The all-inclusive Rutgers dumpster fire thread...

[Frozen]

The Rutgers Women’s Basketball Program Takes Another Step Back As Top Three Scorers Transfer Out

 

[StopCoolio]

I always get confused, was Oden the guy they thought was going to win the Heisman in 2018 or the guy they thought was going to win the Heisman in 2019? Or was he the guy who was going to win multiple Heisman's?

 

[Briancuse]

I always get confused, was Oden the guy they thought was going to win the Heisman in 2018 or the guy they thought was going to win the Heisman in 2019? Or was he the guy who was going to win multiple Heisman's?

That was Savon Huggins who was supposed to win multiple heismans.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

That was Savon Huggins who was supposed to win multiple heismans.

Does that make him the Ron Powlus of Rutgers?!

 

[Briancuse]

Does that make him the Ron Powlus of Rutgers?!

Ron Powlus looks like Joe Montana compared to the crap they have had at Rutgirls.

 

[billorange44]

It's kind of sad in a way over at Rutgers on Rivals. Their football team is gearing up for another 2 win season. Their basketball team is and always has been pathetic. Their girls basketball team should be playing other junior colleges that they can compete with. They got a little life when their LAX team was beating nobody and fell into the #1 spot by a little more than default. Two losses and one of those was an a$$ kicking by Delaware and now they don't even mention LAX over there anymore. In fact, it sounds like a warm summer evening, crickets. Poor Rutgers. They remind me of a toddler standing around with a full diaper waiting for something, anyone to make a change for them, for the better.

 

[SUfaninAZ]

Rutgers... One big dirty diaper.

 

[FAL]

Rutgers... One big dirty diaper.

Bye-bye, dumpster fire...

 

[NJCuse97]

View attachment 94529
Bye-bye, dumpster fire...

So are we now saying instead that Rutgers is a DIAPER FIRE? It's like they're in a whole new realm. They've gone to plaid.

 

[billorange44]

So are we now saying instead that Rutgers is a DIAPER FIRE? It's like they're in a whole new realm. They've gone to plaid.

My intent was not to change this thread. It is what it is and they are, like I said, a toddler, with a full diaper. You have to feel sorry for them. You want to help them, but you really don't want to get any poo on your hands, so, you let them stand there, waiting for a change. Hopi downs continue.ng the BIG will do something, anything! Well, that's not going to happen. Just good old Rutgers. The beat downs continue.

 

[tipphill]

My intent was not to change this thread. It is what it is and they are, like I said, a toddler, with a full diaper. You have to feel sorry for them. You want to help them, but you really don't want to get any poo on your hands, so, you let them stand there, waiting for a change. Hopi downs continue.ng the BIG will do something, anything! Well, that's not going to happen. Just good old Rutgers. The beat downs continue.

please see article on the approved 115 mil practice facility and other upgrades at rutgers. this includes a comprehensive sports medicine program in conjunction robert wood johnson health care system. robert wood johnson donated 18mil toward this.
i wish we were as fortunate as this. i feel sorry for us. we make fun of rutgers red hole of debt and deficits but they continue to get money and expand.per the propaganda article it says that athletic donors are up 80%in the past 3yrs.

 

[billorange44]

please see article on the approved 115 mil practice facility and other upgrades at rutgers. this includes a comprehensive sports medicine program in conjunction robert wood johnson health care system. robert wood johnson donated 18mil toward this.
i wish we were as fortunate as this. i feel sorry for us. we make fun of rutgers red hole of debt and deficits but they continue to get money and expand.per the propaganda article it says that athletic donors are up 80%in the past 3yrs.

It doesn't sound like it is doing them any good. Rutgers is still Rutgers. Maybe Robert Johnson should have stayed down at the crossroads a little while longer. Sounds like that deal they made isn't working out for them athletically.

 

[HtownOrange]

please see article on the approved 115 mil practice facility and other upgrades at rutgers. this includes a comprehensive sports medicine program in conjunction robert wood johnson health care system. robert wood johnson donated 18mil toward this.
i wish we were as fortunate as this. i feel sorry for us. we make fun of rutgers red hole of debt and deficits but they continue to get money and expand.per the propaganda article it says that athletic donors are up 80%in the past 3yrs.

