The ACC is worse off without Maryland than the other way around - Washington Post

[huskyrob1]

That's absurd. Rutgers offers the other Big 10 teams an annual conference win.

Oh yeah, and they make the Big 10 conference look great when they lose at home to teams like Eastern Michigan. The whole NYC metro area must have been tuned into that one.

 

[huskyrob1]

You really are dumb. He explained the many qualifications that RU had for admission to the B1G in a few statements above. Where does UConn stand in that check list? I see UConn satisfying 4 out of the six metrics that he described and the most important of all, AAU membership is not one of them. Rutgers knew they were going to the Big Ten before the breakup of the old Big East. It did not come as a surprise to them or anyone else for that matter. Don't count on previous national championships in men's and women's basketball to matter. Clearly, athletic success did not matter at that time. If it matters now, the UConn has a long way to go to improve men's sports. UConn is now a school for women's athletic championships, it seems to me. I don't doubt that even with cable cutting the P5 cartel will survive with or without UConn.

I guess some of the qualifications were having several forceable rapes and at least one killing every year. He made a mistake inviting Rutgers, went for short term monetary gain, and ends up with an embarrassment for the league for years to come, and in thee major market in the Northeast no less. I wouldn't send my daughters to Rutgers if it was free.

Crime At Rutgers Sparks Lawsuit And New Crime Alert Policy | New Brunswick Today

 

[CL82]

Rob, I feel like you were trolling on this. Rutgers presence in the New York DMA allowed the Big 10 to charge a premium in it. Add to that that New Jersey is a state of 9 million people with probably 3 to 4,000,000 outside the New York DMA And you can see the value in adding them. Even in a cable cutting world that brings value. They weren't best choice from a athletics perspective, but they did everything that the Big Ten needed them to do from an economic perspective.

 

[huskyrob1]

Rob, I feel like you were trolling on this. Rutgers presence in the New York DMA allowed the Big 10 to charge a premium in it. Add to that that New Jersey is a state of 9 million people with probably 3 to 4,000,000 outside the New York DMA And you can see the value in adding them. Even in a cable cutting world that brings value. They weren't best choice from a athletics perspective, but they did everything that the Big Ten needed them to do from an economic perspective.

It's short term value, the cable box model is going the way of the Model T. People only want to pay for what they want to watch, not everything offered on the gd cable box. That's old news anyway, everyone knows that the Big 10 added them for short term financial gain. It's been analyzed on this board ad nauseum. What's Rutgers done for the Big 10 lately? I firmly believe that the Big 10's inviting RU was short sighted on many levels. You make it sound like the 9 million men, women and children in New Jersey all wear Rutgers hats and t-shirts.

 

[Adios]

Then it's like adding NIU to get the Chicago market. I get it now. It took me a second.

Are you seriously comparing Rutgers to NIU? You sure you went to Villanova? Not some Villanova fan since Rollie or whenever out in the boondocks?

 

[Adios]

Seton Hall might be a better add than Rutgers. The Hall would have to suit up their soccer team to compete with Rutgers football, but other than that...

The comparison is picking Newark and Rutgers to claim the NYC market. Not quite a home run in my opinion. Like picking a school that is near, but not in, Chicago to claim the Chicago market. A school without much of an established winning athletic program.

You are a lunatic.

Moving on. The Big Ten should add Quinnipiac hockey.

 

[huskyrob1]

Rob, I feel like you were trolling on this. Rutgers presence in the New York DMA allowed the Big 10 to charge a premium in it. Add to that that New Jersey is a state of 9 million people with probably 3 to 4,000,000 outside the New York DMA And you can see the value in adding them. Even in a cable cutting world that brings value. They weren't best choice from a athletics perspective, but they did everything that the Big Ten needed them to do from an economic perspective.

Cable box revenue be damned, the cable companies are losing cable box subscribers left and right. Very soon their only major revenue will be for internet access (even there they have major competition from Frontier) to Hulu, Sling, and Amazon. Roku and FireStick sales are exploding. That being said, check the weekly national Neilson's this past season for UConn football games vs Rutgers football games. The results might surprise you, the disparity is not as bad as you would think. If UConn goes 6-6 next year or 7-5 (one can only hope) and is bowl eligible then anything is possible.

 

[Rappin'Rodney]

I really love these targeted ads. The words "Amazon," "Big Ten," and "Rutgers" all appear on this current page. Now Amazon suggests that I might be interested in purchasing an official NCAA Rutgers Scarlet Knights adult adjustable ball cap, or perhaps a set of Big Ten mini pennants. If this isn't gallows humor, then I don't know what is!

 

[CL82]

It's short term value, the cable box model is going the way of the Model T. People only want to pay for what they want to watch, not everything offered on the gd cable box. That's old news anyway, everyone knows that the Big 10 added them for short term financial gain. It's been analyzed on this board ad nauseum. What's Rutgers done for the Big 10 lately? I firmly believe that the Big 10's inviting RU was short sighted on many levels. You make it sound like the 9 million men, women and children in New Jersey all wear Rutgers hats and t-shirts.

Yeah, I'm not sure that you understand the metric. Rutgers being part of the Big Ten is a money printing machine that is generating millions of dollars for them. End it really doesn't matter what shirt people are wearing. It it's just the number of households.

Even assuming that the cable TV rights bubble burst, and I think this likely, the population of New Jersey can be used to support the big 10 network either as a standalone TV right ad on, or as part of a future Internet subscription process.

Economically, Rutgers was the right add for them.

 

[huskyrob1]

Yeah, I'm not sure that you understand the metric. Rutgers being part of the Big Ten is a money printing machine that is generating millions of dollars for them. End it really doesn't matter what shirt people are wearing. It it's just the number of households.

Even assuming that the cable TV rights bubble burst, and I think this likely, the population of New Jersey can be used to support the big 10 network either as a standalone TV right ad on, or as part of a future Internet subscription process.

Economically, Rutgers was the right add for them.

It's just the number of households that still have cable boxes and still pay $180 a month. That number is shrinking faster than you can say FireStick. Don't you see the flaw in your argument? Less households means less revenue for the cable companies AND the B1G. Someday it will be zero or close to it, people are wising up and realizing they can get by watching anything they want for only $60 a month with an internet connection and even that game can change for the ISP's if cellular technology improves, and it will. At that point the actual number of people who tune in to a Rutgers game (not much) starts to mean something for the B1G and the P5 in general. Also I don't think at that point that anybody will want to subsidize Rutgers football in NJ and make it a TV add on right because their ratings suck.

 

[Rappin'Rodney]

A crime spree masquerading as a community college.. That's funny...

Funny, but true. You know its bad when the forensic audit team has to compile a chronological matrix just to identify which members of the board patently refused to have a friendly chit-chat with the auditors.

Oh, and why did the scope of this forensic audit begin fiscal year 2010 and not before then? It wouldn't have anything to do with the Yum! Center bonds being issued in 2010 would it?

 

[CL82]

It's just the number of households that still have cable boxes and still pay $180 a month. That number is shrinking faster than you can say FireStick. Don't you see the flaw in your argument? Less households means less revenue for the cable companies AND the B1G. Someday it will be zero or close to it, people are wising up and realizing they can get by watching anything they want for only $60 a month with an internet connection and even that game can change for the ISP's if cellular technology improves, and it will. At that point the actual number of people who tune in to a Rutgers game (not much) starts to mean something for the B1G and the P5 in general. Also I don't think at that point that anybody will want to subsidize Rutgers football in NJ and make it a TV add on right because their ratings suck.

Sigh, you're right Rob that Delaney guy doesn't know what he's doing. Frankly I expect B10 schools to start petitioning to join the AAC any day now.

 

[Rufus]

Look at all the recruits the Big Ten is pulling out of New Jersey and MD/DC/NOVA now. It is night and day different from the years prior to the B1G adding UMD and RU. Before, only Penn State had a consistent presence in the region. Now most of the B1G does. Look how well the B1G has performed lately in football. Look at how well several have done in recent recruiting classes. These recruits are helping to improve the football teams of many B1G schools. The recruiting benefit of the additions of UMD and RU can’t be ignored.

 

[Zissou]

You are a lunatic.

Moving on. The Big Ten should add Quinnipiac hockey.

Well, they added Rutgers, so maybe.

 

[Adios]

Well, they added Rutgers, so maybe.

Doesn't it suck that Villanova will never get into any other conference? Even the ACC?

 

[Zissou]

Doesn't it suck that Villanova will never get into any other conference? Even the ACC?

Nope. The Big East is a perfect fit. Not even shopping.

 

[Adios]

Nope. The Big East is a perfect fit. Not even shopping.

Go figure. But Seton Hall is a better add than Rutgers to the Big 10. Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure.

 

[Zissou]

Go figure. But Seton Hall is a better add than Rutgers to the Big 10. Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure.

You brought up the Hall. Like Wichita State, SH doesn't have a football program. I was employing sarcasm to highlight your comment as foolish. I don't really think suiting up the Hall's soccer team to compete with Rutgers football is viable. Rutgers would probably win that contest, most of the time.

 

[Adios]

You brought up the Hall. Like Wichita State, SH doesn't have a football program. I was employing sarcasm to highlight your comment as foolish. I don't really think suiting up the Hall's soccer team to compete with Rutgers football is viable. Rutgers would probably win that contest, most of the time.

Oh, so you are trying to troll me. Didn't work. Because all you did was make yourself look stupid.

 

[Zissou]

Oh, so you are trying to troll me. Didn't work. Because all you did was make yourself look stupid.

What are you, like 12?

 

[Adios]

What are you, like 12?

You really lack the ability to do simple chains of logic. You said you tried to make me look foolish with your idea of sarcasm. That's also known as "trolling". And you sure wasted plenty of time if that was your objective.

And you're telling me to grow up? Also calling me a woman? Misogynist?

 

[buddy]

You are living in a fantasy world. I once was, but after a couple of years of Boneyard I realized that nothing was going to happen positive for UConn for a long time, and likely never. I am beginning to believe the UConn back to the Big East crowd may be correct after all. Firesticks don't matter for UConn. Cable cutting will hurt UConn as the next round of negotiation for the AAC comes before there will be any conference realignment and if you are correct, then the offer will be even less than it is now. Rutgers is a member of the B1G and they will be rolling in dough as long as the B1G exists.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

He made a mistake inviting Rutgers, went for short term monetary gain, and ends up with an embarrassment for the league for years to come, and in thee major market in the Northeast no less.

I won't dispute that the major reason for bringing in Rutgers was a cash grab, but it was definitely more than that. Another long term benefit of Rutgers is accessing the fertile recruiting grounds of NJ. I found an article on SBNation that counts blue chip football recruits (4* and 5*) by state from 2013-2017. NJ came in 12th with 41. I can't find counts for the other sport. But, using a different source (https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2017RES_RecruitMaps-Final-20170613.pdf) here are per capita rankings for men's sport recruiting. I counted the states myself so I could have miscounted a little, but it's close enough.

Baseball - 11th
Basketball - 17th
Football - 11th
Soccer - 8th
Track & Field - 4th
Wrestling - 3rd

I know some of those sports don't matter in the big realignment picture, but it shows the full breadth of the athletes available in NJ. It is more than just $. I didn't see numbers for lacrosse, but I'm pretty sure NJ offers a lot there as well.
For what it's worth, Maryland had a higher per capita for every sport but wrestling, and that includes women's sports.

 

[huskyrob1]

I won't dispute that the major reason for bringing in Rutgers was a cash grab, but it was definitely more than that. Another long term benefit of Rutgers is accessing the fertile recruiting grounds of NJ. I found an article on SBNation that counts blue chip football recruits (4* and 5*) by state from 2013-2017. NJ came in 12th with 41. I can't find counts for the other sport. But, using a different source (https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2017RES_RecruitMaps-Final-20170613.pdf) here are per capita rankings for men's sport recruiting. I counted the states myself so I could have miscounted a little, but it's close enough.

Baseball - 11th
Basketball - 17th
Football - 11th
Soccer - 8th
Track & Field - 4th
Wrestling - 3rd

I know some of those sports don't matter in the big realignment picture, but it shows the full breadth of the athletes available in NJ. It is more than just $. I didn't see numbers for lacrosse, but I'm pretty sure NJ offers a lot there as well.
For what it's worth, Maryland had a higher per capita for every sport but wrestling, and that includes women's sports.

Rutgers has more football decommits than any other P5 school I can think of. Just ask DT Travis Jones, decommited from RU and was one of Randy Edsall's first big pickups. As for other Big Ten schools getting more access to NJ, they've always recruited heavily in New Jersey.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

I didn't mention Rutgers' inability to field quality teams, I just noted that by inviting Rutgers it gives them more access to NJ recruits. I know the B1G has historically recruited there, but it must give them more opportunities when they actually play games home and away with Rutgers. It also gives them more press in the paper, assuming the local papers do what the Courant does with their AAC specific articles.When playing a game at Rutgers, I assume some schools are inviting potential recruits. Maybe not, but it seems like the ideal time to have them see a game.
Having Rutgers in the conference makes NJ officially a part of the B1G footprint.