Not sure if this is a good or bad thing:
http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/i..._be_featured_on_real_sports_regarding_fo.html
http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/i..._be_featured_on_real_sports_regarding_fo.html
Rutgers to be featured on Real Sports regarding football arms race
- Thread starter Scarlet_Scourge
- Start date
Jon Frankel is the reporter. Of course this is not going to be a good thing. However, in the end, we're in the Big Ten so there's no turning back now.
Now that I read some more about it, it looks like they will go negative. Real sports is basically all negative stories and then one quick feel good story at the very end. Some faculty members blame sports for all kind of things that have zero to do with sports, but it is what the Union feeds them. Whenever the Union fail to negotiate a good deal they always blame it on sports. Never mind that Rutgers spends WAY MORE on academics than they do sports 96% of their budget vs %4 for sports.
I'm guessing RU because they'll be tying it into the subsidy which is the highest in the nation as I understand.
Will they mention the success of the investment due to future revenues?
I gotta admit in the past I would save the date, watch the episode, and complain about how anti RU it was.
But these days IDGAF. It just doesn't matter.
Great it's us and Eastern Michigan(who nobody but 4,568 fans care about) as the featured schools. RU must truly be must watch TV. There are a plethora of schools they could have featured but low and behold it's us again. Bryant Gumbel I thought that guy was done when Gerry Curl went out of style.
It's going to be a slam piece with nary a mention that we will be close to budget neutral come 2021. If they wanted to be fair they would point out the creative accounting tricks used by schools to hide athletic deficits. Such as stadium costs moved to University building costs, something which goes on our athletic books here. That story would ruin their narrative however.
It's going to be a slam piece with nary a mention that we will be close to budget neutral come 2021. If they wanted to be fair they would point out the creative accounting tricks used by schools to hide athletic deficits. Such as stadium costs moved to University building costs, something which goes on our athletic books here. That story would ruin their narrative however.
Last edited:
Jon Frankel - scion of a family well known in Journalism and Hollywood - was recruited by RU (I don't know if he got an offer) and SU out of HS to play football, out of Horace Mann I believe in NYC. He went to SU I believe as a walk on - not sure if he ever suited up - I've played flag football with him and knew him years ago. A very nice, smart guy.
So What! What difference is it going to make to the FB Program? It will be typical media B.S. that wont effect anything. Fret if you will, but why bother?
Just because a dollar of your operating budget wasn't spent on athletics, it doesn't mean that it was spent "on academics." And I don't think you want to try and make the argument that Rutgers spends "way more" on teaching and research than sports to people who don't believe that Rutgers shouldn't be spending money on athletics at all.
But, you're correct, Rutgers is going to get savaged in this report as the poster child for institutional collegiate priorities gone haywire, administrative incompetence and an arms race with far more losers than winners. Generally, I stipulate to every point being made, and then I change the channel to watch a Big Ten football game. This isn't an argument that needs to be won in order to go out and do what we plan to do in the world of college athletics, particularly when it's being made by a high-profile player from the media-industrial complex responsible for the very increases in the cost of competing in intercollegiate athletics they're bemoaning.
Rutgers is a flagship, AAU state university; this is what we do. The academic faculty needs to accept it and get on board with it, or take a gig somewhere else. According to a slideshow I saw yesterday on NJ.com, Rutgers pays its faculty -- on average -- more than any other University in the state except Princeton; could high-profile, top-tier intercollegiate athletics be part of the reason why? Short of the death of American football due to its inherent health risks, the game isn't going anywhere, and Rutgers isn't either. They've been playing the game at this level long enough that very few people can seriously claim that Rutgers wasn't engaged in this Triangle-Trade when they got hired, there.
You can't do much to refute the argument I think is going to be made by this report, other than to chuckle about it and admit, "yeah, the Rutgers Athletic Department has been criminally mismanaged for about 35 years; it's about time someone noticed. It says a lot about New Jersey's self esteem."
Last edited:
Imagine the media attention if all the NJ players stayed home and won here. It would be a total national phenomenon. Rutgers is at the center of the media universe.
The next person to give a shit about anything Bryant Gumbel has to say will be the first.
Featuring Rutgers in a show about the athletics arms race is kind of like featuring Rowan University in a show about the effects of selectivity in admissions. Surely there are better examples whether you are for or against the issue.
I mean let's assume one is against Universities investing in athletics facilities. Why even talk about Rutgers? Rutgers has bottom tier facilities almost all the way across the board, yet as mentioned above Rutgers also has one of the highest subsidies. Shouldn't Rutgers be then proof that schools should be investing in facilities?
On the flip side, if you are ok with the arms race, why not actually show people schools that are, you know, actually in on that race (Oregon, Bama, UMich, Ohio State, FSU, etc...).
I mean let's assume one is against Universities investing in athletics facilities. Why even talk about Rutgers? Rutgers has bottom tier facilities almost all the way across the board, yet as mentioned above Rutgers also has one of the highest subsidies. Shouldn't Rutgers be then proof that schools should be investing in facilities?
On the flip side, if you are ok with the arms race, why not actually show people schools that are, you know, actually in on that race (Oregon, Bama, UMich, Ohio State, FSU, etc...).
Love it . Should help recruiting. Rutgers spends all their money on sports! Spread the word
Because I for one don't enjoy arguing with the people who read the ledger when it prints this stuff and won't like it now. It continues to fan negative flames around the program. It's likely last year's stuff and mike rice get brought up. I'd rather the states taxpayers were supportive of the states flagship university
Yep. It would be like Miami in the early-mid 80's but with positive attention because hopefully we wouldn't be thug d-bags about it.
There is a small vocal minority of faculty who hates sports and they believe Rutgers should only offer club sports at best. These are the same people who actually argued that Rutgers should drop out of the Big Ten because it would take too long for them to get their full share. I am NOT kidding... they actually wasted the BOG time with that.
That is exactly what not to do. Even if you totaled Rutgers 30+ year investment into big time sports that yielded the revenues that Big Ten membership will bring and you could make it look positive, that then begs the question of what will be done with that Big Ten money and the answer will be further investment into sports. The end result will just be a flagship state school with athletics on par with other large state schools.
It is my opinion that if a defense is offered it should be along the lines of the value of competitive sports in overall education. Equate it with dance and music and art and other quasi-academic endeavors supported by universities. Once you defend the connection of sports and education the value to the student, it then becomes a question of level of competition.. and then you have the ability to look at costs without revenues from being "big time" and compare it to the costs of running a big time program with big time revenues. But you must win the argument regarding the value of sports first.
Then suggest that New Jersey residents deserve the same level of competition for their flagship state U that other states offer at multiple state universities. Talk about Kansas with Kansas, Kansas State and Wichita State as an example. Why shouldn't New Jersey have one such school offering top level competition?
Then mention that the doing anything in New Jersey is expensive. Cost of living, union rules, etc. Mention that spending in politics is out of control as well (it is an election year), and that it would be good for all if some sort of spending constraints were applied akin to salary caps but that it would have to be carefully enacted to allow leveling of the field to increase competition and that it would be bad if such rules came about that simply ensure those with the best facilities now will have that advantage protected. There should be some allowance for schools to level the playing field in all things, salaries, facilities, recruiting, etc. That would increase competition for the betterment of all.
It cannot be defended based purely on future revenue.
Last edited:
You want to be bigtime you get time in the barrel. The poor little RU trying tie catch up crap is hilarious no one cares about the facilities around the US
Trying to be a player for 25 plus years
Failing and still sinking money is the story the media has chosen
Deal with it
Trying to be a player for 25 plus years
Failing and still sinking money is the story the media has chosen
Deal with it
Because if they did that, they would blacklisted in the states those schools are in until the end of time. The mentality is totally different. And that includes even when those schools went through dark periods.
I'm sure there are professors at all those schools that hate athletics, particularly at a place like FSU where athletes were literally getting away with violent crimes. But going on the record is a no-no- you'd be in deep crap as a professor vocally speaking out against it.
Now it is nice that we don't have groupthink at RU, but that is exploited by the media as they deal with a vocal minority who don't even deal in facts.
Asking Mark Killingsworth, a Michigan alum and season ticket holder, and RU econ professor, to talk about what's wrong with big time athletics shows the dishonesty of the media on this issue.
I didn't realize Goldberg went to RU- he officially overtakes Bernard Marcus at the biggest famous douche alum we have and most useless. I've seen Goldberg speak before, he's going to look like a moron and talk about what he knows nothing about, that much is guaranteed.
They won't mention his role as leader in the faculty union I imagine.
I understand people who don't like this, but to me that's the old school way of thinking. This thing is basically gonna paint us as a big time athletic department that spends big and that Rutgers is a football school and sports school. Years ago isn't that the stuff we've dreamed about? They could've done it on Alabama or something, think about it. And we "holier than thou" would have called out Bama for being a football school but in the end, they win championships and get recruits, isn't that what they want? And the difference is - the big difference - is that Rutgers is actually a good school! Nothing they say in the show can take that away, it's not like they can say "Rutgers needs to stop spending on sports they need to improve their academics" Rutgers is one of the top institutions in the world! So yea, if someone wants to spread that we also spend a lot on sports and are a big time athletic department to college sports fans and recruits and whoever may watch this show, than great! And if your fears are that the show may say something about sports benefitting at RU at the expense of academics, well I doubt they will because they'd be lying, and if they did and anyone actually believes it, those aren't the people I want associating themselves with our school anyway!
If this kind of information is in it, then it can't be good.
"And tax-funded Rutgers, New Jersey’s largest university, is Exhibit A. As per HBO’s facts, figures and interviews RU has sacrificed academics for football and basketball. According to RU economics professor Mark Killingsworth, the athletic department over the last 12 years has lost $312 million, with many more to come.
Professors Killingsworth and David Hughes cite records showing that in 2014 $26 million originally designated for academics was instead applied to RU’s sports debt.
And students, parents of students, taxpayers and the quality of Rutgers as a highly regarded academic institution will continue to pay that price.
Rutgers is now preparing to spend many millions more to improve its basketball facilities, to make them more attractive to the best recruits. And if those recruits are good enough to help RU win Big Ten games, they’ll bolt for the pros after their freshman or sophomore years. Apply, rinse, repeat."
http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/the-obsession-and-insanity-of-laughable-nfl-mock-drafts/
"And tax-funded Rutgers, New Jersey’s largest university, is Exhibit A. As per HBO’s facts, figures and interviews RU has sacrificed academics for football and basketball. According to RU economics professor Mark Killingsworth, the athletic department over the last 12 years has lost $312 million, with many more to come.
Professors Killingsworth and David Hughes cite records showing that in 2014 $26 million originally designated for academics was instead applied to RU’s sports debt.
And students, parents of students, taxpayers and the quality of Rutgers as a highly regarded academic institution will continue to pay that price.
Rutgers is now preparing to spend many millions more to improve its basketball facilities, to make them more attractive to the best recruits. And if those recruits are good enough to help RU win Big Ten games, they’ll bolt for the pros after their freshman or sophomore years. Apply, rinse, repeat."
http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/the-obsession-and-insanity-of-laughable-nfl-mock-drafts/
The story Arms Race on Real sports with Bryant Gumbel this evening credits one Jake Rosenwasser as the producer. Rosenwasser attended the University of Michigan, which pays it's head football coach 4x more than what RU pays its coach. But no mention of Michigan, and the focus is Rutgers. This is because RU is the center of the media universe. Imagine what it will be like when all the Jersey kids stay home and win national championships at RU.
The show discussed how much the athletic department loses but 98% of it focused on football, which makes money.
Totally agenda driven and dishonest segment.
Totally agenda driven and dishonest segment.
Just read a piece on the 5 mains points. Laughable.
1) the critics. They probably protested everything when they were in college.
2) spending at The Hyatt. So what? Would you rather bitch about players getting suspended for doing stupid stuff the night before a game?
3) the subsidy. It's dropping, and will be eliminated soon, but God forbid they should mention the fact that we do our accounting a tad different than a lot of other schools at our level.
4) "mike rice tapes"??? REALLY? Get over it, move on, the rest of the nation has.
5) "one student's troubling tale" WTF does this have to do with anything? Get your education paid for by that state or, better yet, earn a scholarship.
How pathetic.
http://247sports.com/Recruitment/Jamaal-Beaty-92378/RecruitInterests
1) the critics. They probably protested everything when they were in college.
2) spending at The Hyatt. So what? Would you rather bitch about players getting suspended for doing stupid stuff the night before a game?
3) the subsidy. It's dropping, and will be eliminated soon, but God forbid they should mention the fact that we do our accounting a tad different than a lot of other schools at our level.
4) "mike rice tapes"??? REALLY? Get over it, move on, the rest of the nation has.
5) "one student's troubling tale" WTF does this have to do with anything? Get your education paid for by that state or, better yet, earn a scholarship.
How pathetic.
http://247sports.com/Recruitment/Jamaal-Beaty-92378/RecruitInterests
I went to a college in NYC which had tuition that was many times that of Rutgers. I got a 4 year partial scholarship and a part time job, the rest was paid by student loans and I never went hungry... in Manhattan! My parents didn't pay a single cent of my tuition.
Surely this would be a lot easier to do in New Brunswick, or Newark, or Camden at Rutgers.
The rest of the story was a total hackjob that left out a TON of facts. You know it is bad when freaking NJ.com of all places has to correct them on all the errors. Yikes!
Surely this would be a lot easier to do in New Brunswick, or Newark, or Camden at Rutgers.
The rest of the story was a total hackjob that left out a TON of facts. You know it is bad when freaking NJ.com of all places has to correct them on all the errors. Yikes!
