Codey Lies, Newspapers Editorialize Against Rutgers

Sigh…another day in the state of exits.

The Trenton Times editorializes against Rutgers and Schianogate here. Says the paper in a piece titled Is Schiano Stadium Next?: “the bottom line for a sport that doesn’t seem to have a bottom line is for university presidents to regain control of athletic programs.” Read that again Slick McCormick because, quite plainly, you have lost control. We have no idea who is driving this bus, but we no longer believe you are even on board.

Gannett, meantime, weighs in with its Schianogate-inspired editorial at “The whopper contract of Rutgers University head football coach Greg Schiano leaves a sour taste in the mouths of many people who believe that academics are a bit more important on our college campuses than pep rallies and bowl bids.”

For those counting, that makes four major newspapers that have editorialized against Schianogate, secrecy, hidden payments, and the culture of money laundering that has taken hold at Rutgers.

It gets worse.

The Star Ledger’s Sheneman filed yet another funny cartoon skewering Rutgers and Mulcahy III.

The Ledger also referred its readers to this blog, here and here.

Speaking of Ledger readers, they weigh in here on Schianogate. Don’t miss the one titled “Another Black Eye.”

There’s a wonderful Ledger photo here. Check out the Nixonian body language, a posture that shouts: I will stonewall…I will…I will.

And, nationally, the number of stories skewering Rutgers for the Schianogate scandal just keeps multiplying.

As for NJ Senate president Dick Codey — a poster-boy for all that ails New Jersey’s pay to play political culture, complete with trophy ring souvenirs from Rutgers’ bowl games on his fat little fingers — he is quoted in the Ledger saying: “What [Schiano’s] done to Rutgers University has been tremendous,” Codey said. “The number of applicants is way up. The quality of students has always been good, but it’s better. It’s been great.”

Wake up and smell the jockstraps, Senator Codey. Rutgers’ applications are up negligibly. There’s no meaningful increase in the quality of students. All this is spelled out in the Rutgers Fact Book.

(For vivid proof of Codey’s jocksniffer credentials, check out this photo. He has his nose about as close in the huddle as we think appropriate to imagine on a g-rated site.)

At least Codey’s colleague, state Senator Loretta Weinberg, has her wits about her. The Bergen Record reports that she is joining our call for a full-on investigation into the secrecy, deception, and chicanery that now characterize the Mulcahy III reign. The Record quotes Weinberg: “I do know that when you attempt a “deal” like this, it’s an attempt to hide something at a public university. If you’re embarrassed about what you are doing, you shouldn’t be doing it.”

Uh…we guess the ethics implicit in her remarks sail over the heads of Greg “Greedy” Schiano, Mulcahy III, Slick McCormick, et. al.

On a last note, Inside Higher Education — read by university officials across the land — is now covering Schianogate, here. Rutgers consequently is taking its apparently rightful place among the other academic laggards of the land, schools that exist only to provide cover for factory sports programs.

Sigh. The stench of Schianogate still hangs heavy over the state.


9 Responses to Codey Lies, Newspapers Editorialize Against Rutgers

  1. Chuck says:

    Get over yourself. Rutgers Stadium is puny compared with even middling college football stadiums. The idea of an expansion is eminently reasonable. The only question is one of execution.

    How is this “Schianogate?” It is beyond dispute (at least among college football fans like myself) that the only way Rutgers will ever make money (or break even) off of football is to consistently play in BCS games. How can that happen with such a puny stadium? It can’t. Schiano knows that. Any half-a$$ed college football coach knows that.

    Do you honestly think that Rutgers can even consider completely withdrawing from football after they have spent so much? And what makes you think the reputation of the school would improve dramatically if we don’t play football? How is the University going to raise (or beg) for the funds necessary to make that happen? Football is not the poison pill here. There are far deeper problems at Rutgers that have nothing to do with football.

    Get a hold of yourself, people.

  2. Grumpy alum says:

    How is it Schianogate? Hmmm…. let’s see for a moment here…

    A public university launders money through a backdoor to an already overpaid coach whilst slashing yet more positions, deferring more maintenance, and hiking fees further. The university is in the porcess of firing staff and closing its patent office, which will drain yet more funds from the sciences and especially the Waksman Institute, yet CAN fund unlimited helicopter travel for its greedy and rapacious head coach. Further to this, we know find out about a secret deal regarding guaranteed dates for stadium construction was signed by the president and football coach, meaning that everything the university president told students and alumni about the process being “undecided until the Board of Governors voted on it” was an utter lie.

    In any instituition that had respect and regard for its stakeholders, this would lead to dismissals and investigations. At Rutgers, our president says he’s “at a loss to explain”. He’s prostituted his school for a spoilt brat of a football coach. That’s why it’s Schiano-gate.

    No Chuck, I’m afraid it’s you who needs to get over yourself. If you can’t see the injustice of firing staff, cutting sports, leeting buildings rot, closing patent offices and slashing courses whilst pouring money into the greedy hands of a football coach and lying to the university community about stadum expansion whilst signing secret deals, then life has taught you precious little.

  3. Steven Hart says:

    “Do you honestly think that Rutgers can even consider completely withdrawing from football after they have spent so much? And what makes you think the reputation of the school would improve dramatically if we don’t play football?”

    Ever hear of the maxim, “Don’t throw good money after bad”?

