Greg extension poll lifted from Round Table, thank you RAC93
- Thread starter RUTGERS95
- Start date
I’d love to hear the rationale behind extending him when the program is stagnant and he still has three years left. Not firing him because of the buyout, more nil maybe coming, etc wouldn’t be my choice but is at least somewhat defensible. Can’t find a case for an extension
Greg gets some incredible excuses by the schianoites. Will be curious to see how this breaks on this board given we see less of that nonsense vs the round table.
Yep, Schiano’s talent for losing all stems from the Louisiana Purchase. That vast new US territory became home to many of current Big10, SEC and B12 schools which triple the competition for adequate recruits. He is forever behind the 8 ball due to that. And also due to Joe Biden.
He deserves the job until he passes, and full salary in perpetuity to his heirs recognizing the futility of his steadfastly trying to win but not delivering given the impossibility of it.
Being a lousy coach as some argue couldn’t be further from the truth. He’s a great coach, just at losing.
Last edited:
You need to give credit to the originator of the poll on the Round Table.
No extension, his contract has 3 more years to go after this season.
A 6-6 season or worse should be reason to replace him.
7-5 would mean "very hot seat in 2027
8-4 would be acceptable.
9-3 should just have a bonus added on if he repeats that in 2027.
10-2 would have rollover clause added would extend his contract an extra year if he repeats it in 2027
11-1 means auto 1 year rollover
12-0 would get my extension vote
A 6-6 season or worse should be reason to replace him.
7-5 would mean "very hot seat in 2027
8-4 would be acceptable.
9-3 should just have a bonus added on if he repeats that in 2027.
10-2 would have rollover clause added would extend his contract an extra year if he repeats it in 2027
11-1 means auto 1 year rollover
12-0 would get my extension vote
Disagree with Richard that it's a "narrative" - it's just pointing out how it is. Didn't do him much good in the end, but I'll give James Franklin a little credit for checking himself after PSU lost to Oregon last year: he briefly called the PSU big game struggles a narrative too, before he acknowledged that nope, they were a plain fact. Same with us. We're a mediocre program right now. I'm more pro-GS in general than some in this thread, but if he can't get us off the 5-7/6-6 treadmill, his time here is going to end like Franklin's at PSU did.
(Editing to add: might be clear already from what I posted, but I voted No.)
I honestly don't think it's that weak. I don't think we have a sure BIG win there although, Northwestern is the one I'd bet on us
Really? Umass, bc, Maryland, Howard, NW, a rebuilding state penn, a suspect and rebuilding Michigan, a crappy Wisconsin and sparty…that leaves Indiana and Nebraska and usc…sorry but that’s not a hard schedule. 7-5 or 8-4 minimum
If RU cant score much again then a change would make sense. RU had good offensive talent last year but was only 59th for scoring with 344 points. The lowest scoring team in top 21 was Texas A&M (19th) with 439. The top 10 were all well over 500 with Indiana having 666 but of course most of them played in at least one bowl that adds to tallies.
My concern was that if GS was bumped RU would get stuck with KC who is no offensive genius despite Greg always glazing him. Greg likes his predictable and subdued plays (hey it worked in the 90s). It could be Flood 2.0 but I think Maybe Tate and AD don't want more decaf. Hopefully they would have NIL because a coaching change means existing players bolt.
GS got hot with a president and AD on the same page and united in a reach for success. I've seen that when a prez, AD and new coach are amped-up and synchronized good things can happen - lifts the whole college. A new broom coach would be better than a leftover who is kept to "keep recruits" like Flood was. NIL sweeps clean
My concern was that if GS was bumped RU would get stuck with KC who is no offensive genius despite Greg always glazing him. Greg likes his predictable and subdued plays (hey it worked in the 90s). It could be Flood 2.0 but I think Maybe Tate and AD don't want more decaf. Hopefully they would have NIL because a coaching change means existing players bolt.
GS got hot with a president and AD on the same page and united in a reach for success. I've seen that when a prez, AD and new coach are amped-up and synchronized good things can happen - lifts the whole college. A new broom coach would be better than a leftover who is kept to "keep recruits" like Flood was. NIL sweeps clean
RU has had a much easier Big10 schedule (2024), so easy in fact that some pundits considered RU a playoff contender. Then after a 4-0 start Schiano bungled the season like only he can. He can’t outcoach the Gatorade coolers and once again this year will be a disappointment, the only thing he’s consistent in.
8 wins LOL.
The majority of our toss up games being on the road makes it a bit more difficult. I wouldn’t be shocked if we weren’t favored again after the Howard game. Thus the reason Vegas has our over/under at 4.5 wins this year.
IDK- 3 wins that should be in bag are UMess, Howard and BC. IF Rutgers can't win 4 of Maryland, MSU, Northwestern, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Penn State in year 7 of a head coach, it's time to move on.
