President Tate, RU,Al, and football.
- Thread starter ScarletteK80
- Start date
Great to have a President that cares this much about athletics, even if we don’t have the money. It’s become very clear. No one believes in Schiano. This was purely a monetary decision.
I appreciate Tates response BUT it falls on deaf ears. Since he took office he has preached winning culture and accountability. Today’s decision shows neither . Keep your tweets until you stop lying to the University and Alumni.
You are wrong again. Try reading instead of emotionally reacting. Politi is a fool and a tool of hate.
There are a few things that are fan facing numbers and the real numbers- What Aaron and Tate are showing- tell the story of why we are going to keep Greg around. And these are real numbers...but, I do not believe they are the true numbers behind the closed doors. Those are the numbers that create the narrative for the rest of us.
NIL and roster money are a constant...that is the same if Greg is here or not- throw that number out. It should have nothing to do with this decision- and quite honestly, we will have more roster money if we make a great hire and less if Greg has another crappy year after this 2-3 win season.
Buyout numbers- that is the initial number- and as these guys start getting jobs out there, that number drastically reduces. New staff- it will not be as large and I bet we go with more of an up and comer who will be more around half of Greg's current salary.
And if we are doing nothing- a half empty stadium and parking lots are going to cost us close to $10 mil lost revenue annually.
NIL and roster money are a constant...that is the same if Greg is here or not- throw that number out. It should have nothing to do with this decision- and quite honestly, we will have more roster money if we make a great hire and less if Greg has another crappy year after this 2-3 win season.
Buyout numbers- that is the initial number- and as these guys start getting jobs out there, that number drastically reduces. New staff- it will not be as large and I bet we go with more of an up and comer who will be more around half of Greg's current salary.
And if we are doing nothing- a half empty stadium and parking lots are going to cost us close to $10 mil lost revenue annually.
As a rule I despise modern university presidents but I like/trust Tate and think he'll do the best he can. Sports fans are used to hearing about millions of dollars being thrown around like Monopoly money. I've seen presidents and AD wreck themselves. Maryland has been cripped for a long time. Yow spent a lot of resources expecting big sports to pay for it (Terps won a couple of titles) but it never happened. With a looming global financial tsunami looming you dont want to be running out as the water deceptively recedes
This is from 2012 but it explains some of the overreach. Terps are still buggered (last in B1G finances I think)
"It's no secret that Maryland is in dire financial shape, but the school's change in circumstance has been sudden. Years of untenable financial practices, lukewarm fundraising and disappointing performances in football and men's basketball have hampered the athletic department. Tack on lackluster graduation rates, an exhausted donor base and persistent turbulence within the department, and Maryland now possesses one of the most dysfunctional athletic departments in the country."
www.si.com
This is from 2012 but it explains some of the overreach. Terps are still buggered (last in B1G finances I think)
"It's no secret that Maryland is in dire financial shape, but the school's change in circumstance has been sudden. Years of untenable financial practices, lukewarm fundraising and disappointing performances in football and men's basketball have hampered the athletic department. Tack on lackluster graduation rates, an exhausted donor base and persistent turbulence within the department, and Maryland now possesses one of the most dysfunctional athletic departments in the country."
How Maryland went broke: Inside the athletic department's decline
How Maryland went broke: Inside the athletic department's decline
In explaining why the Terrapins were leaving a conference they'd been affiliated with for 59 years, Loh said: "Number one, by being members of the Big Ten
www.si.com
Last edited:
A lot of executives think they're smarter than they really are. Preaching a winning culture needs to extend beyond saying "don't be afraid to win". That's like telling depressed people to just think happy thoughts.
exactly, it’s not an $83MM problem. That’s nonsense. As you say, NIL and coaching staff salary is a constant. The buyout money and I think a feeling that this job is incredibly unattractive meaning that a replacement will be difficult to find are the drivers.
100%
To go further on the "2027 New Staff $30m" fake number AP and Tate are citing.
2027 staff is a sunk cost.
Similar to NIL/Roster money - its not like keeping Schiano means a $0 2027 staff.
The staff cost will be there with or without Schiano.
It literally is only a $28m (and likely less) decision.
Every other $ cited is a sunk cost.
Its just the buyout + any additonal staff cost above Schiano 2027 staff.
Its actually embarrassing and a little distressing that the University President is putting out such a seemingly ignorant tweet.
It’s spin. He knows that the small fanbase is falling apart and is trying save face.
Exactly. But one thing I don’t agree with is the 28mm number. There is not a single person on staff with a multi year contract that has the ability to sit out for the remainder of their contract. The defensive guys brought in ( which make up most of the longer term contracts) will have offsets. They are young and need to be employed to stay relevant. Kirk and Brock have 1 year remaining and they are more than likely the only ones that won’t be as attractive as candidates due to age. Shaw also has another year and will be a hot commodity. So will be offset. Only contracts that would have no offset would be Schiano.
It's the buyout money. In the NIL age our recruiting disadvantages (campus, facilities, lack of winning history) are nullified making the job more attractive, assuming the NIL money is there.
That's because its not Al, it's Aaron.
On the money, that's where we are. However you describe it, we don't have enough to take that big of a bite.
That said, I like having the LSU tag-team on board. They moved up the NIL money for this year, and I'd like to see how high they can get it. It doesn't happen right away, but if they can build it, we can swallow salaries like this in the future (though I hope we don't need to). The money-raising has improved. They basically started at zero. We have to give it some time to continue to keep improving it.
And as much as I find Al entertaining, it's not the fans on these sites and most of them at the games that will make the difference. It will be bigger donors and sponsors. If and when the LSU tag-team continue to line them up, we can make some moves on players and, if need be, coaches. If that happens, then I think the money from those like the fans on these sites and throughout the stands will increase significantly too.
That's the most likely way for it to happen.
Last edited:
People don't realize Al and Aaron are two different individuals? They are completely different, and they are the same in that they are both Rutgers homers, which is not a bad thing.
On Aaron's post, people have to realize that Pres. Tate and Keli Zinn would have been swimming against the tide with the buyout cost "narrative" whether the numbers were pumped up or not. NJ.com and the politicians would have been swarming like sharks with blood in the water destroying Rutgers with their wasteful spending on football narratives. It's one or the other (1) Rutgers is stupid to keep Schiano and is not serious about football; or (2) Rutgers football is sinking further into an already enormous debt.
The decision stinks for us fans. It's terrible. I don't like it, but I understand it. But there would have been consequences to the buyout as well that could have set us back.
There is a narrative regardless.
"Rutgers spent $XX to finish last in the Big Ten. Going to play $X in 2027 for a repeat."
The only way to change it is to win.
I laid this out a while ago in some other thread.....
Cost/Impact of Change:
- negative $17.3M buyout for GS
- minus - cost of new HC Salary
- plus - the net of removing Greg's Staff and adding the new staff (guessing this will be a plus due to the current bloated staff situation)
- plus - potential revenue increase based on attendance bump from the optimism that comes with a new HC
- plus - revenue increase for concessions / parking etc from the attendance bump
- plus - likely revenue increase from donations bump with optimism of a new HC
The only way it would have worked from a financial PR perspective is if a booster(s) paid the buyout. SL would have a field day otherwise and NJ is already very hostile to its flagship school. The poor boosters would suffer a similar fate.
Keli and staff are doing great work on the athletics financials. 26 will be better. 27 will be a lot better. The department paying the buy out would have put that work in jeopardy.
It’s a terrible situation and without booster funds this is the most prudent move for the dept and school as a whole, as sad as it is.
Keli and staff are doing great work on the athletics financials. 26 will be better. 27 will be a lot better. The department paying the buy out would have put that work in jeopardy.
It’s a terrible situation and without booster funds this is the most prudent move for the dept and school as a whole, as sad as it is.
Agree with you and @NickRU714 --there are dueling narratives, and either way, Rutgers would come out looking bad, as I laid out above. I don't like the decision, don't agree with it, but I understand it. Live to fight another day with more donor money in pocket, hopefully. . . .
Good analysis IMO. I am OK with this decision, but I would have been Ok with the opposite one as well. The truth is there are no decisions here that are guaranteed winners, and we have to hope the one they picked is the best path.
That being said, it was more the decision of the big donors, and I can understand how they might not want to fork out so much money with a buyout as the only positive result. This is assuming no sane person would be willing to pay for the buyout and pay the large sums needed to attract a decent new coach.
They spin it like this because they know there is a large portion of media and as you can see- fans, who have no clue how real business numbers work.
Add in- the NIL numbers- they most likely go down with this decision where a new coach may have actually had them go up a bit. And attendance- I even look at it a little more in depth too - that less than half full stadium against Michigan. If this was 2 years ago and we only had 15k of our fans show- Michigan would have filled most of those seats for us. This year- even their fans didnt care to come out to watch that game.
Remember when you were stating who the interim coach would be threads when actual smart people like superfan were telling you he wouldn't be fired for the very reason you have finally realized.
It’s a charade.If we aren’t serious about being competitive in Football than drop down altogether.
Again more lies from Al. I never said anyone would definitively be the interim coach. I offered options. Continuously telling lies from your burner accounts isn't helping your cause here.
Work on your beer belly and less on something you know nothing about. Sports. You'll be better off.
Shows there is no plan or desire to fix the problem. He hopes what fans are left will just keep spending money. Embarrassing direction for a B1G Football team .
Last edited:
Excellent recap of our situation. The real impact will come to light next season we see the impact this decision has on the Football revenues and Budget.
Somebody else said it best, we can’t afford to live in the nice neighborhood but try to fake it. I can only imagine the things that are said about Rutgers behind closed doors amongst big ten leadership.
My guess is we're talked about like the Kansas City Royals or Pittsburgh Pirates ... we're happy to take a cut of the money and get our asses kicked by the Yankees and Dodgers every year.
When Rutgers got in to the B1G - on some real merits - I thought it might be because the B1G brass wanted more cupcake teams so it wasn't all boss teams beating each other up. There was a lot of conference scheduling discussion going on. As it is now I think if a team plays two OOC teams only one will count for a bowl. That's where RU and Terps come in.
"A school can still put two FCS opponents on its football schedule, but once the College Football Playoff expands to 24 teams in 2027, only one of those games can help its case with the selection committee if it wins both. The second win will still show up in the standings. It carries no weight in the playoff evaluation."
They say, “thank God for Rutgers. We need somebody to lose games.” You can’t have a top half of the conference without a bottom half.
Spend $$$$ on players and we will win! This whole Coach Schiano thing is a film flam, another 10 years of losing with some other high paid guy who won’t have the players.
Either spend $$$$ on players or forget it!
I hear that but my thing is, why else would they keep this guy as the coach if it's not about money? If the options are between 1. there not being enough money 2.they think schiano is a good coach, just had two bad years 3.they don't care either way and just want to keep fans in interested enough to spend
. Unless there may be reasons other than that I think it's because of money. Either way until they get a new coach I have no optimism for the program.Someone should ask him or her what the benchmark is for staying on beyond next year. I don't like ambiguous terms like must show "improvement" it should be clearly defined. Then we know if Tate and Zinn are actually serious or not. 7 years without a winning conference record, next year can't be 8 years without one and GS staying on because he reaches a bowl at 6 with a 3-6 conference record. That kind of thing is almost unprecedented in the P4, Wilcox is the only one that got to year 9 without one before being fired mid season. Having a winning conference record every so often (say 3 years or so, that's like 3 times in 10 years is very reasonable) is a goal any team in the P4 should have whether you're RU, Vandy, Duke, Cuse etc. It's not asking a lot. If you have no desire for at least that much there's no point to spending 10s of millions on coaches and players.
I actually do feel Tate and Zinn aren't like anything we've had here before with any AD and certainly any president. I'm just like you all but I get the impression from listening and reading etc..that infrastructure in the AD is changing and improving. Outreach to alums, corporations, sponsors seems more emphasized than ever before. It all takes time but in the long run it benefits the health and well being of the athletic department and its future operation. Just like turning around a large company, it doesn't happen overnight after many years of incompetence and/or neglect.
If there is a clear definition of what the standard should be and what's acceptable (winning conference record) then I can still believe in them and that they are serious about positive change and this whole thing is just one off due to financial circumstances not of their creation. If they don't have that minimal standard then, I'd be skeptical if anything has really changed from the past.
I actually do feel Tate and Zinn aren't like anything we've had here before with any AD and certainly any president. I'm just like you all but I get the impression from listening and reading etc..that infrastructure in the AD is changing and improving. Outreach to alums, corporations, sponsors seems more emphasized than ever before. It all takes time but in the long run it benefits the health and well being of the athletic department and its future operation. Just like turning around a large company, it doesn't happen overnight after many years of incompetence and/or neglect.
If there is a clear definition of what the standard should be and what's acceptable (winning conference record) then I can still believe in them and that they are serious about positive change and this whole thing is just one off due to financial circumstances not of their creation. If they don't have that minimal standard then, I'd be skeptical if anything has really changed from the past.
Last edited:
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football Postgame Show: Nebraska Cornhuskers Edition - TKR Pod
-
02
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football HC Greg Schiano's Nebraska Postgame Press Conference
-
03
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football flattened by Nebraska for fourth straight loss
-
04
The Knight Report
How to watch Rutgers / Nebraska; Pregame Info, Spread, More: Gameday Central
-
05
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football safety Chris Joines out for rest of 2026 season