ADVERTISEMENT

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

What a red herring.
RU's athletics debt is not out of line with peer institutions (in spite of the fact that RU is playing catch up having moved into the B1G), but the faculty Union thinks its an easy target so we get articles like this.
Just another reason why collective bargaining should be illegal for "professional" occupations such as teaching.
 
Last edited:
What a red herring.
RU's athletics debt is not out of line with peer institutions (in spite of the fact that RU is playing catch up having moved into the B1G, but the faculty Union thinks its an easy target so we get articles like this.
Just another reason why collective bargaining should be illegal for "professional" occupations such as teaching.
The old Rutgers says they have no money to give us raises and yet look how much money they are spending on football. Remember the more money the professors make the MORE MONEY THE UNION MAKES since this allows them to collect higher fees and all those luxury VEGAS trips they go on with Union Money are not going to pay for itself!

NEVER MIND that most of that Money comes from the Big Ten and if Rutgers didn't offer sports and were not in the Big Ten.. GASP... they would NOT have all that money to spend in the 1st place!
 
WAHHHH oh well … we will be making $55 million next year and when the TV is back up in 2025 it’ll be $70 million … by the time the current recruits are seniors at RU debt will be gone
Huh ?? Yeah I’m pretty sure the athletic department will incur operational costs, scholarship costs & travels costs each year going forward. 🤔Or are you picking up the tab personally?
 
Two reasons for RU: 1.) to just clean up the accounting once and for all.

Barchi ran a revenue center model where every operating unit outside some centralized functions was responsible for their own revenues & expenses.

While that model forces some accountability it had 2 big problems at Rutgers. 1.) It made investment and capital expenditures in growing and new initiatives very expensive unless you could wrangle big grants or donors. And we all know how paltry RU giving is. 2.) It negatively impacted growth areas by turning internal investments into loans or central overhead that needed to be covered by "revenues" (tuition dollars, fees, fannies in seats etc.) and it starved departments that were historically considered top programs nationally or internationally, but were not in fields that had possibilities for big grant support.

For instance, Rutgers has typically had much much stronger humanities programs (History, English, Philosophy, etc.) than other Big Publics and on par with the Ivys in some instances. But under Barchi the humanities were starved.

The humanities at RU like athletics brings certain reputational advantages (obviously very different types and scales) and Barchi's model did not account for "brand" or "investment." To be fair he was dealing with a huge merger with the medical school that brought its own debt and financial issues.

2 ) By forgiving the AD "loans" or reclassifing direct and indirect institutional support, Holloway can wipe the slate clean and it gets rid of stories and attacks like these.

Holloway may also be moving to manage the University holistically rather than by cost center.

Which makes sense if you want to build and strengthen and grow and leverage existing strengths while building up average or underperforming programs like the RU Ad and engineering for instance (nothing wrong with engineering! It's just not as strong vis a vis our peers as other departments & programs).
Good analysis on Rutgers Rant where Sarge, Politi and Kratch note that this is a non-story and old in some ways. They noted that this was all disclosed earlier. Only thing that changed is that Holloway is considering forgiving the University loan to the athletic department. That may have caused an uproar with some faculty members who have now bubbled this up to try to be a "new story." This option to forgive the loan did not seem too surprising to them - they seemed to expect that would happen. Folks can take their own listen to it on the podcast from this week and draw their own conclusions. That is what I took away from it.
 
What are these guys going to do in a couple years when we need to put a 26,000 seat addition on the Stadium.
The way Pikes going we may need a new arena too!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RUTGERS95
Why? If we are worried about money the solution is to cut football. We were fine financial until we invested in football.
Last I saw, the football program breaks even. Cut football and you cut it's revenue and donations as well.
 
Last I saw, the football program breaks even. Cut football and you cut it's revenue and donations as well.
My point was funding as many programs we did wasn’t an issue until we invested in football.

it is tough to do fair accounting to do a P&L per sport as costs and revenues are shared.

I just don’t think other sports lose 70,000,000
 
I am a landlord with 17 properties. According to my jealous neighbor I have too much debt. Let's sell the only two properties that make money - that makes a lot of sense. What a tool you are.
We are losing money every year and there doesn’t seem to be a path towards profitability.

the debt isn’t the issue. The annual deficits are the issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MidwestKnights
Good analysis on Rutgers Rant where Sarge, Politi and Kratch note that this is a non-story and old in some ways. They noted that this was all disclosed earlier. Only thing that changed is that Holloway is considering forgiving the University loan to the athletic department. That may have caused an uproar with some faculty members who have now bubbled this up to try to be a "new story." This option to forgive the loan did not seem too surprising to them - they seemed to expect that would happen. Folks can take their own listen to it on the podcast from this week and draw their own conclusions. That is what I took away from it.
This 100% this, this is all this is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2Kplus20
We are losing money every year and there doesn’t seem to be a path towards profitability.

the debt isn’t the issue. The annual deficits are the issue.
There is no issue. This thread is predicated on a pointless attack on RU athletics comprised largely of disinformation (due to the intentional lack of context that ran contrary to the desired narrative).