  4. Chuck says:

    Grumpy is a good name for this poster, because he sure knows how to complain. Here’s an idea. Why don’t you specifically lay out your plan for Rutgers in the unlikely event the University downsizes/gets rid of football? You haven’t. And my guess is you can’t. That is because Rutgers without football is unlikely to be any different than Rutgers with football.

    At least with football, there is at least a chance state support will increase sometime in the future.

    There seems to be an idea that just because our state university is called Rutgers, that somehow students can gain reputation on the cheap. That is cheap. It’s about a cheap as buying a house when you pay no money down and actually gain money. Reputation is EARNED. You have to spend money to earn a reputation. Rutgers doesn’t have that money now. Not from its alumni. Not from the state. So you better come up with some plan to save Rutgers in the event you get your wish, because if you don’t, you’re just being grumpy.

  5. Chuck says:

    We don’t know exactly what happened with Schiano and that money from the marketing company. If it was Schiano who attracted that money in the first place, then it wouldn’t be a problem because the money wouldn’t have been there without him. As for the administration keeping it a secret, I agree there is some lack of transparency. I too am a skeptic of McCormick and I wouldn’t mind seeing him replaced. But don’t think his successor will be any different on football.

    As for Schiano being “spoiled,” nothing could be further from the truth. Schiano is no different than a high performing CEO who is being pursued by better companies. When better companies (Michigan) come calling, you’re obviously going to demand more from your present position. That is precisely what Schiano is doing. It’s no different than real life. Schiano’s demand for an eminently reasonable stadium expansion is hardly without merit.

  6. Alum from the Banks says:


    7-5 Greg Schiano being the 4th highest paid coach in college football? Leading a team that was a field goal away (4th quarter against USF) from possibly going underwhelmingly to a .500 record last year. Having successfully vanquished football powerhouses like Buffalo, Norfolk State, and Navy, we had one high profile win against USF, maybe Pittsburg, but last year was not a lot to brag about, except winning an extremely low-profile bowl game.

    A school should not so willingly bend over to all his demands. I think we’re getting a little carried away based upon the very minor success of two seasons.

    And what about all this talk about Old Greg “inspiring a state” and giving us “the best thing in Jersey.” Can we get a little perspective here? The guy is an entertainer. In the meantime, his coworkers at the University are advisers on Congressional Procedures, researching spinal cord injuries, and trying solve the energy crisis. New Jersey deserves better heroes than the 7-5 and $2 million Greg Schiano.

  7. Grumpy alum says:

    There is a certain fascination in observing the eternal sunshine of the football-crazed mind. Chuck, I’m afraid that this “eminently reasonable stadium expansion”, as you put it, is now fully revealed as nothing of the sort (although I could have told you that 9 months ago). So, in your mind it’s “eminently reasonable” to rush headlong into construction without the funds to pay for it? Please. You’re not speaking with children here, and somewhat higher standards of proof are required than “we’re going to win a national championship if you keep sinking money into us”. This has been an embarrassment and indictment of the current leadership of Rutgers from the get-go. A con-job.

    As for your frankly delusional comment about Schiano not being “spoiled”, really. A man who can hold the administration to ransom by throwing a tantrum about leaving? A man who gets his every wish granted while some of the best minds in the world are left begging for funding? When we give Wise Young or Jay Tischfield (as but two examples of men utterly more talented and rare than Schiano) a free car and country club membership, then we’ll be heading in the right direction. But while we gut athletics to fund football dreams, we’re heading in the wrong direction. You may prefer a Rutgers light on academics and heavy on star recruits; I, simply, do not.

    How to improve Rutgers without football? I’ve already posted on this, but will oblige you once more.

    1)We make academic excellence the unambiguous first priority of this university. We set a goal, like (as discussed here some time ago) 5 top-ten departments in 10 years, 10 top-ten departments in 20 years, and we don’t digress from it as a goal.

    2) We return the focus of Rutgers to participatory sports, not spectator booze-fests. We reinstate the cut sports and make it clear that if boosters want a top football team, they organize funding for it themselves.

    3) We take the vision of a rebuilt, academically excellent Rutgers to the state and the community as our fundraising drive. The University’s energy directed towards the improvement and betterment of the University will be far more attractive to doners than one of a football-factory where doners are asked to make up the academic funding shortfall. We make transparency a goal and appoint an honest and respected President. We direct all of our energy towards fostering a sense of growth, of reclaiming our historic mission.

    4) we don’t lie to the university community about contracts. We don’t hide shell-payments to employees. We don’t allow a football coach to run the university. We never show contempt for the stakeholders of the university by acting behind their back or arranging sham “discussions” that masquerade as genuine dialog. We understand instead that it will be a reputation for excellence that will create value, not a reputation for duplicity and dishonesty that we are richly dserving of now.

  8. EyesandEars says:

    Is this history repeating itself in NJ? Remember the Seton Hall-Bob Brennan scandal? Isn’t Codey an SHU grad?So what’s he doing flaunting three of RU’s bowl rings? Isn’t there an ethics commission in this state? Law of average is that there is more to this story,especially when 100’s of mllions are involved.Side inquiry: Do the Board of Governors have to earn priority points or do they automatically get free luxury lounge seats? Be nice to see that one openly answered by each of them.

  9. JoeWillie12 says:

    Whoever is part of the coverup needs to face the music.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: