Either way I don't blame Alabama for this. It would be great if they had LOV insurance in place. They didn't. Learn from it. Better protect guys like Tua in the future.
Well, to go into detail a little more, when I read the FSU story I believe the amount in the fund was 240K. My understanding and this is consistent with NCAA practices, is they try to limit both how much can be spent and what is allowed. It's not just a slush fund, where if a player wants a new car or something they get the money. I recall for instance money being used when a player had to travel due to a death in the family.
I just found this on the NCAA site:
"
$84.5M
Student Assistance Fund
Distributed to Division I student-athletes for essential needs that arise during their time in college."
Here's another quote: "
A Student Assistance Fund reserve is a tricky thing. On the one hand, money not spent is money that cannot possibly benefit student-athletes. On the other hand, holding money in reserve means the institution can respond to one-time events, like natural disasters that destroy all of a student-athlete’s possessions."
Nothing I've read indicates the school has any say in the amount of money that's available in the fund, simply in how they choose to spend it. Not trying to take a shot here, but it seems at one point in time Ohio State was using money (25,000) from their fund to pay for student parking. This was years ago, but it seemed they were also using the fund to pay for health insurance, despite the fact that the school can use regular athletic department funds to pay for health insurance. So there are some choices there, but it's still hard capped: "
The Student Assistance Fund is a limited pot of money that can pay for things which schools cannot, like travel, clothing, and school supplies"
In Alabama's case though, I have to reiterate they were paying for one form of insurance for 16 players and had used up 68% of the fund. Yes, they could have just fit Tua in there and not have exceeded the cap, but they couldn't fit Jeudy, Ruggs, Tua, etc... and still have made the numbers work. With the current framework, there's really no go back and do it differently next time. They chose the better policy of the two available, they simply can't afford to pay for both.
Now, getting back to my idea, this is where more positive things can be done in the future. No, the student fund can't cover a school like Alabama paying for this, and Alabama can't use other funds to pay for this, so their hands are tied. If you did open up a new fund, for instance one tied to limited likeness use, like jerseys, then you can open a pathway to provide more benefits to players. I'm not against that by the way, I want players to be better taken care of.
To anyone questioning Alabama on this, just get our your calculator and do a google search. The money wasn't there for everyone to get both policies, period.