How much of the donations was a reaction to joining the B1G and how much is ongoing? The reality is that the Rutgers AD is in the hole to some $400MM, probably more as we have seen some of their accounting. With projected B1G money, if Rutgers stopped all AD spending, it would take 10 years to pay off the debt. The three year figure was probably necessary to imply that donations are increasing when they are really nothing more than a one time spike. Regardless, even if true, at an 80% increase, Rutgers is in the red annually $30-40MM.

States are moving away from being the majority source of income for colleges and universities. Schools heavily dependent on the State for funding will be hard pressed for the future when they run more like private institutions. Everyone is beginning to see that "free education" is not free, someone has to pay (taxpayer) and that the payor wants more bang for their buck (hospitals, infrastructure, lower taxes, new business development, etc.). Access to college has exceeded equilibrium and it t is likely that colleges and universities will be merged, scaled back and/or closed.

Schools like Rutgers that have mortgaged their future on their athletics department are in trouble. We can complain all we like about SU not moving as fast as we want, but let's be real, they don't have the State funding and they don't have the worry that the State funding may dry up soon. SU has always moved forward. Sevyrud has a solid plan (hard science, research, medicine, etc.) which is where many long term money sources are garnered (patents, grants, big donors, etc.).

I prefer Syracuse' AD problems over Rutgers' AD problems.

 

[tipphill]

How much of the donations was a reaction to joining the B1G and how much is ongoing? The reality is that the Rutgers AD is in the hole to some $400MM, probably more as we have seen some of their accounting. With projected B1G money, if Rutgers stopped all AD spending, it would take 10 years to pay off the debt. The three year figure was probably necessary to imply that donations are increasing when they are really nothing more than a one time spike. Regardless, even if true, at an 80% increase, Rutgers is in the red annually $30-40MM.

States are moving away from being the majority source of income for colleges and universities. Schools heavily dependent on the State for funding will be hard pressed for the future when they run more like private institutions. Everyone is beginning to see that "free education" is not free, someone has to pay (taxpayer) and that the payor wants more bang for their buck (hospitals, infrastructure, lower taxes, new business development, etc.). Access to college has exceeded equilibrium and it t is likely that colleges and universities will be merged, scaled back and/or closed.

Schools like Rutgers that have mortgaged their future on their athletics department are in trouble. We can complain all we like about SU not moving as fast as we want, but let's be real, they don't have the State funding and they don't have the worry that the State funding may dry up soon. SU has always moved forward. Sevyrud has a solid plan (hard science, research, medicine, etc.) which is where many long term money sources are garnered (patents, grants, big donors, etc.).

I prefer Syracuse' AD problems over Rutgers' AD problems.

what i referenced had nothing to do with state funding. you are correct that increased in donors is directly related to their entrance into the big 10. however they claim that 71mil has been raised in donations as of mid-march with goal of 100mil in the R BIG 10 BUILD CAMPAIGN(their caps not mine). just suggest you read the article.
they already have strong research and hard science, together with the med school and rmj affiliation .
you over state the idea that rutgers as an institution has "mortgaged their future on athletics". an institution of that enormity will not collapse because of athletics. their overall budget from the state in 2016 was 34.8 billion(i assume for the 3 campuses). additional research grants for 2015 is 612.5 mil.
athletics is not going to destroy the university. nor as history has shown the nj state legislature will not let rutgers falter,despite what the tax payers , and the university professors objecting to the monies spent say.
a faculty group has called for a private outside consultant to review the the finances of the athletic dept. there is a 36.8mil shortfall in the 84mil operating budget.
excellent article by keith sargeant nj advanced media for nj.com. it appears to me they are trying to be in a holding mode until full share of big 10 hits in 2021.

 

[OrangeDW]

please see article on the approved 115 mil practice facility and other upgrades at rutgers. this includes a comprehensive sports medicine program in conjunction robert wood johnson health care system. robert wood johnson donated 18mil toward this.
i wish we were as fortunate as this. i feel sorry for us. we make fun of rutgers red hole of debt and deficits but they continue to get money and expand.per the propaganda article it says that athletic donors are up 80%in the past 3yrs.

And they're still at the bottom of the league in hoops and football every year. You can only be called a "sleeping giant" for so long. Hoops program has just been "asleep" since the 70's. LOL.

 

[HtownOrange]

what i referenced had nothing to do with state funding. you are correct that increased in donors is directly related to their entrance into the big 10. however they claim that 71mil has been raised in donations as of mid-march with goal of 100mil in the R BIG 10 BUILD CAMPAIGN(their caps not mine). just suggest you read the article.
they already have strong research and hard science, together with the med school and rmj affiliation .
you over state the idea that rutgers as an institution has "mortgaged their future on athletics". an institution of that enormity will not collapse because of athletics. their overall budget from the state in 2016 was 34.8 billion(i assume for the 3 campuses). additional research grants for 2015 is 612.5 mil.
athletics is not going to destroy the university. nor as history has shown the nj state legislature will not let rutgers falter,despite what the tax payers , and the university professors objecting to the monies spent say.
a faculty group has called for a private outside consultant to review the the finances of the athletic dept. there is a 36.8mil shortfall in the 84mil operating budget.
excellent article by keith sargeant nj advanced media for nj.com. it appears to me they are trying to be in a holding mode until full share of big 10 hits in 2021.

My reference to mortgaging their future was to the AD, not the university as a whole. Recall from many articles written on this matter that Rutgers Bank has loaned money to the AD, as we as other sources, to the tune of nearly $400MM which is known. What is not known is whether the AD must pay back other sources of revenues that were not clearly "loaned" or "borrowed" must be paid back as well. It is also known that the AD is losing $30-40MM annually. While several pro Rutgers' AD articles tout that they will receive $40-50MM annually in the future, what is known is that Rutgers already receives $10+MM, thus the estimates must be decreased by what is being received at this point to determine the actual increase. By several models, Rutgers will still be losing money, which is why many NJ writers are offended that neither the school nor the AD will answer questions in full, explaining the full accounting of how, even under the best projections, Rutgers might break even with the B1G money, yet never be able to pay back the nearly half billion $$ already borrowed (recall that the amounts known do not include all amounts received from other sources nor does it include what may have been hidden). We haven't even considered inflation since the projected money is down the road. Thus, in the best case scenario, the AD will break even on annual expenses with no money to pay interest on the debt, let alone to pay down the principal of the debt.. Add to that the fact that best case scenarios rarely ever come to fruition, resulting in the AD continuing to add debt with no means of servicing the debt.

RU is not going under for the AD, that was never said nor implied. However, RU will either have to rein in spending, force cuts, or discontinue athletics unless there is a profit shown somewhere. Their reckless spending has many consequences and the academics are reasonably asking questions that should be answered (as are writers, and the people). RU historically has been a university with little support from the alumni. As one of the oldest institutions in the nation, their endowment should rival any big state u. and the Ivies.

Though I am not a Syracuse alumn, I grew up in Onondaga County and followed Syracuse. That said, if I were a faculty member at Rutgers, an NJ taxpayer, parent of a student. etc., I would be very concerned at the reckless management of the AD.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

My reference to mortgaging their future was to the AD, not the university as a whole. Recall from many articles written on this matter that Rutgers Bank has loaned money to the AD, as we as other sources, to the tune of nearly $400MM which is known. What is not known is whether the AD must pay back other sources of revenues that were not clearly "loaned" or "borrowed" must be paid back as well. It is also known that the AD is losing $30-40MM annually. While several pro Rutgers' AD articles tout that they will receive $40-50MM annually in the future, what is known is that Rutgers already receives $10+MM, thus the estimates must be decreased by what is being received at this point to determine the actual increase. By several models, Rutgers will still be losing money, which is why many NJ writers are offended that neither the school nor the AD will answer questions in full, explaining the full accounting of how, even under the best projections, Rutgers might break even with the B1G money, yet never be able to pay back the nearly half billion $$ already borrowed (recall that the amounts known do not include all amounts received from other sources nor does it include what may have been hidden). We haven't even considered inflation since the projected money is down the road. Thus, in the best case scenario, the AD will break even on annual expenses with no money to pay interest on the debt, let alone to pay down the principal of the debt.. Add to that the fact that best case scenarios rarely ever come to fruition, resulting in the AD continuing to add debt with no means of servicing the debt.

