In your example, the player got an NFL paycheck
by tdiddy07 (2019-01-10 12:32:39)
Edited on 2019-01-10 12:36:37

In reply to: the tuition presumes that is what it would cost the player  posted by jt


and then went back to get a degree--unless I'm misreading your statement about first going on the open market and then turning around and paying his tuition (Maybe it just means getting some likeness licensing money). In that example, unless he is financially irresponsible, he is likely to pay full freight. I wasn't following what you were getting at.

If you would rather cite figures of average real costs to the average student in the high school applicant's shoes, there is some merit to that. Of course, those that are below a certain threshold will have virtually identical costs to any school meeting 100 percent of need. Maybe the market cost is actually nothing or is like $15-20k a year, which it was for me. But in that example, the value of the ND degree in particular will certainly be more valuable than that of many other schools recruiting him. Thus, the sticker cost is likely a better capture of ability to gain return on investment from ND (the broader value that is being gained for future earning purposes).

But in any situation, the marginal cost to ND is of absolutely no value whatsoever in assessing the value to the player.




Replies: