Rutgers Owes Fired Football Coach $8.5M

Rutgers fired their football coach and owes him $8.5M. This amount will most likely be negotiated down but they will still pay him millions for not working.

Perhaps it’s time for Rutgers to consider abolishing the football program.

Any thoughts?


It shouldn’t have started. NJ is not a football fan paradise. Rutgers couldn’t sell out of season tix.

Reminder that Rutgers reputation was built on academics and not sports.

Hell, winning season and Columbia HS doesn’t fill the stands.


didnt they just extend his contract a little while ago?


oots said:

didnt they just extend his contract a little while ago?

He's in the 2nd year of an updated 5-year contract.  He first signed in December 2015 for 5 years.  The contract was replaced in November 2017 for another 5-year term.  


The offensive coordinator was fired also and they owe him about $900k.


Did you know... On November 6, 1869, Rutgers University faced off against the College of New Jersey, now Princeton University, in the very first college football game in the history of the sport.

I think the program enjoyed some success under Greg Schiano. Seemed to be heading in the right direction. 

Joining the Big 10 was a HUGE mistake. The quicker they can extricate themselves from that the better off they'll be. But you think firing a coach is costly? I can't imagine what it's gonna cost when (if) we can leave the Big 10. 

Rutgers, Newark - Class of 2019


I think joining the Big 10 was a good decision for the university overall.  For sports not so much, especially football and basketball.  There is just not the same climate or appetite for big time college sports in NJ as other states such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, PA, etc.


yahooyahoo said:

I think joining the Big 10 was a good decision for the university overall.  For sports not so much, especially football and basketball.  There is just not the same climate or appetite for big time college sports in NJ as other states such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, PA, etc.

That's the 'problem'.  From TX to MN, high school & college sports is everything.  In TX it is common for parents to hold back their boys, so they will be a year older than their class mates - in order to gain an advantage in whatever sport they participate in.

Having said that, when Rutgers had good teams (the last 3-4 years under Schiano), they did generate a buz and had some sold out games.  At that time, there was a degree of interest from casual sport fans.  Heck, I watched their bowl games, and I am not a college sport fan.

Unfortunately the team started loosing traction under Flood.  While Ashe has shown progress in some of the off field aspects, he was unable to recruit (and coach) to the level required to reach middle of the pack Big 10.

So, can it be done?  It will take a special coach, who is willing to make a long term commitment to the currently 'sad sack' program.  And, it may take a contract, that is overpaying now, in return for heavy penalties for early departure.  A premier coach won't take that (the starting point is just that bad).  A strong #2 might.  Is Sciano is interested in coming back?  I doubt it, but would love to be proved wrong.

Financially, as Rutgers is getting closer to a full conference share, the money should be available to make one more try at high level competition.  If they fail one more time, they have to re-evaluate their position.

Has any University ever stepped down from a major conference?


Yes, but how recently did you have in mind?

  • University of Chicago left the Big Ten after 1924 (and dropped football altogether).
  • Georgia Tech left the SEC after 1965 and Tulane after 1967 (both went independent).
  • South Carolina left the ACC after 1967 (and went independent).

When the Big East Conference fell apart, the Catholic schools split off to form a new Big East Conference while the football-playing schools formed The American Athletic Conference (AAC).  UConn is now leaving the AAC to join the new Big East but UConn football will be independent.  UConn is paying $17 million to the AAC to exit early and $3.5 million to the Big East as an entry fee.


tomcat said:

yahooyahoo said:

I think joining the Big 10 was a good decision for the university overall.  For sports not so much, especially football and basketball.  There is just not the same climate or appetite for big time college sports in NJ as other states such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, PA, etc.

Is Sciano is interested in coming back?  I doubt it, but would love to be proved wrong.

Schiano seems to be the sentimental favorite.  In the short-term, it would give the program a boost but I don't think he's the long-term answer.  Rutgers will most likely overpay Schiano (even though he's unemployed) and eventually fire him several years down the road.


yahooyahoo said:

I think joining the Big 10 was a good decision for the university overall.  For sports not so much, especially football and basketball.  There is just not the same climate or appetite for big time college sports in NJ as other states such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, PA, etc.

 The purpose of joining an ATHLETIC conference is to compete in  sports against the other teams in the conference. How can it be a good decision, but for “sports not so much?”


I had heard that joining the Big 10 required some investment/increases in Rutgers' library resources. I found an article indicating that their libraries are now linked. Not sure if there are other academic requirements/benefits.

https://news.rutgers.edu/feature/big-ten-libraries-borrowing-best/20140706#.XZVWWEZKi7C


The schools do have a group called the Big Ten Academic Alliance https://www.btaa.org/. It used to be known as something else and I know that the University of Chicago maintained its presence in that consortium long after they stopped competing in Big Ten sports. I’m not sure if they’re still a part of it. Whether it’s really meaningful or just something that makes for a good sidebar story, I’m not sure.

Rutgers soon will get a full share of conference revenue and that will be much more money than they could make anywhere else, except perhaps the SEC. The experience for fans and students might be better if they played in a conference that was less competitive so the teams could win more games, but the difference is many millions of dollars per year.

As for the Big Ten, the goal was to increase brand awareness and clearance of their TV network in the New York metropolitan area (same goes for Maryland in the Beltway).

Rutgers football will never be on the same plane as Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State or Nebraska. You could say the same about several of the existing Big Ten schools too, but they need to shoot to be more competitive with the middle.

Basketball can be more fluid, but with the Big East, it can be tough for Rutgers to draw local talent. If my kid plays at Seton Hall, I can probably make it to a lot more road games than I could versus Big Ten opponents.

As a program that was strong previously, Rutgers wrestling has adapted well to being in what is the best conference for that sport.

On the other hand, the Big Ten is also the best conference for women’s volleyball. There never was much focus on that sport in New Brunswick and now they play against some schools that draw seven or eight thousand to a match. In five years and change, the Rutgers women’s volleyball team is 1-101 in the league.


jimmurphy said:

yahooyahoo said:

I think joining the Big 10 was a good decision for the university overall.  For sports not so much, especially football and basketball.  There is just not the same climate or appetite for big time college sports in NJ as other states such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, PA, etc.

 The purpose of joining an ATHLETIC conference is to compete in  sports against the other teams in the conference. How can it be a good decision, but for “sports not so much?”

Joining the Big Ten gave the university greater credibility academically, gave it a national and international platform to promote the school, will provide greater financial revenue for the university via athletics, and the schools in the conference have an academic alliance (as mentioned above).  Unfortunately, to gain all this they threw some of the athletic teams under the bus.


jimmurphy said:

yahooyahoo said:

I think joining the Big 10 was a good decision for the university overall.  For sports not so much, especially football and basketball.  There is just not the same climate or appetite for big time college sports in NJ as other states such as Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, PA, etc.

 The purpose of joining an ATHLETIC conference is to compete in  sports against the other teams in the conference. How can it be a good decision, but for “sports not so much?”

 This. 




In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.