There‘s no point in belaboring this non-issue with talk of cutting any sports. No sports need cutting.
 
We are losing money every year and there doesn’t seem to be a path towards profitability.

the debt isn’t the issue. The annual deficits are the issue.
The deficit is all about the cost of the olympic sports and that fact that 1) we had to play catch up on facilities to meet B1G standards and 2) have not received full share of B1G revenue. What a leader you wold be - of course I am certain you have never been given responsibility to lead.
 
Olympic sports don’t cost what our annual deficit is. There is no way. The cost of Olympic sports were a non issue until we invested in football.

No need for the personal attacks. Plus you are 100% wrong with your last sentence.
 
There is no issue. This thread is predicated on a pointless attack on RU athletics comprised largely of disinformation (due to the intentional lack of context that ran contrary to the desired narrative).

There‘s no point in belaboring this non-issue with talk of cutting any sports. No sports need cutting.
You have a lot of good things to say and I believe you are intelligent. I think you would also agree the media and especially certain newspapers have a very important role to play when it comes to politics.

I am going to guess there are things in this article that should be known. I think Rutgers owes it to the taxpayers of NJ to be transparent.

I don’t think this is a pointless attack. It may be an attack.
 
Last edited:
You have a lot of good things to say and I believe you are intelligent. I think you would also agree the media and especially certain newspapers have a very important role to play when it comes to politics.

I am going to guess there are things in this article that should be known. I think Rutgers owes it to the taxpayers of NJ to be transparent.

I don’t think this is a pointless attack. It may be an attack.
It’s pointless to talk about cutting sports.

The goal is to get our revenue sports to produce enough wins to create a self sustaining cycle of revenue and donations that it covers the entire athletics program including non-revenue sports. That doesn’t happen without first investing in the revenue sports at an appropriate level.

RU has never historically done that. Now it is. We got hit by a pandemic right when the school began to invest properly in it’s revenue sports. Which creates a temporary loss of revenue right as we’ve just invested heavily.

Borrowing money internally and against our BIg Ten share is part of all this. And perfectly okay.

A strong athletics department is good for the school. It provides lots of benefits in terms of branding and visibility that just won’t happen without it. Think of it like a marketing expense.

Two of my kids, very good students with lots of options to go almost anywhere they wanted chose to go through the RU honors program for their undergrad degrees. Neither one would’ve even considered doing so if not for their exposure to the school via the football program during Schiano‘s first stint here.

It’s not that they are big on college football, they aren’t. It’s that they associated good times and family togetherness with RUFB games which lodged RU in their heads as a potential destination. Without that exposure, that positive marketing of the brand through the football program, there was zero chance they would’ve opted to go to RU. One is now a lawyer. The other is in a PhD program for Physical therapy and will likely own her own practice at some point. They both had very positive experiences with the school and are likely to be good donors o the school.

That sort of thing is a great way for RU to continue to build the quality of it’s academic programs, and improve it’s reputation, by bringing in more and more high GPA kids who then go on to grad schools become very successful and subsequently give back to the school.

It sounds like Holloway gets that. Barchi might’ve too, but was hired to manage other priories. To make money, you gotta spend money. RU athletics spending was never good enough to lead to sustainable success. Now we’re finally spending intelligently.
 
I am not for cutting sports. I am vehemently against it.

everything you say I get and respect.

I do think the public has the right to know about the income statement and balance sheet of Rutgers athletics.

My concerns are that competing in the future will become too costly and that at some point us and many other programs will have to cut bait. Changing media and NIL will be the reasons.

I think you would agree without Schiano here there would not be a clear path for survival.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seasidetony
It’s pointless to talk about cutting sports.

The goal is to get our revenue sports to produce enough wins to create a self sustaining cycle of revenue and donations that it covers the entire athletics program including non-revenue sports. That doesn’t happen without first investing in the revenue sports at an appropriate level.

RU has never historically done that. Now it is. We got hit by a pandemic right when the school began to invest properly in it’s revenue sports. Which creates a temporary loss of revenue right as we’ve just invested heavily.

