Rutgers in the Press: More Bad News

Way to go, Mulcahy III, the nation’s press keeps writing about Rutgers — even the AP just moved a big story on the national wire — but the bad news is how bad this coverage is. The AP story, for instance, cites Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan, chairman of the Assembly’s higher education committee, pondering exactly how much damage to academics will be inflicted by the reckless and stupid stadium expansion caper.

The AP story also ponders exactly how Mulcahy III can keep insisting the fundraising is going along swell when the prime players — Seatbelt Corzine and Elizabeth Ray Lesniak — have both admitted the search for $30 million in private contributions for the stadium is DOA.

Even the Chronicle of Higher Education now has covered this embarrassing story, so word of Mulcahy III”s folly is cascading across the college scene.

And nobody has a clue exactly what new math Mulcahy III is using when he insists all is cool with the stadium expansion — despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. What are you smoking, Mulcahy III?

Just seeing Mulcahy III puts one in mind of a line from The Departed: “bad haircut, no dress sense and an air of scumbag entitlement.”

Meantime, rumors are multiplying that the strong 2009 recruiting class assembled by Greg “Greedy” Schiano is beginning to fracture as the high school commits tumble to the realization that the Rutgers expansion will not happen, Greedy Schiano is all about me-me-me, and a Rutgers diploma just keeps getting more worthless with every day of bad news. Already highly rated recruit Desmond Scott has decommitted; watch for similar announcements in days to come.

As for how bad Rutgers has become, a report from the Center for Measuring University Performance tabs Rutgers as a dismal 54th in the country. The public ivy has become a common weed, as all pretense of academic excellence has been stomped into oblivion by the rutting jocksniffers who presently are in charge of the school. Make no mistake — the ineffectual push for bigtime sports has taken a huge toll on scholarship at Rutgers, as monies that had supported intellectual excellence (e.g., the Outstanding Scholars program) get wiped out in favor of putting more cash into sports. Do note what the university said: “Without state support for this program, the university is not able to support another new class of scholars.” But, apparently, it has a bottomless pit of money for football players on scholarship. Of course that makes it very, very hard to take any Rutgers’ claim revolving around intellect seriously.

And just when Schianogate is getting us down…there’s this cartoon from the Ledger’s Sheneman.

Well…Mulcahy III always insisted football would raise national awareness of Rutgers. Who knew he would be so right? Who knew Rutgers would become the punchline in so many jokes about greed, incompetence, and stupidly run universities? Who knew how swiftly a Rutgers degree could be debased? Mulcahy III you are indeed a man of your word…sort of.


23 Responses to Rutgers in the Press: More Bad News

  1. mike says:

    what a bunch of assclowns. get a life you tools.

  2. EyesandEars says:

    Run everyting open and above board for once. If a slush fund was created,fire the guilty parties involved,all of them and move on.Other institutions clean up their messes.It’snw time for Rutgers to do the same before asking for one more donation or increase for anything.They created this monster,they must be forced to clean it up,top to bottom.

  3. Anonymous says:


  4. Grumpy alum says:

    You really do get a sampling of the pro-football types here…

  5. John Lister says:

    …and admire their eloquence and erudition!

  6. Rutgers44000 says:


    Oh wait, I’d better throw in some awful grammar/spelling and call you guys nerds, otherwise this comment won’t get past the moderation stage.


    There maybe now this comment won’t be deleted.

  7. John Lister says:


    Oh, come now! That can’t be true! It implies that there have been at least two such posts…

    But please try.

  8. Rutgers44000 says:

    Funny how you don’t even attempt to justify an obvious travesty I just pointed out, nor do you apologize, of course. You just keep up the elitist bullsh*t. Is that all you know how to do, Mister “Look at me I’m so much smarter than you because I’m not a fan of college football”?

  9. Grumpy alum says:

    Rutgers 4400, we’re waiting for you to stop your whining and try to present an argument here.

  10. Rutgers44000 says:

    There’s no point… I’ve presented real arguments time and time again, but the convincing ones that I put a lot of effort into are inevitably deleted (hmm I wonder why). The only way to get my posts past the moderation stage is to write one or two sentence comments that present no facts and barely even address the original issue.

    Anyway, I’m sure if you posted your anti-football arguments on rivals or something like that, and the ones you put effort into were constantly deleted, you would be “whining” quite loudly… hell you would probably declare it a victory for your cause.

  11. Grumpy alum says:

    I struggle to believe you, truth be told. I think that the more likely scenario is that you have no means of justifying why a university should pour money into a football program when it can’t even provide students with proper classrooms. Why don’t you stop obfuscating, post a response, and then if it gets deleted, report that here. I frankly think you’re just a troll with nothing to add here.

  12. Rutgers44000 says:

    You’re calling me a liar now??! You’re in f*cking denial, pal. That is beyond insulting. Is that what you people do, any time you’re proven wrong, you just accuse the other side of lying? (See the 99% renewal rate accusations against Luicci). Others have complained of their posts being deleted also, if you would look at the comments of some other threads.

    I even emailed the rutgers1000 about this, and the response I got was something like this (unfortunately I deleted the email otherwise I would share it): We get many comments, and we delete those that are too long, contain inappropriate material, or are too off topic. We are deleting about 2 comments for every 1 we let through.

    Somehow I think that is bullsh*t… tell me, Grumpy, do two thirds of YOUR comments get deleted? I didn’t think so.

    Anyway, you tell me to “post a response” but what am I responding to? The discussion is on the absurd deletion of posts… give me something else to respond to and I will.

  13. Grumpy alum says:

    Oh dear. I’m at work and busy, yet can’t help responding. You seem almost a caricature of a booster in your frothing inability to put together anything vaguely resembling an argument.

    I have no idea what the editorial policy concering comments here is. However, the blog is run by the Rutgers1000 and therefore the ball’s in their court concerning what gets deleted. Given some of the comments that they allow, I can only imagine the stupidity of those deleted. Get a grip.

    As for lying, I consider the huge majority of that to be perpetrated by the pro-football crowd. Like the lie that football has benefited academics at Rutgers, or that “everybody” pays football coaches through shell deals. And those are just the first two that spring to mind.

    If you feel you’re being denied your rght to speak, you have many avenues open to you. You can start your own blog, or write to the New Jersey papers. You could even preach to the choir of stupidity that is the rivals site. But having a tantrum because you don’t get your way here just makes you look small.

  14. Rutgers44000 says:

    Wow… I wrote a rather lengthy response to that, but low and behold it mysteriously disappeared.

  15. John Lister says:

    To Rutgers4400:

    I was being sarcastic about “only two posts”. However I have yet to see a cogent argument for Division 1A sports anywhere. I don’t believe it can be made. If you think you know one, please point us to it. If you believe that you have had a post deleted (and I have had *none* of mine disapproved), send me an e-mail and I will find web space for it. I post under my own name and I work for Rutgers so you can find my e-mail address.

    Go ahead!

  16. Grumpy alum says:

    “low and behold”?

  17. bronxboy says:

    It’s difficult to imagine that posts by boosters aren’t being accepted on this site, but in the spirit of fairness the specious, unverified, delusion “arguments” of the supporters of that utterly corrupt enterprise known as big time college football should be recorded for the sake of posterity. Here’s just a small sampling of their endless supply of nonsense.

    Nobody took pride in RU before big time football.

    Nobody took pride in the State of New Jersey before RU played big time football.

    The students, faculty and alumni who value education and believe it should be the only priority at RU, hate both football and the school.

    RU should endeavor to be like Michigan, a university that would never engage in academic fraud to keep its players eligible.

    Professionalized sports has brought prestige and ever increasing academic improvement to RU since the school went big time thirty years ago.

    RU is a large State U. Therefore, it shouldn’t strive to excel academically. It’s elitist to even consider it. Only the pursuit of athletic elitism is worthwhile.

    Division IA football at RU never loses money. It only makes money and generously contributes it to the rest of the school.

    The brightest high school students judge a college by the record of its football team and will flock to RU in unprecedented numbers with another winning season.

    The recent increase in applications to RU isn’t the result of a demographic trend as reported by all colleges throughout the State, but the result of big time football.

    RU is the third best university academically in all of DivisionIA because of the football team’s APR ranking.

    The RU stadium expansion plan is a sound financial undertaking that pays for itself despite the need for thirty million in private donations from unknown sources and near capacity crowds for the next thirty years.

    RU will eventually be like the rare half dozen or so schools that have maintained high academics standards and also play consistently winning Division IA football. This brilliant “argument” ignores the far more logical conclusion that RU will become like the other 110 Division IA universities that wallow in academic mediocrity. Argument by the dishonest rhetorical device of the fallacy of selected instances is a staple of boosterism.

    RU, a colonial college, was anonymous, disregarded and disrespected nationwide until its big time football team won a few games.

