Update: More current reporting shares that Pat Hobbs referenced his cardiac health as he shared this news with his staff. Best wishes, of course, to him and his family.
This might be nothing. It also might be something, but something personal and maybe sad. It also might be something else. It could be any number of things. Whatever thing or lack thereof it is…
Rutgers’s athletic director reportedly resigned today.
It’s odd timing for an athletic director resignation. The athletic year just started. At Rutgers, it’s especially strange timing, because while Pat Hobbs’s overall tenure was far from magnificent, he did ultimately bring Greg Schiano back, which has gone rather well in terms of on-field results, and I’m not sure Rutgers has ever enjoyed better recruiting in the big-money sports than they’re experiencing right now. Ace Bailey and Dylan Harper are Scarlet Knights. Schiano’s 2025 class might end up in the top 25. This was supposed to be the best moment in Hobbs’s time at Rutgers. Now, he’s out.
It’s the recruiting thing which makes us most interested, especially given Hobbs’s reported opposition to hiring Schiano back in 2020. Is this the result of discord between Hobbs and the seemingly newly unlocked Rutgers boosters?
Rutgers is an unusual character in the college sports landscape. It’s in the Big Ten solely because of its cable media market, and it’s unlikely it would receive a full power conference revenue share if college sports started again from scratch. Still, it’s the state school in a populous state, and its proximity to New York City must count for something, especially in basketball. The case for Rutgers is stronger in a lot of ways than the case for Mississippi State. And yet…it’s Rutgers.
At a very high level, there are two parts to running a strong athletic department. The first one exists in all sports, and it’s general competence: Good coaches, good administrators, clean facilities, etc. This is the stuff schools like Texas and Stanford do so well, leading to massive success in medium-money and low-money sports. The second one only exists in big-money sports, and it’s the booster game: Maintaining alignment while raising large sums of money to unleash on, most notably, the recruiting market. Stanford struggles at this second one. Notre Dame seems to struggle at it. Texas struggles at the alignment piece. Alabama excelled in this arena under Nick Saban, but was that because of Alabama or because of Nick Saban?
The first one is essential, but the two are inexorably intertwined, with success in one often smoothing things out in the other or pulling the other along for the ride.
What we seemed to be seeing at Rutgers was an infusion of potency in that second arena. There was a lot more money being spent on Rutgers athletics than had previously been the case. Did that ultimately swing around and tackle Hobbs? Did the boosters run him out? Or are we fundamentally misreading this situation, one where almost nothing is currently known?
Hopefully, everybody is ok and this is nothing more serious than little-p politics or a guy getting sick of his job. We’re giving it attention, though, because there’s an angle where this could be a breakthrough for Rutgers. If Hobbs and the boosters weren’t aligned, as seemed to be the case during the Schiano hiring campaign, this gives those boosters a chance to find an athletic director with whom they are aligned. Crucially, this can go a few different ways, with which way it goes depending a lot on how competent Hobbs’s replacement turns out to be. It doesn’t help athletic ecosystems to be aligned if the people receiving the resources aren’t capable of maximizing their value. Schools shouldn’t want boosters running their athletic departments. They should want the athletic director who can do the most with their boosters.
Miscellany
- ESPN reported on some ideas Major League Baseball’s throwing around to keep starting pitchers in the game for longer. The focus of the report is on a six-inning minimum, and I’m surprised it’s getting so much attention, because I’d think that would be terribly unlikely to pass. Among the others, some seem diametrically opposed, such as the proposal for a five-batter minimum for relievers and the other proposal for removing the DH once a starting pitcher comes out of the game. I don’t know what needs MLBPA approval and what doesn’t, but the gist of the situation is that MLB has correctly identified the issue (too many injuries, decreased starting pitcher importance) and is looking at solutions. Some, especially the DH removal one, seem more plausible than others.
- The College Football Playoff announced yesterday that its committee won’t use conference titles as a criterion, attributing the change to the automatic bid earned by some conference champions. I mean…sure. But that’s not really how it works? Basically, “conference championship” is off the explicit list of things to consider when two teams are really, really close in the committee’s eyes. That list isn’t a bible, though. It’s a vague guide for how to make the harder decisions. If two teams have similar résumés and the committee’s deciding between them for 8th and 9th, the conference title will still be on the résumé of whoever has it.
- The A’s still aren’t completely locked into their Las Vegas move, but they inched closer again yesterday. If I’m understanding this AP report correctly, the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority is the last group that needs to sign off on it, and after the latest meeting on the topic, their CEO indicated approval should be secured on December 5th. No current red flags there. But there’s time!
