PonyFans.com

Interesting article about Rutgers and their football problems.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/28/sport ... .html?_r=1

I think this article hints at what many see as a real problem at Rutgers and that is the attitude and general arrogrance of the faculty at the school. Rutgers had argueably the worst football program in NCAA history prior to Schiano. The fact that the program was so bad reflected the attitude of the Board and faculty that the sports programs and particularly the football program were nice, but should be kept in proper perspective within the gamut of what an academic institution was all about. There has been huge resistance from the faculty as to direction of the program since the hiring of the former AD ( who had big and resented political connections which he used to pressue the Board and push aside the faculty ) to make Rutgers big time and capture the NYC area imagination which started with the hiring of Schiano. The push for football was a true clash of cultures which has never subsided, but the faculty resentment just festered under the surface and has been subdued with football success. Now with the former AD gone and Schiano moving on the battle for Rutgers is on again with academic eliteists challenging the role of sports at Rutgers and particularly football which they regard as a waste of money and not serving the academic interests of the university.

In general the faculty is very arrogrant, eliteist, snobby and in reality more interested in serving their own personal interests than even those of the university. Roughly 12 years ago a new university President declared that all faculty should have teaching responsibilities which created trauma through out the university as 46% of the faculty only conducted research and viewed themselves as above menial teaching. A huge political clash ensued with the President threatening to challenge their tenure status if they could not teach which was supported by then Governor Christie Whitman. Bottom line is that Rutgers faculty consideres themselves to be an elite faculty that wants the university to be governed totally in accordance with their prerspectives and view of an academic world. Most HS students in NJ do not know that Rutgers is the main state university and until recent years was not the university that most HS students would consider because of it's long history of arrogrant treatment of the kids and generaly uncooperative support of sutdents at all levels of the university. ( Example, my son attended a NJ Community college whose entire curriculum was designed by Rutgers, used only Rutgers approved/Rutgers in-use text books and all courses/credits were approved by Rutgers to be readily acceptable for transfer to Rutgers. He graduated with a 3.65 and applied to Rutgers who proceeded to challenge and not credit him for 12 hours of English and Science courses that were taught by Princeton professors at the CC. After several rounds of challenge Rutgers eventually accepted his transcript and admitted him. After admission they informed him that his GPA could not be used for admission to the School of Business which required a 3.5 because he had not achieved the GPA at Rutgers. As a result, he would be required to attend at least 2 semesters at Rutgers achieving a 3.5 GPA before he could be admitted to the business school. Yep, 5 years to achieve a 4 year degree just for Rutgers to prove a point. This is a typical experience for kids with Rutgers and that is why it is not a popular and friendly university despite being the state university. Needless-to-say, my son quickly blew off Rutgers and did not waste a year of time and expense to prove himself to Rutgers. Almost forgot that as a transfer student he could only take night classes the first year and could be given no consideration for university housing. ) Rutgers is a truely excellent academic institution who graduates very well prepared students; however, it will never be an athletic friendly school and it will be interesting to see the direction of the football program with the loss of Schiano and his political power base which poured more thant $150 million into the football facilities in the past 8 years. .

They are not exactly Ivy -basically the same academically as SMU - high 50's ranking

Not sure what they are so snooty about.

actually just checked - we are ahead of them several spots in the rankings....for what its worth.

I'm glad that we don't have those problems. Thankfully SMU's faculty supports all school programs including athletics. Way to go faculty. You are a big part of the reason SMU is a great university!

They love them some SMU sports! bunch of jock sniffers, all of them.

I should clarify that my general remarks and observations were directed toward Rutgers College which is the crown jewel within the university. Rutgers University has 4 or 5 other colleges within the university which all have their own cultures, but it is the original campus Rutgers College which is the center of attitude coupled with the R & D guys. What is interesting is that even with fairly high academic standings Rutgers University had a similar huge boost as seen at SMU in applications when the football program started to win. Applications increased by several thousand and Rutgers College actually had a considerable boost in the SAT level and caliber of student they enrolled. This is an interesting argument that the academic types tend to gloss over is that the PR resulting from the football program can bring in research grants, alum $$$$ and a higher level of sudent applicants. Hopefully, Rutgers University has seen the light and will not regress which was one of the real questions raised by the author in the article base of this thread.

Great summary, Pocono!