Talent was and will continue to be the predominant issue. Head coach talent.
Greg has one of the lowest win percentages of any active coach
- Thread starter RUTGERS95
- Start date
Well this part is obviously a net positive, yes?
Maybe she is bringing Athletics to maturity.
Like I said, and not to be offensive, but your mindset is small time. No Big Ten or SEC school operates the way you are recommending. Football is the most high profile sport, but it's really not driving any buses. The amount of football teams that generate enough money to not only cover themselves but other sports can be counted on a few fingers.
Rutgers will never be one of those schools. It won't happen nor should it, but if you are looking at Rutgers football like a business, you'd have killed it long ago. Rutgers football has lost more money than every other sport combined x 100.
I agree she needs to show it, but you also doesn't need to say something isn't happening when you don't know.
She has a plan and working it. There are some sports that will get more support than others, and much of that has to do with alumni action and where she thinks she can get the most wins. She's obviously taken on a monumental task and there are alot of moving parts, not the least of which is NIL is front and center and she is in control of that now, but it's a heavy lift. Bottom line is she's investing as other B1G teams do. Winning in football is the most important thing and everyone agrees. Winning in other sports is important too. She's not selling out the entire department so Schiano can have more staff bloat. Those days are long over, as they should be.
hopefully
no offense taken but I think you are wrong. Football drives the bus, that is not even debatable and we lack any success there. The reason why I think this is because until we right football, no area is going to succeed in a meaningful way to help the school the way it is needed. Resources are limited so you need to prioritize what is most important along what timeline. I am already suspect of her big picture understand given the support of the PE deal. it's a fair discussion on resource allocation and merit
it's quite simple, fix football or face future considerations
Then why do no other Big Ten schools operate the way you are suggesting? What future considerations are you talking about?
Never said that. Did say it’s premature exaltation.
Until she delivers positive change it’s all just talk. Every AD candidate in the history of college says all the right things, got hired, continued the popular messaging, etc.
Here, the results haven’t matched the rhetoric.
so your presumption is to do it like other schools? that doesn't seem to be working for us very well. Many school will disproportionately allocate revs to football, we already know this. Now there are many reasons for this, many of which have been highlighted here and over the years so no need to beat a dead horse. I don't think you grasp the magnitude of disdain, contempt, laughs and more at the expense of Rutgers football. It was such that with a PE deal, they found so little value in Rutgers football that we were to be put last with one other school in a bucket of less than 100mm a year which was more than 2x less than bucket 1. We need to have value in the program outside of what location provides. There are changes coming to college football and unless we raise the 'perceived' value of the football program, many here will be crying in their cereal bowls.
no one gives a shyyt about baseball, womens' basketball, lax, crew, tennis etc etc. it's location of the football program that got us here. None of that is undeniable. The BIG doesn't make 1.3 billion a year because of those sports. The state of the football program is what is going to kill us.
when you're in NY next, PM me (although I rarely read those lol) and I'll buy drinks. would be a great discussion over drinks and I can certainly let go some things I know.
#2 had the assignment. As a seasoned veteran, #1 Toure had terrific instincts, and would have made the play, but he was injured, which is why #2 replaced him.
You could say that 8-9 win seasons are very much probable ,and we already would have been there with a better coaching staff.
If we didn’t call time out on that Illinois FG we win at least 8 games in 2024. Nothing to do with NIL.
The year before that we won 7 games rolling with a QB who couldn’t throw a lick. Ironically, that was the year Al was insisting we were heading for a magical season and Gavin Wimsatt was a Heisman candidate. Again - lack of funding was not the reason we didn’t win more games.
In that 1881-82 thread, worth noting, in 1882, the Rutgers Queensman had no head coach, just a team captain. That 1882 team went 6-4!!!! I bet the support staff was zero too.
If a P4 school was allowed, how many sports would they keep other than Football and MBB?
I don’t think it would be 22.
I guarantee you that’s not true. I know it’s hard for a few of you to believe but many schools take pride in everything with their name on it. We are on our way there. Tell someone from USC nothing matters but football and they will laugh in your face while parading their Olympic gold medalists past. We simply need to invest more in our Olympic sports. Which Keli is doing. Football gets far more support from the school than it deserves. Al is actually right about one thing. The rest is on the fans.
Last edited:
As I said, football is the most important sport. However, live content rules. A wrestling match between. Iowa and Penn St will draw way more eyeballs than a replay of Ohio St and Michigan from 1989. The B1G needs other sports besides football for that reason alone. The B1G takes pride in Olympic sports. It’s why schools like Michigan are what they are. They expect excellence in everything. It’s great we have an AD who came from that type of environment. We are finally Afro g like a Big Ten school and it’s great see. The everything football don’t work under Mulchahy and it wouldn’t work now. The Big Ten for starters would never allow it nor would Keli want to do it.
Appreciate the offer. I try to avoid NYC now likes it’s the plague.
Well since it’s not allowed we’ll never know, right?
I do agree with you about an institution being very proud of their success across the athletic spectrum. Who wouldn’t be. It’s marketing 101 at its best. Nothing better than being able to toot your own horn.
Same for winning at the conference level too. I know you know this but maybe some others don’t, the first goal on the whiteboard in a legacy B1G school locker room is:
1. Win the B1G
Cali is 100% correct on this. My sister is an alum and pretty decent UCLA booster, and they take a lot of pride, and they support all their Olympic sports. They stink at football but have 127 national championships. UCLA has a great academic reputation and wins at at everything except football. Football doesn't drive that bus.
Well that particular bus was driven, owned and the route set by John Wooden.
Mark Harmon and others were lucky to get a seat on it. Even Gary Beban had to pay his fare.
Similar to a bus company in Bloomington, IN too.
If they were as successful as their friends across town on the gridiron, I’m sure your sister would be talking about that too. And rightly so.
A better coaching staff isn’t coming to a place without money. So we would not be able to recruit as well, unless we’re hiring Urban Meyer, who has already said he isn’t coming to a place without money. It’s a minor miracle we’re recruiting as well as we are, given our financial constraints. As soon as prospective candidates hear our NIL Budget, they’ll laugh in our face. James Franklin is scheduled to make $13M in 2030. That’s double what Schiano is making today. His average salary over the duration of his contract is $8.2 M. Roughly $2M more than Schiano is making. It is going to take a lot more money to hire a “better” coach, plus pay off the existing staff.
Something doesn’t add up.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | College Athletics Database
One is spending considerably more in pretty much every category. Can’t put my finger on which one.
How dare you inject facts into a discussion. Only things that matters are emotions, hand-waving and finger-wagging. GTFOOH with facts. Maybe pictures would help?Something doesn’t add up.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | College Athletics Database
knightnewhousedata.org
One is spending considerably more in pretty much every category. Can’t put my finger on which one.
I'm not a math whiz, but Rutgers is at $76.09M in football spending for 2025, while Virginia Tech is at $44.46M.
Is 76.09 greater than 44.46, or does Virginia have a different exchange rate than NJ?
Please cut the crap. There is one single reason our defensive talent projects to be as poor as it does and it has very little to do with money. We let the entire portal season expire before putting a new DC in place. No marquis high major transfers were going to consider us without knowing who the coaching staff would be. Full stop.
The proof is on the other side of the ball. We clearly had the money to not only retain our top tier playmakers that would be desirable additions pretty much anywhere (Duff and Raymond), but we paid to bring in a QB from a high major conference (I don’t care what BC’s record is - Lonergan’s metrics are better than AK or Gavin’s ever were going into an offseason. He wasn’t “cheap” and it’s not even a guarantee he’s going to start. We are also paying a 3rd year developmental kid who was a a solid tier recruit - the room is arguably the deepest it’s been in eons). There are some questions at a few spots on the OL, but lets put it out on the table that the only reason the outlook for next season is as low as it is - is because of the above paragraph (1st one) - and again - it didn’t matter how much money we had, there were other teams who could’ve matched it and no top level player is choosing a program without knowing who the damn coaches will be. This isn’t a “minor” thing. It’s huge - and the reason odds are stacked against Johansen big time. Not “money”.
If your still not convinced that “money” is why we can’t have a decent defense- then look no further than the dang year your “Heisman candidate” broke all time incompletion records as a starter at RU, we chose to continue playing him, and still won 7 games despite that because of our strong defense (we were able to “afford” the cost of defensive players then, yes.
