PDA

View Full Version : Rutgers - 1 Good Season Does Not Make You Ohio State



Impeach Corzine
02-20-2007, 02:39 PM
I know I am not going to be popular for saying this but here we go...
Rutgers University football head coach Greg Schiano last week signed a 4-year contract extension through 2016 that will pay him about $2 million a year when all the supplemental payments, additional compensation, longevity payments and housing allowances are factored in.

What it says is that the Rutgers University Board of Governors has lost its collective mind. How can the board justify paying the football coach almost four times as much as the college president, someone who is hardly underpaid himself? And how can it reconcile giving Schiano that kind of money, not to mention an $800,000 interest-free housing loan that will be totally forgiven if he remains at Rutgers for eight years, when it signed off on eliminating six other intercollegiate varsity sports, cut 750 university jobs and 800 courses, and raised tuition 8 percent to help balance the books?

The six varsity sports were men's swimming and diving, men's heavyweight and lightweight crew, men's and women's fencing and men's tennis affected 153 athletes and 10 coaches. A group of students and alumni, called Save Our Sports Coalition, has argued that eliminating the teams will result in the loss of top scholar-athletes as well as financial donations from alumni.

In what way does a winning, big-time college football program enhance the education of the university's students? In what way does it boost the institution's academic prestige? It could be fairly argued that it diminishes both by placing such an absurd premium on a nonacademic pursuit.

What was wrong with a football schedule that included Princeton, Penn, Columbia, Colgate and Lehigh? What is to be gained, other than satisfying the adolescent craving of some alumni for gridiron supremacy, by vanquishing the likes of Louisville, South Florida and Cincinnati on autumn afternoons? Every Rutgers student and every New Jersey taxpayer deserves an honest, intelligent answer.

JerseyDevil
02-20-2007, 04:30 PM
Impeach Corzine - I moved this to the NJ Schools and Education forum.

I agree with some of your points - but I do see the benefits of building up the football program. Sad to say - but football sells and helps advertise the school in numerous ways. In the long run, have a top rate football program can help other aspects of the school, including bringing advertising money can't buy, and money into the school. Rutgers was basically an unknown before. In Indiana few people have heard of Rutgers, which is just as good if not better than Indiana University - yet there are few people in the country who hasn't heard of IU.

Now that being sad - I don't want Rutgers to be known as a "sports" school. Academics should take priority. When I moved to Indiana - I thought it was ridiculous at how much people went on and on about IU and Purdue - hell you can get their jersey's and shirts in grocery stores. After moving here though - I was disheartened to see that New Jerseyans lacked any sense of pride in our own state university though. Sad to say - but having a winning football team will bring this pride.

MITHRANDIR
02-23-2007, 12:03 AM
I know I am not going to be popular for saying this but here we go...
Rutgers University football head coach Greg Schiano last week signed a 4-year contract extension through 2016 that will pay him about $2 million a year when all the supplemental payments, additional compensation, longevity payments and housing allowances are factored in.

What it says is that the Rutgers University Board of Governors has lost its collective mind. How can the board justify paying the football coach almost four times as much as the college president, someone who is hardly underpaid himself? And how can it reconcile giving Schiano that kind of money, not to mention an $800,000 interest-free housing loan that will be totally forgiven if he remains at Rutgers for eight years, when it signed off on eliminating six other intercollegiate varsity sports, cut 750 university jobs and 800 courses, and raised tuition 8 percent to help balance the books?

The six varsity sports were men's swimming and diving, men's heavyweight and lightweight crew, men's and women's fencing and men's tennis affected 153 athletes and 10 coaches. A group of students and alumni, called Save Our Sports Coalition, has argued that eliminating the teams will result in the loss of top scholar-athletes as well as financial donations from alumni.

In what way does a winning, big-time college football program enhance the education of the university's students? In what way does it boost the institution's academic prestige? It could be fairly argued that it diminishes both by placing such an absurd premium on a nonacademic pursuit.

What was wrong with a football schedule that included Princeton, Penn, Columbia, Colgate and Lehigh? What is to be gained, other than satisfying the adolescent craving of some alumni for gridiron supremacy, by vanquishing the likes of Louisville, South Florida and Cincinnati on autumn afternoons? Every Rutgers student and every New Jersey taxpayer deserves an honest, intelligent answer.

In general I agree with you. Money should primarily be spent on academics.

NJ Rutgers is taking a gamble. If NJ can get into the big money bowl games, the school can get a relatively big pay day. (enough to pay for the football program and other school programs) If they can not get into the big bowl games they may just be wasting money.

I agree with JD that the school should try to keep (or improve) its academic standing and not become (solely) a sports school.

NJPRIDE
02-23-2007, 03:52 AM
R.U. is far from a sports school . I believe it was ranked the 63rd best university last year. It already has a good academic program. Around the country many people have always thought it was an Ivy league school.