ADVERTISEMENT

Season ticket numbers

It's hard to know how much of a bump a new coach would have brought Rutgers. I agree that ticket sales would be better under a new coach, but it's difficult to say how much. Despite the wishes of many here, Rutgers would never hire a "name" coach, so there'd be a lot of uncertainty about the new guy and how well he would connect with the fans. Again, I'm not saying we have to keep Ash, but only that there's a lot of difficulty quantifying how much extent firing Ash would have prevented the slide in season ticket sales.

I don't mean to change the subject, but I think it might be hard to hire the kind of coach we want if Ash doesn't get what all of his colleagues would consider to be a fair shot at turning the ship around. So maybe we just have to be willing to accept the ticket loss.
You and @rutgersguy1 make a good point about firing in year 3. Some might take pause and think they will not be given enough time to turn the program around and pass on applying.
 
You and @rutgersguy1 make a good point about firing in year 3. Some might take pause and think they will not be given enough time to turn the program around and pass on applying.
There was a time when coaches would receive five years to turn things around. These days expectations are different and success is measured in a shorter period. There have been several schools who have display success in a little as three seasons. That has become the baseline for most programs. That may not be a realistic answer, but it is what it is these days.
 
There was a time when coaches would receive five years to turn things around. These days expectations are different and success is measured in a shorter period. There have been several schools who have display success in a little as three seasons. That has become the baseline for most programs. That may not be a realistic answer, but it is what it is these days.

Rutgers is a place that needs five years, because you’re not going to be able to recruit 4 and 5 stars off the bat. It’s an adverse situation program where you have to work harder for less success.

You turn things around by developing your own players. This is what Schiano successfully did, And Ash hasn’t done as well because he didn’t recruit Florida. Now that he’s recruiting Florida, I think Ash is on the right track.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ruronny
Rutgers is a place that needs five years, because you’re not going to be able to recruit 4 and 5 stars off the bat. It’s an adverse situation program where you have to work harder for less success.

You turn things around by developing your own players. This is what Schiano successfully did, And Ash hasn’t done as well because he didn’t recruit Florida. Now that he’s recruiting Florida, I think Ash is on the right track.

But remember that Schiano had great Florida connections from having been at Miami. Ash is just another face down there. There are *lots* of great high school players there, and everybody ought to recruit there, but it's not as though Ash is going to stand out the way Schiano did.
 
There was a time when coaches would receive five years to turn things around. These days expectations are different and success is measured in a shorter period. There have been several schools who have display success in a little as three seasons. That has become the baseline for most programs. That may not be a realistic answer, but it is what it is these days.
I agree and disagree at the same time! :Surprised:
Yes, times have changed.
But @camdenlawprof has a good point. If a coach has options, and he is looking at one school vs. Rutgers, and he sees Rutgers fired their coach after 3 years, he might think another place will be better because he will be given more time. The Rutgers job has the potential to be a career-ending job because the coach will have a terrible W-L record after 3 years.

On the other hand, if a coach is confident in his abilities, has swagger and stain, and he sees that the previous coach was a total train wreck, he may proceed.
 
I believe you but when you have no real experience with the sport. It makes understanding the finer things that make picking a successful coach difficult. Hobbs admitted he fell in love with Ash over a phone interview. After that Hobbs basically passed on other qualified candidates.

The guy who thought it was a great idea to hire Flood was a former player... so...
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRU2RU
Rutgers is a place that needs five years, because you’re not going to be able to recruit 4 and 5 stars off the bat. It’s an adverse situation program where you have to work harder for less success.

You turn things around by developing your own players. This is what Schiano successfully did, And Ash hasn’t done as well because he didn’t recruit Florida. Now that he’s recruiting Florida, I think Ash is on the right track.
I disagree. Look at what Brohm did at Purdue.
Brohm worked with subpar recruits and started competing in his first year. He has also landed several 4 and 5 star recruits in 2 years. This 4 or 5 year narrative at Rutgers is a weak excuse for accepting less than mediocrity.
 
The one factor of all those people you have mentioned and Hobbs, big egos. They pretty much made decisions on their own without input from others who could help with the process.

That wasn't the case with Hobbs. He spoke with a lot of football people before hiring Ash. People hire the wrong football coach all the time in college football. That is why there is turn over in coaching every year.
 
I agree and disagree at the same time! :Surprised:
Yes, times have changed.
But @camdenlawprof has a good point. If a coach has options, and he is looking at one school vs. Rutgers, and he sees Rutgers fired their coach after 3 years, he might think another place will be better because he will be given more time. The Rutgers job has the potential to be a career-ending job because the coach will have a terrible W-L record after 3 years.

On the other hand, if a coach is confident in his abilities, has swagger and stain, and he sees that the previous coach was a total train wreck, he may proceed.

I think his argument is that the norm these days is to give only three years to succeed, and so there aren't many places that would give more time than there. Thus, he argues, a dismissal at three years would not hurt our ability to recruit a new coach. I wonder if his factual argument is true, but I don't know. I do know that Cal fired one coach in 2001after four years (the team beat only Rutgers that year), and that another, Sonny Dykes, lasted only three years.
 
I think his argument is that the norm these days is to give only three years to succeed, and so there aren't many places that would give more time than there. Thus, he argues, a dismissal at three years would not hurt our ability to recruit a new coach. I wonder if his factual argument is true, but I don't know. I do know that Cal fired one coach in 2001after four years (the team beat only Rutgers that year), and that another, Sonny Dykes, lasted only three years.

The other part of whether a coach needs more than 3 years is if there is any sign of improvement. It is hard to argue that Ash showed any real sign of improvement over 3 seasons, either in recruiting or on-the-field performance.
 
That wasn't the case with Hobbs. He spoke with a lot of football people before hiring Ash. People hire the wrong football coach all the time in college football. That is why there is turn over in coaching every year.

Lol who? Like Barry Alvarez and Urban Meyer? Two of our foes whose best interest is that Rutgers remain horrible?

That is such a NJ thing and Hobbs completely missed it. You don't ask your competition to sign off on who is going to manage your business. That's mind blowingly stupid.
 
Pat had the chance to fix this problem last year and balked out of ego. He thinks he can get a better candidate than he could have last year (I personally don't). So as a result of punting a year, the AD will lose anywhere from 5-10M for his choice (on top of the money we have bled since Ash has been here). When you tally it up, the Ash hire, the extension, the triple down of keeping him and the buyout will have cost this school close to 25-30M in a 4 year period. TWENTY-FIVE to THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS.

Throw in the potential of a new school President rolling into town in the next few months, Towers wife getting on the BOG and the strong potential of a 1-3 win season and Pat is absolutely in some hot water for the blundering of football and it's deserved. He's not bigger than Rutgers, no one is.
 
I disagree. Look at what Brohm did at Purdue.
Brohm worked with subpar recruits and started competing in his first year. He has also landed several 4 and 5 star recruits in 2 years. This 4 or 5 year narrative at Rutgers is a weak excuse for accepting less than mediocrity.
Leach made a bowl in year 2 at WSU, Clawson year 3 at Wake Forest. Wilson did in year 5 at IU and you mentioned Brohm. Wilson took 5 years but his offense was usually good to very good so he was given the chance to fix the defense and looked like he might have done okay with his hiring of Allen as DC before he was let go. So you at least have to show some sign of something.

The 4-5 year thing is just giving a candidate a legitimate opportunity but there has to be some signs of something to continue beyond year 4. I think 4 years is plenty of time to show something is happening even if not showing up in wins yet and year 5 definitely has to be a bowl season if one hasn't been made prior.

Like I said year 3 firings happen but it's not that often and when it does I wonder how often it's by the AD who made the hire. I don't know the answer but I tend to think it's more likely a new incoming AD who pulls the trigger vs the person who made the hire.
 
Lol who? Like Barry Alvarez and Urban Meyer? Two of our foes whose best interest is that Rutgers remain horrible?

That is such a NJ thing and Hobbs completely missed it. You don't ask your competition to sign off on who is going to manage your business. That's mind blowingly stupid.
No it's not stupid. Ash proved himself at Wisconsin and Ohio State as a coach at the coordinator level, and they vouched for his coaching ability. He did nothing to raise any red flags. What was unknown at the time of their recommendations is whether he would be a good head coach. NOBODY could predict how that would turn out. And he did nothing at Rutgers to raise any red flags in terms of working hard, putting in maximum effort and running a clean program. Unfortunately, his effort and hard work has not yielded much in the way of positive results. Happens quite a bit around college football.
 
Pat had the chance to fix this problem last year and balked out of ego. He thinks he can get a better candidate than he could have last year (I personally don't). So as a result of punting a year, the AD will lose anywhere from 5-10M for his choice (on top of the money we have bled since Ash has been here). When you tally it up, the Ash hire, the extension, the triple down of keeping him and the buyout will have cost this school close to 25-30M in a 4 year period. TWENTY-FIVE to THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS.

Throw in the potential of a new school President rolling into town in the next few months, Towers wife getting on the BOG and the strong potential of a 1-3 win season and Pat is absolutely in some hot water for the blundering of football and it's deserved. He's not bigger than Rutgers, no one is.
Please explain 5-10 million "as a result of punting a year."
Punting a year will cost closer to $3Million for losing 6,000 season tickets. The numbers you are putting up are cumulative numbers and mere speculation.
It's obvious you don't like Hobbs or at least with respect to what he has done with the football program. But as others have stated, Hobbs will probably be given a chance to make another football hire.
 
Do you trust Hobbs' ability to make the right choice after the disaster called Ash? Football is not Hobbs strength.

I posted this exact sentiment more then 12 months ago, and got clobbered. How things change.

I never fully trusted the guy after learning about the 7 year contract. Shows a lack of common sense, and critical thinking in not taking into account a future where the worst case scenario happens. On the other hand, he has made some good hires too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Local Shill
I believe you but when you have no real experience with the sport. It makes understanding the finer things that make picking a successful coach difficult. Hobbs admitted he fell in love with Ash over a phone interview. After that Hobbs basically passed on other qualified candidates.

Jesus, in private industry you would get crucified for this. Only in the public sector can one do 3/4 of their job correct and be lauded as a success.

Mistakes happen. Everyone commits them. In every industry. The sign of excellence is what you do in response to them. Do you stick your head in the sand, make further mistakes, or are you decisive in correcting the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUskoolie
I posted this exact sentiment more then 12 months ago, and got clobbered. How things change.
This is big time college athletics. That is understood. But this is also Rutgers. Considering RU's history and the train wreck that was Rutgers athletics under the last two ADs (and no disrespect is meant to Tim, but the Rice incident and Flood hiring were under his watch), Hobbs has been a huge upgrade if you look at what has been accomplished.

Yeah, the giant elephant in the room is the faltering football team, which drives the athletics bus. None of us except Hobbs, Barchi and the BOG (and maybe a couple of others) truly knows who made the ultimate decision on whether to keep Ash another year. If it was Hobbs who held firm while others were pushing to fire Ash, then that may result in his firing when a new President is hired. If it was Hobbs and others (President and/or BOG) who jointly agreed to keep Ash another year, don't see how Hobbs gets fired.

And keep in mind, Barchi does not retire until the end of the 2019-20 school year. Therefore, if Ash does get fired at the end of this season, Hobbs will likely still be here, and he will be the one in charge of hiring the next football coach. One has to guess what the chances are of Barchi firing yet another AD (that would be three) in the waning days of his tenure as President. Seems slim. But stranger things have happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rubigtimenow
Not every poster here would be able to see the details that separated Schiano from Ash. First, Ash a much big budget to recruit and hire coaches than Schiano ever had, yet the recruiting classes are not on the same level. Second, Schiano was able to develop players and it was easy to see. Last, Schiano, like Ash didn't have a winning season to that point, but you could see the level of competition jump and Rutgers had fewer blowouts.

Bottom line, it's not about comparing Ash to Schiano as much as it's comparing Ash to his current peers. Purdue in a similar situation was able to climb fast and see instant results. I hear more blaming of others coming from Ash than creating excitement around a program he thinks is on the cusp of turning things around.

Schiano also didn't having the Big Ten flag to waive in front of recruits faces, nor the facilities, nor any recent period of success, although that now seems like a long time ago. I'm in that group who thinks Schiano would do well here again, along with other candidates of course. At the very least he would juice ticket sales, and hope, because he has done it before. And that is what Rutgers needs: Someone who has successfully done it before.

I was always amused by the Ash hire: Hiring the guy who was beat by the guy you just fired (Arkansas, 2013).
 
Schiano also didn't having the Big Ten flag to waive in front of recruits faces, nor the facilities, nor any recent period of success, although that now seems like a long time ago.

I was always amused by the Ash hire: Hiring the guy who was beat by the guy you just fired (Arkansas, 2013).
That's a nice narrative, but not the case. Ash was the DC. And Arkansas was a train wreck in 2013, Biliema's first year after John L. Smith.
 
That's a nice narrative, but not the case. Ash was the DC. And Arkansas was a train wreck in 2013, Biliema's first year after John L. Smith.

How did Gary Nova do that day against the Ash defense? Ash was both the DC and the DB coach. And Arkansas recruited better then Rutgers in the years prior, and had revenge on their mind from losing to RU the year before.
 
Last edited:
That wasn't the case with Hobbs. He spoke with a lot of football people before hiring Ash. People hire the wrong football coach all the time in college football. That is why there is turn over in coaching every year.
Maybe it wasn't the case the first time but what was the reason for retaining Ash this time after another disaster? Btw, the first time around there were qualified head coaches Hobbs could have vetted and interviewed but again he passed on all of them. Ash must have given one helluva phone interview. It must have better than the old sex chat 800 number calls.:Laughing
 
I disagree. Look at what Brohm did at Purdue.
Brohm worked with subpar recruits and started competing in his first year. He has also landed several 4 and 5 star recruits in 2 years. This 4 or 5 year narrative at Rutgers is a weak excuse for accepting less than mediocrity.

Brohm started with enough talent to be decent, a far cry from where Ash started.

It’s the several 4 and 5 stars which put him over the top. A no name, which is what we’d likely hire, isn’t going to be able to do that at Rutgers.

Lastly, where we need the biggest help is in the trenches. We don’t recruit ready made linemen, we develop them. That’s the biggest reason a new coach needs 4-5 years.

If a coach can recruit, the lineman that can impact right away, the building timeframe can shorten, but not going to hold my breathe on that one.
 
But remember that Schiano had great Florida connections from having been at Miami. Ash is just another face down there. There are *lots* of great high school players there, and everybody ought to recruit there, but it's not as though Ash is going to stand out the way Schiano did.

One of Ashs biggest mistakes was not hiring recruiters who had recruited Florida. Thankfully, he rectified that by hiring Noah Joseph and Kolby Smith, who in turn recruited Isaiah awashington and TJ Robinson, two of the best recruits in our incoming class, who are going to play right away. Had we re recruited 2 additional impact players each of the last four years from FL, we would have been in much better shape. We seem to have competitive front line talent but depth is lacking.
 
Taking info from Sarge's Graph, here are the ticket and dollar losses (assigning a value of $50/season ticket X 7 home games) since Ash started coaching at RU:
Loss of Tickets from Previous Season:
2017 - 4,466 (4,466 cumulative) $1,563,000 lost revenue
2018- 1,103 (5,569 cumulative) $1,949,150 lost revenue
2019- 6,124 (11,693 cumulative) $4,092,550 lost revenue

Total lost ticket revenue under Ash $7,604,700
That number is fairly conservative, as it does not include parking an concessions.
That figure exceeds Ash's buyout after this season ends. And that does not even take into account that Ash will get a DC job substantially mitigating what he is owed-- that buyout figure will go down by at least $1,500,000.

A-ha! Hobbs was waiting until he could show that Ash's buyout would be less than lost revenue. Genius!
 
How did Gary Nova do that day against the Ash defense? Ash was both the DC and the DB coach. And Arkansas recruited better then Rutgers in the years prior, and had revenge on their mind from losing to RU the year before.
Again, that's a nice narrative if you want to play superficial games. But did you take into account that the top 4 receivers for RU were drafted (or played) in the NFL? Kroft, Carroo, Pratt and Coleman.

Actually, the 2013 defensive performance was an improvement under Ash vs. Rutgers.
2012- 397 passing yards, 525 total yards and 5 passing TDs and 0 INT.
2013- 346 passing yards, 400 total yards, 3 passing TDs and 1 INT

If you want to play the recruit ratings game, shall we delve into the running game and look at the performance of RU's 4 star running back? 9 carries for 21 years. Hell of a job by Ash's defense.

We can go back and forth and parse silly statistics, if you want.
 
No it's not stupid. Ash proved himself at Wisconsin and Ohio State as a coach at the coordinator level, and they vouched for his coaching ability. He did nothing to raise any red flags. What was unknown at the time of their recommendations is whether he would be a good head coach. NOBODY could predict how that would turn out. And he did nothing at Rutgers to raise any red flags in terms of working hard, putting in maximum effort and running a clean program. Unfortunately, his effort and hard work has not yielded much in the way of positive results. Happens quite a bit around college football.

Got it. Let's make sure to ask James Franklin and Jim Harbaugh this time if they approve of our new coaching hire. I'm sure they'll have our best interest at heart.

My God what a sucker you are. Wish you were my competitor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATIOH and bjp063
How much football experience did :
Sandy Barbour of Penn State have?
Mark Hollis, former AD at Michigan State
And Lynn Swann, who has a lot of football experience, is likely on his way out at USC.
Barbour and Hollis spent their careers in athletics hriing coaches and being around them. Hobbs spent his previous career running a law school. If I wanted to hire a lawyer Hobbs would have much better insight due to experience then barbour or Hollis or Swan. Football coach I rather go with those who spent their career in athletics.
 
Barbour and Hollis spent their careers in athletics hriing coaches and being around them. Hobbs spent his previous career running a law school. If I wanted to hire a lawyer Hobbs would have much better insight due to experience then barbour or Hollis or Swan. Football coach I rather go with those who spent their career in athletics.
That's an incomplete response. Hobbs was AD at Seton Hall and hired the current basketball coach. He also was involved with the building of the Prudential arena.
 
Got it. Let's make sure to ask James Franklin and Jim Harbaugh this time if they approve of our new coaching hire. I'm sure they'll have our best interest at heart.

My God what a sucker you are. Wish you were my competitor.
No, not a sucker. Just not jaded like you are and looking at everything with hindsight and anger.
Hobbs did not base his decision on what Alavarez and Meyer said. It is very common to call someone's former bosses and employers to get a read on a hire before making the hire. And yeah, sure, Alvarez and Meyer were certain that Ash was going to be a failure as a head coach. They certainly lose sleep at night that Rutgers is a sleeping giant that is going to awake and take the B1G title from them.

Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Not every poster here would be able to see the details that separated Schiano from Ash. First, Ash a much big budget to recruit and hire coaches than Schiano ever had, yet the recruiting classes are not on the same level. Second, Schiano was able to develop players and it was easy to see. Last, Schiano, like Ash didn't have a winning season to that point, but you could see the level of competition jump and Rutgers had fewer blowouts.

Bottom line, it's not about comparing Ash to Schiano as much as it's comparing Ash to his current peers. Purdue in a similar situation was able to climb fast and see instant results. I hear more blaming of others coming from Ash than creating excitement around a program he thinks is on the cusp of turning things around.

Schiano's first few recruiting classes weren't great either - but they were pieces of the puzzle that he could develop to become better players, while he improved infrastructure, etc. By his 3rd year, the team was on the verge of being competitive - and then in his 4th there was a car accident that derailed the build a bit. But an identity had been established, and all the 2-and-3-star pieces were in place and developed to be positioned well for when the conference fell apart and the door opened to jump up the rankings.

Ash hasn't shown me that. I don't see an identity on offense or defense. I don't see the under-recruited pieces becoming top tier performers and poised to leap forward. I don't see the conference on the verge of collapse, or even a team poised to take advantage if it did.

My excitement for this season is at rock bottom - lowest it's probably been since I was an undergrad during the Shea years.
 
That's an incomplete response. Hobbs was AD at Seton Hall and hired the current basketball coach. He also was involved with the building of the Prudential arena.
So he spent 2 years as an interim AD at a school that doesn't have a football program. He negotiated Seton Hall deal to play at Prudential but didn't build it.
 
Last edited:
So he spent 2 years as an interim AD at a school that doesn't have a football program. I would call that a ton of experience.
Nobody said it was a ton of experience.
But hey, let's overlook his 4 years of experience at Rutgers and say he has zero football knowledge.
 
Rutgers is a place that needs five years, because you’re not going to be able to recruit 4 and 5 stars off the bat. It’s an adverse situation program where you have to work harder for less success.

You turn things around by developing your own players. This is what Schiano successfully did, And Ash hasn’t done as well because he didn’t recruit Florida. Now that he’s recruiting Florida, I think Ash is on the right track.
just the opposite,IF you were Nebraska or Michigan with a baseline past,a culture and a History of past winning accomplishments that would be an OK approach of 5 years(though thats NOT todays norm even at though programs).
At Rutgers just sitting around with a" hope" and no significant signs that progress is being made, that an never been HC will turn things around in 5 years is not a intelligent move.All it does is just set one of the current worst power 5 programs back even further,makes the mountain to climb higher.
 
How much football experience did :
Sandy Barbour of Penn State have?
Mark Hollis, former AD at Michigan State
And Lynn Swann, who has a lot of football experience, is likely on his way out at USC.

Dindn't Barbour come from Cal? I forget where Hollis is from but I believe it was p5
 
Nobody said it was a ton of experience.
But hey, let's overlook his 4 years of experience at Rutgers and say he has zero football knowledge.

tjxvpuomyi821.jpg


Sorry, I had to...

I like Hobbs and think he's done very good things here.... outside of football. That's the one glaring black mark right now, and it's unfortunately what drives the bus in an athletic department. He needs to fix it, but he hasn't yet shown me any prowess in understanding what's needed to make that happen.
 
ADVERTISEMENT