Schools with alumni that donate do so because their alumni have great nostalgic feelings about their time attending the school. Rutgers (as a whole) has done almost everything it could for decades to convey to its students that it really couldn't care less what their feelings towards the school is. The RU Screw is real. Contrary to popular belief, IT DOES NOT HAPPEN AT EVERY OTHER SCHOOL. For a large portion of the student body, the RU Screw eventually winds up being a deal breaker for future donations (it did for me).
Then there's the school's politics, which is an entire kettle of fish in and of itself. But athletics is a big part, too. The school never made an effort in athletics. Never. And because of that, except for like four seasons in the school's history, we've never had real success in football or mens basketball. Successful athletics is another thing that makes students feel nostalgia about their time in school. Nostalgia = $
John Goodman explained it in Revenge of the Nerds ...
We don't have alumni support like other schools because we don't have a history of winning like other schools. The support doesn't come first; it never does. The school must win first and that means the school must behave like winning is important (and spend like it is) before it can expect to make a return on its investment. Win first, then revenue.
We may win with this year with Harper and Bailey (and I hope we will), but then they'll leave and unless there is a 3rd Harper brother (whose best friend is also a Top 5 national recruit), the season after (and the season after that, etc) Rutgers is gonna find itself with an empty stadium on a lot of evenings because of the ticket price increase. This massive increase (before winning) is just another shortsighted version of the RU Screw.