Rutgers athletic director Pat Hobbs abruptly resigns
- Thread starter Tango Two
- Start date
I find it interesting that a number of the people making speculative comments on here…don’t remember them posting on this board before
Just sayin’
Just sayin’
And yet, it happens everywhere and most assuredly has happened inside the walls of S-L. *Stuff* happens and it is not always Harvey Weinstein *stuff*. Yes.. of course it is wrong.. but, if it happened, the wronged parties are within those families and if they haven't gone public with it why should the S-L? Even if a wronged party wanted to punish such people, why should the S-L cooperate? Is it just for views.. for money? Is Rutgers and the the people harmed more by the alleged affair or by forcing out an effective executive and/or going public with the private matter? Resignation and even forced resignation is likely the correct thing for Rutgers for various reasons if the rumor is true.. but it should end there and hopefully it has.
Last edited:
Many of us said the way the resignation happened was questionable (e.g., no press conference, why no LOA in interim, no comments immediately afterwards). Now there's rumors emerging, albeit on Reddit, and posters supporting them.
It's fair to question, and where there's smoke there's usually fire.
Oh and it's a huge event on FB message board.
Teenage girls and scumbags spread rumors with the intention of ruining reputations. Middle aged men generally go about their business and wait for the facts to come out.
Yup, that’s a fireable one. Open up the organization to a bunch of trouble if it’s not addressed.
Politi did put out an article foreshadowing that something would come out. But look your right - if Patrice Hobbs (his wife) has a job with adequate medical insurance coverage he could switch to immediately, then all the strange surrounding circumstances are, in fact, speculative. Or perhaps even, her insurance is better, and they are already on her plan?
I hate to say it though - but if that’s not the case - nobody as close to 65 years old (Medicare eligibility) as he is would proactively elect to forego a leave of absence that would allow him to retain medical insurance that he needs. By resigning, unless his wife’s coverage is an option, that would mean he chose COBRA coverage to support his major medical problems. It’s not speculative to say nobody would ever do that.
It's not fair to make shit up or pass along rumors as fact.
Lesson learned - don’t share info unless you’re prepared for the usual suspects to come out, guns blazing, that you’re either trolling or are looking to start trouble
I know a guy with a strange message board handle who’s been sharing info on a school in another conference leaving that conference to join the B1G or the SEC for a few months now
While someone will engage in friendly banter or informative college football talk, there are others who will constantly shit on the idea because they either don’t follow it enough, or too naïve to put the pieces together
It’s part of what sharing information on message board does - brings out some really good posters, and also as the haters
He simply was speculating. He also said he didn't know anything other the the statement from Hobbs
Patrice is an Administrative Judge for the State of NJ. She is a very nice person.
That information on her employer is readily available on LinkedIn. So now we can stop the speculation on his insurance coverage.
It never did. There is only one poster who claims he "knows" something. Maybe this is someone who has an axe to grind against the gymnastics coach?
Just to be clear - I'm not speculating about Hobbs at all - I wish him the very best. My post above was genuine curiosity how health benefits through a public employer like Rutgers differ (if at all) from the private sector.
If Hobbs was having an afrair with a subordinate , that’s probably a violation of some type of sexual harassment university policy . So he would have to go . And I imagine the subordinate could sue and make this kinda messy from a PR standpoint.
But big picture Rutgers athletics will go on. Make a solid hire
But big picture Rutgers athletics will go on. Make a solid hire
One thing that doesn’t square with Shelby’s interpretation is a forthcoming S-L expose.
If such is already planned and on the way, Shelby doesn’t think Politi would write the ‘unanswered questions’ article. At a minimum he’d know of the bombshell story and wouldn’t play dumb.
So he doubts that’s already in the works and the S-L tipped RU off. But Shelby still finds the cardiac issue explanation unconvincing.
If such is already planned and on the way, Shelby doesn’t think Politi would write the ‘unanswered questions’ article. At a minimum he’d know of the bombshell story and wouldn’t play dumb.
So he doubts that’s already in the works and the S-L tipped RU off. But Shelby still finds the cardiac issue explanation unconvincing.
Looks like Hobbs wife has good benefits.
They could be on hers or already or both on Rutgers. No way for us to know unless some of the so called insiders here have a source in the Rutgers HR department or at the state
If it results in a resignation of someone in the corporate hierarchy it is often reported. What we don't know is if that is relevant here
Whether we like him or not, Politi is not stupid and knows his article, whether we consider it clickbait or not, will generate views and have people talking, which, combined with Pat's resignation, is already on a 12 page thread
I look at as, if the speculation is true (and I hope it's not - I like Pat and appreciate everything he's done for the university), but for all intents and purposes, if it does turn out to be true, the first article is the bait and the follow up smash piece is the "cherry on top" for him and the SL as it'll generate clicks and ratings
It's a good question. I had a discussion about this with a football staff person abut what what happens when one turns 65. If the employee remains employed at 65, they are required to enroll in Medicare Parts A and B. IIRC, Medicare Parts A and B are significantly more expensive in premiums than the employee coverage.
Further, if I understand this correctly, even if the spouse does not also work for the State, health benefits are available:
"The Retired Group of the State Health Benefits Program (SHBP) or School Employees’ Health Benefits Program (SEHBP) offers medical, prescription, and dental coverage to certain retiring members and their eligible dependents. Members must have been full time employees who were eligible for health insurance coverage until their retirement date."
Also, when spouses both work for the State:
"State law prohibits two members who are each enrolled
in SHBP/SEHBP plans from covering each
other. Therefore, an eligible individual may enroll in
the SHBP/SEHBP as an employee or retiree, or be
covered as a dependent, but cannot be both."
Your top paragraph doesn't ring right. Everyone has to enroll in Part A Medicare at age 65. But those who are covered by group health insurance at work do not join Part B until they retire. This is no different for those employed by the state. When one does retire, one's spouse must join Parts A and B upon reaching 65.
I know of several couples who both were employed by the state. Each has his or her own state health insurance while employed. When one of the spouses retires, he or she is covered as a dependent of the work who is employed.
I'm not familiar with Medicare parts A and B. I should have preceded my first statement with "if I understand correctly" as well. I just looked at that "Fact Sheet", and here it is quoted. Is it wrong, or did it change recently. The date of the fact sheet is April 2024. This ain't my area of expertise, which is why I looked it up, but I could also be reading it incorrectly.
But the person I was discussing this with may have only been referring to Part A. He may not have specified. I was surprised by this rule.
"Medicare Coverage is Required if Eligible
Upon retirement, if you and/or your dependent are age 65 or have been on Social Security Disability
for 24 months or more, you are required to enroll in Medi- care Parts A and B. If you have not enrolled
in both parts of Medicare, you should contact Social Security to apply 90 days prior to your retirement date."
So your take is the SL is holding the story??? Putting their info to be stolen by another media company?
Why would both spouses have their own insurance when working ? Wouldn’t it be cheaper for one to be on the others state insurance as a dependent. Usually the spouse that makes less money can get the premium cheaper
Wasted 40 minutes reading this entire thread from soup to nuts, FFS is the guy out there laying pipe or not?
No
For all we know, this could be false
And, like I've said, I hope to God it is
But something (actual, multiple things) don't add up
And usually, when there's smoke, there's fire
As mentioned earlier, SL could have found out about it, alerted RU, who told Hobbs, etc.
Or, it could all be BS
We'll find out soon enough either way
The S-L isn't a fan of Rutgers or Hobbs, to put it mildly. If there were even a smidgen of evidence, the S-L would happily run a story reporting that Hobbs is accused of doing something wrong (having an affair with a subordinate). Q.E.D. There isn't a smidgen of evidence that he's done anything wrong.
Maybe that evidence will emerge, but to me it's wrong for people to be speculating and spreading rumors when there's no present evidence of wrongdoing.
Maybe that evidence will emerge, but to me it's wrong for people to be speculating and spreading rumors when there's no present evidence of wrongdoing.
This I agree with. As stated I doubt the 'cardiac issue' is the reason but I also don't think the SL has anything yet. I think RU found something out and proactively dumped him....or rather allowed him to retire immediately to keep some benefits and craft an excuse else they'd fire him.
Medicare A & B might be more expensive than state employee coverage but it is less expensive than private coverage
Which invites the question, "why would the S-L hold such a story?" It's hard to think of why that would do that. Running the story (if there were any evidence for it) would be great for the S-L.
As @Knight Shift's post indicates, the state simply doesn't allow that.
Explain why SL is holding the story. They never have before! But all of sudden they want to protect Rutgers😂😂😂 Funniest crap I've ever heard on this board!
The key words are "upon retirement." If you continue to work after age 65, you do not need to be in Medicare Part B so long as you are covered by group life insurance.
Similar threads
