With the Schiano coaching situation having arisen, the spotlight has once again fallen on Rutgers woeful athletic finances. Many have assumed that with Rutgers in the B1G they should have all the money in the world, but that's not how it's been -here are some commonly held beliefs, with some facts about them. Data comes from a 2019 report from consultants hired by Rutgers, link at bottom:

Belief 1: The six-year clock on Rutgers getting a full B1G share must be ending now.

The Truth: The clock didn't start on the six-year waiting period until 2015, so in fact, Rutgers isn't scheduled to get a full B1G share until 2021.

Belief 2: Rutgers has been getting a "half-share" of B1G money during this six-year waiting period.

The Truth: What the deal actually reached says is that Rutgers gets an amount equal to what they were expecting to get in the Big East (had the Big East not fallen apart) for those six years. And that's not half a B1G share. Here are the actual B1G payout amounts by year:

2015: $8.6m
2016: $9.0m
2017: $9.4m
2018: $9.8m
2019: $10.2m
2020: $10.6m

That's not half a B1G share. For example, the B1G per school payout for regular members in 2017 was about $36 million. That's almost 4 times more than what Rutgers got. In 2018, the payout was about $50m, about 5 times what Rutgers got.

Belief 3: Well, the B1G is now getting over $50m a school, and 2021 is right around the corner, so Rutgers will be rolling in the dough very soon right?

The Truth: Yes and No. Yes, the regular B1G members are going to be getting massive checks over $50 million, heck they started getting those last year. But no, Rutgers won't be getting them, at least theirs will still not be as massive. That's because in order to make up for the paltry amounts contracted for between 2015-2020, Rutgers has asked for and received loans against those later checks from the B1G. But the B1G of course expects to be paid back. Here are the advance amounts Rutgers has gotten:

2018: $14m
2019: $16m
2020: $18m

That $48m will come out of Rutgers distribution checks between 2021 - 2026, so assuming no more loans in the interim, Rutgers is slated to finally get a full, free and clear equal B1G share in .... 2027.

Here's the link, the data I quoted is on pages 14 and 15, but there is other interesting stuff in there as well:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/sidearm.sites/s...Report.pdf

Maryland is likely in a similar position, as in 2018 it took out a whopping $31m loan against future revenues from the B1G.

Challenging situation for Rutgers, compounded by the fact that they apparently don't have nearly as many big-dollar athletic donors as any other Big Ten program.

On the other hand... any program currently outside the P5 would have eagerly accepted the same Big Ten deal that Rutgers got, so no one can credibly criticize Rutgers for taking that deal.

That is illuminating indeed. I don't know what's more sad - Rutgers getting scraps for 6 years with debt owed or the B1G having to pay a bottom feeder big bucks after 2021.

(11-27-2019 07:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Challenging situation for Rutgers, compounded by the fact that they apparently don't have nearly as many big-dollar athletic donors as any other Big Ten program.

On the other hand... any program currently outside the P5 would have eagerly accepted the same Big Ten deal that Rutgers got, so no one can credibly criticize Rutgers for taking that deal.

No question, Rutgers has to take that deal all day, they will still get infinitely more than they would have gotten in the collapsed Big East, or in a Big East that stayed together.

What I found interesting though is that the B1G drove a pretty hard bargain, they created a situation where a new member would be getting far less than other members for a long period of time.

What was particularly tough was that the B1G brought on Rutgers and Maryland to help boost their media payouts. They indeed did get a big boost in 2017 with the first of their re-upped media deals, but Rutgers and Maryland were not allowed to partake in that - their money post-2017 stayed the same as agreed to in 2012 while regular B1G members feasted on the new, extra cash that having the DC and NYC markets assumedely helped bring in.

(11-27-2019 07:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-27-2019 07:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Challenging situation for Rutgers, compounded by the fact that they apparently don't have nearly as many big-dollar athletic donors as any other Big Ten program.

On the other hand... any program currently outside the P5 would have eagerly accepted the same Big Ten deal that Rutgers got, so no one can credibly criticize Rutgers for taking that deal.

No question, Rutgers has to take that deal all day, they will still get infinitely more than they would have gotten in the collapsed Big East, or in a Big East that stayed together.

What I found interesting though is that the B1G drove a pretty hard bargain, they created a situation where a new member would be getting far less than other members for a long period of time.

What was particularly tough was that the B1G brought on Rutgers and Maryland to help boost their media payouts. They indeed did get a big boost in 2017 with the first of their re-upped media deals, but Rutgers and Maryland were not allowed to partake in that - their money post-2017 stayed the same as agreed to in 2012 while regular B1G members feasted on the new, extra cash that having the DC and NYC markets assumedely helped bring in.

Rutgers will eventually make out in the BIG. What they are currently dealing with is better than being stuck in the AAC, which you have already commented on. But one would expect the BIG to do a bit more for both schools since these schools did help them get a strong foothold in their respective markets. It seems that once Rutgers and Maryland do start to get a full share that it will decrease the amount that the other BIG schools split among themselves.
By that time, the BIG maybe making so much money that it wont hurt much.

The irony is...and what I think pisses many people off about Rutgers is...that Rutgers is managing to accomplish nothing while still collecting more than double what an AAC team gets. NOT accounting the "loans" they are getting from the Big 10 Conference. I would think that Rutgers could use their $$$ and conference prestige to get ONE of their sports into a competitive position.

But... I guess not.

(11-27-2019 07:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  No question, Rutgers has to take that deal all day, they will still get infinitely more than they would have gotten in the collapsed Big East, or in a Big East that stayed together.

One still has to consider the cost of doing business within those conferences. You have to spend that much more in the Big Ten than you did in the Big East.

I remember the 90's and the OCS topic Rutgers wrestled with, rather than sourcing out football to the Meadowlands. OCS matters to the Big Ten. They all have one, so prospective members should, too. Keeping football on Rutgers' campus kept them on the Big Ten radar, but at what real cost?

I don't know what the answer is. I don't believe the ACC would have been better for them (if the ACC even wanted them). The cost of athletics at Maryland would suggest similar woes. However, I do believe Rutgers would have more football success in the ACC, where that could generate interest for donor pipelines and traditional revenue streams (heck, imagine a football game where Rutgers fans and students actually show up and stay?).

They should spend that money on basketball and when they finally get a full share go all in on football.

(11-27-2019 07:45 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  That is illuminating indeed. I don't know what's more sad - Rutgers getting scraps for 6 years with debt owed or the B1G having to pay a bottom feeder big bucks after 2021.

How about B$G fans bragging about how equitably they treat their members? That’s pretty sad.

Rutgers will start getting nearly double even paying back at a rate of say $6M per year for 8 years. So if the B1G is distributing $50M per school they will be getting $44M in 2021. I don't think I'd get too worried about their position. They will be getting more than many SEC schools, and of course all ACC, P12 and B12 schools except Texas. Also they have been budgeting with the smaller take, so the ship should right much quicker.

Maryland did take a substantial amount up front. They have much more to pay back and will be impacted longer.

(11-27-2019 11:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-27-2019 07:45 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  That is illuminating indeed. I don't know what's more sad - Rutgers getting scraps for 6 years with debt owed or the B1G having to pay a bottom feeder big bucks after 2021.

How about B$G fans bragging about how equitably they treat their members? That’s pretty sad.

We have to buy into our share of the BTN. That is why the payout disparity is so large for so long.

Rutgers made some dumb hires for AD's, football, and basketball since they entered the B-10. The pay offs for those stupid moves plus paying their replacements has been costly probably requiring the loans talked about above. However Rutgers made a lot of improvements before getting into the B-10 including a stadium expansion, practice facility upgrades, and weight and locker room improvements in Schiano's first stop at the university. The school has already made some improvements at the RAC, their Olympic sports fields, and already has a winter / bad weather bubble for practices and off season training. Rutgers can get by until those full B-10 payments start coming in, in 2021 and then start with upgrades and facility improvements again at that point. The university's first concern is to replace the Ashe folly with Schiano or another high energy recruiting coach to begin righting the football ship and then progress with the infrastructure needs. Men's basketball is improving under the new coach, the women's basketball program is in good hands, and the other Olympic sports programs are competitive in the B-10 too. Rutgers is a very strong academic institution with Medical, Dental, and Law schools and its future is not as bleak some people would have you think despite some of the past decisions it has made and its initial growing pains after admission to the B-10. I can remember Northwestern being at the butt end of B-10 jokes years ago and they have had a resurgence in recent years so Rutgers can turn their misfortunes around to with some good decisions and the future B-10 payment they will receive. I'd take the growing pains in recent years in the B-10 over the alternative G-5 conferences and their pay outs any day.

(11-28-2019 04:11 AM)panite Wrote:  Rutgers made some dumb hires for AD's, football, and basketball since they entered the B-10. The pay offs for those stupid moves plus paying their replacements has been costly probably requiring the loans talked about above. However Rutgers made a lot of improvements before getting into the B-10 including a stadium expansion, practice facility upgrades, and weight and locker room improvements in Schiano's first stop at the university. The school has already made some improvements at the RAC, their Olympic sports fields, and already has a winter / bad weather bubble for practices and off season training. Rutgers can get by until those full B-10 payments start coming in, in 2021 and then start with upgrades and facility improvements again at that point. The university's first concern is to replace the Ashe folly with Schiano or another high energy recruiting coach to begin righting the football ship and then progress with the infrastructure needs. Men's basketball is improving under the new coach, the women's basketball program is in good hands, and the other Olympic sports programs are competitive in the B-10 too. Rutgers is a very strong academic institution with Medical, Dental, and Law schools and its future is not as bleak some people would have you think despite some of the past decisions it has made and its initial growing pains after admission to the B-10. I can remember Northwestern being at the butt end of B-10 jokes years ago and they have had a resurgence in recent years so Rutgers can turn their misfortunes around to with some good decisions and the future B-10 payment they will receive. I'd take the growing pains in recent years in the B-10 over the alternative G-5 conferences and their pay outs any day.

That last line says a lot. Fans prefer winning games not conference payouts.

Great article Quo
I wish Rutgers and Maryland weren’t in the Big 10.
They don’t belong.
As an Iowa fan I kind of like Nebraska in Big 10 (though Iowa vs Nebraska wasn’t a rivalry before, as they played maybe twice in 3 decades prior)
Nebraska made a huge mistake leaving Big 12 and OU, KU, OSU & UT

(11-28-2019 10:11 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Great article Quo
I wish Rutgers and Maryland weren’t in the Big 10.
They don’t belong.
As an Iowa fan I kind of like Nebraska in Big 10 (though Iowa vs Nebraska wasn’t a rivalry before, as they played maybe twice in 3 decades prior)
Nebraska made a huge mistake leaving Big 12 and OU, KU, OSU & UT

Thanks, and Happy Thanksgiving.

I agree about the three teams you mention. Ideally, Maryland and Rutgers belong in an Eastern conference with schools like Penn State, Temple, Army, Navy, Pitt, Syracuse, WVU, and BC that will never exist.

Nebraska of course belongs in the Big 8, but the Big 8 became untenable thanks to the development of TV contracts based on demographics that emerged once Notre Dame broke up the CFA circa 1990. So given that reality, the Big 12 was and is the best they can do.

The irony is, in today's emerging streaming world, the Big 8 perhaps could have a media-dollars viability these days that it didn't have the past 25 years.

Anybody up for re-forming the band?

(11-28-2019 10:11 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Great article Quo
I wish Rutgers and Maryland weren’t in the Big 10.
They don’t belong.
As an Iowa fan ...

Such a shocking sentiment to hear from the western edge of the traditional Big Ten. I am lucky I was sitting down.

Quote: Nebraska made a huge mistake leaving Big 12 and OU, KU, OSU & UT

I expect more than a few Nebraska fans may miss their former Big Eight conference mates in the Big 12 (and elsewhere), but I wouldn't be surprised if they missed the Longhorns ... somewhat less.

So much from these moves have been botched, though, it does take time to settle. Cutting ties with cultural and historic rivals have been the biggest blow to the sport, imo. And the hubris that television revenue is enough to ease the pain is just absurd. Hey, we make $50 million! Yeah, you could be making more.

For the Big Ten, I don’t think they’ve done a good job for any of its three newest programs. Rutgers and Maryland don’t need to be found under PSU’s shoe yearly as well as OSU and Michigan’s. And it’s not like the three eastern schools ran that deep or close before. Whereas Nebraska needs to be seen with the eastern bloc...upkeep the program having a brutal conference schedule. And, honestly, I think the Big Ten fails to capitalize on what is/was there between Penn State and Nebraska. Same with PSU and Iowa...the three should be annual fixtures. Far better than UNL-Illinois or Purdue, or PSU-Indiana (how old is that one getting for the Hoosiers?).

I have a hunch that 2022 will be the year that the Big Ten scraps its divisions and changes the rules so that the 2 "best" teams always go to the CCG.

Then it could to a schedule where teams have 5 permanent opponents and play the other 8 teams 50% of the time.

If I had to guess the 5 permanent opponents will be

Rut- MD, PSU, OSU, Mich, Pur
MD - Rut, PSU, OSU, MSU, Indy
PSU - Rut, MD, OSU, MSU, Neb
OSU - Rut, MD, PSU, Mich, ILL
Mich - Rut, OSU, MSU, Pur, Minn
MSU - MD, PSU, Mich, Indy, Wisc
Indy - MD, MSU, Pur, ILL, Minn
Pur - Rut, Mich, Indy, NW, ILL
ILL - OSU, Indy, Pur, NW, Iowa
NW - Pur, ILL, Iowa, Wisc, Neb
Wisc - NW, Minn, Iowa, Neb, MSU
Minn - Mich, Wisc, Iowa, Neb, Indy
Iowa - ILL, NW, Wisc, Minn, Neb
Neb - PSU, Wisc, Iowa, Minn, NW

(11-28-2019 11:51 AM)goofus Wrote:  I have a hunch that 2022 will be the year that the Big Ten scraps its divisions and changes the rules so that the 2 "best" teams always go to the CCG.

If the Big Ten ever does this, one of the priorities should be helping Rutgers, and to a lesser extent Maryland, with the football schedules. They need to not be playing Ohio State -and- Penn State -and- Michigan every single year. If there are "permanent" opponents, they should get at most one of those permanently, and play the others only once or twice every four years.

Fascinating info and I was not aware.

As I long-time Indiana follower, I was pleased for the Big Ten to invite Rutgers and Maryland, and remain so. I do agree with Garrettabc that Rutgers should focus strongly on hoops first.