What do other big-time programs have that RU does not ?

[HeavenUniv.]

This is NOT a thread about our head football coach or Athletic Director.--I certainly DO NOT claim to be an expert on what is needed to become a consistent national power in college sports. I did live just minutes from an SEC school for a couple years so I am just going by what I noticed while I lived there--

Fanatical state residents who make the college sports teams part of their life,not just something to do if the team is winning and the weather is nice and there isn't a wine and cheese festival that they might go to

STRONG support by local media YEAR-ROUND--large amounts of coverage almost always pointing towards things that are positive about the university,both academically and athletically

ENDLESS marketing in the community

Willingness by the state,university,and donors,major and small,to donate to have good facilities

 

[rutgersal]

its a one word answer - MONEY

 

[AreYouNUTS]

One thing, and one thing only, when it comes down to it:

- a single big, big, BIG-time booster (see: Knight, Pickens, etc), OR

- a couple dozen private, and/or corporate, big-time boosters

 

[Bagarocks]

its a one word answer - MONEY

Holy crap I can't believe for the second time I emphatically agree with Al!

 

[MozRU]

What do other big-time programs have that RU does not ?

 

[sct1111]

Rutgers has a decent amount of fans. But we don't have the amount of die hards that the big time programs have. We don't have a state that identifies with the state university. We have local media that likes to stir up controversy every chance they get. People who aren't in tune with Rutgers only hear the negatives and in turn don't have a positive image of Rutgers.

Our taxes are so damn high in this state, that whenever we hear of Rutgers planning on investing in new infrastructure, people complain it's coming out of their pockets. Therefore we don't get a lot of private support because "my taxes are already too high" "students already pay enough to go there" etc. meanwhile state support is at an all time low.

We have only been a decent team for less than 10 years. We haven't been good enough long enough to develop big time donor support. Perhaps that will come in the future.

That being said, Rutgers has a bright future. I mean there's pretty much nowhere else to look but up at this point.

 

[mdk01]

This is NOT a thread about our head football coach or Athletic Director.--I certainly DO NOT claim to be an expert on what is needed to become a consistent national power in college sports. I did live just minutes from an SEC school for a couple years so I am just going by what I noticed while I lived there--

Fanatical state residents who make the college sports teams part of their life,not just something to do if the team is winning and the weather is nice and there isn't a wine and cheese festival that they might go to

STRONG support by local media YEAR-ROUND--large amounts of coverage almost always pointing towards things that are positive about the university,both academically and athletically

ENDLESS marketing in the community

Willingness by the state,university,and donors,major and small,to donate to have good facilities

First, with respect to athletics there is tradition. Many of these programs go back 75-100 years, not just playing the sport, but playing at a top level. Think of the South between 1940 and 1965. Virtually no professional team presence in any sport, and none in football. Wonder why the SEC has such fanatical fans, well grandpa and great grandpa had no alternatives when they were growing up.

Second, the esteem with which a flagship state university is held within these states. Yes, you had kids from these states going Ivy, Stanford or MIT, but after that the question is why you weren't going to go to Ohio State, Indiana, Michigan, UNC, UVA, Ole Miss etc. And that's reflected in the alumni networks and donations. UT, within Texas, has as good a network as most Ivy schools do nationwide. RU started very late in the game with respect to being a flagship institution within the state, and is still playing catch-up. When I college application age, Douglas was the only part of the university that had a stellar reputation(ironically particularly in-state), mainly because the Ivies had not yet completed the process of going coed. The narrative went that Douglas got a lot of women who were Ivy material if they had been fully coed. So work still needs to be done with respect to the "flagship reputation".

 

[derleider]

This is NOT a thread about our head football coach or Athletic Director.--I certainly DO NOT claim to be an expert on what is needed to become a consistent national power in college sports. I did live just minutes from an SEC school for a couple years so I am just going by what I noticed while I lived there--

Fanatical state residents who make the college sports teams part of their life,not just something to do if the team is winning and the weather is nice and there isn't a wine and cheese festival that they might go to

STRONG support by local media YEAR-ROUND--large amounts of coverage almost always pointing towards things that are positive about the university,both academically and athletically

ENDLESS marketing in the community

Willingness by the state,university,and donors,major and small,to donate to have good facilities

I would say mostly - large state populations, or lack of local pro sports teams, plus a some commitment to playing the sport at a high level.

 

[Caliknight]

Having some insight into USC's program, I would say the following:

1) Money, not just from the conference, but from alums. I don't know their giving rate, but I would bet my life it is sky high. But it takes more than money.

2) Culture of winning. They don't field teams to field teams. If you go to a game, all over their stadium are signs that read, "We Play for Championships". Succinct, to the point, and cuts through bs. They field teams to win. Every homecoming they honor athletes from other sports at breaks in the action. It is an utter embarrassment of athletic greatness. Winning breeds winning, and at some point, is just an expectation. In NJ, GS got ridiculed for even suggesting such a thing.

3) Pride. They don't allow outside forces to determine the direction and goals that they have not only for football, but other sports. They control their destiny.

4) Direction- the whole school is behind their program, from administrators on down. Say what you want about that culture, but that is what we are competing with. If there were thoughts of a USC 1,000, they would be ridiculed to the point of never outing themselves in the first place for having such silly ideas. A coach emailing a part time professor about the status of a grade becoming a potential reason to fire the coach? That is a lol situation.

5) Getting back to point- money without the above still won't do it. Lots of schools we are competing with will have as much or more money. They also have those intangible things that makes winning more feasible. Money is a baseline at this level and doesn't mean we will win. It just gets us in the competition door.

 

[BK_TO_THE]

Other big-time programs made the decision to go "big-time" before the age of twitter and 24-hour news cycles.

 

[MozRU]

There have been papers written on it. The Northeast over a couple of centuries has buried public universities and catered to the private colleges. Only with the onset of outrageous tuition the last 10yrs have people woken up and are asking: What am I paying for!?

I have been saying this for years: What is that school w/o basketball? The Northeast will come around.

 

[lilphilw]

1. Money
2. A tradition of winning
3. No state wide support
4. A proven coach

 

[derleider]

Having some insight into USC's program, I would say the following:

1) Money, not just from the conference, but from alums. I don't know their giving rate, but I would bet my life it is sky high. But it takes more than money.

2) Culture of winning. They don't field teams to field teams. If you go to a game, all over their stadium are signs that read, "We Play for Championships". Succinct, to the point, and cuts through bs. They field teams to win. Every homecoming they honor athletes from other sports at breaks in the action. It is an utter embarrassment of athletic greatness. Winning breeds winning, and at some point, is just an expectation. In NJ, GS got ridiculed for even suggesting such a thing.

3) Pride. They don't allow outside forces to determine the direction and goals that they have not only for football, but other sports. They control their destiny.

4) Direction- the whole school is behind their program, from administrators on down. Say what you want about that culture, but that is what we are competing with. If there were thoughts of a USC 1,000, they would be ridiculed to the point of never outing themselves in the first place for having such silly ideas. A coach emailing a part time professor about the status of a grade becoming a potential reason to fire the coach? That is a lol situation.

5) Getting back to point- money without the above still won't do it. Lots of schools we are competing with will have as much or more money. They also have those intangible things that makes winning more feasible. Money is a baseline at this level and doesn't mean we will win. It just gets us in the competition door.

Of course there wouldnt - because USC is a successful FB program and has been decades.

Most of it is historical accident, or rather, its so out of the realm of our current situation that asking what they did is meaningless - they got in on the ground floor of the sport because they were huge schools in huge states, or biggish schools in areas with no pro teams (and some areas that still dont have one.)

What teams have done it recently? Louisville I guess - biggish school in area with no pro team. Oregon - money bombs. TCU and Baylor - high population/high recruit state with the same coach through their entire success.

So what can RU do - luck into hiring the right coach (like all of those four - none splurged on the next big thing or an experienced guy) basically and get out of the way.

 

[e5fdny]

WINS as opposed WINS or wins.

There is a difference.

 

[Caliknight]

Of course there wouldnt - because USC is a successful FB program and has been decades.

Most of it is historical accident, or rather, its so out of the realm of our current situation that asking what they did is meaningless - they got in on the ground floor of the sport because they were huge schools in huge states, or biggish schools in areas with no pro teams (and some areas that still dont have one.)

You are answering a question that wasn't asked. It isn't how they got there. It is what they have that Rutgers doesn't. I gave an example of that.

 

[mdk01]

get out of the way.

And when has that happened at Rutgers?

 

[NickyNewark51]

Local loyalty and support....shame...I was a fan in grammar school at 12 yrs old never even went to RU or any college. Just a matter of state pride and loyalty.

 

[Caliknight]

Local loyalty and support....shame...I was a fan in grammar school at 12 yrs old never even went to RU or any college. Just a matter of state pride and loyalty.

That starts with students and alumni and builds out from there.

 

[cRURah]

You answered your own question in the first sentence (OP).

 

[derleider]

You are answering a question that wasn't asked. It isn't how they got there. It is what they have that Rutgers doesn't. I gave an example of that.

If the point of the question is just to list differences bteween RU and other teams then jeez - we can list a million. RU is in NJ. Its in a city that states with New and ends in k. Its got four campuses instead of one or two or three or five.

Clearly the point is to offer a critique though - what do successful programs have that make them successful that RU does not. And Im saying - none of that matters - the success predates most of the other stuff and is largely due to geography and random historical stuff (why USC and not Occidental - who the hell knows - it was a century ago).

And if you look at the recent examples of success (UL, Oregon, TCU, Baylor) its basically about lucking into the right coach (Petrino, Strong; Patterson; Briles) and keeping him - not much more, except in Oregons case, where its just about having a ton of cash and the cache of the worlds biggest sports brand behind you.

So I'll say - the answer is - they all have or had when they were good, better coaches than we have. Thats more or less the sum of it.

 

[BROTHERSKINNY]

A lot of stuff above I agree with. I will tell you as a kid in High School in NJ in the Mid 80's I heard more about TTFP than about Rutgers. I almost never saw anyone who wore RU gear just for the sake of wearing it.
Fast Forward to today and I see Rutgers gear everywhere. I drive the GSP everyday and I count at least 20 -30 cars each way with an block "R" somewhere on their car. I go into stores and see Rutgers gear being sold. While it is not perfect there is no one who can convince me that the increased profile in football for RU has not raised the profile of both Rutgers and New Jersey.
We are getting there but have some work to do. In ALL cases the program and Rutgers are light years ahead of where they were in the mid 1980's.

 

[mikefla]

they definitely have better fans

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

Recently Governor Christie said about 67% of his property taxes go to schools.

Right there you have the problem.

Rutgers is a state school... in a state that is way too expensive for everything. And there is really no state pride until you challenge someone on state pride.. then they defend themselves.. but they don't want to contribute to anything that promotes state pride.

Hell.. New Jersey couldn't get behind fighting England and King George. Half the colony or more were Torries.

And Rutgers only became the State U some 60-70 years ago. Long after the weathly families with generational wealth had built ties to other eastern universities. And we didn't even pursue big time athletics until 40 years ago or so. Lastly, Rutger sis not the top school in the state thanks to Princeton. Is it a coincidence that there are no big tim college sports powerhouses in states that host an Ivy League school? I think not.

But here's the thing.. we Rutgers fans and residents of New Jersey need to challenge fellow residents and politicians.

Why should fly-over states have 2 or more FBS schools competing at the highest level while New Jersey's flagship State U is publicly excoriated and chastised for even attempting this?

Why don't the residents of New Jersey deserve a State U and football and basketball program to be proud of?

Why don't the residents of New Jersey deserve college football and basketball programs to be proud of?

We pay the highest taxes in the nation and the politicians cannot find a way to properly support the flagship State U... WHY?

You cannot blame over-taxed residents for thinking Rutgers and Rutgers Football is somehow ripping them off. What they need to understand is that Rutgers is being ripped off right alongside them. Rutgers has to deal with all the graft and corruption in union contracts and in building expenses and in insurance costs and sweetheart retirement deals and on and on and on... just like their local schools and municipalities have to over-pay for all of this driving up their taxes.

Rutgers is a victim right alongside the average taxpayer. Rutgers, due to the existence of the Board of Trustees. might be the best run entity in the state. It tries real hard to keep the politicians out of its coffers... and is attacked by said politicians for doing so. And since the media is in the hands of the politicians.. it is hard for the average taxpayer to understand it all.

 

[CuredbywinningRU]

It's all about Money. Admired brand helps, but you rarely get brand without money. It's a bit of a chicken and egg in our case since we never had either. Speaking of money + brand = success - UND did not play Mens Lax not too many years ago. But once they started, they quickly became a top 5 program. The brand helped get recruits to a nascent program but so does their absolutely top of the line LAX facility - ie, Money helps. Same story with the relatively recently created UF womens soccer program - new, but top program.

 

[e5fdny]

It's all about Money. Admired brand helps, but you rarely get brand without money. It's a bit of a chicken and egg in our case since we never had either. Speaking of money + brand = success - UND did not play Mens Lax not too many years ago. But once they started, they quickly became a top 5 program. The brand helped get recruits to a nascent program but so does their absolutely top of the line LAX facility - ie, Money helps. * Same story with the relatively recently created UF womens soccer program - new, but top program.

And nice cars in the parking lot. Don't forget that one. ;)

* Lady Gator LAX is a good example too.

 

[LotusAggressor]

Local loyalty and support....shame...I was a fan in grammar school at 12 yrs old never even went to RU or any college. Just a matter of state pride and loyalty.

This is very true. A sizable amount of the fan base at a lot of these National Championship contenders are people who aren't alumni. The programs are a source of state pride, not a convenient scapegoat for all of the state's ills.

 

[Caliknight]

If the point of the question is just to list differences bteween RU and other teams then jeez - we can list a million. RU is in NJ. Its in a city that states with New and ends in k. Its got four campuses instead of one or two or three or five.

Clearly the point is to offer a critique though - what do successful programs have that make them successful that RU does not. And Im saying - none of that matters - the success predates most of the other stuff and is largely due to geography and random historical stuff (why USC and not Occidental - who the hell knows - it was a century ago).

And if you look at the recent examples of success (UL, Oregon, TCU, Baylor) its basically about lucking into the right coach (Petrino, Strong; Patterson; Briles) and keeping him - not much more, except in Oregons case, where its just about having a ton of cash and the cache of the worlds biggest sports brand behind you.

So I'll say - the answer is - they all have or had when they were good, better coaches than we have. Thats more or less the sum of it.

That's the lazy answer, and the point of the question was the question he asked, not the point you think he was trying to ask.

A coach without support and funds won't get it done. It takes a lot more than just a coach. It is a highly competitive field. It takes a multitude of things, and sometimes that isn't enough (see Texas currently).

 

[ScarletDave]

1. Money.

2. LONG history of winning/ Championships/ BCS bowl games.

3. And for many, lack of anything else to do in the area besides farm some crops.

 

[NickyNewark51]

That starts with students and alumni and builds out from there.

Just my point.....i'm just an average kid off the streets of the rugged Italian 'THEN' North Ward of Newark and Belleville/Nutley and attached myself with pride to my state u unconditionally from a tender age though my dad was a Scot-Canadian and mom Irish with Pennsylvanian roots growing up in a ND fight song household and knew who i was.....a proud Jersey kid. Why can't these alums get their act together...

 

[NickyNewark51]

That's the lazy answer, and the point of the question was the question he asked, not the point you think he was trying to ask.

A coach without support and funds won't get it done. It takes a lot more than just a coach. It is a highly competitive field. It takes a multitude of things, and sometimes that isn't enough (see Texas currently).

1 THING Jersey is known for is putting out TALENT and BRASHNESS....Lets get our stuff together guys.

 

[NickyNewark51]

Recently Governor Christie said about 67% of his property taxes go to schools.

Right there you have the problem.

Rutgers is a state school... in a state that is way too expensive for everything. And there is really no state pride until you challenge someone on state pride.. then they defend themselves.. but they don't want to contribute to anything that promotes state pride.

Hell.. New Jersey couldn't get behind fighting England and King George. Half the colony or more were Torries.

And Rutgers only became the State U some 60-70 years ago. Long after the weathly families with generational wealth had built ties to other eastern universities. And we didn't even pursue big time athletics until 40 years ago or so. Lastly, Rutger sis not the top school in the state thanks to Princeton. Is it a coincidence that there are no big tim college sports powerhouses in states that host an Ivy League school? I think not.

But here's the thing.. we Rutgers fans and residents of New Jersey need to challenge fellow residents and politicians.

Why should fly-over states have 2 or more FBS schools competing at the highest level while New Jersey's flagship State U is publicly excoriated and chastised for even attempting this?

Why don't the residents of New Jersey deserve a State U and football and basketball program to be proud of?

Why don't the residents of New Jersey deserve college football and basketball programs to be proud of?

We pay the highest taxes in the nation and the politicians cannot find a way to properly support the flagship State U... WHY?

You cannot blame over-taxed residents for thinking Rutgers and Rutgers Football is somehow ripping them off. What they need to understand is that Rutgers is being ripped off right alongside them. Rutgers has to deal with all the graft and corruption in union contracts and in building expenses and in insurance costs and sweetheart retirement deals and on and on and on... just like their local schools and municipalities have to over-pay for all of this driving up their taxes.

Rutgers is a victim right alongside the average taxpayer. Rutgers, due to the existence of the Board of Trustees. might be the best run entity in the state. It tries real hard to keep the politicians out of its coffers... and is attacked by said politicians for doing so. And since the media is in the hands of the politicians.. it is hard for the average taxpayer to understand it all.

Nice post...the problems are way too complex for the average Joe.

 

[NickyNewark51]

A lot of stuff above I agree with. I will tell you as a kid in High School in NJ in the Mid 80's I heard more about TTFP than about Rutgers. I almost never saw anyone who wore RU gear just for the sake of wearing it.
Fast Forward to today and I see Rutgers gear everywhere. I drive the GSP everyday and I count at least 20 -30 cars each way with an block "R" somewhere on their car. I go into stores and see Rutgers gear being sold. While it is not perfect there is no one who can convince me that the increased profile in football for RU has not raised the profile of both Rutgers and New Jersey.
We are getting there but have some work to do. In ALL cases the program and Rutgers are light years ahead of where they were in the mid 1980's.

Were getting there...I hope in my lifetime were truly dominant at least regionally....figure the next 15 yrs..lol.

 

[RU31trap]

Money alone is not enough. Yes, money gets you great facilities, elite Head Coach, Assistants and exposure. You also need elite athletes in the field to win.

 

[Caliknight]

Elite coaches don't typically go to schools where they other things aren't in place (facilities, funding, friendly faculty/administration).

You could offer Saban $7MM a year and he isn't coming to Rutgers.

 

[mikefla]

Elite coaches don't typically go to schools where they other things aren't in place (facilities, funding, friendly faculty/administration).

You could offer Saban $7MM a year and he isn't coming to Rutgers.

BINGO

People seem to forget. EVERY time we have a HC opening we get a list of also ran hopefuls that apply..and a few barely recognisable names that THINK about applying and usually ONE GOOD name that uses us for negotiating his contract upwards with the team he stays with.

We then start looking at ANYONE who would agree to come here...that narrows it down to usually 2 candidates......and NONE of them are Saban or anyone NEAR his caliber. They dont want to take a chance on a program that could tank their already stellar career.....for ANY amount of money

The "hire a name coach" crowd suffer from short AND long term memory loss I think LOL

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

Lastly, Rutger sis not the top school in the state thanks to Princeton. Is it a coincidence that there are no big tim college sports powerhouses in states that host an Ivy League...


There is an Ivy League school in PA. There are basketball powerhouses in CT and NY.

 

[mdk01]

Elite coaches don't typically go to schools where they other things aren't in place (facilities, funding, friendly faculty/administration).

You could offer Saban $7MM a year and he isn't coming to Rutgers.

He wouldn't because "friendly faculty/administration" has never existed. And you forgot one! Friendly media, which might have existed in a condescending way when the team was little more than a glorified 1-AA outfit but has never existed since they began trying to be a legit Power 5 team.

 

[RU31trap]

To me a "Big Time" program requires a commitment from the top down. Look at OSU, I have nothing to substantiate the following, but if I'm not mistaking when Urban Meyer was hired he quietly sat down with the BOT and Executive Committee to request the following if a National Championship was in their future plans:

1st-the recruiting requirements had to be relaxed.
2nd-No interference from faculty.

Yes, OSU had tradition, a winning culture, great facilities and now a great coach, but without elite talent their is little difference between Urban Meyer and Greg Schiano.

 

[beaced]

BAGMEN?

 

[HeavenUniv.]

Good Ol Rutgers --That was a GREAT post.

 

[RUinPinehurst]

What does Rutgers have that other big time programs do not have?

Alumni that do not contribute sufficiently to their alma mater, relative to other states' flagship universities with big time programs.

An administration that is historically inept, relative to other states' flagship universities with big time programs.

A state government that does not adequately support its flagship university, relative to other states' flagship universities with big time programs.

A state population that does not support its flagship university, relative to other states' flagship universities with big time programs.

This all needs to be overcome, sooner than later.