All this said - in the spirit of the Sorsby recovery lingo - I, unlike many, am giving Greg the acknowledgement credit that AFTER the damage was done, he did “the next right thing” in relinquishing all control and bringing in a brand new up and coming defensive staff to try to pick up the pieces. This doesn’t make up for the rest - not by a landslide - but for Johansen and the others he’s brought in’s sake - I’d like them to at least get a fair shake. Meaning - if they somehow come in and make noticable progress with the dumpster fire they inherited, I would want them to get another year to see if they could complete the transformation. Clearly - I’m in the minority on this. But your really off the wall on this money bandwagon with due respect.
Last edited:
Like I said can’t put my finger on it. Wanted to link all the data and drop downs. But agree some people respond better to pics. Should have known my audience.
Football drives the boat and next comes MBB...but, with that said- there are a lot of prestigious Alumni that participated in the Olympic sports as well as sports like baseball. This keeps them interested, but if the football and MBB teams were more successful- those Alumni would be giving more in general.
Dropping the other sports is a tricky situation.
Heck- some of the biggest names to come out of Rutgers sports have been from these outliner programs.
But, anyone that doesn't understand that Football not only drives the bus for Athletics, but it is at least a co-pilot for the University itself. And guess what- it will always be a loss leader.
100%
I'm not advocating dropping for all and if that is how it was read my apologies. I'm merely saying that football needs as much resources as possible to become a steady middle of the pack BIG school. We need a top down approach with all hands on deck to fix this. Football is the face of the school and drives much more than given credit to
Something doesn’t add up.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University | College Athletics Database
One is spending considerably more in pretty much every category. Can’t put my finger on which one.
Last year, Virginia Tech approved an "Invest to Win" plan to close the gap.
The plan says $204.3 million of athletics department spending in 2027. This would be in line with Rutgers based on Keli's comments and my expectations.
Where does Virginia Tech get the money? Four ways. Higher university subsidies, higher student fees mandated to athletics, a bridge loan (who repays it?), and a doubling of donations.
Last edited:
just grabbed yours as the last quote instead of grabbing a whole bunch of others- was not meant to be specifically directed at you...all good.
But the fieldhouse was slappin'.And no NIL.
That’s all well and good. But was responding to “budget” opex vs capex.
Pulled from my attachment earlier.
Breakdown
Coaches Compensation$26.36M (17%)
Non-Coaching Athletics Staff Compensation$22.91M (15%)
Breakdown
Coaches Compensation$47.74M (25%)Non-Coaching Athletics Staff Compensation$31.43M (16%)
Take a wild guess which one is RU and which one is Va Tech. But we’re not spending!!
They aren’t paying $1.3B for Rutgers Football either. There are 12 Saturdays of football along with playoffs. Call it 35 weeks out of the year that they would need to show reruns rather than live programming. No TV exec in the world would make that deal. Hopkins has their own deal with ESPN. There is some level of economics around lacrosse as an example that is enticing enough for that to happen. The only question is, does a school want to get their *** kicked and embarrassed on live tv or do they want to to compete. The direction is clear. Every school in the Big Ten has long ago decided to compete. Thankfully, we have an AD who has decided the same.
The school is doing more than their part. I’m not sure why this is even a discussion. You’ve said that yourself. It’s the donations outside of that which are the issue for football. If a school does t support their other sports, it is effectively dropping them. There is a reason schools like Michigan, UVA, UNC, Ohio St, Alabama, and many other support all of their sports. It’s good business in advertising. It’s mildly shocking some here don’t want to be winners.
The circle jerk by the same 5 or 6 guys is so repetitive their hands must be exhausted.
B1G Football though is watched on many platforms. Same for MBB.
But you are correct live programming is what’s needed. And more of it. Especially in the winter. It’s why I advocate for what everyone knows by now is my favorite.
You and I both can recite how many NCs these schools have for M and W Lax.
But in the big and B1G picture, it’s “Animal Farm” where some are more important than others.
Quick question, and I mean no harm…
Is the 66 your graduation year or the year you were born?
Whether its the correct approach or not - at least it's trying something different.
Instead of just saying "We need more money!" without any actual viable plan or forethought put into it.
Remove lacrosse. Look at wrestling, volleyball, etc. There is no substitute for live programming. More platforms mean an even bigger desire for more live sports. This conversation has gotten silly. Rutgers does more to support football than many other schools in the Big Ten alone. If the fans of the program don’t further support it to necessary levels, that’s on them.