I agree with you. Franklin is reeling in a lot of new money at Virginia Tech. It will not surprise me if in year 2 or 3, VT wins the ACC Championship. Greg has aspirations for winning the B1G Championship, but as Franklin learned, that climb gets steeper near the top. For seven years, Rutgers has been competing in the bottom 1/3 of the B1G level playing field.
Beat USC lol? They are going to run video game points up on Schiano.
Completely agree with this. Every team in this conference is a threat, that's why we're so much better than the SEC.
Different era. Keeping recruits that aren’t that great is irrelevant. You can just go buy others that an incoming coach would likely want to do anyway. The next coach needs to be a complete change from the Schiano malaise. Keli wants to win. That’s not Schiano or anyone in his tree.
I find it hard to believe that there is someone out there who:
1. Is a better head coach,
2. That we can afford,
3. That can do more with the resources we have, and
4. Wants to come here.
This person doesn't exist. Additionally, I find it nice that he runs a clean program (that isn't constantly in the headlines for bad things) and that he's not stupid enough to leave if he starts having major success.
1. Is a better head coach,
2. That we can afford,
3. That can do more with the resources we have, and
4. Wants to come here.
This person doesn't exist. Additionally, I find it nice that he runs a clean program (that isn't constantly in the headlines for bad things) and that he's not stupid enough to leave if he starts having major success.
Agree 100%, but in reality with Greg, I believe a 4-8 season id most likely. Get him out of town asap!!
Run a real red zone offense.
Endless screen passes on the 7 yard line dont work in B1G when everyone and their pets know what's coming..
Its a very fixable problem but GS cant shake-off the 90s when teams could have a "dirty dozen" goal line plays and the motto was "If you execute you win." How does a WR execute a screen on goal when 5 B1G defenders are on him as the ball is snapped?
20 years of good yardage between the 20s just to wilt near goals. That's bad coaching when it happens year after year and even opponents are incredulous about it. RU's main problem isn't NIL or game day coaching (every team blames losses on that) - its the most hideous red zone philosophy and playbook in major CFB- and it as like that in BE too.
"..baffling to the both of us -- is that Rutgers gets stopped completely dead in the red zone. They can look amazing between the 20s but as soon as they cross the opponent’s 20 yardline (actually I can pinpoint where the per-play effectiveness and a-EPA begins its collapse at the 31), everything falls apart. This includes things which are totally maddening to observe, like o-line blocking grades, which makes no sense (it’s the defense in the trenches that’s supposed to get fatigued on long drives, not the offense), and Rutgers’ preternatural 2nd & long passing game which goes from a +7 percentage point overperformance compared to 1st & 10 (itself kind of weird) outside the red zone to a mind-bogglingly terrible 16% 2nd & long success rate inside the red zone.
Numerically, the offense goes from a 57.6% per-play efficiency between the 20s to a 44.1% efficiency inside the 20. A small part of that is a falloff in rushing efficiency, by about four points -- fairly natural, as defenses compress -- while the major part is that passing efficiency collapses an astonishing 21 percentage points, from 57.8% outside to 36.8% inside.
As such, Rutgers has only converted 16 of its 27 meaningful red zone trips in FBS play to touchdowns, a 59.3% rate. For context, global efficiency is usually coincidental enough for F+ advanced statistics that having a 70% red zone touchdown conversion rate goes hand-in-hand with a top-30 ranking. That’s basically true this year (it’s actually top 33, the service academies are hyperefficient outliers), but there are four teams who are F+ darlings outside the red zone and so are highly rated offenses in that system, but are under 61% in red zone efficiency and so my model is very skeptical of them finishing the season strong: Illinois, Kansas, Texas Tech … and Rutgers."
Duck Tape: Film Analysis of Rutgers Football 2025
A preview of Oregon’s week 8 opponent in Piscataway
www.addictedtoquack.com
Oregon forum makes the best description but others have see it even back in GS1.0 days when defense had to save offense (recall UConn 2006. I always recall Rice having a 142 yds with 4.7 avg vs WV and no score in a 31-3 game (and he only had only 6 yd pass. Even the GS 06-07 teams should have been better.
GS has never won a conference championship in all years of coaching
s. Is a sub 500 coach
b. A below average game day coach
c.. has never develop a QB
d. Is a great hype man
e. Will always have a slogan ready
f. Always over promise and under deliver
g. Has taken millions of NJ taxpayer $$$
h. A nepotist
Damn that is the problem we hired a politician rather then a football coach
No extension, his contract has 3 more years to go after this season.
A 6-6 season or worse should be reason to replace him.
7-5 would mean "very hot seat in 2027
8-4 would be acceptable.
9-3 should just have a bonus added on if he repeats that in 2027.
10-2 would have rollover clause added would extend his contract an extra year if he repeats it in 2027
11-1 means auto 1 year rollover
12-0 would get my extension vote
I don’t think this exercise can be done until we see what the teams we play are like and evaluate the state of our offense and our defense following the season. If Indiana comes back down to earth (hypothetical example) - beating them becomes much less of a big deal than it would seem like now.
Unless Greg does something crazy like make the play offs, I don’t see him getting an extension simply because it’s not necessary with 3 years remaining on his contract and coach long term plans is no longer a factor with recruiting.
Come on. It’s preseason. We have no idea how good or bad any of these teams will be other than UMass and Howard. It’s not out of the realm that 6 of the 8 others above win 7-10 games pre-bowl season. If the defense is substantially improved after installing a brand new coaching staff and the offense only takes slight steps back following AK’s departure, there is no circumstance where he gets the boot with 6+ wins. The above is a big IF though.
Last edited:
How can anyone take this argument seriously based on your first point?
I do not think there is another head coach who has less success with the amount of resources Greg has available to him.
Of course it is - how else do you interpret “rip the bandaid off and fire him” based on a 6-6 season?
Now you're talking nonesense--- what resources--- NIL money?. How convient that you haters forget he got nothing until Zinn came along.How convient how you haters forget he worked hard to retain some great players that by the way he recruited. How convient you haters forget how he, on his own, nurtured and developed some of RU's biggest,most influential and best donaters. Greg Brown for example.Some of you are incessantly blinded by the hate.. No one's here for life but some of you act like replacing coaches is a solution to all our failings--the easy way out guys always take that path rather than fix the harder issues. And the most annoying thing of all is your lack of "real" support be it $ or just plain backing the school . And don't give me the absolute bull crap about accepting mediocrity.
a good search came up with this
Rutgers spent a school-record $76.1 million on its football program for the 2024–25 academic year. While this aggressive investment places Rutgers in the top tier of Big Ten football operating budgets, they significantly trail conference heavyweights like Ohio State and Michigan, which spent well over $200 million across all athletics to fuel their football programs
Financial Comparison Across the Big Ten
Rutgers prioritizes football to remain competitive, but its spending profile differs drastically from other members in the conference. [1]
- Rutgers: $76.1 million (football only) out of a $193.8 million total athletics budget. The football program alone generated a $48.6 million deficit due to lagging ticket sales and lower external contributions compared to the rest of the conference. [, 2]
- Ohio State: Led the conference (and the nation) with total athletic expenditures nearing $336 million in the 2025 fiscal year. The Buckeyes' football-specific budget leads the Big Ten, supported by massive stadium capacities and premium seating revenues. [1, 2, 3]
- Michigan: The Wolverines routinely top $200 million in total athletics spending. Their football infrastructure and coaching salary pools comfortably outpace Rutgers. [1, 2, 3, 4]
- Penn State: Spent roughly $255 million across all sports. Their football program benefits from one of the highest-earning ticket bases in college sports, allowing for greater self-sufficiency than Rutgers. [1, 2]
- Nebraska: Reported over $200 million in total athletic spending. Despite being located in a smaller state, massive donor contributions and localized fan support heavily subsidize their football program over
- Rutgers' figures.
- Maryland: A closer geographical and historical comparison in the Big Ten. Maryland generally spends less on its overall athletics department, with its total expenditures hovering in the $130 to $140 million range.
That’s an addendum that shouldn’t have been added IMO.
It should really just be about the extension: yay or nay at 6-6.
Come on. It's year 7 of Greg. PSU is down (we let that one get away last year), Nebraska is floundering, and MSU and Wisconsin have been terrible.
Some of you are incessantly blinded by mediocrity . . . . .
Thought the argument is no rebuilding with NIL. I guess programs like PSU and Mich probably can’t afford to buy players like RU
Not sure what you are trying to say here?Thought the argument is no rebuilding with NIL. I guess programs like PSU and Mich probably can’t afford to buy players like RU
On the NIL front- did Greg spend all the money retaining Raymond, Duff and other players and not have any money to pick up players in the portal? May have missed it, but who are the major transfers in for 2026 season?
Indiana was bad until suddenly they weren’t. Every year teams overperform and underperform. It goes both ways. Maybe USC will end up being an easier game than we think. Or Indiana. It’s preseason - don’t know yet.
All I’m saying is - our defense ranked 129th last season in yards allowed. A decision was made this year not to get rid of Greg. He installed a whole new defense. If that unit finishes 50th next year, and we go to a bowl game, nobody is going to want to move on from our defense whether we go 6-6 or 8-5 (likely the difference of a few bounces). Greg isn’t getting the boot in either situation if he fixes the D, nor should he unless we would be prepared in that situation to make the bold move of replacing Greg with our DC (which would figure to be incredibly risky no matter how good a first season he has). The last thing we would want to do is remove Greg and hire a replacement over an up and coming stud DC which - if things improve considerably would be the buzz on here. I’m not saying it will happen only that the bar for drastic improvement is low.