well go to the Patriot League then or the other sports forum because arguing for 30 Olympic sports on the fooball board where our AD turned the program into a dumpster fire isnt going to get you anything sympathy, in fact now I know your agenda
well go to the Patriot League then or the other sports forum because arguing for 30 Olympic sports on the fooball board where our AD turned the program into a dumpster fire isnt going to get you anything sympathy, in fact now I know your agenda
Perhaps we can raise tuition. It's already the biggest bargain in the Big Ten , no ?Baseball and softball need better facilities. Lacrosse needs better facilities. Soccer could use an upgrade beyond what is coming.
Baseball and softball need better facilities. Lacrosse needs better facilities. Soccer could use an upgrade beyond what is coming.
baseball and softball just got an indoor practice facility. Soccer and lacrosse are moving into the Rodkin center. While these asks are important, they shouldn’t be prioritized over the recruiting needs of football , which lost half its paying customers do to its inability to produce a competitive product, thx to subpar recruiting.
Our baseball and softball facilities are barely college level.baseball and softball just got an indoor practice facility. Soccer and lacrosse are moving into the Rodkin center. While these asks are important, they shouldn’t be prioritized over the recruiting needs of football , which lost half its paying customers do to its inability to produce a competitive product, thx to subpar recruiting.
Dealing with complicated questions is not a strong suit of many on this board.I was there Saturday. I saw how awful it was. If it was raining it would have reminded me of Temple except we beat Temple.
So gut everything and anything to try to fix football? For how long? What is the timeline to fix football before you fix other sports?
I think it's a much more complicated issue than this board seems to make it.
Can't we celebrate field hoxkey being ranked and promote football?exactly...did we not lose over 5 million in lost revenue plus buyout money would take that further up but yeah field hockey
Our baseball and softball facilities are barely college level.
Can you expand that?
any proof that everything else is being gutted..why are you and some others spreading that....you do realize a $100 million facility was just produced
Thanks for the answers. And I really am not trolling. I was having the discussion with someone else and kind of wanted to see where the normal consensus of people were.Three thoughts here (by the way I’m not convinced your original question is serious ... it seems like you’re trolling).
1) We already eliminated several men’s sports (Title 9 driven) so how much did they matter? They were already “sacrificed”
2) You say you were there Saturday and it was awful ( it was a sorry sight there were only 3 people in my row and I have great seats). In spite of that the crowd in attendance Saturday (or any other home game in the last 15 years) EXCEEDS THE TOTAL ATTENDANCE of most other sports (hoops and wrestling aside) for that ENTIRE time span. There are a few die hards, parents, and boyfriends/girlfriend of the players as the sole attendees of several sports. It’s just the way it is. Football matters more.
3) Successful football programs can an often do help build (and fund) non-revenue sports.
I think it's worth adding to the equation that you have to do all of the aforementioned sacrificing for a coach that no one else seems to want at any price. The BOG has a certain fiscal duty here, and I assume considering someone's 'market value' is a part of that duty.With what Schiano was asking for, on the timeline he wanted, would you be willing to sacrifice other sports and projects to have gotten him?
This is what it came down to.
Is football worth cutting the legs out of other sports? Right now we just don't have the money at Rutgers to upgrade everything today.
I'm not flaming or trolling but it a real question. Do you, as an AD, screw over your other programs to push this hire?
I'm not sure if I was an AD I could.
Football and men's basketball are the only 2 profitable sports at Rutgers. The revenue generated from both sports helped fund the other sports here. With the millions in ticket, parking, concessions, and souvenir revenue that has steadily declined over the last 4 years because of the football program, there is more of a likelihood that other sports will be negatively impacted than paying the cost of hiring Schiano. If GS were hired, and it is likely that football revenue would increase quickly enough to be a net plus to all of the other programs.My argument is my opinion. I believe we should have a full compliment of sports and not sacrifice any.
I want Rutgers football to be extremely successful but I also want all Rutgers sports to be successful.
You are drinking the cool aid from being too close to the program - the math problem is "not" putting money into the program.This is basically what @Caliknight has been saying all along.
At the end of the day, this whole thing is a math problem. The school isn't willing to poor tens of millions of dollars of "Rutgers money" into the football program. Our expenses - coaching salaries and infrastructure - have to be paid for out of football-derived revenue as well as conference-derived revenue and donor money.
Math problem. Always has been.
That’s a tasty little fact the all football all the time people won’t recognize. At peak Schiano, we were losing millions while decimating most every other program.Even when we were winning, the program was losing money. What would we have received if we met his demand?