ADVERTISEMENT

101.5FM bashing Rutgers Student Subsidy again...

DHajekRC84

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Aug 9, 2001
29,930
19,045
113
well it was snowing so I turned off the music to hear the news/weather...and of course...the headline:

"Highest of 230 schools..supporting its miserable athletics program....blah blah and it won't get better until 5 years or so..."

of course just missing a few facts... but you know this is all the 99% of the listeners hear and believe.

Can't read the paper anymore, watch ESPN anymore, or listen to the damn radio...
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU22
Why do people on this board follow the following three media outlets and then run to this board and complain almost weekly?

-NJ 101.5
-NJ.com/Star Ledger
-Mike Francessa

Here's a tip: don't listen to them. I feel like it would lower my IQ if I did. They cater to a gullible audience.
 
Don't know, haven't listened in a long time. I wish him the best if he's in poor health, but I really don't ever want to hear him on the radio again.
 
Plenty of other things to complain about with the way NJ utilizes their money, a university's sports program for your flag ship school should not be one. Students go for the culture, sports just so happens to be a portion of all college campuses culture. Buddies of mine(were all a year out of school) went all over to SEC schools and bigger programs solely because of the athletics/academics. They wanted big time sports atmosphere whether that be football or basketball schools. The draw of out of state applicants/brains can only help the reputation of Rutgers. People need to get off their high horses and see the hard numbers and progress.
 
Why do people on this board follow the following three media outlets and then run to this board and complain almost weekly?

-NJ 101.5
-NJ.com/Star Ledger
-Mike Francessa

Here's a tip: don't listen to them. I feel like it would lower my IQ if I did. They cater to a gullible audience.

same reason some people either don't read or comprehend what folks write in their post. Or click on and comment in a thread that they want to bitch about for being there? (respectfully) take your own advice and don't click on it. I only put the station on because it was snowing and they do have good weather report and traffic (ok with you?).

For the record I do indeed avoid all of these above...because they get me pissed and make me bitchy!
 
101.5 is generally mimicking the Morton Downey Jr formula
Mort was great. Loved when Stuttering John got to him.
hqdefault.jpg

 
Um except this isnt news it was just a blast for no reason plus the idiots used the $36 million number and did not say anything about the subsidy being cut to $23 million...they lied

The AP interviewed Hobbs recently, and released an article about it yesterday. So yes, it was in the news.
 
Its not new news and they reported old figures...nothing in that article was new

I don't listen to the station, so don't know what they said about it (whether they were right or wrong).

All I'm saying is they talked about it cause the article made the rounds yesterday. Bash the AP for writing about it, not the station for talking about it. (unless they were wrong in their info, I don't know).
 
What was the source of the article. Was it from Rutgers sports information or elsewhere? I would think if we had the cut of close to $20 million in "subsidy" that Rutgers would champion that improvement and get a positive release out as such and also note going forward how the increased B1G revenues will reduce the amount further. As I said do we know what Rutgers sports information released and how it may have been bastardized by some of the local media. The info I have seen mentioned how football had a profit of $8 million and even men's basketball showed a profit.

The issues basically involve the so called non revenue programs that are part of the educational opportunities and experience for many students which are like various other activities and clubs available on campus and funded by student fees. Do any of these groups show a profit...some of which I am sure people would question the need and purpose whether they be political, social, gender or other interest. A lot has to do with the accounting procedures used by the schools which often gets lost in any public commentary and especially in NJ and Rutgers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU22
10% of the subsidy goes to one specific sport, and 70% of that covers the coach's salary. When that coach finally decides the game has passed them by, the subsidy will drop to where the student fees cover more than half of it.
 
10% of the subsidy goes to one specific sport, and 70% of that covers the coach's salary. When that coach finally decides the game has passed them by, the subsidy will drop to where the student fees cover more than half of it.

So... when 7% of the subsidy goes away, student feels will cover more than half of it? That would mean that student fees cover more than 46.5% of it already.
 
So... when 7% of the subsidy goes away, student feels will cover more than half of it? That would mean that student fees cover more than 46.5% of it already.
Yes. Thanks for doing the math for me. (it's actually 45.37% now).
 
Yes. Thanks for doing the math for me. (it's actually 45.37% now).

So... moving the needle 4.63% is a big deal? Um... okay. O.o

You also have to figure that that 7% you reference isn't just going to disappear and go to 0%... there will be another coach hired. Average salary in the Big Ten is $365K, and we'll likely be at least a touch north of that.
 
Eventually student fees will be 100% of the subsidy. The subsidy at Rutgers is made up of two items: student fees, and direct institutional support. Rutgers has plans to eliminate direct institutional support. There are no plans to eliminate the student fees. So therefore the student fees will be 100% of the subsidy.
 
They have no facts. You could say Ash makes a billion dollars and the school gives him a Rolls Royce and the listeners would eat it up. It's like fatcessa with a political angle which just makes the whole thing dumber.
 
As fans it is difficult to see a non fan point of view. If someone does not follow sports they have a right not to want to pay for them.similar to those who live on the coast and then charge those who do not to use the beach or cry for government money to rebuild beach that will always wash away. No other states do that but whining long enough sometime pays off. Those who want it should pay for it.
 
As fans it is difficult to see a non fan point of view. If someone does not follow sports they have a right not to want to pay for them.similar to those who live on the coast and then charge those who do not to use the beach or cry for government money to rebuild beach that will always wash away. No other states do that but whining long enough sometime pays off. Those who want it should pay for it.

But people who aren't Rutgers fans or aren't Rutgers students aren't paying for Rutgers athletics. The money that makes up the subsidy comes from student fees and tuition. I guess you could claim that since state appropriations make up about 17% of Rutgers' budget, then 17% of the non-student-fee portion of the subsidy comes from state support. That works out to $2.2 MM. I bet I can find several hundred items in the NJ state budget that cost $2.2 MM that I have no interest in.
 
As fans it is difficult to see a non fan point of view. If someone does not follow sports they have a right not to want to pay for them.similar to those who live on the coast and then charge those who do not to use the beach or cry for government money to rebuild beach that will always wash away. No other states do that but whining long enough sometime pays off. Those who want it should pay for it.

so students who don't use the bus system shouldn't have to pay for them? Students who never go to the concerts or museums shouldn't have to pay for them? Students who never need them shouldn't pay for the campus police? Or those not using the gyms shouldn't pay?

Even if students don't go to the games their is an indirect benefit they receive as part of the school. Whenever they put on a Rutgers sweatshirt or sticker on the car. Its a brand equity thing at least.

Choosing not to attend sports activities is their choice but should not result in a refund. Actually the lack of support by the "new" generation of Rutgers Students is more the problem. (some of it certainly justified)
 
  • Like
Reactions: soundcrib
As fans it is difficult to see a non fan point of view. If someone does not follow sports they have a right not to want to pay for them.similar to those who live on the coast and then charge those who do not to use the beach or cry for government money to rebuild beach that will always wash away. No other states do that but whining long enough sometime pays off. Those who want it should pay for it.

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
 
He apparently fell down and broke his crown. Incredibly, his replacement is less intelligent and more abrasive.

The only thing I can think of that's less intelligent and more abrasive is a brillo pad. But it wasn't even the ignorance and abrasiveness that drove me nuts about him.. it's that he had awful on-air performance... long, pregnant pauses... clicking his tongue behind his teeth constantly... fake forced laughs at things he wants you to think are funny... repetitive rhetorical questions without taking any callers... it was just painful to listen to. It was like locking an old man in a recording booth and letting him ramble aimlessly to himself for hours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU22
Plays put on by CAP and Cabaret are ticketed. Now, obviously, as student-run orgs, the way they make money is different from the way the athletic department makes money.

If I had to make the choice, I personally wouldn't mind paying for tickets to go to the odd football, basketball, etc. game if it meant a smaller term bill.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT