Rutgers' reputation seems to weather scandal

The Rutgers University basketball scandal that caused a national frenzy two weeks ago appears to be having little long-term effect on the school's reputation, a new poll finds.

The vast majority of respondents agreed with the decision to fire head men's basketball coach Mike Rice, who was seen in video footage manhandling players, using antigay slurs, and throwing basketballs at or toward players. That behavior, 93 percent of respondents said, was not acceptable.

However, a slight majority said the behavior exhibited by Rice is either "very" or "fairly common." The Monmouth University/Asbury Park Press poll did not suggest an explanation for the seeming discrepancy.

"I can't tell you why. I think it's one of those things where stuff happens in the world and you can't control everything, and this is one of the world's dirty little secrets - in this case, college sports," said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. "That was interesting: It's not acceptable, but it happens."

So, while 82 percent of respondents agreed with the decision to fire Rice and 56 percent approved of the resignation of Tim Pernetti, the athletic director who saw the video last fall, 70 percent said the scandal had not affected their view of the school.

"As far as Rutgers is concerned, there's probably not going to be a major impact on its standing among the general public in New Jersey," Murray said, though he noted that the school has specific constituent groups to worry about, including alumni donors and potential athletic recruits. "As far as the public is concerned, this did not really tarnish its opinion all that much."

A slight majority also agreed that president Robert L. Barchi should not resign.

And even though 27 percent of respondents said they now held a less favorable view toward Rutgers, Murray said, the fact that only 10 percent of respondents held an overall unfavorable impression of the university is "an indication this is soft."

The poll surveyed 806 adult New Jersey residents last Thursday through Sunday by phone - both landline and cell. The margins of error ranged from 3.5 percent to 5.3 percent, depending on how many people were polled on specific questions.

Of the respondents, 37 percent said either they or family members had attended the university.

New Jerseyans were split on the role of athletics at Rutgers: 44 percent of the respondents said the school places an appropriate amount of emphasis on athletics, while 31 percent said too much emphasis is placed. Twenty percent said they did not know.

Rutgers announced last fall it would be moving into the Big Ten athletic conference, which Barchi said in an open letter would bring "substantially higher revenues."

"This is critical to our goal of achieving a financially self-sustaining athletic program and providing greater support for all our teams and student athletes," the letter reads.

Some among Rutgers' 13,000 full- and part-time faculty and staff have accused the university of overemphasizing athletics.

Among the general public, the poll results suggest a vague discomfort with the stress on athletics, but no acute anger.

"The sentiment does not seem to be strong. This is watercooler talk rather than, 'Storm the ramparts and take over Rutgers,' " Murray said. "There's this nebulous sense that Rutgers is probably doing what most universities at its level do."