Lance Leipold’s overall head coaching record is 125-29, much of which occurred at Div 3 Wisconsin-Whitewater, where he won multiple national championships. You gotta admire Buffalo for rolling the dice on a great D-3 coach. He’s starting to succeed at Buffalo now. Keep an eye on this coach. Of course I hope his team loses on Saturday, but he just might be the real deal.
Buffalo head coach
- Thread starter APKnight
- Start date
Id rather have him than Schiano Part 2 if we part ways with Ash.
Tell him to bring his resume.
I can give you 7 Million (Ash buyout an Asst Coaches money due end of next year) reasons that at the end of next year when/if RU loses every game this year and next and would still be at Rutgers on December 15, 2019..Who would take a job at Rutgers for <3 Million when they fire a Coach after 4 years when the school is on NCAA probation and plays in the BIG10 east..
Looks too much like Mr. Belding from Saved by the Bell:
But he is only making $405,000 per year.
Hell, for 405k, we hire him to coach and give ash an office to play Minecraft all day
I agree with the last part of your statement. It’s about perception as well. Coaches care about that. Riding it out with Ash and then making a run when we have the money to spend is worth the pain over the next year or so. I know that’s an unpopular opinion but there it is. We’re not getting anyone that’s proven with the money we have to spend right now. Period.
Looks too much like Mr. Belding from Saved by the Bell:
But he is only making $405,000 per year.
But that coy half-grin is all Zack Morris.
Having a full share will not increase spending. It will simply reduce Rutgers subsidy to Athletics. This has been brought up way too many times and some of you still don't get it.
Show me a source that says that will happen? I wouldn’t count on that being the case.
It might not increase spending as much as some are thinking but it should increase.
The subsidy was in the vicinity of 18M IIRC (not including student fees which will remain) but the increase when we get a full share is going to be in the neighborhood of 30M or more. There are some loans and stuff that need to be repaid but still there is a surplus and as those things get run off that surplus would grow a little more too not to mention the conference revenue will also be increasing.
It's not a bottomless pot of gold/panacea that some envision it as but our budgets should go up with time. Regardless, it's still smart/efficient use of resource that matter not just having money to spend.
Last edited:
You new to this board?
The source is Barchi himself who has said publically on numerous occasions that Athletics will be budget neutral.
"I can see us moving to budget neutrality in six years," university president Robert Barchi said last week. Barchi 2013
While institutional support per year will still be required to support the administration of univrsity Title IX efforts through the Division of Intercollegiate Athletics, no further direct support from the operating budget of Rutgers–New Brunswick will be required. Barchi 2017
Nowhere in those quotes does it say that Rutgers will be spending less money on athletics when it gets the full share then what it spends now. When Hobbs is out there talking about the full share is needed to make them competitive I’m not really understanding how it will not increase the athletics budget.
No worries Red, there will more money for athletics once fully funded. Only a fool would think otherwise.
Since RU seems determined to keep hiring assistants, it should be noted that only HC's really get the accolades for winning and fired for losing. I've always felt that hiring a successful HC from the lower divisions really makes a lot of sense. First, they know how to handle college age kids, coach them up, and win. They are administrators who understand that they are the one who answers to the AD and fans. Second, they can probably be hired at a significantly lower price which is still a lot more than they were making. This does not imply the usual "let's save some money" which is pretty common here, but a simple fact.
So, you get a guy who has already learned the hoops he has to jump through even though the new job has bigger ones. Assistants generally fly under the radar and have much less to do with the overall running of the program. Yes, they usually get axed when the HC goes, but they are not generally considered the real problem and end up somewhere else pretty quickly.
Ash came from a powerhouse program. He was given prime beef to coach. His mistakes would be minor to the overall success of the program and, thus, make him look like a genius too.
For those who thought Schiano was not a good game coach, how's he looking now as the D coordinator with all that prime beef?
So, you get a guy who has already learned the hoops he has to jump through even though the new job has bigger ones. Assistants generally fly under the radar and have much less to do with the overall running of the program. Yes, they usually get axed when the HC goes, but they are not generally considered the real problem and end up somewhere else pretty quickly.
Ash came from a powerhouse program. He was given prime beef to coach. His mistakes would be minor to the overall success of the program and, thus, make him look like a genius too.
For those who thought Schiano was not a good game coach, how's he looking now as the D coordinator with all that prime beef?
People keep bringing up his OSU stint but for me at least, while he wasn't on my pretend AD list at all, it was his Wisconsin DC stint that made him acceptable not OSU. The OSU/Meyer thing is just a bonus or finishing off of a resume IMO. Wisconsin wasn't recruiting a bunch of 4/5 star guys when Bielema was there and Ash did a good job there.
The problem with Ash for me and it unfortunately seems to be playing out is that he didn't have enough strong offensive connections/influence as he came up in the profession.
Grinch is similar now going to OSU/Meyer in a sort of finishing off of his resume but it's his steady improvement of the WSU defense over his 3 year tenure (stats I've posted in one of these threads) that makes me see some potential. Difference with him is he has plenty of offensive connections/influence as he grew up in the profession and I've posted all of them a million times here.
Part of the problem is the pool of $$$ allotted for assistant coaches. I think if I read Ash's contract correctly when it was posted recently that pool is only 2.7 million. That is not enough to attract top level talent when you have to spread it out between all the coaches. This is why we have JN as a dc.
Where did I say less???
The more money Rutgers gets from the Big Ten means reducing Rutgers University subsidy to the Athletics budget. It is that simple.
Rutgers Athletics deficit of income to expenses was $38 million in 2016. That meant the University had to subsidize Athletics by that amount. Barchi wants the subsidy reduced down to Title IX requirements (about $2million).
Read for yourself
www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2017/10/rutgers_unveils_financial_plan_how_the_big_ten_is.html
Below the article you posted it shows projections and in that direct institutional support and I see that number shrinking from 17M to 0 over time. Isn't this what we're talking about as subsidy?
Even further below that are projections of expenditures from 91M to 104M isn't that demonstrating the budget is increasing as well.
Yes as "projections" but that $17m number was lessoned by a loan of $20m from the Big Ten from future earnings. So the real deficit from 2016 was $38m
So even when Rutgers is entitled to a full share they will not be getting it all as they pay back the loans.
That 17M is an actual number for 2016 not a projection and that's the actual annual recurring subsidy that needs to be eliminated.
The loan could be about 23M (18M principal 5M interest) by 2021 going by another article linked in the one you posted. That will be serviced and run off over time as I mentioned. I didn't remember the exact amount but this is it.
I agree we won't be feeling the effects of every dollar increase in B10 revenue but the budget will be going up as you see the projected expenditures are going up over time. The subsidy will be eliminated and the loan will be serviced/run off over time and the budget will increase steadily while that is happening. Just not as much as some people here expect, it's not a bottomless pot of gold as I said. And again it's not just spending money but how it's used that matter more.
Exactly!!!!....RU fans think that every football coach is dying to come here...why would they when our fans get the pitchforks out by every 2nd or 3rd years!
Why doesn't
CA take over the DC job ala Greg and dump JN?
You can be sure that AD Hobbs has been in touch with the agent for Troy State’s Neal Brown. He has northeast football in his background and his teams have some amazing performances against the Big Boys. He is a young, proven head coach.
I like him and have mentioned him before. But I won't say proven, that term gets thrown around too much. Nothing is proven for anyone for the most part until they actually prove it consistently and that even includes P5 coaches. Go snag Tracy Claeys from WSU and bring him back to the B10 and that would be a nice combo.
Why would you think Hobbs is in touch with anyone though? You know something none of the rest of us don't and have we suddenly struck the lotto to have 8M to spare for a buyout?
I wouldn't. The worst things about rehiring Schiano would be
- So many fans here still worship the ground he walks on and would call for banning you (or having a fit and put you on ignore) when you have legitimate criticism.
- Coaches don't often have the same "magic" a second time around.
Yup. What is impressive is Troy won on a measly 253 yards of offense. Nebraska turned the ball over 3 times, but Troy had 2 turnovers.
Clemson in 2016- lost by only 30-24
LSU in 2017 : 24-21; Also beat Akron
Pivoted from 4-8 in first year to 10-3 and then 11-2.
Their defensive numbers have been pretty solid too even though he's an offensive guy. Vic Koenning is the DC for him now. I like that, well rounded team seems like.
And as I pointed out years ago... Kyle Flood beat his defense and his leftover defense two years in a row. We hired the guy we beat handily. SMH.
I know he was at Arkansas for 1 year and it wasn't good but coaches can have down years and that was also the first year after the Petrino/John L Smith mess. It's hard to read too much into a 1 year stint positive or negative and his time before that was good at Wisconsin.
Robb Smith who quite a few people here liked took over for him and I can't ding Ash or any coach for what happens after they leave. How much of an affect can a guy have positive/negative at a place being a coordinator for only 1 year.
Similar threads