Borrowing money internally and against our BIg Ten share is part of all this. And perfectly okay.

A strong athletics department is good for the school. It provides lots of benefits in terms of branding and visibility that just won’t happen without it. Think of it like a marketing expense.

Two of my kids, very good students with lots of options to go almost anywhere they wanted chose to go through the RU honors program for their undergrad degrees. Neither one would’ve even considered doing so if not for their exposure to the school via the football program during Schiano‘s first stint here.

It’s not that they are big on college football, they aren’t. It’s that they associated good times and family togetherness with RUFB games which lodged RU in their heads as a potential destination. Without that exposure, that positive marketing of the brand through the football program, there was zero chance they would’ve opted to go to RU. One is now a lawyer. The other is in a PhD program for Physical therapy and will likely own her own practice at some point. They both had very positive experiences with the school and are likely to be good donors o the school.

That sort of thing is a great way for RU to continue to build the quality of it’s academic programs, and improve it’s reputation, by bringing in more and more high GPA kids who then go on to grad schools become very successful and subsequently give back to the school.

It sounds like Holloway gets that. Barchi might’ve too, but was hired to manage other priories. To make money, you gotta spend money. RU athletics spending was never good enough to lead to sustainable success. Now we’re finally spending intelligently.
And with results (W’s) to show what can happen when you do this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mildone
And with results (W’s) to show what can happen when you do this.
One can argue money is needed to be in the game. Money only gets you to the table. The results are because with the money we hired Schiano and assistants.

id bet, on average, if there were no Schiano 2/3 of the final 3 list would fail.
 
One can argue money is needed to be in the game. Money only gets you to the table. The results are because with the money we hired Schiano and assistants.

id bet, on average, if there were no Schiano 2/3 of the final 3 list would fail.
We are eating at that table now…the other sports are showing progress because we were finally seated ($$$) at the B1G restaurant.

Bigger budget (from the B1G) allows for a better hires and the ability to recover quicker from the bad ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mildone
We are eating at that table now…the other sports are showing progress because we were finally seated ($$$) at the B1G restaurant.

Bigger budget (from the B1G) allows for a better hires and the ability to recover quicker from the bad ones.
Yum.

The question that hopefully won’t be need to asked. When do you say enough is enough. Schiano and Pike have is on the right path. We need to continue to thread the needle.
 
Yum.

The question that hopefully won’t be need to asked. When do you say enough is enough. Schiano and Pike have is on the right path. We need to continue to thread the needle.
I’m not even talking about those guys or those particular sports…we are finally beginning to see tangible results at some Olympic sports because of the increase of their respective budgets.

That success is what hopefully leads us to what @mildone was saying earlier…a successful Athletics program overall (and not just Football and MBB) might not end up paying for it or themselves but an increase in donations to those individual sports OR the school in general can’t hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mildone
That would be nice. I 100 percent understand you shouldn’t even bother casting if you don’t have bait.

this is all about generating enough revenue to stay in the game
 
I am not for cutting sports. I am vehemently against it.

everything you say I get and respect.

I do think the public has the right to know about the income statement and balance sheet of Rutgers athletics.

My concerns are that competing in the future will become too costly and that at some point us and many other programs will have to cut bait. Changing media and NIL will be the reasons.

I think you would agree without Schiano here there would not be a clear path for survival.
Yes, everything should be transparent and I am skeptical that anything is being hidden. Visible to the curious is one thing. Advertising inner workings of the AD is anither and is not necessary. I also don’t beleive that NJ taxpayers are paying much, if anything, to sustain RU athletics via their state taxes. I’m willing to listen if someone knows (factually and w/proof of the numbers) what percent of my taxes goes to RU athletics.

I‘d be willing to bet it’s an insignificant percentage and NJ taxpayers have much, much bigger spending issue fish to fry.

I actually do not believe that Schiano is the only person who can lead the FB program. OSU lost a legendary coach in Meyer and they’re still here and kicking ass, right? But I’m glad GS is here now because he was able to push RU to spend enough to have success. He has restarted the build he started years back. It’s good for us fans, good for the FB program, and good for the university.
 
That would be nice. I 100 percent understand you shouldn’t even bother casting if you don’t have bait.

this is all about generating enough revenue to stay in the game
I’m optimistic that RU is on the right track. Attack articles like the one(s) in question aim to derail our progress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NotInRHouse
This Targum article says that additional information was uncovered in the North Jersey article. That is inaccurate. No new information was uncovered by the article.
 
Talking points…talking points…talking points.

It’s like a relay race at this point where the first bit of “news” is the baton and it goes from one media outlet to the next and so on and so on.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT