take a second mortgage out on the house. She was smart enough to get an academic scholarship from Michigan Engineering, but at Harvard she was from too affluent a background to receive a need-based award. At Northwestern we were actually told by an admissions officer that we could look into their second mortgage program.

+1 to L.C.'s post above

Last Edited: 12/20/2014 10:34:03 PM by OhioCatFan

BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,454

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/21/2014 12:01:53 AM

OhioCatFan wrote:

D.A. wrote:

. . . with the desired result being that no student incurs out of pocket expenses to attend Harvard) . . .

Proof that OHiO University pays its profs too much!

DA, I think we may be very close on agreement, I think we are hung on verbiage.

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/21/2014 12:52:39 PM

OhioCatFan wrote:

D.A. wrote:

. . . with the desired result being that no student incurs out of pocket expenses to attend Harvard) . . .

I'm simply restating what they state on the home page of their financial aid website. I clearly do not have first hand knowledge of their actual practice of making good against that. There is a big graphic in the middle of their home page I linked to above stating "100% of our students can graduate debt free." If that is BS, then so be it.

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/21/2014 1:06:46 PM

D.A. wrote:

OhioCatFan wrote:

D.A. wrote:

. . . with the desired result being that no student incurs out of pocket expenses to attend Harvard) . . .

My information is back in 2000, so maybe things have changed, but my first reaction is that it is B.S. Thanks for clarifying where you got the information and that you were simply reporting a source's information and not making a statement of known fact. I guess I failed to understand the attribution in the original post.

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,064

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/21/2014 1:20:19 PM

Note that it says "no student shall incur..", not "no parent shall incur...". I take this to mean they don't want their students graduating deep in debt, but if they feel that the parent can afford to pay, the parent should pay.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,454

Status: Offline

RE: Vedder and Hartke strike again...

Posted: 12/21/2014 1:24:27 PM

D.A. wrote:

OhioCatFan wrote:

D.A. wrote:

. . . with the desired result being that no student incurs out of pocket expenses to attend Harvard) . . .

Going through this right now, their statements and their financial aid plans are by far the easiest to understand and comprehensive as any! Their endowment allows them to be extremely generous, and 20% of their students pay no money to attend.

Showing Replies:	26 - 50 of 83 Posts
Jump to Page:	< Previous 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 Next >

View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics

There are 247 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

247 Guests
0 Registered Users

There are no other users looking at this page.