Imaging RU is 1-9 on senior night and the stadium is taken over by Penn State fans on national TV. Hoping this isn’t true, but would that push Hobb to make a decision?
Poll: Does Ash get fired if RU only wins 2 games in 2018?
- Thread starter ScarletStateofNJ
- Start date
No one seems to want to answer this, or if they do most have been hit on the crack pipe with some of the names thrown around. A big name coach is not coming to this train wreck, it's going to have to be an up and coming guy and your back to square one with a gamble
yes this is what I am talking about...this WILL get worse and embarrassing, like 90% chance...how are we not getting blown out by Michigan and PSU at home by alot..hopefully these are noon starts and not primetime
Aren't one of these games already scheduled for 330 or primetime since State Penn or Michigan would probably be in the running for a spot in the B1G Champ Game?
Many of those guys work out. And many don't. But when you hire one you don't give him a contract that you can't afford to get out of. You need to recognize going in that they may not succeed, and have a contingency plan for it. The good news is that since it's not a "big name" that person likely doesn't have the negotiating leverage to make it so you can't get out of the deal if it doesn't work out.
No idea why Rutgers took such a risk with this hire.
The coach at U Buffalo would be a great place to start looking for a new coach. What he did at WW was amazing, esp while battling Mt Union for more than a decade.
Another coach would be KC Keeler but I'd get a GFY from some here every time I bring him up in the past. But he has won in NJ at Rowan, he won the National Championship at Delaware FFS, and hes winning at Sam Houston St. I mean, unless theres some red flags that pops up on him, what else he has to do to get Rutgers to check his resume?
Yes there was a 38M shortfall for 2016 and it was covered by 17M institutional support, 10M loan (which turned out to be 6.1M in actuality) and 11M student fees.
I see the increased income from increased conference distribution. While we're not getting a full share we're going to be jumping to 20M+ vicinity and growing over the next handful of years.
There are two things to get rid of the institutional support of 17M and a 23M dollar loan. Eventually our B10 revenue will be in vicinity of 30M more than what we get now annually. So that alone leaves 13M more than the 17M insitutional support annually. So you have 13M annually after 2021 to service/runoff a 23M dollar loan. And that 13M surplus will only grow as the B10 revenue grows annually.
I'm not sure I'm understanding your point. I've laid out the numbers as they're given in the articles I've seen.
From another article:
Here are the annual loan projections through 2021:
Year: Loan, Interest @ 5.75%
- 2016: $6.1 million, $350,824
- 2017: $5.519 million, $668,220
- 2018: $2.81 million, $829,800
- 2019: $1.33 million, $906,275
- 2020: $1.33 million, $982,750
- 2021: $1.287 million, $884,281
- 2022: N/A, $711,781
Interest total: $5,333,932
Last edited:
Yes you are missing my point. The loan is a subsidy too. Basically you take the 2018 shortfall, minus the $11 million student fee and Rutgers still has to cover the rest. Also you keep going back to the loan being 6 mill than Rutgers subsidy had to pick up the rest so its 17 million plus the 4 mill that the loan didnt cover. Unless there was an unknown 4 mill donation the difference had to be covered. Your math is all wrong.
How is a loan a subsidy..Yes you are paying interest to yourself, but what would RU make on that money if part of the endowment?
I'm still amazed that folks think RU will eat 10 million (ASH buyout and Asst Coaches salaries) the end of this year...even if RU is blown out the last 2 games.. We got into this situation by being frugal and yes there appears to be buyers remorse with Coach Ash..His salary is will below what RU should have budgeted for a HC..
I don't see donors ponying up 5 Million to offset a buyout of a coach that has been at RU for 3 years.....Season tickets aren't final until after National signing day so how will RU know a mass number of folks are not renewing and impacting future revenue
You are just making up your own facts. Its been explained to you multiple times, you just refuse to listen. Why would the loan have to be paid off in year one? If it is, isn't it gone the next year, and then we have an even bigger surplus?
The increase in revenue will cover the subsidy, the debt servicing , and permit an increase in spending. It will. That's it. PLUS, they most likely will never reduce the subsidy to zero. That is just lip service to the non-athletics people. Rutgers will knock it down to the level of our peers and that will be good enough. They will similarly never cut the student fees.
You and a few other people seem hell bent on making up scenarios, and then blaming the administration for the scenarios you have made up. There is no truth to any of it. You assume the worst, and then whine about it.
The loan came from the Big Ten and has interest. Your comment about season tickets are based on recruits is laughable. If RU doesnt win another game what recruits are going to RU??
Some of you people are clueless about how bad it is at Rutgers. The opportunity of joining the Big Ten and making noise is long over. We will be a laughingstock for years to come in football.
Agree. All of this talk is just stupid and counterproductive. There is a zero percent chance he is fired after this year. It is what it is. Hopefully the team rebounds. If they do not, Ash will be gone after next year. It ain't rocket science.
Yes I agree the shortfall minus the 11M student fee is covered by the school through 17M institutional support and 10M loan which was actually 6.1M. So I'm not sure the 38M shortfall was actually 38M but rather 34M but I can't say with certainty.
Let me ask you this what are the figures that need to be eliminated over time? Do you not agree that it was the 17M institutional support in 2016 and the total loan of 23M (18M principal +5M interest) accumulated from 2016-2021?
The 23M isn't some annual number like the 17M it's a total accumulated figure over the handful of years. We're going eventually from say around 12M now to 44M in 2021. That's a jump of 30M+ annually. Doesn't that number cover the 17M? You have a 13M surplus yearly and that 13M can service/runoff the 23M loan eventually no? It seems pretty clear to me but you're saying I'm wrong and I'm not seeing what you're seeing. Maybe some others can chime in and see if what I've been saying makes sense.
Jesus. Don't take my word for it. Stop being lazy and look up Barchi's comments for yourself. Barchi+revenue neutral+ athletics.
Assume the worst?? Did you watch Saturdays game? Clowns
Its $24.6 million for 2018. They are taking future advances in the next several year. Already posted the article.
Rutgers’ new five-year projections plan shows a dramatic increase in those figures. The Big Ten is now expected to give Rutgers $12.6 million in 2017, $24.6 million in 2018, $27.1 million in 2019 and $29.4 million in 2020.
We were supposed to be fully funded by 2020
Not necessarily. Most of these coaches are pretty narcissistic and think they can transform programs. Additionally, NJ has pretty solid recruiting grounds. It’s not like we are Wyoming or Montana in terms of available talent. Ash hasn’t been able to recruit the Bryce watts and kelvin harmons of the state, which are the level of players Rutgers needs to get and coach up. Then you throw in the biggest factor: $$$$. We aren’t talking Alabama figures but there’s successful head coaches at lower levels looking for a raise that can be found.
Yes and this year is the first jump into the 20M+ range (it was projected 12.6M for 2017, actually I think it may have been less than projected) and if you notice the direct insitutional support has dropped from that 17M figure in 2016 down to 8.2M, exactly the point I'm making.
As the revenue increases that 17M from 2016 will be taken down to 0 eventually with still a surplus of 13M by the time we reach that 44M figure in 2021. So that 13M annual surplus over the 17M in 2016 can be used to service/runoff the other 23M accumulated loan. Again it all jibes to me.
I am fully aware of Barchi's comments. I was just stating my prediction.
None of that has anything to do with your ranting about the loan or the student fees, which have nothing to do with revenue neutral. You are just making stuff up or are willfully ignorant at this point. The Big Ten payout is enough to offset the subsidy and increase spending. That is a fact, end of story.
My comment about you "assuming the worst" had nothing to do with the game on Saturday. I thought that would be clear, since it has nothing to do with this conversation.
I think we can all agree its a boatload of cash that RU has borrowed to subsidize the Athletics department even before the Big10. Anyone who says we should not be in the Big10 doesn't understand the benefits outside of Athletics. We will take our lumps and hope for a few championships and respectability in all sports..
We were penny wise with a football HC and Assistant Coaches and we are in a deep (financially and team performance) hole that we don't have a T.Boone Pickens or Kevin Plank to write a 30 million dollar check to help us out. This is nothing against those donors that have recently graciously pledged money, I just don't see a large donor of that elk and desire to make up for short sighted decisions over 500-750K per year that could have made a big difference with football hires. .
We were penny wise with a football HC and Assistant Coaches and we are in a deep (financially and team performance) hole that we don't have a T.Boone Pickens or Kevin Plank to write a 30 million dollar check to help us out. This is nothing against those donors that have recently graciously pledged money, I just don't see a large donor of that elk and desire to make up for short sighted decisions over 500-750K per year that could have made a big difference with football hires. .
I'm making statements based on facts. You and the other non believers present no facts.
Let me post this again as you are clearly to lazy to read facts.
Rutgers’ new five-year projections plan shows a dramatic increase in those figures. The Big Ten is now expected to give Rutgers $12.6 million in 2017, $24.6 million in 2018, $27.1 million in 2019 and $29.4 million in 2020.
In 2021, when the Big Ten cuts even-shares to all 14 members, Rutgers and Maryland will have smaller portions because of their respective advances.
In 2020 the rest of the Big Ten will be getting $51 million.
And what you are ingnoring is that Rutgers projections for income included slight increases in season tickets and advertising. Good luck with that.
Last edited:
Ok. So in 2021, how much does Rutgers get? How much smaller than the +$51mm the other teams get??
Over how many years do the advances get paid back?
You need that information.
How about stop being lazy and look it up yourself. Tired of posting multiple articles on this that lazy arguemented people like you want to ignore and come with zero facts. This is one of many threads over the years. Believe what you want. But being lazy isnt factual. Ive provided many articles on this. Do your own homework for a change.
We're projected to be making 44M in 2021. The other B10 schools are reported to be making 51M for 2018 because of the new contract. I think it's projected to be 52M next year 2019. So by 2021 assume the rest of the B10 mid upper 50M range so we might be 10-15M behind them. It's still a much narrower gap then now. It will just continue to close with time after 2021. We pay down the advances by taking smaller payouts than the full share. I don't know that the schedule of that has even been released but whatever it is, the revenues are still a lot more than now and enough to cover the institutional support we've been getting and to service/runoff the loan.
However, I'm not sure what us trailing the rest of the B10 though has to do with eliminating the 17M institutional support figure from 2016 and the servicing the accumulated 23M dollar loan. In 2016 we got 9.8M in conference revenue and the institutional support was 17M. In 2021 we're projected to receive 44M, that's a 30M+ jump in revenue. So you cover that 17M institutional support with at least a 13M+ surplus every year. That 13M+ annual surplus is more than enough to service/runoff the loan over time. The budget also was 83.9M in 2016 and is projected to go up to 104M in 2021.
So the 17M institutional support will be taken down to zero in the 2016-2021 time frame and the 23M loan will likely be serviced/runoff post 2021 and the budget will steadily continue to grow. We're still likely to be in the bottom tier of the conference with regards to spending but that wasn't the point. These subsidies/loans will be paid off and our budget will still be growing slowly that was the point. You tell me do you see anything wrong with my explanation and math?
It's all in these articles but I've already cut out the appropriate snippets in prior posts. The projections of revenues/expenditures for each year are all the way at the bottom of the first article but split into two sections.
https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/...nveils_financial_plan_how_the_big_ten_is.html
https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/...ocument_shows_rutgers_athletics_could_pa.html
https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/...hletics_borrows_against_future_big_ten_r.html
This. This guy understands it. Instead some people want to scream at others on here to fit their negative view of the future of the athletics department using lip service quotes from Barchi back in 2013. Nobody said it was going to be a $100 million windfalll. What it will do, however, is lift Rutgers out of the nickel and dime situation they’re currently stuck in.
LOL. If you know, then you wouldn't be making the argument you are making.
$44mm - the $17mm athletics subsidy = more money than we are making right now. Thus, your argument is ridiculous. Even if we bring the subsidy to $0, as per Barchi's statements, we will have significantly more money to spend.
You aren't explaining anything to anyone, except that you don't understand the situation. That's the whole point.
Just as I figured you would be lazy, stupid and uninformed. Walking the earth with your head up your ass. I guess you are comfortable with that by now.
What a pleasant human being you are. Do you have anymore 2013 Barchi quotes to fit your narrative?
Maybe you should pay attention. It wasn't a one time quote and he brings it up every year.
some of you guys need to be more respectful otherwise take it to the CE board. This board is becoming unreadable with the constant attacks etc.. c'mon guys, we're all fans here
Interesting 2 lines from the above article:
2019
Salaries and fringe benefits: $41.502 million
2021
Salaries and fringe benefits: $47.971 million
If RU estimates are correct, it means RU can effectively raise the salary +15% for every coach by 2021.
Maybe (probably) more will be allocated to FB, and an impact will be felt. But for the AD as a whole, this is not some huge windfall. So expectations should probably be tempered across the board.
Conceding that 2021 is STILL not a full B1G share, so, that salary number can (will) go up due to the increases in share after 2021.
2019
Salaries and fringe benefits: $41.502 million
2021
Salaries and fringe benefits: $47.971 million
If RU estimates are correct, it means RU can effectively raise the salary +15% for every coach by 2021.
Maybe (probably) more will be allocated to FB, and an impact will be felt. But for the AD as a whole, this is not some huge windfall. So expectations should probably be tempered across the board.
Conceding that 2021 is STILL not a full B1G share, so, that salary number can (will) go up due to the increases in share after 2021.
I've always said that.. We're still likely to be in the bottom tier of the conference spending wise and that its not a bottomless pot of gold/panacea that some think. On top of which spending money isn't the key in itself, it's how you use it that matters more.
That being said the increased revenues over time will be enough to cover the institutional support we've been getting, service/runoff the loan post 2021 all the while slowly increasing the budget, a budget that will still likely be in the bottom tier of the conference though.
Right. That’s all I think everyone on this thread was saying. That it won’t be some windfall but it will allow us the money to hire a Brohm level coach (3.5 mil) versus a guy like Ash. That’s it. And all this comes with the huge caveat that all the money in the world can’t fix everything if you make bad decisions with it. See Tennessee or Texas.
the full share is no magic bullet to suddenly turning the football program around. If Ash stays till end of next season that will be three MAC level recruiting classes in a row that the next HC and staff will have to fix,and that could take another 2-4 years to rebuild the talent level ,after the new hire,to B10 competitive level.
I have come to terms of not caring, I will just go to the games and hope for the best and root for the kids in the process. At this point I hope recruiting improves or we find that 1 or 2 diamonds that can carry the team and make everyone else better. I can't wait for basketball and wrestling, they will start soon and have that to look forward to. Another 4 - 8 year rebuild, I don't think I have it in me.
Latest posts
-
-
FB Recruiting 2024 Transfer Portal Thread -- Spring Window Edition- Latest: -RUFAN4LIFE-
-