  18. Rutgers44000 says:

    John– I posted a really long response to you, explaining why I feel it’s good for Rutgers to be in D1A football, but it was deleted. Do you want me to email it to you?

    bronxboy– you’ve taken all of the pro-football arguments and made them more extreme, then worded them in such a way that is misleading and stupid sounding. Then you threw in some things that none of us ever tried to claim in any fashion. And you say that’s in the spirit of fairness?? I would respond to each one individually but if I did that there’s no way this post would get through without being deleted.

    P.S. You people need to get out of denial… our posts ARE deleted… and lots of ’em. Others have complained of it, and it’s obvious given that the posts from RU1000 people are so much more frequent than posts from pro-athletics people.

  19. John Lister says:

    To Rutgers44000:

    Please e-mail me: I would like an intelligent discussion. I would particularly like to know what you think Rutgers gets from D1A rather than playing in a lower division where there is a reasonable degree of probability that the players are actually scholars and a high percentage of them graduate.

    For the record, while I am of the opinion that the behavior of the Rutgers BoG, McCormick and Mulcahy should result in their being fired or resigning, I don’t agree with the continually-used epithet “jock-sniffer”. That joke grew old very quickly.

  20. It's Time says:

    Same applies when anti football people wish topost on,rivals.Greasetruck or Scarlet Nation.Why not arhue for their rights and let ALL posts stand in all forums? Guess David Liss,Aurelo Vincatore and the Touchdown Club won’t allow that,now would they? hey are next in my gunsights chum.

  21. John Lister says:

    Rutgers 44000 wrote to me in two e-mails (condensed to one, but nothing removed or edited, except for my adding numbers to points I’m responding to):

    All we have to do is examine what we have to gain, what’s the same, and what we have to lose by dropping football down to a lower level (say 1AA for the purpose of argument).

    WHAT WE WOULD GAIN: Would be able to pay less to the coaching staff, pay less for facilities upgrades and stadium maintenance, and pay for 20 fewer football scholarships (#1) (65 as opposed to 85). If you can think of anything else significant, let me know.

    WHAT WOULD BE THE SAME: Travel expenses for away games, equipment expenses

    WHAT WE WOULD LOSE: Nearly all of our revenue from tickets, concessions and parking, nearly all of our revenue from licensing apparel, all of our revenue from TV, the tremendous exposure that comes with RUTGERS being plastered all over the media from football (and the increased interest from prospective students that comes with it), the drastic increase in school spirit and unity that a strong football team brings, and a bunch of very fun events that many students, alumni, and NJ residents enjoy with great passion (#2).

    Financially and otherwise, the positives of 1A football greatly outweigh the negatives. That’s why any school in a position to compete in 1A football makes the attempt to do so. Teams generally aren’t in 1AA because they would prefer to be, it’s because they don’t have the support or recruiting potential that schools such as Rutgers have.

    I would also like to respond to your comment in the last post that if Rutgers dropped down to lower level of football, there would be a “reasonable degree of probability that the players are actually scholars and a high percentage of them graduate.” I believe this argument is not valid, given that Rutgers football’s APR (Academic Performance Rating) is ranked THIRD in the entire nation (#3).

    One more thing I’d like to add: according to this article, Rutgers football actually made $5 million more than is spent last year. Also, Senator Codey acknowledges something that the Rutgers1000 refuses to…that football generates increased applications and donations. I’d really like you to read this (#4).


    My responses:

    (#1): Scholarship money is bandied around as though it were all real. While the value to the recipient of the scholarship is the cost of tuition (and housing and whatever else is covered), the cost to the university is much less. Tuition is essentially free, though there is a marginal administration cost of processing an extra student. Housing is the opportunity cost of not having a paying student in the dorm, though if the space is reserved for athletes, it’s a sunk cost. Meals are again marginal: the extra cost of the food (considering how much is thrown away) is very little compared with the cost of the staff who prepare and serve it. So those savings aren’t a lot.

    (#2) TV revenue would probably go away, I agree, were Rutgers to move to a lower division. However, Rutgers’ licensing is more than just football. How many of those licensed T-Shirts that you see in the shops in New Brunswick and Piscataway are bought because of football? Certainly it’s unlikely that Rutgers would be able to charge the admission prices that they do, but there are other savings. If Rutgers really had athletes it could trust, it wouldn’t have to put them up in the Hyatt before every game.

    As far as exposure goes, I would much rather see Rutgers name nationally elsewhere than on ESPN.

    Finally, how does the fun change? Couldn’t Rutgers students, alumni, friends and interested people also have fun at a Division 1AA game? I can’t speak for Football, but Rutgers hosts the Metropolitan Conference Swimming championships every February. These are Division 2 & Division 3 schools. I work the meet and see a lot of real students swimming their hearts out and making some good times. Judging by the noise coming from the stands, I would say that the spectators are enjoying the show!

    (#3) This is not a valid comparison. All you are saying is that Rutgers is #3 academically in a very weak selection of students. Compare the Football team with the rest of the Rutgers student body academically. When those numbers stand up, and there is no necessity for “athletes-only” classes, no special tuition, and where football players graduate at the same rate and with the same overall scores as other students, we have real student athletes.

    (#4) While I’m not calling Mulcahy a liar about his statement here, I’m extremely surprised that if Football had made $5M, that the news would be buried three quarters of the way down a puff piece. However, Rutgers Athletics consistently refuses to open its books, so there is no way that we can check or audit these numbers.

    I’m also sceptical of Codey’s announcement that Rutgers is getting more and better applicants. I would like to see much more data here.

    Finally, to the moderator(s), I would like to see more cogent posts that contradict the RU1000 position. It makes for good debate. I would also prefer *not* to see the posts which are merely insulting. We know they exist, but it’s really difficult having a resonable discussion with a moron.

  22. Grumpy alum says:

    Like all “big time” football programs, Rutgers conceals much of the cost through standard tricks. To give but one example, the significant cost of maintenance and upkeep of the stadium is concelaed within the maintenance budget. Even with its fiddled figures, Rutgers has never come close to breaking even with football. John’s point is correct in that if football came close to being profitable, the books would be opened with a lot of crowing. The reason the books remain closed is that the university realizes that if the true cost to the taxpayer were known, support would further ebb.

    Codey is utterly wrong about “more and better applicants” if one looks beyond Rutgers. At a period when college applications are rising across the nation, Rutgers has only a less-than-national-average increase in applicants to show for the 10s of millions it has sunk into football under the direction of Mulcahy. Donations have risen to a record high last year of $102 million (slightly less this year, I understand), but ths has been part of a concerted push to engage alumni. There would have to be much more data presented for even the most tenuous causal connection with football to be established. NUY, for example. has seen greater rises in giving than Rutgers these last 5 years, and of course doesn’t have a football team.

    I find myself being particularly irked by the nebulous comments about “school spirit”, “school pride”, and “state pride” that get thrown about. Any genuine pride in Rutgers rests with it being a good university. The question is, would spending the countless millions that football has devoured since we joined the big east on making this a better university have generated more genuine, lasting pride in Rutgers, than can be achieved by a football team who mostly are not here due to anything to do with the strength of the academic programs at Rutgers University. I think that unequivocably, the answer here is yes. If you believe a win over Loiusville papers over the rotting infrastructure and declining academic reputation of Rutgers as a point for pride, I would say you have little idea of what a university should be.

    The base point here is of course, that if you argue that football wins make Rutgers a better university, you are committed to the converse, that if the football team loses, the university must be the worse for it. Pride needs less shallow foundations than this.

    Again, I do not see that there is an singly substantive argument for football having improved Rutgers University. One only has to see the decaying campus and glittering football facilities to see that “big time” football has done the opposite; it’s resulted in this university building luxury lounges for real recruits while genuine students study in run-down, poorly-heated, crowded squalor. In short, it’s turned the proper priorities of this school upside down.

  23. Rutgers44000 says:

    1. Seems like you’re arguing my side here, but I’ll play devil’s advocate as well and say that if the football players weren’t taking up those 20 scholarships, there would be 20 more students paying full expenses. This, however, is insignificant compared to the benefits of 1A football.
    2. How many of those licensed t-shirts are bought because of football? Compare the amount of Rutgers apparel you see now to that of 8 years ago. Conclusion: Most of them. And you’re not going to see any more of Rutgers in the press for non-athletic reasons if it de-emphasized athletics than you do now. As for the fun factor… yes, people could have a good time at a 1AA game, but it would be miniscule compared to what we have now… 1000 students at most would show up, it wouldn’t be a huge schoolwide event… nothing compares to the experience of being at a big time 1A football game.
    3. You’re right that football players do worse academically than the rest of the student body on average, however, as well as they are doing now compared to other teams, it is unlikely football’s academic performance would improve if we dropped to 1AA.
    4. Why do you people assume that everything that goes against your agenda must be a lie?

    I’ll respond to grumpy later.

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: