With an added 11 click gallery of 10 hires for Rutgers. Yeah, those 12 million monthly page views aren't inflated at all.
NJ.com Article Today: "5 Reasons Rutgers Might Not Fire Kyle Flood At Season's End"
- Thread starter RutgersRaRa
- Start date
Subsidy numbers are rarely apples to apples. Our $36mm number that follows us around does not convey a meaningful number, as it is overblown and taken out of context. Subsidies are university-specific calculations, and each university accounts for the numbers differently. Rutgers' accounting is so far behind in doing things more in line with other programs that our number is essentially meaningless. Keep in mind that we are still buying our way out of the AAC (the annual fee escapes me), and it is my understanding that the $6mm annual paydown for the stadium expansion hadn't, at the time the subsidies were reported, been moved off of the Athletics Department's books and onto the Buildings and Grounds books, which is how most universities handle accounting for their facilities upgrades. They do this because they are pro athletics, so shiny things up to make it more palatable to make their athletics (football) competitive.
Aside from this, subsidies should be given in relative numbers--relative to the overall university budget. Even if we accept the $36mm annual subsidy as actual, a university with an annual budget of $500mm and a subsidy of $15mm is in worse shape than we are, but it isn't reported that way. Numbers are funny things. As I've done before on here, I encourage anyone who wants to have more perspective on what the numbers mean (and what they don't) to read Kristi Dosh's book, Saturday Millionaires, which I've linked below.
Saturday Millionaires
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
Here is a link to the NCAA finances as reported on USA Today. They still have us listed in the AAC so I'm assuming that the numbers are from the 2013 season which would be the last year in the AAC and that matches this article: http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...s-loses-more-than-36-million-last-fiscal-year
I would suspect that given the increased attendance numbers for the B1G plus increased B1G money ($10,000,000 reported by Barchi vs. $5 or so from the AAC) that this year and last year should see a marked improvement in the revenue picture.
Here is a link to the NCAA finances as reported on USA Today. They still have us listed in the AAC so I'm assuming that the numbers are from the 2013 season which would be the last year in the AAC and that matches this article: http://www.dailytargum.com/article/...s-loses-more-than-36-million-last-fiscal-year
I would suspect that given the increased attendance numbers for the B1G plus increased B1G money ($10,000,000 reported by Barchi vs. $5 or so from the AAC) that this year and last year should see a marked improvement in the revenue picture.
Skyler you need to stop.
Forget about results for one second, the product on the field is completely unwatchable. Players are out of position on D far too often.
We do too many little things wrong. Fumbled snaps, illegal forward passes (by Nova), illegal formation every game, missed PATS/ chasing points early, kick offs out of bounds, using time outs too soon and not having them late in the fourth. These are all signs of a very poorly coached team. We don't correct the little things at all. We scored seven touchdowns verse Indiana this year and on four of those touchdowns we walked away with six points and not seven. How does that happen?OSU does directional kicks on their kickoffs, yet we're lucky if we keep the damn thing in play.
As for recruiting, i like our class a lot, but Flood has shown he will not land top in state talent. We are making it too easy for Jim Harbaugh to land these guys. Flood has no ties at all. It's embarrassing. I didn't think it was a problem at first. But all I heard after last season was how great the recruiting momentum was. guess what, we landed exactly zero top 10 NJ guys. The same amount of top 10 guys we got after a losing season. That is terrible. Flood also has zero coaching ties. Both of our coordinators were promotions from within. We got incredibly lucky with Friedgen. Even if we fire Rossi, who is Flood going to bring in? Seriously, what makes you so confident that Flood can find a proper D-coordinator? Everyone puts blame on Rossi... well guess what, Rossi was Flood's higher.
Forget about results for one second, the product on the field is completely unwatchable. Players are out of position on D far too often.
We do too many little things wrong. Fumbled snaps, illegal forward passes (by Nova), illegal formation every game, missed PATS/ chasing points early, kick offs out of bounds, using time outs too soon and not having them late in the fourth. These are all signs of a very poorly coached team. We don't correct the little things at all. We scored seven touchdowns verse Indiana this year and on four of those touchdowns we walked away with six points and not seven. How does that happen?OSU does directional kicks on their kickoffs, yet we're lucky if we keep the damn thing in play.
As for recruiting, i like our class a lot, but Flood has shown he will not land top in state talent. We are making it too easy for Jim Harbaugh to land these guys. Flood has no ties at all. It's embarrassing. I didn't think it was a problem at first. But all I heard after last season was how great the recruiting momentum was. guess what, we landed exactly zero top 10 NJ guys. The same amount of top 10 guys we got after a losing season. That is terrible. Flood also has zero coaching ties. Both of our coordinators were promotions from within. We got incredibly lucky with Friedgen. Even if we fire Rossi, who is Flood going to bring in? Seriously, what makes you so confident that Flood can find a proper D-coordinator? Everyone puts blame on Rossi... well guess what, Rossi was Flood's higher.
well he sure is happy about being in BIG------"The merger has allowed for more collaboration and fostered more cutting-edge research, he said. The move coincided with Rutgers’ entrance into the Big Ten athletic conference, which came with academic collaborations with member schools such as Michigan, which also has enhanced research at Rutgers, officials said."---I assume people read yesterday's article about the success of the merger--Barchi stays if he wants--the accolades come pouring in for his job with the merger.
They are putting words in his mouth which in the article he clearly says....
People are twisting thing to fit their agenda
I don't think you people understand that keeping Flood will cost us more money than hiring a new coach. Barchi understands this.
Last edited:
I believe Barchi has said that he is really only here to make sure the medical school merger gets completed successfully. He was looking to retire from Thomas Jefferson, I think, but was intrigued by the Rutgers opportunity specifically because of the medical school element.
I think if Rutgers really wanted to get rid of Kyle Flood, they would've fired him instead of suspending him for the whole Barnwell debacle. The fact he's still coaching illustrates that the administration really doesn't want to let him go if they don't have to.
I originally thought Flood had to at least get to a bowl game this year to have a chance of being safe, but I can honestly see 5-7 with reasonably competitive performances against Nebraska and Michigan being enough to get him another year. And quite frankly, Politi's pretty much spot on with regards to the reasons.
I originally thought Flood had to at least get to a bowl game this year to have a chance of being safe, but I can honestly see 5-7 with reasonably competitive performances against Nebraska and Michigan being enough to get him another year. And quite frankly, Politi's pretty much spot on with regards to the reasons.
Looking at the calculations the increase in cost of firing flood and hiring a new coach (if we pay market rate of around $3 mil) is around $2.6 million per year, which actually might be a little low depending on the cost of assistants both hiring new and paying off old) So the question then becomes do we stand to lose 2.6 - 3 million a year retaining Flood?
First, the thought of looking at 1-0 every week next season again (instead of the big picture whole season arc, including development, that a thinking person would go through) drives any enthusiasm south.
There is a very strong case to be made that retaining this in over his head Iona man is costing RU financially and hopefully someone in a decision making role will consider that.
Also, we have a guaranteed increase coming--guaranteed. Why not borrow against that--structure it so it works--there are many options. it's not like we are paying a coach and don't know whether there is money in the future.
There is a very strong case to be made that retaining this in over his head Iona man is costing RU financially and hopefully someone in a decision making role will consider that.
Also, we have a guaranteed increase coming--guaranteed. Why not borrow against that--structure it so it works--there are many options. it's not like we are paying a coach and don't know whether there is money in the future.
As much as we'd like, I don't believe any reasonable person can expect RU to spend close to what OSU or Michigan does. Excluding other sources, just the per game revenue makes that impossible.
The Size of their Stadium alone will double our ticket sales. Plus they must sell many times what we do in merch.
Spending money in a smart way is better than just spending as much as possible and hoping for the best, we don't have unlimited funds or bunch of billionaire donors to do that.
Show me where it says that debt service for a football stadium should be on the Bldg and Grounds books, or that that's how other university's report it. That's not my understanding, though I wish that were the case.
He was hired to oversee the merger and is more concerned with the academic side of Rutgers than the Athletic side. That's what most college presidents are hired for: Academics, not Athletics
Barchi also has to try and make the merger as financially sound as he can.
Athletics have little room in his plans except not to take funds from the academic side of the school and he just about stated that when he talked about cutting the subsidies the Athletic Department is getting and wanting it to be revenue neutral as soon as it can be.
But can see why you're upset , because being a member of the B1G has some academic advantages.
As for Barchi retiring in 2016, think that's when the merger is supposed to be completed and that merger is the reason he was hired.
As much as this will be blasphemy on here and pains me to say, I'm now on the side with Politi and the SL writers. Not so much with their vendetta against Julie, because that I think is purely personal, but their position on pretty much everything else recently is spot on. Turns out they were right about Flood and the Barnwell situation being more serious than "just an email" asking for extra credit. Also turns out the program-wide discipline problem went far beyond Carroo and Laviano breaking curfew the week of the first game. Lord only knows what's going to come out on the self-investigation regarding failed/ignored drug test results, etc. And the product on the field is pretty much dogs#it. Yet, we are being told to be patient and support Kyle even though as the CEO of the program this all falls on him. Got it.
I really hope Politi and company take all the juice they used to get TP fired and also tried to use to get Julie fired and aim it at this inept coaching staff who quite honestly is embarrassing us all.
I really hope Politi and company take all the juice they used to get TP fired and also tried to use to get Julie fired and aim it at this inept coaching staff who quite honestly is embarrassing us all.
That's not really what I'm talking about. I mean he's not interested in competing with them, full stop. Whether in budget or on the field. I think he's missing the key concept that being "competitive" is the thing that will drive us to budget neutrality - because competitiveness drives up demand for tickets/merchandise and increases donations.
I don't think he's interested in competing with anyone. His goal is to get athletics to be budget neutral, and that's it. It's not a matter of "we have to spend money to make money"... it's "we have to stop spending money".
He's basically voting not to increase the debt ceiling.
This is it exactly. How many times do folks have to read about the "revenue neutral in six years" plans before it sinks in? Barchi talks about it constantly, TP talked about it, it's one of the administration's main talking points about the athletic budget.
The sad thing is only a very small handful of athletic departments in the country are not subsidized, and the last time I checked a year or two ago, none of them had a football team that was getting regularly blown out in conference games or a basketball program that has been rebuilding for over 20 years.
The more I watch this fiasco unfold, the more I fear we are watching Gruninger 2.0, "Big time on the cheap"
It's not true. As far as I can tell, he didn't say what Real claims he said. He did say that Rutgers stepping up to big time athletics wasn't his call, and that was a decision made long before he arrived at Rutgers. He did say about joining the Big Ten, "This is where Rutgers belongs."
Correct. When Barchi says "budget neutrality" what he is really talking about is "expenditure neutrality". But what he doesn't understand (and quite frankly, many folks, including some of our fans and alumns) is that "expenditure neutrality" will actually lead you further away from "budget neutrality".
He is assuming revenue is a constant in their calculation of budget neutrality. It is not. He thinks we're in the red now? Keep status quo and Barchi, along with everybody else, will find out what red really means. $36 mil? He aint seen nothin yet.
Last edited:
Robert, thanks for finding that transcript.
Regarding the claim in this thread that Barchi said he wouldn't have made the decision to join the Big Ten, that is obviously false, since Barchi in fact made the decision to join the Big Ten.
The Big Ten and CIC are not research consortiums, and do not allocate research grants. (The Big Ten Cancer Consortium, on the other hand, is a research consortium.) The CIC provides a ton of benefits, but increased research funding is not one of the benefits. If Rutgers is seeing increases in research funding, it is primarily due to things that Rutgers is doing.
This is not about budget neutrality.
This is not about Ohio State and Michigan.
This is about:
Kyle Flood has more players arrested than wins against teams with a winning record.
Kyle Flood has more academic fraud scandals than wins over ranked teams.
Barchi wants to talk about academics and reputation?
Oh, and for the budget tards....
A decrease in attendance will cost RU more than a new coach.
Dino Babers, as one example, gets paid $400,000 a year, and has more B1G wins this year than Flood.
This is not about Ohio State and Michigan.
This is about:
Kyle Flood has more players arrested than wins against teams with a winning record.
Kyle Flood has more academic fraud scandals than wins over ranked teams.
Barchi wants to talk about academics and reputation?
Oh, and for the budget tards....
A decrease in attendance will cost RU more than a new coach.
Dino Babers, as one example, gets paid $400,000 a year, and has more B1G wins this year than Flood.
The budget comments are why Rutgers might overlook all of that to *keep* Flood, rather than spend additional money on new coach.
The financials don't add up.
Towers has to pay most if not all of Flood's buyout.
If we hired Dino Babers at Flood's salary, it would be an exponent of his current one.
Where is the additional money? Assistant coaches? Let's assume, god forbid, they kept Flood. Rossi at a minimum would have to be fired. So there'd need to be money for that anyway.
NIRH,
What do you think the estimated decrease in attendance would be? My estimates are keeping Flood has to cost -3 million.
Rutgers is only on the hook for $400,000 of Flood's salary? Not sure where you get the $2.6mil from. Regardless, between decreased ticket sales, parking, donations and concessions....I think you hit $2.6 without breaking a sweat. Really, all it would take is one large donor to tighten up the wallet to make the decision a no brainer. I'm sure JH has already done the math. It all boils down to wins really and why I think Flood is gone unless he pulls out some big upsets.
Someone had run the numbers, but it will depend on what schemes Julie would come up with to perpetuate the parking scam we currently have. You have to figure much of Light Blue and Silver would be empty, but she may just leave Blue, Yellow etc, empty and just sell them out to TTFP and Michigan fans.
She could also try to make tickets to TTFP and Michigan like $200, the only games that stand any chance of coming close to capacity.
Then you have concessions. I would like to know how much concessions were for USF in 13- you have to figure that will be close to all games other than TTFP and Michigan.
3M is still light in that scenario when you consider major donors have threatened to rescind all RU support if RU keeps Flood- that amount by itself could excede 3M significantly.
I would also like to get a cite to the article or date because I don't recall any such statement by Barchi. Instead, Barchi has talked about how wonderful it is to be in the B1G, and planning documents by the University compare Rutgers to B1G universities. Ever since the 1990s, Rutgers has wanted to be in the B1G because it is much more academically comparable than the Big East or AAC.
Politi gets all his ideas and info from here. We all could do a better job.
Just to give you my methodology:
Flood has 3 more years on his contract so for a total
Floods Buy Out: + $700,000 (I read that some where)
New Coach cost + $3,000,000 per year for 3 years ($9,000,000) (Average Salary)
Flood's salary - $1.450,000 per year ($4,350,000)
New Assistants salary + 850,000 per year ($2,550,000) (This is just a SWAG)
Get the book I linked above. Also, note that I didn't say that it should be on one books or the other, I said it is on many other programs' B&G books. Accounting is radically different between universities. Some athletics department are separately incorporated as non-profits, for instance.
Barchi: "My commitment to the institution is to take that and make sure we have a high-integrity program that focuses as much on academics as it does athletics, and take it to a place where it’s budget neutral."
So people think he'll keep flood in the name of "budget neutrality" and forget that he's not running "a high integrity program" that "focuses on academics"?
The only part of that sentence that flood didn't violate in August is the fact that he comes cheap.
So people think he'll keep flood in the name of "budget neutrality" and forget that he's not running "a high integrity program" that "focuses on academics"?
The only part of that sentence that flood didn't violate in August is the fact that he comes cheap.
Dino Babers is exactly the kind of guy I think we'd be targeting - successful HC at a non-P5 school with potential for a higher ceiling. If we hired him at Flood's salary ($1.25M) then we'd be tripling his salary... but that doesn't mean one of the other schools out there looking for a coach isn't thinking the same thing and offering $1.5M or more. I think our top end negotiating position is probably $2M, and that might be pushing it.
If it turns out he doesn't do well, we'll have more money to search for another coach in a few years. If he turns out to be the next Urban Meyer out of BGSU, we'll have more money to pay to keep him.
He isn't the kind of "name" guy that is expected to move the needle on recruiting, though, that many are looking for - especially as most of his resume is west of the Mississippi. But I don't think we have the pocketbook for that type of "name".
We'll also be looking for coordinators and other staff. Our current all-in budget is about $3.75M for HC and staff... I can't imagine that growing to more than $4.5M if we clean house next year.
Here, just go straight to the source. Most up to date data available on every school in the country. Report through 6/30/15
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/
I wish i had the time or energy to look up which of you that are now agreeing with Politi were ripping him when things were going better for the football team. I said it once and will say it again, I would hate to be in a foxhole with a whole bunch of our "fans" on this site.
Don't have the links handy, but when Barchi was hired, he specifically said he was only here for five years before retirement. His goals were getting a master plan done and implementation of that plan started, and the med school merger and implementation. Look for interviews with Barchi in the first few months after his hiring date.
My sense has always been that the BOG hired Barchi to break some eggs and force some unpopular decisions that have been languishing for decades, and then hire someone with Big public university experience for the long-term.
This.
Colleges football programs are always losing their best players to graduation. To think it should take several YEARS to have a decent QB is rather ridiculous. We face teams every season with brand new QBs.
I remember when it was a year or two into Flood's time as head coach. The Schiano haters thought Flood was "doing it the right way" with recruiting across the board as opposed to the way Schiano did it. Years later, those recruiting years don't look so good. Plus, most (if not nearly all) of the gamebreaker type players were brought in by Schiano.
Yet keep giving him a pass. I'm sure we can sit through 3 years of Laviano learning on the job so he will have a successful senior season.
Similar threads
