‘Unsustainable’: How Rutgers athletics quietly racked up $265M in debt

[mildone]

Here is a profile of the main investigative reporter who wrote the story. Checked out her LinkedIn profile, and no college degree is listed?

View embedded media

Here is a review of one of her other investigative masterpieces on charter schools from an education policy journal based at the Harvard Kennedy School. Investigative journalists are out for clicks and have to sensationalize mundane facts to weave their narrative. As @e5fdny said- "It's what they do." They did the same thing in their hatchet job on RU Athletics :

Part of the investigative journalism racket, at least in this example, is framing news with negative innuendo, in a way that looks damning, even when nothing illegal has taken place ......”
......
Another trick of the journalist trade is to put the journalist’s own opinion in the mouths of “experts.”
.......

You might wonder what these three professors have in common. It turns out that all of them have directly or indirectly accepted funding from labor unions, which have been hostile to charter schools. That funding isn’t disclosed by the investigative journalists to readers.

One can easily understand why readers might have come away with the impression that the reporters do oppose charter schools. Maybe it was the “flawed experiment” headline. Maybe it was the mafia murder reference.

Newspaper Hit Piece on Charter Schools Misses The Mark

Reader hours, reporter time disappear into flawed journalistic experiment

www.educationnext.org

The timing strongly suggests that someone or some organization is driving this most recent rehashed attack on RU athletics. Not the usual anti-athletics faculty, they’re just pawns and are being used. The journalists are likely also pawns. Very willing ones, but still pawns.

Could be political, could be something else. Also appears that someone inside the administration is involved, a disgruntled employee perhaps. Never a shortage of such people.

Who, behind the scenes, is the real target and who benefits, are the questions. The obvious answers are often not the correct answers with these hit pieces.

The one thing that’s clear is that this is not a case of “exposing the truth” or “informing the public”.

 

[Ridge 22]

These kind of articles and conversations make me insane, as they are often pushing an anti-football agenda and are very misleading in how they portray the situation. Often, you see athletics and football used as interchangeable terms in these debates. They are not. Football at full share will bring in $60M a year in media rights alone. That is before tickets, concessions, parking, donations etc. Football will easily cover itself with that revenue stream. Men's BB as well. And that is before you even get into the intangible advertising benefits the University receives as result of having a football team in the B1G. It is once you go beyond those sports where the losses begin. If we want to be cost neutral, it is really easy to do. Just cut all the Olympic sports, especially the women's programs which bring in next to nothing in revenue. But wait, we can't because of Title IX. I wish these articles would tell it like it is. Football and Men's BB cover themselves. It is the other sports that create most of the losses and which we are largely required to run. Not suggesting it would ever be good thing to cut these sports, and we need them to be in the B1G as well. But at least put all this in perspective. The problem isn't really football, but everything else.

 

[GSGS]

NJ Gov Murphy was asked about this in his news conference yesterday. Specifically, he was asked about borrowing that was used to support the operating budget that was only supposed to be available for capital projects. Murphy responded that he is aware of the issue and allegations, but hasn't had a chance to look into in detail. He continued that if the allegations of borrowing to support the operating budget were true, he would consider it a very serious matter.

 

[mildone]

These kind of articles and conversations make me insane, as they are often pushing an anti-football agenda and are very misleading in how they portray the situation. Often, you see athletics and football used as interchangeable terms in these debates. They are not. Football at full share will bring in $60M a year in media rights alone. That is before tickets, concessions, parking, donations etc. Football will easily cover itself with that revenue stream. Men's BB as well. And that is before you even get into the intangible advertising benefits the University receives as result of having a football team in the B1G. It is once you go beyond those sports where the losses begin. If we want to be cost neutral, it is really easy to do. Just cut all the Olympic sports, especially the women's programs which bring in next to nothing in revenue. But wait, we can't because of Title IX. I wish these articles would tell it like it is. Football and Men's BB cover themselves. It is the other sports that create most of the losses and which we are largely required to run. Not suggesting it would ever be good thing to cut these sports, and we need them to be in the B1G as well. But at least put all this in perspective. The problem isn't really football, but everything else.

There isn’t a problem. Things aren’t ideal, but if the revenue sports can continue to improve and win games, and the fan base grows as a result, and if the pandemic doesn’t worsen, then finances will take care of themselves.

No need to cut any sports. No need to take this disinformation filled hit piece seriously.

 

[Ridge 22]

There isn’t a problem. Things aren’t ideal, but if the revenue sports can continue to improve and win games, and the fan base grows as a result, and if the pandemic doesn’t worsen, then finances will take care of themselves.

No need to cut any sports. No need to take this disinformation filled hit piece seriously.

Agree with all this. But there is certainly a disinformation problem out there.

 

[mildone]

NJ Gov Murphy was asked about this in his news conference yesterday. Specifically, he was asked about borrowing that was used to support the operating budget that was only supposed to be available for capital projects. Murphy responded that he is aware of the issue and allegations, but hasn't had a chance to look into in detail. He continued that if the allegations of borrowing to support the operating budget were true, he would consider it a very serious matter.

Murphy, like any other politician everywhere, is going to see which way the wind blows politically before staking out a position. But the way politics works, 95% of what’s really going on is maneuvering behind closed doors, unknown to the general public.

For all we know, pressuring Murphy in some way is the real agenda of all this and trashing RU athletics is basically a tool, effectively making RU athletics collateral damage.

Or maybe Holloway is the target. Who knows.

People should resist being unwitting pawns in someone’s power play. Again, there’s no chance this is just “informing the public”. Not given the timing and the obvious slant of the article.

 

[wheezer]

You could extend the argument to high school sports as well.

Also, most universities do not include facilities in the sports budgets so the ~$265 million debt should be half. ~$40 million is a loan from the B10 which is backed by guaranteed money. So, we are really looking at $92 million debt over six years (~$15 million per year). In 2021 Rutgers received ~$43 million (smaller due to Big10 loan) and will grow to ~$65 million in 2027. The numbers looks promising.

I inquired in another thread if RU reports things differently, and you have pointed out a difference, RU reporting facilities in the sports budget while other programs do not.

if this is true, is should be made very obvious to the people of NJ.....or, start reporting numbers the same as other universities do.

 

[rurichdog]

I inquired in another thread if RU reports things differently, and you have pointed out a difference, RU reporting facilities in the sports budget while other programs do not.

if this is true, is should be made very obvious to the people of NJ.....or, start reporting numbers the same as other universities do.

Can't do that.
We have to be the one University that reports it fair & straight.

 

[wheezer]

Can't do that.
We have to be the one University that reports it fair & straight.

If anything, report it both ways....and indicate the OTHER way is the way other universities do it.... if the negative number is cut in half, or more, this way, it would seem a good idea

 

[Tango Two]

'Takes your breath away': Murphy calls Rutgers athletics' financial woes 'concerning'​

'Takes your breath away': Murphy calls Rutgers athletics' financial woes 'concerning'

The debt includes loans from the university and Big Ten to cover years of annual athletics department operating shortfalls of up to $73 million.

www.northjersey.com

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

There isn’t a problem. Things aren’t ideal, but if the revenue sports can continue to improve and win games, and the fan base grows as a result, and if the pandemic doesn’t worsen, then finances will take care of themselves.

No need to cut any sports. No need to take this disinformation filled hit piece seriously.

I'd agree with all of this, but disinformation campaigns these days have a way of being effective when ignored.

 

[RUInsanity]

The timing strongly suggests that someone or some organization is driving this most recent rehashed attack on RU athletics. Not the usual anti-athletics faculty, they’re just pawns and are being used. The journalists are likely also pawns. Very willing ones, but still pawns.

Could be political, could be something else. Also appears that someone inside the administration is involved, a disgruntled employee perhaps. Never a shortage of such people.

Who, behind the scenes, is the real target and who benefits, are the questions. The obvious answers are often not the correct answers with these hit pieces.

The one thing that’s clear is that this is not a case of “exposing the truth” or “informing the public”.

Election Year for Governor?

 

[Knight Shift]

'Takes your breath away': Murphy calls Rutgers athletics' financial woes 'concerning'​

'Takes your breath away': Murphy calls Rutgers athletics' financial woes 'concerning'

The debt includes loans from the university and Big Ten to cover years of annual athletics department operating shortfalls of up to $73 million.

www.northjersey.com

‘Unsustainable’: How Rutgers athletics quietly racked up $265M in debt

We can't cut a bunch. The absolute most we can cut is two men's sports under NCAA rules. It's not going to solve the problem. A proper amount of funding from the state will make a real difference. Cut 4 men's and 4 women's sports. Nice and fair!

rutgers.forums.rivals.com

 

[Tango Two]

‘Unsustainable’: How Rutgers athletics quietly racked up $265M in debt

We can't cut a bunch. The absolute most we can cut is two men's sports under NCAA rules. It's not going to solve the problem. A proper amount of funding from the state will make a real difference. Cut 4 men's and 4 women's sports. Nice and fair!

rutgers.forums.rivals.com

Some people can't get to one or another with paywalls so a second was posted from a second source

 

[mildone]

Agree with all this. But there is certainly a disinformation problem out there.

True. But there’s always lots of disinformation about lots of stuff. It’s a constant problem made worse by the growth of the internet.

Seems like there‘s a 99.9% disinformation to .1% verifiable fact out there. And it seems to me people have lost their capacity for skepticism. But maybe we never had much of that to start with.

I’m skeptical of everything all the time. “Maybe“ is becoming my favorite word. “We’ll see” my favorite phrase.

 

[mildone]

I inquired in another thread if RU reports things differently, and you have pointed out a difference, RU reporting facilities in the sports budget while other programs do not.

if this is true, is should be made very obvious to the people of NJ.....or, start reporting numbers the same as other universities do.

That makes sense to me. Although someone will surely write an article calling it misleading. Can’t win with those who want to stir shit up.

 

[mildone]

I'd agree with all of this, but disinformation campaigns these days have a way of being effective when ignored.

That’s true. It can be hard to respond well to disinformation sometimes. Responses can create a problem where there wasn’t one to to start with.

Sometimes, the way to make a problem go away is through indirection. An indirect counter-attack.

My guess is that, whomever is behind all this, they aren’t done and there are probably additional planned attacks. When we see them, that will confirm that this is agenda-driven as opposed to informative. And it might become more clear who the real target is.

 

[mildone]

Election Year for Governor?

Maybe, but if he’s the target, which is an unknown, then I’d guess it’d more likely something we’ll never know about. A legislative issue or other issue over which the Governor has influence.

Nut really, it’s pure speculation. I just mentioned it as a possibility. One of hundreds of possibilities. The key thing is we can see it’s an attack. An attempt to form a public narrative. There’s an agenda, not just some unbiased presentation of useful facts.

We’ll probably never know the intended target(s) or whom is behind it. But figuring that out would be real investigative journalism. Expose the attacker(s).

 

[LotusAggressor]

Whether any of this is true or not, it won't end well.

 

[e5fdny]

The timing strongly suggests that someone or some organization is driving this most recent rehashed attack on RU athletics. Not the usual anti-athletics faculty, they’re just pawns and are being used. The journalists are likely also pawns. Very willing ones, but still pawns.

Could be political, could be something else. Also appears that someone inside the administration is involved, a disgruntled employee perhaps. Never a shortage of such people.

Who, behind the scenes, is the real target and who benefits, are the questions. The obvious answers are often not the correct answers with these hit pieces.

The one thing that’s clear is that this is not a case of “exposing the truth” or “informing the public”.

You did say the timing was interesting, right?😉

 

[RU-05]

These kind of articles and conversations make me insane, as they are often pushing an anti-football agenda and are very misleading in how they portray the situation. Often, you see athletics and football used as interchangeable terms in these debates. They are not. Football at full share will bring in $60M a year in media rights alone. That is before tickets, concessions, parking, donations etc. Football will easily cover itself with that revenue stream. Men's BB as well. And that is before you even get into the intangible advertising benefits the University receives as result of having a football team in the B1G. It is once you go beyond those sports where the losses begin. If we want to be cost neutral, it is really easy to do. Just cut all the Olympic sports, especially the women's programs which bring in next to nothing in revenue. But wait, we can't because of Title IX. I wish these articles would tell it like it is. Football and Men's BB cover themselves. It is the other sports that create most of the losses and which we are largely required to run. Not suggesting it would ever be good thing to cut these sports, and we need them to be in the B1G as well. But at least put all this in perspective. The problem isn't really football, but everything else.

Problem with this argument is, we lose so much on the non revenue sports because we are in the Big Ten. Why are we in the Big Ten? Because of Football and Basketball.

Being in the Big Ten also squashes the Title IX argument. The conference does not let us in if we only field revenue positive sports.

 

[rurichdog]

Murphy saying "it takes your breath away" is rich...he's blushing about the State University's financial accounting, after spending 20 years at Goldman Sachs. Right.

 

[RU-05]

Murphy saying "it takes your breath away" is rich...he's blushing about the State University's financial accounting, after spending 20 years at Goldman Sachs. Right.

Did Goldman lose a ton of money when Murphy was there?

 

[Ridge 22]

Problem with this argument is, we lose so much on the non revenue sports because we are in the Big Ten. Why are we in the Big Ten? Because of Football and Basketball.

Being in the Big Ten also squashes the Title IX argument. The conference does not let us in if we only field revenue positive sports.

I understand all that. But that wasn't my point. My point was that these articles and conversations typically make it appear that the source of the problem is the vast amounts of money spent on football. True, football is by far the most expensive program to run. But it also brings in the most money and is often a source of income to fund the other non-revenue sports. To me, arguing that a school spends too much on football misses the larger point. Yes, you could cut football and save $50M, but if it costs you $100M in revenue, how does that make sense (my numbers are arbitrary, but you get the point). The real issue is all the $ spent on the non-revenue sports, but the articles never even mention that. The $ problem is driven by Title IX and the Olympic sports. Yet none of this is ever presented in perspective.

 

[rurichdog]

Did Goldman lose a ton of money when Murphy was there?

Maybe Murphy can pull up a chair & teach us how to really paper over losses while over reporting revenues and make it all look squeaky clean to the regulators.

 

[mildone]

You did say the timing was interesting, right?😉

LOL. Having read some of the obsessive RUFB hatred on their board, it wouldn’t totally shock me to find out some well-off Sara alumn was behind the attack.

 

[mildone]

Whether any of this is true or not, it won't end well.

I don’t think this attack will go anywhere other than creating some noise for a while.

 

[mildone]

Murphy saying "it takes your breath away" is rich...he's blushing about the State University's financial accounting, after spending 20 years at Goldman Sachs. Right.

No, he’s making a typical politicians statement that assuages those who want him to be outraged without actually committing to any position at all. He qualified all his comments with a lot of ifs.

Insofar as his reaction to this RU athletics attack in the media, he’s no better or worse than any other governor of any other state at any time in history. It’s politics 101.

 

[RUInsanity]

Maybe, but if he’s the target, which is an unknown, then I’d guess it’d more likely something we’ll never know about. A legislative issue or other issue over which the Governor has influence.

Nut really, it’s pure speculation. I just mentioned it as a possibility. One of hundreds of possibilities. The key thing is we can see it’s an attack. An attempt to form a public narrative. There’s an agenda, not just some unbiased presentation of useful facts.

We’ll probably never know the intended target(s) or whom is behind it. But figuring that out would be real investigative journalism. Expose the attacker(s).

Although they may have died down a bit since our integration into the BIG, attacks against RU Athletics Spending/Funding have been going on in earnest since the original stadium renovation / Mulchahy era. While many other states staunchly support their schools and programs ........ I think in general it's just a Jersey thing to eat our own.

 

[mildone]

Although they may have died down a bit since our integration into the BIG, attacks against RU Athletics Spending/Funding have been going on in earnest since the original stadium renovation / Mulchahy era. While many other states staunchly support their schools and programs ........ I think in general it's just a Jersey thing to eat our own.

Can’t argue any of that.

 

[RU-05]

Maybe Murphy can pull up a chair & teach us how to really paper over losses while over reporting revenues and make it all look squeaky clean to the regulators.

I kind of felt the issue with Goldman was they made too much money.

 

[RU-05]

I understand all that. But that wasn't my point. My point was that these articles and conversations typically make it appear that the source of the problem is the vast amounts of money spent on football. True, football is by far the most expensive program to run. But it also brings in the most money and is often a source of income to fund the other non-revenue sports. To me, arguing that a school spends too much on football misses the larger point. Yes, you could cut football and save $50M, but if it costs you $100M in revenue, how does that make sense (my numbers are arbitrary, but you get the point). The real issue is all the $ spent on the non-revenue sports, but the articles never even mention that. The $ problem is driven by Title IX and the Olympic sports. Yet none of this is ever presented in perspective.

I think you are right that these articles should clarify the situation(I didn't read this one), and you are right it should be noted that Football is not a money loser(though I'm pretty sure they took the football stadium expenses out of the accounting mix, so that is fuzzy math in my book) but you also can't say "the problem is Title IX and the Olympic sports" when, again, the reason those sports are currently losing money they way that they do, is because we are in the Big Ten, and we are in the Big Ten because of football.

Football is the reason those sports are losing money at the rate the currently do.

 

[mildone]

I kind of felt the issue with Goldman was they made too much money.

How can anybody ever make too much money?

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

unfortunately, the situation in New Jersey is that the wealthy and powerful families all have generational ties to schools other than Rutgers, be that Ivy or Catholic or other "name" schools.

they all want the schools where they send their kids to have as many programs and benefits as possible... and want none of their tax dollars going to Rutgers for similar benefits and programs.

meanwhile.. the socialist politician/media cabal wants all tax dollars to be controlled by them... whether that is in Rutgers budget or elsewhere.. they need to pay off their power base. it is easy enough to see what they did with full control over UMDNJ... they want that for Rutgers too.

 

[mildone]

and we are in the Big Ten because of football.

I‘m not sure that’s true. At least, it depends on what you mean. There are multiple reasons we got the invite and there are multiple reasons we accepted.

 

[e5fdny]

Although they may have died down a bit since our integration into the BIG, attacks against RU Athletics Spending/Funding have been going on in earnest since the original stadium renovation / Mulchahy era. While many other states staunchly support their schools and programs ........ I think in general it's just a Jersey thing to eat our own.

Can’t argue any of that.

Agree.

And as to the “Jersey eats its own” thing, I think there is a lot to what @GoodOl'Rutgers said too…it’s not good enough for some and “why are we paying for this” from others.

 

[MidwestKnights]

The timing strongly suggests that someone or some organization is driving this most recent rehashed attack on RU athletics. Not the usual anti-athletics faculty, they’re just pawns and are being used. The journalists are likely also pawns. Very willing ones, but still pawns.

Could be political, could be something else. Also appears that someone inside the administration is involved, a disgruntled employee perhaps. Never a shortage of such people.

Who, behind the scenes, is the real target and who benefits, are the questions. The obvious answers are often not the correct answers with these hit pieces.

The one thing that’s clear is that this is not a case of “exposing the truth” or “informing the public”.

Exactly.

 

[MidwestKnights]

Election Year for Governor?

And the full state legislature.

 

[Knight Shift]

How can anybody ever make too much money?

Ask the progressives, and not talking flow. Bobby Reich bemoans your favorite car maker CEO Elon Musk's earnings and says there is something wrong with our system.

 

[mildone]

Ask the progressives, and not talking flow. Bobby Reich bemoans your favorite car maker CEO Elon Musk's earnings and says there is something wrong with our system.

Complaining about others making too much money is a pretty bipartisan thing. Sure, libs and cons target their complaints at different professions. And both sides beleive their reasoning for complaining is valid while the other side’s is totally wrong-minded. But everybody seems to want some batch of people to make less. And virtually nobody thinks they themselves are paid too much, or have too much.

Me, I think everyone should make as much as they can while playing by the rules. Doesn’t matter to me if we’re taking a janitor in a government job or a billionaire CEO. Good for them all, I say.