This is in response to Tony Buffa's post about the need to switch
to grant-in-aid.
 
Just briefly (well I can try;)) I would say that it should not be
concidered bad (IMHO) to switch to grant-in-aid.  It is true that
students who are poorer need more financial aid...I am a good
example of this...I don't play hockey but the analogy still holds..
I could never afford to pay the tuition here at SLU as it is more
than my parents make in one year combined..hehehehe....so the old
system worked well for players that are desperately in need of aid.
All needs were met by the financial aid prog. of the University.
But, the problems arise when you are dealing with middle income
students. At SLU 66% of the students are on at least *some* financial
aid plan.  That means that most students have to pay a chuck
of the tuition at SLU ($27,000).  If you are Joe Marsh and you
are competing for a middle income player, you will almost always
lose....what can you say to him..."Our financial aid should cover
some of the bill!;)"  I helped to compile most of the financial info.
that the Faculty/Student committee prepared for the Board of Trustees
and even I was startled by their findings...Granted this is only
an estimation...but the committee found that grant-in-aid would
actually decrease the total amount spent by the hockey program in
recruiting.  They reasoned that the scholarship route would place a
set limit on the recruiting budget so to speak.  Whereas in past years
the budget had been variable based upon need.  More often then not (at
least for the past 10 year span) this variability placed SLU above the
projected limit that would be set for grant-in-aid as so many needy
players were recruited by SLU.  These players are put into the financial
aid "mix" first..along with scholars and thus grabbed a large portion
of the available funds right away.  The grant-in-aid would avoid this
by placing a fixed amount aside each year.  This is not to say that
the needy players would be ignored in future years, but only that
the plan is actually to save money by use of grant-in-aid...
Another selling point for the committee was the potential ability
of the hockey recruiting staff to increase the academic level of
the hockey program by recruiting academically as well as sportswise.
The logic is that with grant-in-aid SLU could attract both higher
quality atheletes and scholars.
 
Anyway, those are the two inward looking reasons for adopting the
plan.  The outward reasons are obvious....SLU is a tiny institution
of less than 2000 students....we have no IVY status to draw in players,
we have (had?) no scholarships to draw in players, and we don't have
huge crowds of 16-17,000 people to draw in players.  Joe Marsh has
been one of the sole selling points for SLU hockey for 10 years and
now maybe SLU hockey can be put on the same footing as Clarkson, RPI
and Colgate with respect to recruiting attraction.  As one of only 3
non-ivy, non-grant-in-aid schools in Div. I hockey I can tell you...
it is very hard to skate uphill every year when every one of your
opponents is skating downhill.....
 
One thing that has come to my mind now that I have written this note is
that it is really too bad that grant-in-aid had not come just a bit
sooner for the Saints....This past year SLU lost a wonderful possible
recruit in Marty Reasoner to BC for lack of grant-in-aid (what a diff.
that would have made) plus, from what I have heard around campus
SLU has already lost *2* local recruits for this upcoming season to
Clarkson for lack of guarenteed funds...it really is a shame when
things like this happen:( as all three of these recruits were said to
be quite interested in SLU (as all were local players).
 
 
Well enough talk...
Kevin Todd SLU '96
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.