Tag:Greg Schiano
Posted on: June 6, 2009 11:06 am
Edited on: June 7, 2009 12:11 am

Check For Flying Pigs and the Temperature in Hell

Bob Mulcahy and the Star Ledger.  Write down on paper  your first thought when you read this next sentence.  Star Ledger writer Mark DiIonno (yes, the same guy who gave Rutgers the black eye over the Navy game) will write a lengthy article praising Bob Mulcahy, extolling his virtues and favorably reviewing his career.  My thoughts ran to flying pigs and hell freezing over.

Well it's happened.  Mulcahy was honored by a council of the Boy Scouts of America with their award for "Distinguished Citizen of 2009" at the Baltusrol County Club.  In attendance?  Former Governors Tom Kean, Brendan Byrne, Senator Dick Codey, Greg Schiano, Vivian Stringer and many more.  Was this banquet surprising?  Not if you knew Bob Mulcahy and what he's done for New Jersey, the Meadowlands, and Rutgers University. 

Former Gov. Tom Kean called him one of the most "decent, honest, ethical people I have ever met in my life."

Sen. Dick Codey called him, "the finest man I have met in public service."

Rutgers football coach Greg Schiano said three men had shaped his life. "First, my father, second, Joe Paterno, and third, Bob Mulcahy. (Please don't start with the Schiano to Penn State effluvium again.  He's not going.)

So what's shocking?  That someone at the Star Ledger recognizes this.  Yes, the paper that actually caused Mulcahy's downfall due to their baseless witch hunt, prodded along by a person whose surname begins with the last letter of the alphabet.  (No, not Zorro, he had personal honor and integrity).  Now the SL did manage to hook links to their shameless "investigative" reporting to the article.  Still, it was a decent article nonetheless and a fitting salute to Mulcahy.

So maybe closure is at hand as the article notes.  Maybe Bob is ready to move on.  If so, Godspeed Bob Mulcahy and thank you for all that you did for Rutgers.

And perhaps, the Star Ledger is ready to move on.  Their crack investigative reporters can't ride this non-story any  longer.  They must search for a new muckraking target.  May I suggest one?


Alright, alright Star Ledger lawyers, here's the link.  http://blog.nj.com/njv_mark_diionno

Posted on: May 6, 2009 7:44 pm
Edited on: May 6, 2009 7:47 pm


So I read with pride today that the Rutgers' football team has the third highest APR of a Division 1 football school.  First was Stanford(984), who just nosed out Air Force (983), with Rutgers claiming the bronze at 980 (tied with Duke).  Rice finished out of the medals with 979.  In doing so the Scarlet Knights completed an interesting daily double.  For the past two years, it is the only school to have won a bowl game while finishing in the top 5 in APR.  So congrats, to the players for hitting the books, to Coach Schiano, his staff and the teachers who made this possible.

This reminded me of something I saw after the PapaJohns.com Bowl in Birmingham this December.  My son and I were at the team's hotel waiting to give the players a rousing welcome.  The players filed off their bus in small groups and were greeted by applause from the assembled faithful.  No surprise there.  But as these players came through the lobby, almost all of them saw a woman standing in the corner of the room joining in the cheers.  To a man, each of the players went over and gave this woman a big hug and said "Thank you."  As I was standing nearby, I was trying to figure out who this woman was.  Before the players arrived, Rutgers' AD Bob Mulcahy had done the same thing, giving her a big hug.

Using my sleuthing skills I immediately surmised that this must be Mrs. Mulcahy.  So I thought I would introduce myself as a Rutgers fan, give her my thanks for all that Bob had done for our program and express my support.  I walked over,  introduced myself and asked if she was Mrs. Mulcahy.  She laughed and said that she wasn't.  She then asked me why I had come to this conclusion.  I explained to her my superior sleuthing skills (which had just thoroughly embarrassed me) and that my conclusion was based upon all the affection shown to her by Mr. Mulcahy and all of the players.

She chuckled good-naturedly and said, "No, I'm just one of their teachers."

Almost all of the players on the football team took time during one of the biggest moments of their young lives to express their thanks to one of their teachers.  Kinda says something about this teacher.  And these players.  And this program.
Category: NCAAF
Posted on: March 22, 2009 10:02 pm
Edited on: March 22, 2009 10:10 pm


 Well I'm motivated to write this because I finally got off the football season ticket waiting list.  I am now a paid up member of the Rutgers 56,000.  (Take that Prof. Dowling).  Came across an interview of Greg Schiano with the Sporting News today.  You gotta love this guy.  Outdoing Broadway Joe Namath, Schiano predicted not one, but multiple national championships for Rutgers.  (Now Joe's prediction actually came with a date so it may be a tie.)

This is not new.  When Schiano took over in 2000, he said his goal was to win a national championship at Rutgers.  People laughed.  They stopped in 2006 when Rutgers shocked the world and was ranked as high as #6 after a thrilling come from behind victory over Louisville.  Apparently Greg misses the sound of laughter because he's upped this to multiple NC's.  Here's the quote:

SN: Do you still feel you can win a national championship at Rutgers?

GS: Absolutely. Otherwise, I wouldn't be here. Not only can we, but we will. Multiple times. And I think to do something like that, in an area so close to New York City that hasn't had a lot of experience with big-time college football championships, will be a really special thing.

So yes there are now people probably laughing somewhere, just like in 2000.  But I wouldn't bet against the guy.  Rutgers Stadium expansion to 56,000 (or is it 54,000 I can't figure it out) is on time and on budget.  A potential death blow to the football program in the form of the sacking of AD Robert Mulcahy resulted in the hiring of, if possible, an even stronger proponent of RU football, Tim Pernetti.   And Rutgers is putting better and better players on the field every year.  Which brings me to motivation.

If you watch Schiano's press conferences, you might not think he's much of a motivator.  He's not a fountain of press quotes like Lane Kiffin or Steve Spurrier.  His comments are always careful and non-confrontational.  But every once in a while you get a glimpse of the man underneath.  Like an ESPN clip of Schiano giving his 2006 team a "chopping wood" speech in the locker room.  Or his terse pre-halftime interview with ESPN's Erin Andrews when RU was up 49-0 during the 2008 Louisville game.  Andrews asked if Schiano would be keeping his foot on the gas because Louisville came from behind to win 2007.  "Exactly," responded Schiano who then ran off to the locker room.  Only from these rare glimpses can you see the fire and the drive of the man.  So if he believes he can win multiple national championships at Rutgers, despite all the hurdles put in his path by the local press, uninformed politicians, and backstabbing Board of Governor's members, I tend to believe him.

As far as the players he coaches, he keeps getting better talent every year.  If he can motivate these three and four star athletes like he did with one and two star recruits, look out.  I can see the faces of his players saying this quote attributed to a Confederate Civil War veteran.  When asked about Robert E. Lee, the veteran responded, "I'd charge Hell itself for that man."  Somehow, I think Schiano's players may feel the same way. And that ladies and gentlemen is called motivation. 


Category: NCAAF
Posted on: March 4, 2009 11:34 pm
Edited on: March 5, 2009 2:24 pm

Hypocrite Thy Name is Phil Mushnick

Taken out behind the woodshed today?  Phil Mushnick of the New York Post.  Our man Phil has been writing a column for the New York Post since the flood.  He supposedly prides himself on accuracy and often in his column takes sportscasters to task who are inaccurate .  Take for example Hall of Famer Joe Morgan.  A few years ago Joe was telling a story during a baseball broadcast about the Philadelphia Phillies late season collapse in 1964.  Joe, who never will be confused with Vin Scully or Bob Murphy, got a few things mixed up.  Morgan's mistake?  He said that 1964 was his rookie year and he had an RBI single which extended the Phils losing streak to nine.  Joe was wrong, as our buddy Phil gleefully pointed out.  Joe was a rookie in 1963.  Furthermore his then team, the Houston Astros didn't play the Phillies during their famous losing streak in 1964.  Phil took Joe to task for this inaccuracy.  Ok, fair enough, if you're putting yourself forward as an expert on baseball on a national broadcast you should have your facts right.  So Phil's crusade for accuracy in the media is a good thing.

But if you're going to promote yourself as a champion of media accuracy, you damn well better be accurate as well. Phil pulled his own Joe Morgan a few days ago.  In his March 1 column, Phil cherry-picked inaccurate stories from the good old Star Ledger and referenced "taxpayer funded, under-the-table deals on behalf of Rutgers football  and coach Greg Schiano."  Phil, here's a tip old buddy that someone who has 35 years experience in the media should know.  If you're going to accuse somebody of something, do your own research and make sure it's right.  "Taxpayer funded?"  Wrong, the deal was for part of Schiano's salary to be paid by a sports marketing company that sells Rutgers' advertising.   This is "private funding."  Says who?  Says the Star Ledger Phil. the newspaper you cited for "revealing this" in 2008.  When did the Star Ledger call it private funding?  In a December 6, 2006 article by Matthew Futterman of, you guessed it, the Star Ledger.  So if you'd bothered to check your facts Phil, you'd have found out that the Star Ledger in the summer of 2008 "revealed" an "under-the-table" agreement with Schiano that had been made public knowledge and commented on, favorably in fact, by the Star Ledger in 2006.  Phil then takes this great Star Ledger find and uses it to support his statement the Rutgers got "caught being dishonest or flat-out lying."

Phil then continued his regurgitation of Star Ledger fabrications by calling the new Rutgers AD, Tim Pernetti, a "Schiano shill," which is basically what the Star Ledger said in an editorial last week.  Phil has some experience in this area.  Because by parrotting the Star Ledger's factually untrue pablum, he's made himself into a shill for the Star Ledger. 

Now Phil has the reputation as a champion of accuracy in the media.  So a few Rutgers fans e-mailed him about his error.  Here is his response to one of them:

RB - some folks prefer to root for clean programs, others don't care - unless the team loses. McCormick brings in the head coach's head cheerleader to oversee and reform the situation? You support that? Fine. - mushnick (I don't let the Ledger do my thinking, not for the 35 years I've been covering sports. RU never refuted the paper's findings; it admitted to them. So why your problem with the truth? Because it;s good ol' RU?) 

Wow Phil, just wow!  Rather than dealing with the SL's inaccurate reporting upon which he relied, Phil just gets nastier and infers that Rutgers is a dirty program.  Why?  Because "RU never refuted the paper's findings."  Uh Phil, were you aware that then Rutgers AD, Bob Mulcahy wrote to the Star Ledger refuting this and they refused to print the letter?  Yeah, I thought not.  So I guess the theory is if a paper prints lies,  unless you can convince them to print your rebuttal, the lies become the truth?   Interesting take I must admit. 

Phil, if you are a true champion of an accurate media, do your own research on this issue.  I'd be happy to help you out with it for free if you'd like.  Until then I'd avoid the subject if I were you.  Because you don't know what you're talking about.



Posted on: January 18, 2009 12:14 pm
Edited on: January 18, 2009 5:40 pm

I Have A Dream

Don't get excited.  It's nothing as lofty as Dr. King's hope for an end to segregation.  My goals are much more modest.  My dream is a newspaper that's neutral about Rutgers football.  They don't have to pro-Scarlet Knights.  Just neutral.  You know, reporting facts correctly, not having political vendettas, not being a mouthpiece for a disgruntled, out of state Bob Mulcahy wannabee.  That's all.

Sigh.  What has triggered this longing for a newspaper instead of scandal sheet?  Come on, you already know by now.  So let's get into it.  What's the latest piece of pure unadulterated sewage published by the Star Ledger?  Not content on depriving Rutgers University of the best athletic director in its history, the SL has now weighed in on what qualities the new AD should have.  No they didn't come right out and say his initials should be GZ.  But they did pick up two of Georgie's pet peeves and espoused them as their own.  What a surprise.

The Star Ledger in its infinite wisdom has come up with five qualifications for the new AD.  In typical SL fashion, three are reasonable while the other two are garbage.  You see this way the SL can claim that their coverage is "balanced."  Let's start with the three no-brainers. 1. Must be able to raise money. 2.  Must improve the RAC .  3.  Must inspire coaches to obtain Big East supremacy.  Now who could argue with those?  What a thoughtful column.  The SL is supporting Rutgers right?  In fact any seven year-old sports fan could have come up with these.  What's the alternative?  We want someone who can't raise money, definitely won't improve facilities, and tells RU coaches NOT to win?  Didn't take any thought at all to come up with these.  But they do provide the subtle camouflage of a "balanced" piece.

Now let's look at what this column is really about.  Next qualification?  Must reinstitute the six cut sports.  You remember the six sports that Bob Mulcahy recommended cutting and Prez Dick McCormick and the Board of Governors agreed to, then fired Mulcahy for cutting?  Yeah those.  Men's lightweight crew, men's heavyweight crew, men's and women's fencing, men's swimming and diving, and men's tennis.  Now who could be against this?  I'm not.  I think it would be great to have these sports back.  Why did Rutgers lose them  in the first place?  Was Bob Mulcahy accidently struck with an oar in his childhood and hated crew?  No, two reasons.  The State of New Jersey cut $80,400,000 from Rutgers' budget.  And, Title IX says a university must provide equal sports opportunities for men and women.  Under the prior setup, Rutgers spent much more on the men.  So how, O wise Star Ledger do you propose bringing these sports back?  Are you going to make an $80,400,000 donation?  Are you going to get Title IX repealed?  No.  So why bring this up again?  Hey isn't this one of things George Zoffinger had a hissy fit about?  Oh yeah.

Qualification #2.  Just say no to Greg Schiano.  Like he's some kind of illegal drug or something.  What's the supposed problem?  Greg Schiano pushed for the stadium expansion.  What's wrong with this, it's not funded by a single taxpayer dollar?  Oh, the Star Ledger, that bastion of fiscal responsibility that's almost bankrupt is upset that Rutgers is issuing bonds to fund the construction.  And this is Schiano's fault.  Hmm I seem to recall that the Governor of New Jersey promised $30M in loans from NJ, then backed out after the voters voted down his stem-cell research project.  See the gov's thinking was if the people won't support an religious hot potato like a stem-cell research project, they obviously won't support expanding Rutgers' Stadium.  Yeah, I never understood that one either.  So the gov said don't worry, I will personally  raise the $30M myself.  And  then went out and raised $1M.  So since this all happened after Rutgers was halfway through the expansion and had a huge whole in the ground, Rutgers not surprisingly had to find the funds somewhere.  Did they cut any other sports?  Did they take money away from academics?  No, they issued bonds to make up the difference.

Yep, clearly Greg Schiano's fault.

Wait a minute.  Wasn't Georgie Zoffinger the only Board of Governors member who was against the expansion, even when the gov was promising $30M in loans?  Yeah, that's why I thought.  So SL your latest journalistic endeavor is nothing more than a rehash of Georgie's pet peeves. Why don't you just come out and say that Zoffinger should be made AD?  You're not really fooling anyone you know.  Seriously, give George a by line.  Show some journalistic integrity.  Here are the five criteria for Rutgers AD that you really propose:

1.  Must be a supporter/donor/graduate of Penn State.

2.  Must not live in New Jersey in order to avoid paying NJ taxes.

3.  Must be on record saying that Greg Schiano will go to Penn State when Joe Paterno retires.

4.  Must be disgruntled because Mulcahy originally got the AD job over him.

5.  Must have Star Ledger in his back pocket as his personal public relations firm.

Jerry Izenberg where are you?  We miss you dearly.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com