Most of our fans realize that despite the issues on offense, we should’ve been 5-2 through the Indiana game (where we lost Sam Brown, our offensive weapon who allowed us to keep the ball on the ground). We had no business losing the Nebraska game. That was on Gleason for allowing Evan to air the ball out and he lost his job for it plain and simple.
The Next Two Years are Free
- Thread starter rutgersal_rivals139582
- Start date
Most of our fans realize that despite the issues on offense, we should’ve been 5-2 through the Indiana game (where we lost Sam Brown, our offensive weapon who allowed us to keep the ball on the ground). We had no business losing the Nebraska game. That was on Gleason for allowing Evan to air the ball out and he lost his job for it plain and simple.
The conference situation was crumbling, making it more difficult to do his job, and there were questions as to the type of support Rutgers might be able to provide to the program going forward, given the drastically reduced revenues, and Governors vow to cut expenses. As madhat pointed out, this could have made the situation seem tenuous.
The increase, while significant, wasn’t as much as I expected. He was making 2.03 M at Rutgers and made 3M at Tampa.
With hindsight being 20/20, it turned out to be a financially poor decision for him, as he only lasted 2 years, though he was paid for 5 years. Had he stayed at Rutgers, he likely would have been making $7M -10M, by now, imo.
But the Ohio State experience, working with Urban Meyer was likely invaluable. If this program is one day built into a National Title contender, that experience will likely be a key reason why. So things might work out afterall, for him.
It wasn’t a bad play called, it was just poor execution, especially with the receiver falling down, and not tackling the DB. Had he done so, it would have been similar to a punt, and not so bad. Had Simon put more air under the ball, it likely goes for 6, as the receiver had a step on the DB. But Simon badly underthrew the ball.
Now it is "National Title contender", the fantasy around Schiano continues to spiral down the rabbit hole. If Greg makes it back to the Pinstripe Bowl based on the play on the field, not backing in due to a pandemic, in 2.0 that would be a minor miracle in itself, that is the reality we face.
Are you saying you would turn down a 50% increase in salary that meant an extra $1 million a year? Please stop grasping at straws.
Utah wins.
Surprised about Louisville, but they collapsed after Petrino was fired.
Same for Pitt, WVU--would have thought they did better.
Nebraska- this guy is laughing is arse off!
Of course I wouldn’t. I’m just saying it’s funny how things worked out. At the beginning of 2012, the Big Ten was just a pipe dream, that we hoped to realize at some point in the future. The future came sooner than we thought.
how do you know he walked over the $500k difference and not the idea that his program wasn't going to get the funding he felt it needed to remain winning.
Remember this is a man that would have stayed a DC at the U if his demands for what the program needed wasn't met and that was more than just his salary.
You might feel his and his staff's salaries was the driving factor for his leaving along with pro offer , I feel frustration and self protection was the reason.
Frustrated over seeing his budget cut and feeling he couldn't win at RU with the type of support he felt he was receiving..
Also he probably talked to Tim P about budget cuts and getting the football program funded like it needed.
Talks didn't go the way he liked and decided to leave for Tampa Bay rather than stay at a program he felt wasn't being supported by the RU Administration like it needed to be
Last edited:
Going through some SAFe Agile training.
Couldn't help but think of this place when I came across this quote.
Couldn't help but think of this place when I came across this quote.
—W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis
Sounds like money and pro job wasn't the reason for Schiano leaving
Greg Schiano explains why he left Rutgers in 2012 - The Scarlet Faithful
>The most notable part for me was Schiano openly discussing his decision to leave Rutgers in 2012. he became the head coach of the Tampa Bay BucaanIt changed the trajectory of both his career and the future of Rutgers football.
“The National Football League was something I was not prepared for,” Schiano admitted. “I never prepared to be a head coach in the NFL. It came to me and I took it because I was afraid to be (at Rutgers).”
The reason Schiano was worried to stay at Rutgers was the conference expansion and the realization that the Big East was not going to survive.
“Quite honestly I wanted to be [at Rutgers] the rest of my career. I built a house a half-mile from here,” said Schiano. “I was going to stay here the rest of my career. But then our league fell apart.”<
https://thescarletfaithful.com/greg-schiano-rutgers-football-2012-return-big-ten-nfl/
Seeing us, Maryland, and Nebraska royally struggle in the B1G in football should be a warning for USC and UCLA. I have a feeling that they're (USC in particular) are going to be humbled pretty strongly in the B1G.
