The all-inclusive Rutgers dumpster fire thread... | Page 435 | Syracusefan.com

The all-inclusive Rutgers dumpster fire thread...

{…the university used more than $400,000 of its endowment to fund the fake positions and to pay what she called “kickbacks” to the employment agency.}

Have to give them points for creativity though. Shouldn’t stop criminal charges. But it’s creative.

13E71960-7250-473C-B11F-857175DCA3A7.gif
 
Considering they rehired an abusive, lying, cheating HFC, is anything off the table for Rutgers? Serious question, will Rutgers stop at anything to prove they "belong" in the B1G? Or that they have a legitimate Athletics Department?

In the AD, they have been lying, cheating, stealing, wasting, etc., public funds, student fees, internal loans, and bilking donors for so long, did anyone not expect that it would filter over to other areas of the university?
 
Gotta love those Jersey ethics.

Rutty gonna Rutty

Gotta love em. Shitano is so perfect for that school, right out of central casting
 
Gotta love em. Shitano is so perfect for that school, right out of central casting
Rutgers' AD = STD of College Sports; they keep giving and giving and giving...but only what others do not want. And now the entire school is infected with the AD's ethics, or lack thereof.
 
{…the university used more than $400,000 of its endowment to fund the fake positions and to pay what she called “kickbacks” to the employment agency.}

Have to give them points for creativity though. Shouldn’t stop criminal charges. But it’s creative.

View attachment 216397
This is why endowments really burn me up. Apparently they can be accessed to run some BS scam but we can't even discuss touching it to save non-revenue sports when a once in a lifetime global pandemic strikes.
 
This is why endowments really burn me up. Apparently they can be accessed to run some BS scam but we can't even discuss touching it to save non-revenue sports when a once in a lifetime global pandemic strikes.
The answer really is "it depends". The largest part of schools' endowments usually is restricted; the donor(s) gave the money to be used for a specific purpose, such as endowing a scholarship or a professor's chair. If the schools tried to use that money for something else, they'd be sued in a heartbeat. There are unrestricted monies in endowments, but they are small fraction of the total.

This is a sports board. People here like sports. They don't have a problem with having the unrestricted endowment money spent on sports. People who like sports are a minority, especially when one considers that the majority of students at most universities today are female. Most do not want any money from the endowment to go to sports. The money was given to the academic side of the house, not athletics. Most administrations will not fund any part of sports from the endowment because they don't want to tick off the donors. The academic side of the house is way, way, way more important to the president/chancellor/board of trustees than sports are.
 
Last edited:
The answer really is "it depends". The largest part of schools' endowments usually is restricted; the donor(s) gave the money to be used for a specific purpose, such as endowing a scholarship or a professor's chair. If the schools tried to use that money for something else, they'd be sued in a heartbeat. There are unrestricted monies in endowments, but they are small fraction of the total.

This is a sports board. People here like sports. They don't have a problem with having the unrestricted endowment money spent on sports. People who like sports are a minority, especially when one considers that the majority of students at most universities today are female. Most do not want any money from the endowment to go to sports. The money was given to the academic side of the house, not athletics. Most administrations will not fund any part of sports from the endowment because they don't want to tick off the donors. The academic side of the house is way, way, way more important to the president/chancellor/board of trustees than sports are.
Well put. I would add to your last line that the academic side of the house is earns far more revenue and is more "profitable" than most ADs.
 
Typically, a school’s endowment is its insurance policy. It’s usually a low risk investment fund that is not really liquid for capital expenses. Sometimes funds are set aside as CapEx funds from dividends or part of a donation to the endowment, but usually CapEx requires a more direct donation, and not pulled from the earning power of the endowment.
 
Typically, a school’s endowment is its insurance policy. It’s usually a low risk investment fund that is not really liquid for capital expenses. Sometimes funds are set aside as CapEx funds from dividends or part of a donation to the endowment, but usually CapEx requires a more direct donation, and not pulled from the earning power of the endowment.
typically, but in the case of Rutgers, it is probably also used as a helicopter slush fund for Shady
 
The answer really is "it depends". The largest part of schools' endowments usually is restricted; the donor(s) gave the money to be used for a specific purpose, such as endowing a scholarship or a professor's chair. If the schools tried to use that money for something else, they'd be sued in a heartbeat. There are unrestricted monies in endowments, but they are small fraction of the total.

This is a sports board. People here like sports. They don't have a problem with having the unrestricted endowment money spent on sports. People who like sports are a minority, especially when one considers that the majority of students at most universities today are female. Most do not want any money from the endowment to go to sports. The money was given to the academic side of the house, not athletics. Most administrations will not fund any part of sports from the endowment because they don't want to tick off the donors. The academic side of the house is way, way, way more important to the president/chancellor/board of trustees than sports are.
I am fundamentally opposed to schools using endowments for sports. Beyond that, I believe most schools have lost their way, and will not remain viable long-term in their current model. Lots of endowments are going to be at risk.
 
I am fundamentally opposed to schools using endowments for sports. Beyond that, I believe most schools have lost their way, and will not remain viable long-term in their current model. Lots of endowments are going to be at risk.
That's why I keep mine where I do, safe and sound.
 

Similar threads

Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Football
Replies
5
Views
532
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Monday for Football
Replies
6
Views
465
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Football
Replies
7
Views
1K
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Monday for Football
Replies
6
Views
384
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Friday for Football
Replies
6
Views
461

Forum statistics

Threads
167,141
Messages
4,682,255
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
304
Guests online
1,534
Total visitors
1,838


Top Bottom