RU is not going under for the AD, that was never said nor implied. However, RU will either have to rein in spending, force cuts, or discontinue athletics unless there is a profit shown somewhere. Their reckless spending has many consequences and the academics are reasonably asking questions that should be answered (as are writers, and the people). RU historically has been a university with little support from the alumni. As one of the oldest institutions in the nation, their endowment should rival any big state u. and the Ivies.

Though I am not a Syracuse alumn, I grew up in Onondaga County and followed Syracuse. That said, if I were a faculty member at Rutgers, an NJ taxpayer, parent of a student. etc., I would be very concerned at the reckless management of the AD.

I hate that some of my tax money goes to the dumpster fire.

 

[TheCusian]

<Checks to see if Ash is still the coach.>Future is not bright.</>

 

[tipphill]

I hate that some of my tax money goes to the dumpster fire.

i lived in j for 32 yrs and i hated the taxes as well.

My reference to mortgaging their future was to the AD, not the university as a whole. Recall from many articles written on this matter that Rutgers Bank has loaned money to the AD, as we as other sources, to the tune of nearly $400MM which is known. What is not known is whether the AD must pay back other sources of revenues that were not clearly "loaned" or "borrowed" must be paid back as well. It is also known that the AD is losing $30-40MM annually. While several pro Rutgers' AD articles tout that they will receive $40-50MM annually in the future, what is known is that Rutgers already receives $10+MM, thus the estimates must be decreased by what is being received at this point to determine the actual increase. By several models, Rutgers will still be losing money, which is why many NJ writers are offended that neither the school nor the AD will answer questions in full, explaining the full accounting of how, even under the best projections, Rutgers might break even with the B1G money, yet never be able to pay back the nearly half billion $$ already borrowed (recall that the amounts known do not include all amounts received from other sources nor does it include what may have been hidden). We haven't even considered inflation since the projected money is down the road. Thus, in the best case scenario, the AD will break even on annual expenses with no money to pay interest on the debt, let alone to pay down the principal of the debt.. Add to that the fact that best case scenarios rarely ever come to fruition, resulting in the AD continuing to add debt with no means of servicing the debt.

RU is not going under for the AD, that was never said nor implied. However, RU will either have to rein in spending, force cuts, or discontinue athletics unless there is a profit shown somewhere. Their reckless spending has many consequences and the academics are reasonably asking questions that should be answered (as are writers, and the people). RU historically has been a university with little support from the alumni. As one of the oldest institutions in the nation, their endowment should rival any big state u. and the Ivies.

Though I am not a Syracuse alumn, I grew up in Onondaga County and followed Syracuse. That said, if I were a faculty member at Rutgers, an NJ taxpayer, parent of a student. etc., I would be very concerned at the reckless management of the AD.[/QU

My reference to mortgaging their future was to the AD, not the university as a whole. Recall from many articles written on this matter that Rutgers Bank has loaned money to the AD, as we as other sources, to the tune of nearly $400MM which is known. What is not known is whether the AD must pay back other sources of revenues that were not clearly "loaned" or "borrowed" must be paid back as well. It is also known that the AD is losing $30-40MM annually. While several pro Rutgers' AD articles tout that they will receive $40-50MM annually in the future, what is known is that Rutgers already receives $10+MM, thus the estimates must be decreased by what is being received at this point to determine the actual increase. By several models, Rutgers will still be losing money, which is why many NJ writers are offended that neither the school nor the AD will answer questions in full, explaining the full accounting of how, even under the best projections, Rutgers might break even with the B1G money, yet never be able to pay back the nearly half billion $$ already borrowed (recall that the amounts known do not include all amounts received from other sources nor does it include what may have been hidden). We haven't even considered inflation since the projected money is down the road. Thus, in the best case scenario, the AD will break even on annual expenses with no money to pay interest on the debt, let alone to pay down the principal of the debt.. Add to that the fact that best case scenarios rarely ever come to fruition, resulting in the AD continuing to add debt with no means of servicing the debt.

RU is not going under for the AD, that was never said nor implied. However, RU will either have to rein in spending, force cuts, or discontinue athletics unless there is a profit shown somewhere. Their reckless spending has many consequences and the academics are reasonably asking questions that should be answered (as are writers, and the people). RU historically has been a university with little support from the alumni. As one of the oldest institutions in the nation, their endowment should rival any big state u. and the Ivies.

Though I am not a Syracuse alumn, I grew up in Onondaga County and followed Syracuse. That said, if I were a faculty member at Rutgers, an NJ taxpayer, parent of a student. etc., I would be very concerned at the reckless management of the AD.

ru internal bank loaned 10.5 mil. i do not fully understand your reference to 400mil and your comment that ad may or may not have to pay back money that was loaned or borrowed etc etc . where is the 400mil debt come from that you reference.?who were the lenders??or not lenders that may need to be paid back????? please clarify where you got the 400mil figure from????? this is an edit as i see the 351.9 mil figure quoted by an economics professor---they really need an independent audit.
i am not an alum either. born and raised on tipphill --have followed su since my first game in 1960

 

[HtownOrange]

i lived in j for 32 yrs and i hated the taxes as well.


ru internal bank loaned 10.5 mil. i do not fully understand your reference to 400mil and your comment that ad may or may not have to pay back money that was loaned or borrowed etc etc . where is the 400mil debt come from that you reference.?who were the lenders??or not lenders that may need to be paid back????? please clarify where you got the 400mil figure from????? this is an edit as i see the 351.9 mil figure quoted by an economics professor---they really need an independent audit.
i am not an alum either. born and raised on tipphill --have followed su since my first game in 1960

There are several of us locals who love the Orange but did not/could not attend. My dad loved the Orange and I got hooked with the Louie Bouie show in hoops and with football in general. Lacrosse won me over, not there was a real fight for my fandom.

This issue is an ongoing issue with Rutgers' AD having been in the red (and I don't mean in uniform). They have been annually short and have borrowed much money. The economics professor has publicly stated the $351.9MM figure but I (nor others on this site to my knowledge) have not taken th trouble to analyze the numbers the professor has used and the reported figures over the years. To add to the problem of the true debt, one must determine what Rutgers is actually required to pay back. My gut says that they will not have to pay back the student fees (or return in kind to the university in some manner), how far back the issue goes (I believe it originates around the time of ACC Raid I, but that is my guess, I cannot prove this and I am too lazy to research it), other sources of funding, etc.

My figure is based on the past discussions and is tempered by the professor's number. A year (or two or three) ago, some of us roughly calculated that Rutgers was in the hole to nearly a half billion $, but again, how much must be paid back? Regardless, the prof estimates the $351.9 and they wil be in the red again this year by $30-40MM so the $400MM figure, though ballparked, is not too far off.

One smoke screen I have seen repeatedly used by pro-Rutgers AD spending people (writers, university personnel, etc.) is that they will limit discussion to the current year to mask the perpetual shortfall. Another smoke screen is described above by alluding to the projected income (now at $40-50MM several years out) without discounting the amount by today's income or inflating the projected costs against the projected income. As I am not an accountant, I lack the patience to do the math, suffice it to say that if the CPI increases by 1% annually, the projected spending should follow the same increases, at least the two should track closely. By comparing apples (current shortfalls) to oranges (no not the Orange(men)) (tomorrows projections), they mask the true nature of the effect of the excessive borrowing.

One should ask whether Rutgers' AD would be able to borrow the same money from a regular bank, if not, then you would know that the borrowing is not a safe investment. By borrowing from the university's bank, they will receive favorable treatment and probably a serious discount and/or outright forgiveness of the debt. But this only accounts for a part of the debt.

Additionally, the article points out that they have raised $71MM in commitments but that the goal is $100MM while the first phase of the expansion is $115MM and the loan is $26MM. $71MM and $26MM totals $97MM, still short of the goal by $3MM and by the cost of the first phase by $18MM, without an indication of what the other phases will cost, which amounts to another shortfall of $18MM for 2019 (or whenever the facility is to be completed) on top of the projected revenue shortfalls for that year. Considering the product on the field and the fact that attendance is meh, how long before the NYC located fans of B1G foes realize they do not have to by season tickets to get a seat at the game of their choice? Once this happens, Rutgers' ticket sales revenue will drop. Simply put, way too many numbers floating around and no evidence that they balance out at the end of the day. A CPA could retire off a forensic investigation of the Rutgers AD.

P.S. Sorry for getting long winded, but this is a good discussion and you deserve an explanation, of which I did not do justice because there is simply too much more.

 

[Toga]

There are several of us locals who love the Orange but did not/could not attend. My dad loved the Orange and I got hooked with the Louie Bouie show in hoops and with football in general. Lacrosse won me over, not there was a real fight for my fandom.

This issue is an ongoing issue with Rutgers' AD having been in the red (and I don't mean in uniform). They have been annually short and have borrowed much money. The economics professor has publicly stated the $351.9MM figure but I (nor others on this site to my knowledge) have not taken th trouble to analyze the numbers the professor has used and the reported figures over the years. To add to the problem of the true debt, one must determine what Rutgers is actually required to pay back. My gut says that they will not have to pay back the student fees (or return in kind to the university in some manner), how far back the issue goes (I believe it originates around the time of ACC Raid I, but that is my guess, I cannot prove this and I am too lazy to research it), other sources of funding, etc.

My figure is based on the past discussions and is tempered by the professor's number. A year (or two or three) ago, some of us roughly calculated that Rutgers was in the hole to nearly a half billion $, but again, how much must be paid back? Regardless, the prof estimates the $351.9 and they wil be in the red again this year by $30-40MM so the $400MM figure, though ballparked, is not too far off.

One smoke screen I have seen repeatedly used by pro-Rutgers AD spending people (writers, university personnel, etc.) is that they will limit discussion to the current year to mask the perpetual shortfall. Another smoke screen is described above by alluding to the projected income (now at $40-50MM several years out) without discounting the amount by today's income or inflating the projected costs against the projected income. As I am not an accountant, I lack the patience to do the math, suffice it to say that if the CPI increases by 1% annually, the projected spending should follow the same increases, at least the two should track closely. By comparing apples (current shortfalls) to oranges (no not the Orange(men)) (tomorrows projections), they mask the true nature of the effect of the excessive borrowing.

One should ask whether Rutgers' AD would be able to borrow the same money from a regular bank, if not, then you would know that the borrowing is not a safe investment. By borrowing from the university's bank, they will receive favorable treatment and probably a serious discount and/or outright forgiveness of the debt. But this only accounts for a part of the debt.

Additionally, the article points out that they have raised $71MM in commitments but that the goal is $100MM while the first phase of the expansion is $115MM and the loan is $26MM. $71MM and $26MM totals $97MM, still short of the goal by $3MM and by the cost of the first phase by $18MM, without an indication of what the other phases will cost, which amounts to another shortfall of $18MM for 2019 (or whenever the facility is to be completed) on top of the projected revenue shortfalls for that year. Considering the product on the field and the fact that attendance is meh, how long before the NYC located fans of B1G foes realize they do not have to by season tickets to get a seat at the game of their choice? Once this happens, Rutgers' ticket sales revenue will drop. Simply put, way too many numbers floating around and no evidence that they balance out at the end of the day. A CPA could retire off a forensic investigation of the Rutgers AD.

P.S. Sorry for getting long winded, but this is a good discussion and you deserve an explanation, of which I did not do justice because there is simply too much more.

These guys can launder - I mean loan some money.

 

[HtownOrange]

These guys can launder - I mean loan some money.
View attachment 94562

Thee look like the guys that arranged my student loans...

 

[tipphill]

There are several of us locals who love the Orange but did not/could not attend. My dad loved the Orange and I got hooked with the Louie Bouie show in hoops and with football in general. Lacrosse won me over, not there was a real fight for my fandom.

This issue is an ongoing issue with Rutgers' AD having been in the red (and I don't mean in uniform). They have been annually short and have borrowed much money. The economics professor has publicly stated the $351.9MM figure but I (nor others on this site to my knowledge) have not taken th trouble to analyze the numbers the professor has used and the reported figures over the years. To add to the problem of the true debt, one must determine what Rutgers is actually required to pay back. My gut says that they will not have to pay back the student fees (or return in kind to the university in some manner), how far back the issue goes (I believe it originates around the time of ACC Raid I, but that is my guess, I cannot prove this and I am too lazy to research it), other sources of funding, etc.

My figure is based on the past discussions and is tempered by the professor's number. A year (or two or three) ago, some of us roughly calculated that Rutgers was in the hole to nearly a half billion $, but again, how much must be paid back? Regardless, the prof estimates the $351.9 and they wil be in the red again this year by $30-40MM so the $400MM figure, though ballparked, is not too far off.

One smoke screen I have seen repeatedly used by pro-Rutgers AD spending people (writers, university personnel, etc.) is that they will limit discussion to the current year to mask the perpetual shortfall. Another smoke screen is described above by alluding to the projected income (now at $40-50MM several years out) without discounting the amount by today's income or inflating the projected costs against the projected income. As I am not an accountant, I lack the patience to do the math, suffice it to say that if the CPI increases by 1% annually, the projected spending should follow the same increases, at least the two should track closely. By comparing apples (current shortfalls) to oranges (no not the Orange(men)) (tomorrows projections), they mask the true nature of the effect of the excessive borrowing.

One should ask whether Rutgers' AD would be able to borrow the same money from a regular bank, if not, then you would know that the borrowing is not a safe investment. By borrowing from the university's bank, they will receive favorable treatment and probably a serious discount and/or outright forgiveness of the debt. But this only accounts for a part of the debt.

Additionally, the article points out that they have raised $71MM in commitments but that the goal is $100MM while the first phase of the expansion is $115MM and the loan is $26MM. $71MM and $26MM totals $97MM, still short of the goal by $3MM and by the cost of the first phase by $18MM, without an indication of what the other phases will cost, which amounts to another shortfall of $18MM for 2019 (or whenever the facility is to be completed) on top of the projected revenue shortfalls for that year. Considering the product on the field and the fact that attendance is meh, how long before the NYC located fans of B1G foes realize they do not have to by season tickets to get a seat at the game of their choice? Once this happens, Rutgers' ticket sales revenue will drop. Simply put, way too many numbers floating around and no evidence that they balance out at the end of the day. A CPA could retire off a forensic investigation of the Rutgers AD.

P.S. Sorry for getting long winded, but this is a good discussion and you deserve an explanation, of which I did not do justice because there is simply too much more.

long winded???? i appreciate your patience and education to myself. it all reminds me of the phrase voodoo economics in practice at rutgers. i hope they get an "independent audit" that clarifies what they have done. that would give the taxpayers some ammunition to question the legislature re accounting practices, and funding. up to now the taxpayer in nj has had very little say in the budget, and i was witness to that. early on when i lived there, there was an expected rise in funding as they were making the transition to d1, and needed to build facilities. that was rewarded with some limited success early on with schiano.
that has transitioned now to the promise of the big 10. it remind me of an investment gone bad. you are in to deep too deep do you cut your losses and run or do you wait it out. they will wait it out. its to big a gamble to run and there is some assurance that there will be funds.
i also believe that they are counting on their membership to bring greater rewards other than sports to cover the expenditures. such as higher profile, better quality students and academic standing,consortium research money,and god knows what else that big 10 money brings.

 

[Rage4CUSE]

This thread is GLORIOUS!

 

[TheCusian]

If I was a parent of a student AND a tax payer and my $ was getting the return it has, I'd be pissed annually.

It would be one thing is they were actually getting better.