Just goes to show that money and talent aren't enough to succeed. You need good coaching. The Xs and Os matter most.
Agreed. I always consider Rutgers football on a par historically with USC. If you look at the records in bowl games and national championships they are pretty much identical. If Rutgers is struggling in the B1G, no doubt USC will as well. You just gotta love this board.
I think the point being that USC should not expect the same kind of success in the B1G 10 that they had in the PAC 8-10-12. The weekly grind of the B1G 10 is much more demanding than they're use to.
Bingo. Nebraska thought they were hot **** when they entered and look at them. USC/UCLA are going to have to commute cross county to play many games, many of which will be in very hostile environments in terms of weather.
In other words, you've now abandoned your theory that Schiano left because Rutgers was going to cut his salary or hurt him in other ways. Congratulations! BTW, the subsidy had to be increased drastically afterward to pay for the Mike Rice fiasco.
We seem to have a disagreement between you and @rutgersal on whether the difference was $1 million or a measly $500K. But that's not important. Very, very, very few people would turn down a $500K salary increase at a more prestigious employer. The rest of it, IMHO, is noise.
I think USC should be fine, with the caveat of the unknown effects of travel.
The only offense that’s as potent in the B10 is OSU. I think their offense can carry them to compete near the top but I don’t really know how travel may affect them.
Grind of the schedule is doable imo but grind of the schedule and extra travel I don’t know.
He was saying what Rutgers fans wanted to hear: "oh, I've always loved you and I really didn't mean to suddenly run away with a prettier and richer girl!" I put *no* credence in those statements. And Schiano making them lowers my opinion of him.
Last edited:
It was a bad play call because Simon isn’t that good and putting the ball in the air was not necessary to win the game. Nebraska had no answer for our defense.
I don't know if any of you are old enough to remember when Penn State joined the B1G, the existing members at the time said the same thing. Penn State didn't come in and own the B1G by any means, but they didn't struggle like Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers either. USC hasn't been dominating the PAC 12 recently, so I don't expect them to dominate the B1G, but they will be very competitive, and they will win their share of games. We need to worry about Greg Schiano and Rutgers, not USC and UCLA, they will be fine, they have plenty of their own fans that will worry about them.
I don't think anyone here is "worried" about the Trojans. Just trying to make the point that they will not be the dominant power that they've been traditionally but still will be a top 15-20 team.
Well seems like nothing will convince you and your opinion will stay the same no matter what.
I feel the only money issue was the football budget and the state of Rutgers future.
You just want to find your own reason because of your dislike of him.
But don't take my saying your dislike of him is a put down of you.
The same can be said of my opinion of why he left was budget woes, you and others can claim I feel that way because I like him as RU's HC and tend to give him the benefit of doubt..
But again, don't think Pernetti was in any position to give him $500k extra and increase assistants salaries, when under pressure to reduce the Athletic Department's budget because of receiving lower conference sharing revenue from what was received in the BE to what expected from AAC along with student subsidies supporting athletics being complained about .
So I'll just have to say we disagree and respect your seeing things in a different light.
Teams seem to continue on as they were going after joining the Big Ten. Maryland was up and down and Nebraska was trending down. Only Rutgers really fell off and that's partly because our records in the Big East were smoke and mirrors and far too easy. I suspect UCLA will continue to be up and down and USC will be competitive but disappointing unless they find another Pete Carroll.
actually Nebraska had good years under Bo when they first arrived, then program went down
| Bo Pelini (Big 12 Conference) (2008–2010) | |||||||
| 2008 | Bo Pelini | 9–4 | 5–3 | T–1st (North) | W Gator | ||
| 2009 | Bo Pelini | 10–4 | 6–2 | 1st (North) | W Holiday | 14 | 14 |
| 2010 | Bo Pelini | 10–4 | 6–2 | T–1st (North) | L Holiday | 19 | 20 |
| Bo Pelini (Big Ten Conference) (2011–2014) | |||||||
| 2011 | Bo Pelini | 9–4 | 5–3 | 3rd (Legends) | L Capital One | 24 | 24 |
| 2012 | Bo Pelini | 10–4 | 7–1 | 1st (Legends) | L Capital One | 23 | 25 |
| 2013 | Bo Pelini | 9–4 | 5–3 | T–2nd (Legends) | W Gator | 25 | |
| 2014 | Bo Pelini Barney Cotton | 9–4[n 6] | 5–3 | T–2nd (West) | L Holiday[n 6] |
USC is recruiting very well and will probably end easily as top 10 team, as that part of the game goes. They also hired a really good coach, who will make them a Natty contender once the NCAA rules having to play defense is optional.
I am. I worry about one breaking all the time. Just part of the H&B lifestyle.
@rutgersal is correct. The "bad play call" narrative is beyond false.
Quote from another post I put together actually looking at the 2nd half INT against Nebraska.
Only 1 led to points. And that INT came on 2nd and 17.
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...od-schiano-article.250311/page-2#post-5960198
1st and 10 Neb 38 - Brown for 3
2nd and 7 Neb 35 - Salaam for loss of 1
3nd and 8 Neb 36 - Simon interception to the Neb 31
Neb following possession: Turnover on downs at Rut 27. Zero points.
We totally should have run it on 3rd and 8. Great idea.
1st and 10 Rut 42 - Brown for 3
2nd and 7 Rut 45 - holding
2nd and 17 Rut 35 - Simon interception to Rut 27
Neb following possession: Touchdown to make it 14-13.
So we should have run it on 2nd and 17? just give up on the possession?
End of 4th - 59 seconds left
1st and 2nd incomplete
3rd and 10 - Simon interception
With 50 seconds to go in the 3rd quarter riding our 3rd string QB, yes, we should have kept the ball on the ground on second down, with a 7 point lead. I don’t care if it was 2nd and 30. We had a great punter and our defense was shutting them down the whole game.
Absolutely not. I think Rutgers situation, with Syracuse, Pitt, and WV leaving the Big East was a contributing factor to his decision. Obviously I agree the scope of the opportunity was the main factor.
He has implied that had he known Rutgers was getting the Big Ten invite, he would have stayed.
When you think you have a chance to win the game, you go win the game. Simon was given the opportunity to win the game and he just didn’t execute. We had the matchup we wanted. I’d rather die trying than go into a shell.
Oh, W. Edward Deming was a genius. A lot of what Dr. Deming advocated falls under the heading of common sense and innate managerial instinct, which, in my humble opinion is mostly innate and can rarely be taught or learned. Exceptions apply, and some people can be trained.
What is amazing to me about Dr. Deming is that his BS was in electrical engineering, and his graduate degrees were in math and physics. Not exactly the path of a management guru. Most engineers could not manage their way out of a paper bag, but again, exceptions exist.
I had to look up SAFe Agile training. The description made me laugh out loud. "SAFe promotes alignment, collaboration, and delivery across large numbers of agile teams."
Really? Large organizations need alignment, collaboration and delivery? Briliant!!! Easily stated, but often rarely achieved.
Had Schiano stayed, we would have remained competitive. We stopped putting the work in that was needed to be successful. That is why Rutgers cannot be turned around quickly. And Ash was unable to replenish the talent. Once we turn over the roster, we will once again be competitive.
Look at the Winning Records overall and not just Conference Play.
A&M is not in the same conversation with RU. A&M has had 8 winning seasons out of the last 9.
One winning season in the last 9 years for us. 1st year in the B1G .
The poster wasn’t trying to compare the records of Rutgers and A&M straight up. He’s saying that with all their money to get top recruits, A&M has been really disappointing.
Expectations suddenly become different of coaching staffs though when you have elite talent. And not every good program building coach that moves up the ranks proves to be as good at navigating a roster full of 5 stars.
A&M more than anyone proves that just throwing money at a team to load up on stars doesn't get you great teams. No, it's not just the Jimmy's and Joe's. There's a thing called coaching that really matters...
You're of course correct. You remind me of another cliche with truth: "He can take his'n and beat your'n, or take your'n and beat his'n." The remark is said to be by Bum Phillips about Don Shula, but it may be older than that.