Asbury Park Press Editorial-Rutgers Doubles Down-B1G Mistake?
- Thread starter Knight Shift
- Start date
When someone is completely ignorant of the facts of a situation it's very difficult to argue with them because there is no logical starting point. It's much easier to call the person a moron and move on.
The editorial fails to mention the increase in donations and out of state admissions since the entry to the B1G, which cumulatively exceeds the subsidy.
BTW - it's interesting that the Star Ledger has had positive articles on the new direction of the program.
BTW - it's interesting that the Star Ledger has had positive articles on the new direction of the program.
In essence, this is exactly what Chris Ash referred to in his press conference. He had heard about he difficult media and this is a great example. Want to know why great athletes from the state don't want to stay here to play? See the story Above. Mind-boggling to me.
I could be wrong, but I don't not think that Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama or Texas have these same media issues. I am not comparing these schools to Rutgers in performance, but I can in positioning. We are B1G thus we are Power 5. While their may be media bashing their teams for on-field performance, I feel quite positive there is not someone in media consistently driving wedges between athletics and academics. Frightening to me.
What would be a great benchmark is to determine where the university was in terms of applications, endowment, regional diversity and other factors before the 2006 Rutgers - Louisville game, which was watched by millions on ESPN. I would make the argument that since that night, over 9 years ago, Rutgers has grown leaps and bounds in all facets of measurable metrics, and not just in athletics. I am quite sure that the academics has seen a tremendous amount of benefits from that night as well. And I am sure they won't admit to it. My guess is that the media has seen the benefit also. Not that they would admit it either.
I get it: Rutgers is an excellent academic and research college (I hope so, I am an alum). But as was famously said in a movie once (albeit "The Program"), "when was the last time 80,000 people showed up to watch a kid do a damn chemistry experiment?".
From a marketing standpoint, we can do all we can about showing the many virtues of a Rutgers University education and experience, which, I would think, includes attending a Saturday afternoon football game in the fall and the parties before and after a win in the best conference in the country. Is that so bad? Why can't everyone just get on board and support the program? Better yet, if you don't want to support the program, how 'bout you don't tear it down while it's trying to be built.
Go RU!
I could be wrong, but I don't not think that Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama or Texas have these same media issues. I am not comparing these schools to Rutgers in performance, but I can in positioning. We are B1G thus we are Power 5. While their may be media bashing their teams for on-field performance, I feel quite positive there is not someone in media consistently driving wedges between athletics and academics. Frightening to me.
What would be a great benchmark is to determine where the university was in terms of applications, endowment, regional diversity and other factors before the 2006 Rutgers - Louisville game, which was watched by millions on ESPN. I would make the argument that since that night, over 9 years ago, Rutgers has grown leaps and bounds in all facets of measurable metrics, and not just in athletics. I am quite sure that the academics has seen a tremendous amount of benefits from that night as well. And I am sure they won't admit to it. My guess is that the media has seen the benefit also. Not that they would admit it either.
I get it: Rutgers is an excellent academic and research college (I hope so, I am an alum). But as was famously said in a movie once (albeit "The Program"), "when was the last time 80,000 people showed up to watch a kid do a damn chemistry experiment?".
From a marketing standpoint, we can do all we can about showing the many virtues of a Rutgers University education and experience, which, I would think, includes attending a Saturday afternoon football game in the fall and the parties before and after a win in the best conference in the country. Is that so bad? Why can't everyone just get on board and support the program? Better yet, if you don't want to support the program, how 'bout you don't tear it down while it's trying to be built.
Go RU!
That's my big gripe. They obviously did the research and knew the real situation, but chose to cherry pick facts and list them in a very dishonest way.
I'm pretty sure Rutgers could announce tomorrow that researchers had found cures for both cancer and AIDS and somehow the media in this state would spin it as somewhat negative.
Such a stupid article. ok, rethink our commitment to athletics after admission to the B1G.. He's a moron.
If a reporter in ohio wrote an article about how we pay our coaches to much, or spend to much money on the atheletics program, they would be looked at like they were retarded and black balled.
what is the name of this asshat at the APP...he needs to be publically shamed
I have to admit, this is a beautifully crafted article.. crafted to really make Rutgers football look like a money sucking pig to the casual person...You bring up the coaches salaries and buyouts, then link it to the subsidy, so that the casual person who doesn't know much about Rutgers football thinks that the program loses $36 mil a year... Then they take the Overall Facilities 30 yr master plan and throw the word "athletics" in front to make it seem like Rutgers is looking to spend $3 billion on just athletics... So now you have an article based on lies and skewed facts...No agenda there right? SMH The only thing embarrassing about this article is that it was allowed to be printed!! or posted!! or whatever it is these hack organizations do with articles now!!
It's the editorial board hence, no name attached.
still says:
3600 Highway 66, Neptune, NJ 07754
Here's the Executive Editor:
HOLLIS R. TOWNS, Executive Editor & Vice President/News, x4210, htowns@gannettnj.com
It is simple, really.
Either eliminate all athletics and extra curricular activities not directly tied to academics or do what everyone else does for your level of school.
Rutgers is a flagship state u of what should be a wealthy, highly populous state. When you have flyover country states field 2 and 3 top level athletics programs, I find it difficult to believe that New Jersey cannot afford one and that the people of New Jersey and their children do not deserve the same sort of college level athletics that so many other states provides their residents.
If you think we need a lower level of athletics, well, that will cost MORE than what this will cost once the Big Ten money rolls in. So your choice is elimination of all athletics, something even the Ivies do not do, or do what makes sense for Rutgers.
But if you really want to get serious about academics, lets eliminate all the programs for music and dance and fine art and everything not directly related to the three Rs. And while we're at it, lets only worry about English and forget all those foreign language courses... and only worry about American history and stop all this cultural crap and current day studies and political "science'.. and.. medieval french lit and.. well, you get the picture.
Football is a big part of big college America. Even bad football (looking at you Vanderbilt). There is no reason why the children of the residents of New Jersey shouldn't have access to it just like kids in Kansas and Missouri and on and on. The same goes for the other athletics programs... and fine art.. and music.. and French lit.
Either eliminate all athletics and extra curricular activities not directly tied to academics or do what everyone else does for your level of school.
Rutgers is a flagship state u of what should be a wealthy, highly populous state. When you have flyover country states field 2 and 3 top level athletics programs, I find it difficult to believe that New Jersey cannot afford one and that the people of New Jersey and their children do not deserve the same sort of college level athletics that so many other states provides their residents.
If you think we need a lower level of athletics, well, that will cost MORE than what this will cost once the Big Ten money rolls in. So your choice is elimination of all athletics, something even the Ivies do not do, or do what makes sense for Rutgers.
But if you really want to get serious about academics, lets eliminate all the programs for music and dance and fine art and everything not directly related to the three Rs. And while we're at it, lets only worry about English and forget all those foreign language courses... and only worry about American history and stop all this cultural crap and current day studies and political "science'.. and.. medieval french lit and.. well, you get the picture.
Football is a big part of big college America. Even bad football (looking at you Vanderbilt). There is no reason why the children of the residents of New Jersey shouldn't have access to it just like kids in Kansas and Missouri and on and on. The same goes for the other athletics programs... and fine art.. and music.. and French lit.
Im actually pretty sure that is not true. There was a modest bump in out of state admissions from Big Ten states west of Ohio (which had very low rates of enrollment to begin with). Not nearly enough to even offset athletic scholarship costs.
Donations are up 17% over a year in athletics - something like $2 million. AGain - something - but not enough to really cut into the subsidy.
Now if you are talking overall donations - I guess if you wanted to you could attribute it to the Big Ten. It would be misleading, but technically fundraising did go up alot (due to the $1 billion campaign) at the same time we entered the Big Ten.
Without a doubt the dumbest, most ill-informed, shortsighted and just plain ridiculous editorials I have ever read in my entire life. Nothing short of stunningly idiotic.
I am embarrassed for anyone directly associated with the Asbury Park Press after reading that this morning.
I am embarrassed for anyone directly associated with the Asbury Park Press after reading that this morning.
I have stated for a very long time the notion that big time college athletics simply isn't that important in NJ as compared to other states.Rutgers has experienced great difficulty sustaining a fan base in a state with approximately 8.9 million people which is more than enough to sellout a 52,000 seat stadium.
The media won't support Rutgers until there is evidence that a football program can successfully compete in the B1G which will be very difficult to accomplish in the East division.Right now Rutgers has very little positive to say to refute the arguments written in the Asbury Park Press and the Home News Tribune.Its like going to war with a water pistol and the opponents have semi automatics.
The media won't support Rutgers until there is evidence that a football program can successfully compete in the B1G which will be very difficult to accomplish in the East division.Right now Rutgers has very little positive to say to refute the arguments written in the Asbury Park Press and the Home News Tribune.Its like going to war with a water pistol and the opponents have semi automatics.
Yep. Summed up perfectly. NJ continues to eat his own. Luckily I was told recruits never read the paper :-)
:sunglasses:
Hollis Towns played football at something called Fort Valley State University...if that is not a waste of money than I don't know what is
MEDIA ARE A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES
MEDIA ARE A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES
It's an editorial. Not meant to be "fair and balanced," which is a phrase you might not want to use considering it has been pretty much rendered meaningless by the network which uses it.
The fact is the points made in this piece are all valid. There are other ones that can be made, and we all know them. Bottom line: You win, fewer people care about these things. Same goes for getting a full share of Big Ten revenue.
The problem with this piece is not the list of issues with Rutgers sports. The problem with it is Big Ten membership effectively ends the debate.
Oh, and the subsidy is the biggest among P5 schools, not all universities. UNLV, last time I saw numbers, still had a bigger one, because football revenue there is almost non-existent.
Oh, and the subsidy is the biggest among P5 schools, not all universities. UNLV, last time I saw numbers, still had a bigger one, because football revenue there is almost non-existent.
They should all attach their names to it then. You know, like how they made us put our real names on a paid advertisement to blast the Star-Ledger.
The fate of the Asbury Park Press is not far from what Julie wished on the Star Ledger. The address given is actually the AIG insurance building across the street from where the Press used to be located. I don't know if they actually have an office or P.O. box in the building, or conduct any business at all there, but the actual Press building was reduced to rubble not long ago. Gannett has likely consolidated operations for all their New Jersey papers elsewhere. I would look it up but I could give a rat's backside. The Asbury Park Press was once a great newspaper, but it for all intents and purposes, it really is dead. A shame, as I had family connections there, people who worked there for many years, and were heartbroken when they realized thay had to leave before it died for good. R.I.P. (I actually miss it, and what the APP and the newspaper business used to be).
Just win! Win a lot! When you're winning, you don't have time to notice the losers and naysayers. Heck, they eventually become entertaining and amusing.
Well done, herdof! I was just about to post the same thing when I saw your post. I believe we do have data on increased applications, both national and international, since joining the B1G.
The argument is that increased name recognition increases applicant numbers and quality, one of the key aspects of university quality. And I believe we already have data to support that. Or, we could become SUNY Buffalo.
If Rutgers went small-time in athletics, there'd be that much less interest in all the RU-related sports articles that these hacks write.
This is the second dumbest thing I read today. If you can't figure out why, then you're the one holding the water pistol. Hope you're not an alum or in business. SMH
Yawn. The guy is not a sports fan and comes stumbling into a topic he doesn't have the background and understanding to intelligently inform people about, but that doesn't stop him.
These articles had a point before the B1G. Investment was being made with no guarantee of return. Now, that return is guaranteed. It's not debatable. And anyone who doesn't think that a major college football team in the biggest market in the world won't work, is just completely clueless on the financials of big time college football. It's only a question of how successful it will be financially, somewhere between $35 million and $70 million a year in profit, come 2021.
Rutgers has financial issues and the reality is football is one of the only bright spots. So, after reading similar articles, every year for the last thirty and becoming genuinely worried this anti-sports minority might actually kill our beloved football team, now I see these articles and laugh. That crowd has been forced to, well.....suck it.
These articles had a point before the B1G. Investment was being made with no guarantee of return. Now, that return is guaranteed. It's not debatable. And anyone who doesn't think that a major college football team in the biggest market in the world won't work, is just completely clueless on the financials of big time college football. It's only a question of how successful it will be financially, somewhere between $35 million and $70 million a year in profit, come 2021.
Rutgers has financial issues and the reality is football is one of the only bright spots. So, after reading similar articles, every year for the last thirty and becoming genuinely worried this anti-sports minority might actually kill our beloved football team, now I see these articles and laugh. That crowd has been forced to, well.....suck it.
This is spot on. It's a f'in GUARANTEED return, unless something catastrophic happens to the world in the next five years. Where do you get that kind of reassurance in any other business? It's a no-brainer for Barchi on this recent investment/coaching hire (and it was still conservative and the proper approach). In fact, what Mulcahey and Schiano had done (and Gruninger had done to initially expand the stadium) made it possible for us to be in this situation. Thank God those investments were made. When we are fully vested in the B1G, the total athletic budget will be fully sustained.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Football VIDEO: Greg Schiano talks Kansas State / Rate Bowl Postgame- Latest: greenknight