“Has a coach ever been more important to a school than Greg Schiano is to Rutgers?”
- Thread starter Tango Two
- Start date
They have. really. College Football Country anyway... just had a nice segment on CGD this morning... at about 9:20 am they had a nice discussion about Rutgers at Nebraska.. even though the game is unranked teams on FS1.
Perhaps is GS was a contemporary of Bateman he would have been a better coach way back then in the stone age of college football. GS played LB at Bucknell beginning in 1985. Rutgers last played Bucknell in 1979 and we're only 16-14 vs them. It was a different world of Rutgers Football when Bateman coached. To reach that far back to attack this thread and GS is.. well.. stupid.
Bottom Line: yes. GS is very important to Rutgers Football. Objectively so.
Should he be? No. Not any more than any head coach is. They are all important.. positively or negatively.
But no one else these days seems to be able to get it done here. Haters can offer up any number of names of coaches and blame the fan base for not being able to afford to hire their imaginary guaranteed successful coaches who are better tan GS and would be more important.. but that argument is moot at best. We have had coaches recommended by Superbowl winner Bill Walsh and by Wisconsin Legend Barry Alvarez.. both sucked... but we could afford them.
Last edited:
I’m a GS hater? That’s a hilariously ironic cultish response. 🤣
Your post is full of misrepresentations. I never said people “admiring the job” GS has done have issues. In fact, I wrote that admiration is fine. Appreciation is fine. Fondness is fine.
And trying to paint me as someone who fears being direct in his attacks? Hello, how long have you been in this forum?
I hope that with our conference affiliation,facilities upgrades, stronger expectations in terms of spending and coaching salaries, and rejuvenated fanbase, we will be able to keep it going whenever Schiano hangs it up. But there is no doubt that building it up will have been due mostly to him. The second rebuild isn't done yet. We haven't had a run of winning teams in version 2.0 yet. But the trajectory looks good, and if he gets us there he will deserve his statue.
Sure. You just told us everything you know about him. But you cannot know what he would do if he were hired to replace Shea or Ash or both. What is so hard to understand about that?
You keep expressing a false choice (invalidly binary choice) whereby people must either agree with your opinion or else they are “haters”. That is a sophomoric debate tactic typically used either by people who understand their position to be unsupportable in a properly nuanced discussion, or by zealots.
The topic of this thread is entirely subjective and far too broad a question for there to be a deterministic means of defining a factually correct answer. Nobody voicing their opinion can be objectively determined to be either correct or incorrect.
It’s like saying that someone who thinks Jordan was better than Lebron must be a Lebron hater. False, silly, dumb. It’s subjective and there is no correct answer.
Yeah.. you played a little game in your post. You did say appreciation is fine.. and that's the little cookie that allows you to then associate the entire appreciation thread with "hero worship".
We did see what you did there and what you always do. You pretend to be balanced and reasonable while being unreasonably critical. Hero worship?
"None of them, nor GS, should be hero-worshipped. It’s tacky and undignified. It’s always undignified to worship another human being. That’s what cults are made of and cults suck."
You set yourself up as teh arbiter of what is adulation and hero worship and cultish behavior while allowing there is some proper level of appreciation.. but clearly implying that this whole thread is not that.
I see what you did and the only reason to bother doing so is to limit appreciation for Schiano.
Okay.. you tell me. Why bother claiming this thread is hero worship and adulation and cultish behavior. Even the "Schiano is god" comment is not serious.. you know it. Where do you draw the line between appreciation and adulation? And explain why you feel the need to draw such line in the first place?
Is GS doing a good job or a great job? Is someone says "great" and you think it is only "good".. does that make than a cult follower?
C'mon. Surely you know what you are doing and why. There are many here who don't like Schiano and do not want to see him "appreciated" publicly and are biding their time for a big failure.. any failure.. on his part so they can really lay into him. So when things go well.. they seek to be more balanced and nuanced in expressing their thoughts on Schiano. And I see your tact here as a case of that.
That there’s one convoluted conspiracy theory. 🤣
Have you considered a career in scriptwriting for daytime soap operas? You sure have the right sort of imagination for it.
I said Schiano is solid. He’s just not out savior bc he’s not even the best coach we’ve ever had … he’s under 500. You don’t wanna look at league record
You are twisting yourself into knots trying to invent some convoluted hidden intent. If I wanted to attack or criticize GS or anybody else, I would just do it.
The idea that any sports coach anywhere is all that important to any major university is too worshipful, too cultish a concept for my tastes. It’s how you wind up with a PSU/Paterno/Sandusky situation.
What you’re missing here is that my point isn’t specifically about GS. It’s about all coaches in all sports at all times at all schools everywhere. Saban, Meyer, it doesn’t matter. It’s about all athletes, all entertainers, all politicians, etc.
Worshiping and idolization of humans is undignified and dangerous and, throughout human history, has lead to some horrific situations, like the Sandusky coverup and far, far worse.
That is my sole point. All this other crap you are projecting onto me is laughably paranoid nonsense.
But what sparked your response in this thread?
Is it a warning that we shouldn't go that far or are you accusing this fan base of already having gone too far?
That's my point and, I think, why your response had you called a "weirdo".
On the 1st page of posts.. above yours.. that begins with "I greatly dislike this sort of adulation",,, what adulation are you speaking of?
The answer is plain to see in the post you just quoted: “The idea that any sports coach anywhere is all that important to any major university is too worshipful, too cultish a concept for my tastes.”
Like everyone else, the thread title, the subject of the thread is what sparked my response. Obviously.
You understand, right, that every individual who reads the thread title is going to have their own thoughts and feelings about it? That it will prompt widely varied lines of response?
Diversity of thought. Embrace it because it has always been and will always be inherent to humanity, no matter how hard some try to suppress it.
Simple. For the full body of work, it’s not warranted with what @mildone is talking about.
And if you go by what @Eagleton96 said in the top of his post:
The bold matters. As nobody has had this to work with before.
So expectations should be higher.
* If/When it happens, agree.
Not by a mile. Let 2.0 finish over .500 in the conference once and then a few times more before genuflecting in front of his bobblehead in your Schiano grotto.
I will grant you that the OP title and story title go too far, while putting it in the form of a question that almost seems designed to elicit responses like yours.
But at the same time.. this is Rutgers specific, is it not? Has any coach been more important to Rutgers?
I do not see how that suggests worship or cultish behavior on the part of those who look at the history and say, yeah, maybe Schiano is more important to Rutgers while at the same time can bring about counter-argument comparisons to Bear Bryant, Nic Saban (Bryant wins that contest.. without Bryant, Saban would wonder why he should take a job in Alabama.. etc. I'd also suggest JoePA... but we know that has other implications not intended.
So.. the best answer is.. YES.. there have been more sports coaches that were more important to their universities. None of your nonsense regarding adulation need have come into this topic at all. And, yes, I think it makes people question why you should introduce such a thing and if you have the freedom to do so, then we have the freedom to tell you what we think of your idea.
Last edited:
Dr.John and Burnsie were very good HCs when Rutgers was playing mainly a D-1AA football schedules with the backing they received.
I feel Greg could have been as successful under the support Rutgers was giving and the type of schedule played.
With the proper support I feel both would have Rutgers a winner , Frank Burns found out how without the support the program fails no matter how good the HC is.
I believe Schiano would have fared the same if he received the type of support Burns received once RU decided to play a harder schedule
What makes Schiano stand out is: Greg1 gave Mulcahy a list of things he needed to turn Rutgers into a good program, Bob M gave him what was needed and Rutgers became a good ( not great) program in the G1 era
Before the G2 era started Schiano and the RU AD ( at the time) were at odds over what Schiano wanted to return as RU HC.
It was more than just salary it was length of contract and improvements to program Schiano was demanding .
Pat Hobbs the AD wasn't to interested in hiring Greg and it looked like Schiano was out of the picture until Rutgers fans started speaking out and demanding Rutgers hired Schiano or Rutgers would lose their support.
Schiano and Hobbs reached a compromise on what support the football program would get and Schiano got the length of contract he wanted .
Thus the G2 era was started and now might just be a repeat of the G1 era in terms of program respectability being obtained due to Greg’s rebuilding efforts.
The question is: will the G2 era have Rutgers reach elite status, or like during G1 times fall a little short of that goal.
But for now building a constant winner is what counts and Greg has proven capable of doing that
I can't say if Bateman or Burns would have brought RU to the elite level or just made sure Rutgers was a constant winner and just below being considered one of the best
As for comparing Greg Schiano, John Bateman and Frank Burns, I feel Greg,Frank and John are all cut from the same cloth and all three are winners .
I feel Greg could have been as successful under the support Rutgers was giving and the type of schedule played.
With the proper support I feel both would have Rutgers a winner , Frank Burns found out how without the support the program fails no matter how good the HC is.
I believe Schiano would have fared the same if he received the type of support Burns received once RU decided to play a harder schedule
What makes Schiano stand out is: Greg1 gave Mulcahy a list of things he needed to turn Rutgers into a good program, Bob M gave him what was needed and Rutgers became a good ( not great) program in the G1 era
Before the G2 era started Schiano and the RU AD ( at the time) were at odds over what Schiano wanted to return as RU HC.
It was more than just salary it was length of contract and improvements to program Schiano was demanding .
Pat Hobbs the AD wasn't to interested in hiring Greg and it looked like Schiano was out of the picture until Rutgers fans started speaking out and demanding Rutgers hired Schiano or Rutgers would lose their support.
Schiano and Hobbs reached a compromise on what support the football program would get and Schiano got the length of contract he wanted .
Thus the G2 era was started and now might just be a repeat of the G1 era in terms of program respectability being obtained due to Greg’s rebuilding efforts.
The question is: will the G2 era have Rutgers reach elite status, or like during G1 times fall a little short of that goal.
But for now building a constant winner is what counts and Greg has proven capable of doing that
I can't say if Bateman or Burns would have brought RU to the elite level or just made sure Rutgers was a constant winner and just below being considered one of the best
As for comparing Greg Schiano, John Bateman and Frank Burns, I feel Greg,Frank and John are all cut from the same cloth and all three are winners .
Last edited:
Include it all (1.0 and 2.0) since we’re talking about the one guy in the jist of the thread. Like for example, the years 2007-2011 I think many of us were expecting more or at least the next step.
As mentioned by others, there is lot more work with now. So with that, expectations should be higher. Which IMO is very fair.
Meaning don’t just talk about a great night almost 20 years ago and a nice start this year.
we did eapect more after the 2006 season and Schiano never reached the expectations that Rutgers fans had .
I'm not saying Schiano's the greatest, just saying he's good enough to make Rutgers into a respectable program when taking over a trash heap.
G1 was good enough to make Rutgers a just below top 25 program, but never proved he could make RU into a constantly ranked program that could be considered BCS Bowl material
G2 looks to be the same, build a winning program , reach respectable status by having winning seasons every year, but not be good enough to be a constant top 25 program.
Expectations of being an elite program wasn't reached the first go around and I doubt RU will reach that level this time.
Right now I expect Greg to build a winner , but not one that would be considered among the best.
Once Rutgers starts winning every year and reached minor bowl games on a constant bases,then I expect to see many RU fans decide Greg can't make Rutgers football better than a program that wins , but not be good enough for the 12 team playoffs .
Then the cry will be " Schiano is paid to much, he's not a good coach" will be heard by the fans that expected better just like last time.
The truth is, Schiano is about the best choice for the type of support the administration is willing to give the football program because he forces them to give more support than they want to .
But if RU ever decides to support the football program and has boosters willing to part with the money it takes to be elite, there are better choices to run the team than what Greg had shown his first goaround and how the program loos under him now.
It looks like a program that can be counted on to contend for minor bowl invites, but nothing more than that.
Rutgers will be good under Greg's guidance, but eventually that won't be good enough for Rutgers Fans because of the expectations of greatness we will come to expect.
Right now I'm bummed over RU being 2 TDs behind at the half and feel RU isn't a come from behind type team.
Score is close enough to overcome, so I have hope
Just took Rutgers , yes Rutgers , to Nebraska and went toe to toe til the end. Wow ! Yes , Schiano is an amazing head coach and on par with any program builder in Cfb history
He's won nothing material in his career.
Meanwhile, Tennessee, the team that flirted with hiring him, is #4 in the country.
He's exceptionally mediocre. The data supports this.
Meanwhile, Tennessee, the team that flirted with hiring him, is #4 in the country.
He's exceptionally mediocre. The data supports this.
Cept that isn't your Tom Osborn Nebby team. Greg has done wonders and the perfect guy to get us back to respectability. Greg isn't (IMHO) the guy who's gonna take us to the next level.
I love you man but jumping back to your previous posts... who exactly have we hired? Flood and Ash? Let me know when we hire a proven top coach that provides a real comparison to "what can happen at Rutgers IF IF IF" And I know it is our own fault and we're lucky to get what we've gotten.
Yeah just bring back Chris Ash. You are a clown. What he has done with this program is nothing short of monumental 2x!
Coach Schiano should be congratulated for getting Rutgers to respectability, however we have never been able to get the best possible results in a season. While certainly better than before, we have never had a big championship year. For this reason I assert Coach Schiano is to college football what Buck Showalter is to MLB.
Both are program builder's that set great foundations for further success, but are not the guys to win championships. Only God knows why but for whatever reason they don't seem like a championship is in the cards.
Both are program builder's that set great foundations for further success, but are not the guys to win championships. Only God knows why but for whatever reason they don't seem like a championship is in the cards.
While other FIRST year coaches are beating #1 teams, have their teams ranked, etc. we are happy going “toe to toe” with unranked Nebraska in year 5. Ughh.
Correct. Comparing him to other recent coaches isn’t the proper lens. A .200 hitter gets twice the hits per AB than a .100 hitter does but still sucks.
Schiano doesn’t suck but he’s nothing special either. If he were coaching Indiana he’d be 4-2 at best.
And if Cignetti were at Rutgers now we’d be top 10.
I’ve been saying it for years…it’s an OFFENSIVE game. And having a coach whose focus is old school defense ain’t the answer.
And that has been Shelby’s full-volume complaint and criticism for years as well. Bad hire unless 6-6 is the end of the rainbow for our fans.
We are basically in total agreement here. 👍
All of my posts, except the last one were before kickoff.
Not a hater at all but as I have said in this thread and others like them, sooner or later we need to see more.
Everything is there now for this program to be just a little more than it is now.
So let’s wait to see how the whole season plays out instead of wringing our hands over one loss.
As previously mentioned on this site my measuring stick for a successful 2.0 was an appearance, not even a win, in what was considered a NYD6 game. And yes, I know the new playoff format has changed some of that but you should all know what I mean.
As of right now there is still a possibility of that happening.
So again, let’s see how the rest of the season plays out and then revisit this discussion.
