Zinn confirms Rutgers total roster cost between $20m - $30m

[NickRU714]

Since this keeps getting asked for in various other threads and some posters (who I won't tag out of courtesy) refuse to believe it.
Here is it to easily find over and over.


Asked about a report that Rutgers is somewhere between $20-$30 million in NIL spending on football, Zinn said that "I won't close the range, but I'll tell you that report's accurate."

Q&A: Rutgers AD Keli Zinn talks football, NIL, and more ahead of football opener

Rutgers Athletic Director Keli Zinn met with reporters ahead of the Scarlet Knights' football opener to talk NIL, athletics business and more.

www.on3.com

 

[NickRU714]

Its not great. And towards the bottom of the conference.
But its true.

 

[NewHondo77]

Its not great. And towards the bottom of the conference.
But its true.

It’s still a lot more than UMass or BC.

 

[RUChet]

Its not great. And towards the bottom of the conference.
But its true.

No it’s more like 12-14th as towards bottom sounds even worse

 

[kupuna133]

No it’s more like 12-14th as towards bottom sounds even worse

And 8-16 are very similar overall roster spend.

 

[Leonard23]

 

[RUChet]

And 8-16 are very similar overall roster spend.

Exactly

how about UCF going toe to toe in Q4 with undefeated BYU who beat ND.

UCF estimated roster is $15-20M so less than ours yet we would NEVER be this close to BYU under Schiano

 

[kupuna133]

Exactly

how about UCF going toe to toe in Q4 with undefeated BYU who beat ND.

UCF estimated roster is $15-20M so less than ours yet we would NEVER be this close to BYU under Schiano

The people performing mental gymnastics regarding roster spend are amazing. There is no doubt we spent what we did on the roster. If we didn’t Schiano would be screaming from the mountain tops that he didn’t get the support he needed. He didn’t have a problem making those claims under Hobbs.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

What I wrote in the other thread (that prompted the creation of this thread) ...

Zinn says The Athletic report is accurate? Well ... what does The Athletic report say?:

--------------

"The numbers here refer to the amount of money a school had at its disposal to assemble its 2026 roster — setting aside any player income not managed or controlled by the football program, such as endorsements with national brands. The money comes from a combination of athletic department revenue, outside booster donations and other sources that vary from school to school."

NOTE: It's a report about available money "had at its disposal," not spent money.

"School administrators, on the other hand, have the opposite incentive. They want people to think their number is higher than it really is, which makes them look like great fundraisers."

NOTE: Zinn is a school administrator.

------------------

But somewhere out there is a statement from Schiano saying that our NIL spending was $23.6 million this year. I know this because Kupuna133 said there was. I would like to read (or hear) this statement. If you are asking me if I believe Zinn would used guarded language to make donors/fans believe we were spending more than we are, yes, I believe she is capable of doing that. If you are asking me if The Athletic would make a *best guess* at numbers and then report them as if they came right from a school's balance sheet (knowing the collective college football fandom would run with them as if they had been chiseled on stone tablets), yes, I believe it would. Do I believe that Rutgers football (and associated donors) spent $23.6 million on direct NIL spending for the 2026 season? Not on your life.

 

[miket007]

But somewhere out there is a statement from Schiano saying that our NIL spending was $23.6 million this year. I know this because Kupuna133 said there was. I would like to read (or hear) this statement. If you are asking me if I believe Zinn would used guarded language to make donors/fans believe we were spending more than we are, yes, I believe she is capable of doing that. If you are asking me if The Athletic would make a *best guess* at numbers and then report them as if they came right from a school's balance sheet (knowing the collective college football fandom would run with them as if they had been chiseled on stone tablets), yes, I believe it would. Do I believe that Rutgers football (and associated donors) spent $23.6 million on direct NIL spending for the 2026 season? Not on your life.

I would be shocked if we spent this much considering how late the DC was hired and there were only scraps left in the portal by that time...

 

[RUBlackout]

What I wrote in the other thread (that prompted the creation of this thread) ...

Zinn says The Athletic report is accurate? Well ... what does The Athletic report say?:

--------------

"The numbers here refer to the amount of money a school had at its disposal to assemble its 2026 roster — setting aside any player income not managed or controlled by the football program, such as endorsements with national brands. The money comes from a combination of athletic department revenue, outside booster donations and other sources that vary from school to school."

NOTE: It's a report about available money "had at its disposal," not spent money.

"School administrators, on the other hand, have the opposite incentive. They want people to think their number is higher than it really is, which makes them look like great fundraisers."

NOTE: Zinn is a school administrator.

------------------

But somewhere out there is a statement from Schiano saying that our NIL spending was $23.6 million this year. I know this because Kupuna133 said there was. I would like to read (or hear) this statement. If you are asking me if I believe Zinn would used guarded language to make donors/fans believe we were spending more than we are, yes, I believe she is capable of doing that. If you are asking me if The Athletic would make a *best guess* at numbers and then report them as if they came right from a school's balance sheet (knowing the collective college football fandom would run with them as if they had been chiseled on stone tablets), yes, I believe it would. Do I believe that Rutgers football (and associated donors) spent $23.6 million on direct NIL spending for the 2026 season? Not on your life.

You do realize that each SCHOOL can spend $20.5m in revenue share. NIL is anything from donations from businesses that contribute to the pot.
it’s not far fetched to think RU could have spent that. We just don’t know the breakdown between the two. I would think RU likely spent around $17m and another 6m in NIL

 

[RU#1fan]

Since this keeps getting asked for in various other threads and some posters (who I won't tag out of courtesy) refuse to believe it.
Here is it to easily find over and over.


Asked about a report that Rutgers is somewhere between $20-$30 million in NIL spending on football, Zinn said that "I won't close the range, but I'll tell you that report's accurate."

Q&A: Rutgers AD Keli Zinn talks football, NIL, and more ahead of football opener

Rutgers Athletic Director Keli Zinn met with reporters ahead of the Scarlet Knights' football opener to talk NIL, athletics business and more.

www.on3.com

Deadbeat Al wrong again. Keep posting your BS.

 

[Caliknight]

If you opt into rev share (all B1G schools did including RU) you are REQUIRED to spend the $20.5MM on athletes. Football gets the lion share of that. The rest of the $23MM comes from NIL. This isn’t hard to figure out. It seems unfathomable that Schiano can suck this bad with this much money but this is indeed how bad he sucks.

 

[RUBlackout]

If you opt into rev share (all B1G schools did including RU) you are REQUIRED to spend the $20.5MM on athletes. Football gets the lion share of that. The rest of the $23MM comes from NIL. This isn’t hard to figure out. It seems unfathomable that Schiano can suck this bad with this much money but this is indeed how bad he sucks.

Cannot wait until we can turnover this staff and start fresh with some HOPE in the program

 

[AdventureHasAName]

You do realize that each SCHOOL can spend $20.5m in revenue share.

Yes.

 

[NickRU714]

I don't want a HC who accepts spending less than the school can

IF, and it is IF, Rutgers isnt spending the full revenue share amount allowed (fuzzy math) then Schiano should be fired for allowing it.
Or he should quit and publicly say it's because the school administration is hurting his ability to win.
Nobody would blame him for that.
All blame would be on Zinn (and Tate).

I dont want a coach who accepts not trying to win.

Arguing Rutgers isn't spending what they can - isnt a argument defending Schiano.
It's an argument against him even more.

 

[Samson1975!!!]

Almost there. Keep chopping