Hoo's That
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2013
- Messages
- 29,237
- Like
- 83,410
I think you mean to type "yes, you did a really good job of using the sarcasm font."yes, you did a really good job of using the sarcarm font.
I think you mean to type "yes, you did a really good job of using the sarcasm font."yes, you did a really good job of using the sarcarm font.
Nope, the correct font has always been italic...it just gets confused.I think you mean to type "yes, you did a really good job of using the sarcasm font."
Nope, the correct font has always been italic...it just gets confused.
I thought all Italics talked with their hands... wait that's something elseNope, the correct font has always been italic...it just gets confused.
As mediocre or as downright bad as we’ve been in some years between both sports, our overall results have probably been better than Rutgers over the same span of time and we aren’t $500m in the hole.13 years later here we are. basketball purgatory and 2 decent football teams. pls nuke this stupid thread. its bad juju
This makes absolutely no sense. The NCAA has uniform accounting requirements to evaluate a university’s finances for athletics. See below:Unfortunately Rutgers uses a different accounting method than almost all schools in the P4. Capital projects, for instance, are ledgered to the athletic department instead of the general account. PSU has an almost half billion dollar renovation of their stadium not ledgered to their athletic department. The one standout item in revenues is the lack of alum donations. RU is around 8 million per year while the rest of the B1G is around 30 million per year.
If all schools used Rutgers accounting methodology, much larger deficits would be reported at all the schools.