The deeper we get into this era the more and more it looks like we would’ve been better off either A) staying in AAC or B) joining the ACC which is a little more our speed budget wise and probably would’ve yielded more competitive products albeit lesser competition

-RUFAN4LIFE- said:

Gotta love how they stick to the win first nonsense and ignore that the landscape has changed and that mantra just leaves you in a worse spot now.

And we know they won’t give when they are winning. Donations only went up a little bit when basketball was winning and in the tournament and we’ve never seen the big money come out when football was in lots of bowl games in Greg’s first stint.

Click to expand...

Bowl games? 6-6 and 7-5 for 5 years in a row doesn’t move the needle.
Win 10+ back to back with a realistic shot at doing it again…. And the stadium will be sold out and donations will be double what they are today.

T2Kplus20 said:

And no one should be surprised when it goes back up when Trump okays FSD and cybercabs. It's the game for the next 4 years.

NVDA is dirt cheap. Almost a value stock now.

Click to expand...

jtung230 said:

Trump can ok whatever he wants but Tesla is not ready. The hold up is not Trump.

Click to expand...

They can prematurely approve FSD and cybercabs which will definitely result in a huge run up o TSLA. However when FSD and cybercabs results in deaths (think how the measles outbreak is affecting RFK Jr's plan), then it will all get backtracked really quickly.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

bac2therac said:

Here is your history lesson from Keith

I also stumbled upon the Exit 109 site on my Web TV in 97 after seeing some use net groups a day then of course rutgersfan.com and hundreds of thousands of post later...

The History of Rutgersfan.com

People have often asked me to recount the history of Rutgersfan.com and the history of Rutgers on the web in general. I have often told parts of the

rutgers.rivals.com

Click to expand...

Keith and I still tailgate together in the yellow lot.

Purdue has lost 4 of their last 5. They've been allowing more points then normal and they've been underscoring their average. Rutgers comes into this with some scoring momentum, but also they continue to let up 80 points a game. I don't think this will be a blowout, I think Purdue will struggle a bit offensively as they have, but I think they get enough second chance shots and free throws to score high 70s. Rutgers could be hanging their heads a bit following the Michigan loss, so they could take an edge off their scoring and put them into the 70s. If not I think low 80s, but then if you have high 70s and low 80s, it just feels like it's going to come down to a couple baskets and Purdue at home trying not to bottom out. I could see Purdue getting a couple crucial free throws in the last minute on some ticky tack stuff, but does Rutgers overcome it with a big 3 at the end? I'll say no, we lose by 2, 79-77 and Dylan Grant get a 3 from the left side midway up the arc and doesn't convert at the buzzer.

Login to view embedded media
Huge news if true

Doctor Worm said:

Last year at this time, Brett Baty had been installed as the starting 3B. Mark Vientos had been penciled in as the righty DH, but that ended when they signed JD Martinez. Vientos began the season in the minors.

That was the current Stearns/Mendoza regime.

Although in fairness, neither the current nor the prior regime believed that Vientos had the defensive ability to play third on a regular basis.

Click to expand...

Baty’s D isn’t all that good.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

NotInRHouse said:

Once everyone gets their full allotment in the B1G, we get the same payout. I like that idea better. It works out better for RU. Maybe tOSU fans would disagree. But if everyone gets the same payout, it stands to reason that at least on paper, everyone can move closer to successful programs.

FSU and Clemson are already going to be ahead in NIL so then you add uneven payouts to it and the others can fall further behind.

Click to expand...

Yeah def not sustainable long term to have uneven payouts
May set a precedent for other conferences though, who knows at this point

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

NotInRHouse said:

I would put in its own bucket in a way, I think Boston/DC/Philly have a chip on their shoulder about NYC but Pittsburgh is out there doing its own thing, and a lot of people don't know anything about it.

Click to expand...

Yep agree, Pittsburgh is on its own island out there doing its thing
Cleveland not far but not close, another cool city that's pretty underrated

bac2therac said:

Wasn't there another players brother who threatened to beat someone up from the board? I can't recall his name

Click to expand...

@RU848789 my memory is failing me on this. I don't remember that.

Those were great tailgates. Lots of memories.

Purdue 91
Rutgers 71

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Greene Rice FIG said:

A candidate can say NJ taxpayers paid $200 million the last 4 years paying for Rutgers athletics.

Click to expand...

Taxpayers fund roughly 20% of RUs budget so your numbers don’t add up unless RU spent a billion dollars on athletics the last 4 years.

Mholinko said:

The problem is the old heads on here refuse to give a penny until we have a president and AD

And even at that point they still believe you can succeed in college basketball by contributing the minimum aka ticket sales and concessions

Wrong … never going to happen… college basketball and college athletics in this era will not reward teams who give it the ole college try and try to Hoosiers their way to success

It’s an arms race and while you need a sharpshooter at the end of the rifle (aka a good coach and AD)… you aren’t winning unless your holding a high level weapon or weapons

Click to expand...

Gotta love how they stick to the win first nonsense and ignore that the landscape has changed and that mantra just leaves you in a worse spot now.

And we know they won’t give when they are winning. Donations only went up a little bit when basketball was winning and in the tournament and we’ve never seen the big money come out when football was in lots of bowl games in Greg’s first stint.

DHajekRC84 said:

I'm pretty highly invested and don't have a ton of cash on the sidelines not producing about 5% ROI. But I just took $100k of it and put it into my Etrade account and am buying even for a short term pop when this thing flips back.

Click to expand...

Should just buy crypto if that’s the plan.

A candidate can say NJ taxpayers paid $200 million the last 4 years paying for Rutgers athletics.

Feels like a dejected Oregon level loss coming. PUR by 15-20

29PAS said:

Off

Click to expand...

Topic

Mholinko said:

Again it doesn’t appear political party negatively impacts any schools we’re competing with funding wise

The governor of Ohio, Illinois, Pa, Wisconsin, Maryland, etc don’t seem to be preventing their universities from funding

Not to mention the southern schools

Click to expand...

1. You are looking at the past
2. Some/most states dont have net loss pooulation because of taxes
3. Practically no other school losses more money on athletics than RU