Question for Frank the Tank

[upstater]

Where did the idea that SNY wasn't on in a good part of Connecticut prior to the UConn deals come from? The populated parts of the state Hartford and Fairfield County had SNY. The additions were north, east and southeast of Hartford.

No one claimed it wasn't on in a good part of Connecticut.

I claimed they jacked up their carriage fees once adding UConn. They did. They are now well over what they used to be in Connecticut. They are up 85 cents per sub.

Someone else claimed that SNY wasn't on basic cable prior to getting UConn. I can't speak for the rest of conn., but they are on AT&T basic cable and were not on it as of a few years ago. So, add basic cable x 2.50, new subscribers on new systems x 2.50, all previous subscribers x. 85, and you get the increased figure that corresponds to adding UConn.

Those are two pretty powerful points. In fact, the BTN makes those same kinds of arguments when it looks at new markets. Can it raise the carriage fee price? Can it get on basic cable so that every subscriber pays that price?

This is huge.

 

[CL82]

With all due respect, who did the Big Ten pick as #12 again? NEBRASKA. Small-market, low population growth, NEBRASKA. Why Nebraska? Football history, unparalleled tradition and arguably the most rabid and loyal fan base in college sports. The Big Ten would have likely stayed at 12 if the Pac-12 hadn't backed out of their alliance relationship (which Jim Delany believed would have given the conference the equivalent inventory that would have come with expanding on its own). Following that, when Notre Dame headed to the ACC as a non-football member, that's when the Big Ten was spurred to take action again. In fact, I think history and tradition are much bigger deals to the Big Ten than any other conference, including the ACC. Yes, the Big Ten wants markets, but it wants those blue blood credentials coming along with it. Tradition is inextricably part of the Big Ten's brand (and yes, Rutgers has "tradition" partly because its football program has been around forever) more than even the SEC. Look at how these guys are wedded to the Rose Bowl. Look at how these guys won't still won't play November night games even though TV partners would pay a ton for them. Look at how these guys still start their conference schedule after everyone else. Look at how Ohio State is just getting permanent lights installed in its stadium this year and rival Michigan still doesn't have them. (When they have night games, ABC/ESPN pays to truck in temporary lighting to cover stadiums with over 100,000 seats.)

Sure, potential matters (as evidenced by Rutgers chosen by the Big Ten), but there's some echo chamber thinking going on here if anyone thinks that's going to be enough if it comes down to competing with a football superpower like Oklahoma or an AAU member with the historical bloodlines of Kansas. Certainly, if UConn starts winning CFP bowl games and shows that its football program can draw in NYC viewers, then that can change things. Things aren't static, but tradition and old money *definitely* matter to the Big Ten. That's one of the most powerful parts of the Big Ten's brand.

When you have a chance to pick up a Nebraska, of course you do it. That was a pretty easy move to understand but how many other similar properties are out there for the taking? Rutgers is far more instructive of B1G reasoning.

No one not wearing scarlet was talking about Rutgers' tradition before the B1G dropped a bombshell by inviting them. No doubt the reason for that is that Rutgers' tradition was one of epic futility (with all due respect to our Scarlet Knight fans who drop by.) Yet now, you felt compelled to discuss RU's tradition as justification for its acquisition by the B1G. That's because you were fitting that square peg into the round hole of tradition driving the bus. RU was a worthwhile property because of potential to aid in the B1G's plans 10-20 years out. That's the level of analysis that is taking place. UConn is worthwhile looking at in that time frame. Its status as a land grant institution, the premier public institution in the state, makes it a decent potential fit for the B1G.

As you so aptly pointed out, the B1G is dripping with tradition. They don't need to buy it via conference offers. They need teams to bring eyeballs and cable access dollars. UConn is positioned nicely to bring that. The fact that it is likely to bring unparalleled athletic success in the sports like men's basketball in which the B1G is not dominant is a bonus.

 

[woomba]

Look at how Ohio State is just getting permanent lights installed in its stadium this year and rival Michigan still doesn't have them. (When they have night games, ABC/ESPN pays to truck in temporary lighting to cover stadiums with over 100,000 seats.)

Just a small correction but Michigan added permanent lightning in 2011 - the Under The Lights game in 2011 against ND was the first (and I think only time) it was used.

 

[upstater]

When you have a chance to pick up a Nebraska, of course you do it. That was a pretty easy move to understand but how many other similar properties are out there for the taking? Rutgers is far more instructive of B1G reasoning.

No one not wearing scarlet was talking about Rutgers' tradition before the B1G dropped a bombshell by inviting them. No doubt the reason for that is that Rutgers' tradition was one epic futility (with all due respect to our Scarlet Knight fans who drop by.) Yet now, you felt compelled to discuss RU's tradition as justification for its acquisition by the B1G. That's because you were fitting that square peg into the round hole of tradition driving the bus. RU was a worthwhile property because of potential to aid in the B1G's plans 10-20 years out. That's the level of analysis that is taking place. UConn is worthwhile looking at in that time frame. Its status as a land grant institution, the premier public institution in the state, makes it a decent potential fit for the B1G.

As you so aptly pointed out, the B1G is dripping with tradition. They don't need to buy it via conference offers. They need teams to bring eyeballs and cable access dollars. UConn is positioned nicely to bring that. The fact that it is likely to bring unparalleled athletic success in the sports like men's basketball that the B1G is not dominant is a bonus.

I think you are on target in this response. In fact, the sports economics specialist Andrew Zimbalist once said that Rutgers' losing tradition has rubbed off on the reputation of the school, with high school kids avoiding it despite its excellent academics. This was a discussion that involved marketing the school through sports. Zimbalist was point out that it works positively in 10% of the cases (such as BC or ND) but that in most cases it doesn't work, and that in some cases (Rutgers) the tradition is a detriment to the school's reputation.

 

[B1GALUM]

The one thing about OU is that they were never individually ever rebuffed. What the Pac-12 rejected was OU *and* Oklahoma State going together, which was effectively mandated by that state's powers-that-be. The Pac-12 and probably both the Big Ten and SEC would take an Oklahoma/Kansas combo pretty easily. The "little brother" schools that have political power, though, can be bigger holdups than any grant of rights agreements or academic requirements. That has always been one of my big caveats to a further Western expansion of the Big Ten - while I think the league very much likes OU and KU alone, they don't want anything to do with Oklahoma State and Kansas State (and the only place that seems to allow for the little brothers is the Big 12).

I think this is an absolutely vital issue. If OU (football brand) and KU (basketball brand and AAU member) were available to the B1G without OSU and KSU being an issue, then I can certainly see these two teams being the next in B1G expansion. However, this is an issue that is not going away. As you said 'The "little brother" schools that have political power, though, can be bigger holdups than any grant of rights agreements or academic requirements.' A home for OSU and KSU has to be found if OU and KU go B1G. Will the SEC or Pac12 take OSU and KSU so OU and KU can go B1G? I doubt it. So will OU and KU really ever be an option for the B1G?

 

[Dooley]

When you have a chance to pick up a Nebraska, of course you do it. That was a pretty easy move to understand but how many other similar properties are out there for the taking? Rutgers is far more instructive of B1G reasoning.

No one not wearing scarlet was talking about Rutgers' tradition before the B1G dropped a bombshell by inviting them. No doubt the reason for that is that Rutgers' tradition was one epic futility (with all due respect to our Scarlet Knight fans who drop by.) Yet now, you felt compelled to discuss RU's tradition as justification for its acquisition by the B1G. That's because you were fitting that square peg into the round hole of tradition driving the bus. RU was a worthwhile property because of potential to aid in the B1G's plans 10-20 years out. That's the level of analysis that is taking place. UConn is worthwhile looking at in that time frame. Its status as a land grant institution, the premier public institution in the state, makes it a decent potential fit for the B1G.

As you so aptly pointed out, the B1G is dripping with tradition. They don't need to buy it via conference offers. They need teams to bring eyeballs and cable access dollars. UConn is positioned nicely to bring that. The fact that it is likely to bring unparalleled athletic success in the sports like men's basketball that the B1G is not dominant is a bonus.

Spot on, CL82. Frank, you've come to the wrong place if you are trying to convince people that Rutgers has any football tradition worthy of B1G consideration. A tradition of losing? Sure. But nobody can convince me that Rutgers' football tradition is so much better than UConn's. Longer? Yes. Better? Absolutely not. Earlier in this thread or another, there was debate as to what UConn's best achievement was: losing in the Fiesta, beating South Carolina or beating Notre Dame? Now, quick. Please tell me what Rutgers' best on-field achievement is. If you can give me ONE bowl game bigger than UConn's Fiesta, I'd be impressed (and also accuse you of being stubborn not to admit you're wrong). 8 bowl games in 140 years of football. 8. 7 of them are from 2005-present (does that timeline look familiar?). And none of them are bigger than UConn's Fiesta. Please spare me the "it was a down year" in the Big East talk, too. It was a down year in the Big East for all teams that year, including the beloved, "tradition-rich" Rutgers. But guess who stepped up and won the conference when it had the chance? "No-tradition" UConn. Guess who choked away a double digit second half lead on their home turf last season to give the "tradition-rich" program its FIRST EVER BCS appearance?

I understand the B1G grabbing RU from a media market perspective. Heck, I can understand the argument claiming that Rutgers is a good growth potential play. But, sorry Frank, nobody will EVER convince me that Rutgers is a program steeped in the type of tradition that the B1G covets. UConn would be an excellent addition to the B1G for the same reasons Rutgers was: media market, growth potential, strong academics, and loyal fanbase. But UConn has something Rutgers doesn't: a much longer history of conference and national championships in other sports. THAT is what makes tradition.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

The ACC strategic needs are different than the Big Ten's strategic needs. Louisville was chosen for their likelihood as a Big12 target, for recent football success, and for political reasons (FSU and Clemson weren't crazy about adding a BB centric school). These reasons have nothing to do with the selection criteria for the Big Ten.

That suggestion is good advice but its also a two way street
You do the same thing you accuse UConn fans of doing.
Lumping Oklahoma and Kansas together in your football centric universe is plain dishonest or at the least hyperbole.
Only an idiot would compare UConn football to Oklahoma football.
But Kansas football please.
Given our market with zero football history and the fact your looking to grow your product. You tell me were you would invest. If you tell me Kansas I'm looking for a new advisor.

Your perception of Kansas is based solely on the conference they play in. A truer picture of UConn potential is a what-if scenerio.
What if UConn were in a Big 5. What-if they had some success in that conferrnce. Any other look at this is a false dicodomy.
UConn blows Kansas out of the water and maybe in time Oklahoma.
It has a loyal base and resides in an area of little competetion
and huge population.
Unforunately I have lost faith in the decision makers and the likelyhood of any Ct success on the small football stage they have been relagated to will be meaningless
You no that
That why the direction the AAC takes is critical
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[B1GALUM]

Of course, UT and UNC are two of the toughest nuts to crack since they love their fiefdoms.

I understand that UT and/or UNC to the B1G are the prizes in CR. However ...

How happy are Nebraska and Maryland going to be about former conference mates and soon to be former conference mates, that they despise, being invited to the B1G?

How happy are UT and UNC going to be about leaving their current conferences (fiefdoms), in which they are the premier school, to join the B1G?

UT and UNC do not want to be in the B1G.

Again, I understand that UT and/or UNC to the B1G are the prizes in CR. However ...

My opinion as a B1G alum, which yes I know means nothing, is that I would rather have a university, such as UConn, that desires an invitation to the B1G and will be an advocate for the B1G rather than universities and alumni being dragged kicking and screaming from their feifdoms into the B1G and casting their eye wistfully back to a different time and conference.

B1G Harder and Think B1G UConn.

 

[frankthetank]

Spot on, CL82. Frank, you've come to the wrong place if you are trying to convince people that Rutgers has any football tradition worthy of B1G consideration. A tradition of losing? Sure. But nobody can convince me that Rutgers' football tradition is so much better than UConn's. Longer? Yes. Better? Absolutely not. Earlier in this thread or another, there was debate as to what UConn's best achievement was: losing in the Fiesta, beating South Carolina or beating Notre Dame? Now, quick. Please tell me what Rutgers' best on-field achievement is. If you can give me ONE bowl game bigger than UConn's Fiesta, I'd be impressed (and also accuse you of being stubborn not to admit you're wrong). 8 bowl games in 140 years of football. 8. 7 of them are from 2005-present. And none of them are bigger than UConn's Fiesta. Please spare me the "it was a down year" in the Big East talk, too. It was a down year in the Big East for all teams that year, including the beloved, "tradition-rich" Rutgers. But guess who stepped up and won the conference when it had the chance? "No-tradition" UConn. Guess who choked away a double digit second half lead on their home turf last season to give the "tradition-rich" program its FIRST EVER BCS appearance?

I understand the B1G grabbing RU from a media market perspective. Heck, I can understand the argument claiming that Rutgers is a good growth potential play. But, sorry Frank, nobody will EVER convince me that Rutgers is a program steeped in the type of tradition that the B1G covets. UConn would be an excellent addition to the B1G for the same reasons Rutgers was: media market, growth potential, strong academics, and loyal fanbase. But UConn has something Rutgers doesn't: a much longer history of conference and national championships in other sports. THAT is what makes tradition.

Rutgers has a horrible history. I wouldn't dispute that at all. If you've read my stuff, I have quite a bit of skepticism of Rutgers working out for the Big Ten. I'm just looking at how the Big Ten has acted and continued to act. The fact that Rutgers has a long history (despite it being Cubs-like in terms of success) actually does matter. It's obviously not as compelling as Nebraska's history or even Maryland's history, but the whole "We're the birthplace of college football" line of branding (whether it's historically accurate or not) actually does have an impact on the perception that there's tradition there. It was smart of Rutgers to pump that claim up in recent years - it wasn't a determining factor for the Big Ten, but that single branding line made sure that no one thought of Rutgers as being "noveau riche". Whether it was fair or not, Rutgers got a pass because it's (a) an AAU member and (b) directly located in the NYC market. Expecting that UConn is going to get the same type of pass is faulty.

I've said it before here: the fact that UConn has only been playing Division I-A football for about a decade is going to be a massive mark against it (even more so than not being an AAU member in terms of academics). All of those years in the Yankee Conference don't count in the eyes of the power conferences - from their vantage point, UConn has as much football history as USF. Now, it might *feel* like UConn has been around a bit longer to some people since it was an original Big East member for basketball, but general football perception is that it's noveau riche. I'm sure you'll push back against that characterization, but look at what happened when the ACC chose Louisville based on such "football perception". You can disagree with it and I'm not saying that it's fair at all considering UConn's success in basketball, but that's the predominant view nationally. How UConn is perceived in *football* is absolutely critical - what happens in men's and women's basketball is nice (and I'm personally more of a hoops fan), yet that's ultimately given little weight if you're competing against schools with stronger football credentials.

 

[frankthetank]

Once again, though, just because the Big Ten isn't necessarily going to go after UConn doesn't mean that the Big 12 wouldn't. You're obviously not competing for spots with Oklahoma or Kansas because they're already in the Big 12. There's a chance with the Big 12, but UConn is going to need to sell out football stadiums and draw football TV ratings to make that happen. UConn also needs to lobby that league like crazy - there's going to be a built-in geographic bias that has to be overcome, so they need to be comforted that it's not much more of stretch than WVU.

 

[CL82]

Rutgers has a horrible history. I wouldn't dispute that at all. If you've read my stuff, I have quite a bit of skepticism of Rutgers working out for the Big Ten. I'm just looking at how the Big Ten has acted and continued to act. The fact that Rutgers has a long history (despite it being Cubs-like in terms of success) actually does matter. It's obviously not as compelling as Nebraska's history or even Maryland's history, but the whole "We're the birthplace of college football" line of branding (whether it's historically accurate or not) actually does have an impact on the perception that there's tradition there. It was smart of Rutgers to pump that claim up in recent years - it wasn't a determining factor for the Big Ten, but that single branding line made sure that no one thought of Rutgers as being "noveau riche". Whether it was fair or not, Rutgers got a pass because it's (a) an AAU member and (b) directly located in the NYC market. Expecting that UConn is going to get the same type of pass is faulty.

I've said it before here: the fact that UConn has only been playing Division I-A football for about a decade is going to be a massive mark against it (even more so than not being an AAU member in terms of academics). All of those years in the Yankee Conference don't count in the eyes of the power conferences - from their vantage point, UConn has as much football history as USF. Now, it might *feel* like UConn has been around a bit longer to some people since it was an original Big East member for basketball, but general football perception is that it's noveau riche. I'm sure you'll push back against that characterization, but look at what happened when the ACC chose Louisville based on such "football perception". You can disagree with it and I'm not saying that it's fair at all considering UConn's success in basketball, but that's the predominant view nationally. How UConn is perceived in *football* is absolutely critical - what happens in men's and women's basketball is nice (and I'm personally more of a hoops fan), yet that's ultimately given little weight if you're competing against schools with stronger football credentials.

Frank I think your argument is wiggling around a bit a to get traction. No one here is saying UConn is bastion of gridiron tradition, but we are questioning your assertion that RU's "tradition" played a material role in obtaining a B1G invite. I've noticed that you tend to assign indefensible views to UConn fans, repudiate them, then state that you are sure that we will disagree. I will respectfully suggest that it really doesn't advance the discussion for you, as a visitor, to come and tell us what we think. I suspect that we know our thoughts far better than you do.

You also consistently ignore that Connecticut is also part of the NYC DMA just like North Jersey is. I will submit that through it is a convenient shorthand, RU wasn't invited for geography. It was invited for demographics. The density of the population in North Jersey drives the NYC DMA number for the periodically successful Rutgers team. It's not proximately so much as volume. If you look at the prizes that are available now, Connecticut stands out, particularly when you add the Fairfield county part of the NYC DMA to the Hartford/New Haven DMA. Now that's not the 'historic way' of viewing markets, which was based on the range of broadcast towers, but it is the most useful predictor of households that can be delivered. As such, I'm confident that Delaney and his colleagues are well aware of these numbers.

 

[whaler11]

No one claimed it wasn't on in a good part of Connecticut.

I claimed they jacked up their carriage fees once adding UConn. They did. They are now well over what they used to be in Connecticut. They are up 85 cents per sub.

Someone else claimed that SNY wasn't on basic cable prior to getting UConn. I can't speak for the rest of conn., but they are on AT&T basic cable and were not on it as of a few years ago. So, add basic cable x 2.50, new subscribers on new systems x 2.50, all previous subscribers x. 85, and you get the increased figure that corresponds to adding UConn.

Those are two pretty powerful points. In fact, the BTN makes those same kinds of arguments when it looks at new markets. Can it raise the carriage fee price? Can it get on basic cable so that every subscriber pays that price?

This is huge.

That doesn't add up to 28 million dollars of incremental revenue as has been suggested.

Obviously the BTN could get the dollar here. It's only a shrinking million TV sets though, not the millions they think they capture with NYC and Baltimore.

 

[upstater]

That doesn't add up to 28 million dollars of incremental revenue as has been suggested.

Obviously the BTN could get the dollar here. It's only a shrinking million TV sets though, not the millions they think they capture with NYC and Baltimore.

I didn't write that 28m figure. I took into account production costs, profits, paying off ESPN and others for syndication, IMG, the Mets, etc. The true value is a lot less than the total that SNY collects. In fact, that is also true of all college sports TV contracts, including BTN.

I also ranked Maryland and Rutgers as the top two markets in play.

 

[The Viking]

Frank, you yourself have said you don't think a GOR conference is going to go after a GOR school because of the dominoes that may crumble quickly.
So I ask you this. Lets say you were tipped off tomorrow that the B1G is going to expand in the next few years to fit the new TV deal and/or Delany's final year of his most recent extension...but you weren't told who was going to be added...

What would the five most likely schools be? Are there even that many?

 

[itgoeslike]

That suggestion is good advice but its also a two way street
You do the same thing you accuse UConn fans of doing.
Lumping Oklahoma and Kansas together in your football centric universe is plain dishonest or at the least hyperbole.
Only an idiot would compare UConn football to Oklahoma football.
But Kansas football please.
Given our market with zero football history and the fact your looking to grow your product. You tell me were you would invest. If you tell me Kansas I'm looking for a new advisor.

Your perception of Kansas is based solely on the conference they play in. A truer picture of UConn potential is a what-if scenerio.
What if UConn were in a Big 5. What-if they had some success in that conferrnce. Any other look at this is a false dicodomy.
UConn blows Kansas out of the water and maybe in time Oklahoma.
It has a loyal base and resides in an area of little competetion
and huge population.
Unforunately I have lost faith in the decision makers and the likelyhood of any Ct success on the small football stage they have been relagated to will be meaningless
You no that
That why the direction the AAC takes is critical
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Did I get someone else's mail on this?

 

[frankthetank]

Frank, you yourself have said you don't think a GOR conference is going to go after a GOR school because of the dominoes that may crumble quickly.
So I ask you this. Lets say you were tipped off tomorrow that the B1G is going to expand in the next few years to fit the new TV deal and/or Delany's final year of his most recent extension...but you weren't told who was going to be added...

What would the five most likely schools be? Are there even that many?

Are you saying that we suspend the belief that GORs would prevent moves in this situation?

IMHO, it would be some combo of Kansas, Virginia and/or Georgia Tech with Oklahoma as a possibility. Florida State and/or Miami could be thrown in as a wild card, too (not out of the realm with GT added in). The Big Ten would *want* UNC to be in that group, but I don't think they're budging.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Did I get someone else's mail on this?

Sorry my new glasses are on order


Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[junglehusky]

I know folks are bummed hearing that UConn potentially has to compete with the likes of Kansas, Oklahoma, or some of the ACC schools. Look at it this way - since those potential B1G candidates have GOR and/or little brother issues to deal with, that likely buys us some time to get in fighting shape. Nothing's guaranteed, and as Frank points out we still have to out-perform Cincinnatti and maybe USF and some of the new AAC schools. We can definitely do that academically, whether we can do that on the football field, well... it might take a few years but we can.

 

[specialisthusky]

I know folks are bummed hearing that UConn potentially has to compete with the likes of Kansas, Oklahoma, or some of the ACC schools. Look at it this way - since those potential B1G candidates have GOR and/or little brother issues to deal with, that likely buys us some time to get in fighting shape. Nothing's guaranteed, and as Frank points out we still have to out-perform Cincinnatti and maybe USF and some of the new AAC schools. We can definitely do that academically, whether we can do that on the football field, well... it might take a few years but we can.

another way to look at is chaos is our friend. The more shuffling is the better in my opinion. Our luck has to change at some point.

 

[J187Money]

We've won three national titles in men hoops in the last 14 years. What games did those change exactly?

Without those we aren't even on this board being pissed off about anything.

 

[Dooley]

Rutgers has a horrible history. I wouldn't dispute that at all. If you've read my stuff, I have quite a bit of skepticism of Rutgers working out for the Big Ten. I'm just looking at how the Big Ten has acted and continued to act. The fact that Rutgers has a long history (despite it being Cubs-like in terms of success) actually does matter. It's obviously not as compelling as Nebraska's history or even Maryland's history, but the whole "We're the birthplace of college football" line of branding (whether it's historically accurate or not) actually does have an impact on the perception that there's tradition there. It was smart of Rutgers to pump that claim up in recent years - it wasn't a determining factor for the Big Ten, but that single branding line made sure that no one thought of Rutgers as being "noveau riche". Whether it was fair or not, Rutgers got a pass because it's (a) an AAU member and (b) directly located in the NYC market. Expecting that UConn is going to get the same type of pass is faulty.

I've said it before here: the fact that UConn has only been playing Division I-A football for about a decade is going to be a massive mark against it (even more so than not being an AAU member in terms of academics). All of those years in the Yankee Conference don't count in the eyes of the power conferences - from their vantage point, UConn has as much football history as USF. Now, it might *feel* like UConn has been around a bit longer to some people since it was an original Big East member for basketball, but general football perception is that it's noveau riche. I'm sure you'll push back against that characterization, but look at what happened when the ACC chose Louisville based on such "football perception". You can disagree with it and I'm not saying that it's fair at all considering UConn's success in basketball, but that's the predominant view nationally. How UConn is perceived in *football* is absolutely critical - what happens in men's and women's basketball is nice (and I'm personally more of a hoops fan), yet that's ultimately given little weight if you're competing against schools with stronger football credentials.

I get what you're saying. It just makes me want to puke that a gimmicky slogan, whether true or not, can be seen as a catalyst for acceptance into a power conference. "The Birthplace of College Football" and "New York's College Team/University/umm...we're not sure" = power conference invite. If I'm UConn, my slogan would be "we don't suck like Rutgers and Syracuse". That's got to get us into the Big 12 or SEC, right?

All kidding aside, I agree with your premise: UConn needs to sell tickets, make money and, most importantly, win.

 

[woomba]

Without those we aren't even on this board being pissed off about anything.

You know, if Calhoun was a few years younger and still around & you didn't have the whole APR thing happen last year you probably would've been a shoe-in for the ACC spot that Louisville took. Beyond just winning UConn also needs to hold on to the talent that got them to the top...at least until after the musical chairs end.

 

[NickyNewark]

@frankthetank.. RUFB?Horrible?At least stay consistent but puleeze,Don't bring RU down to cubby's status....perception in the East is their sub 500 historically or worse (Cubs) and RU football if your as smart as your perceived has been competitive historically.525% in a VERY LONG history w/a low mark in the Shea era late 90's early 00's that drag's down our winning pct by a half point!!Remember we were beating Tenn and playing UF to a draw on the road when we were 1AA in the late 70's and 80's!!I remember RU being undefeated and ranked as a youth under Frank Burn's and Jopa saying the only other job he would consider was RU while sending us Dick Anderson in the 80's*who shocked PSU in "88"* cause his wife was happy in the Happy Valley that evaporated on them like "Brigadoon" recently!Every chance he had he pushed for RU to the B1G! Same with Minny's successful ex HC Glen Mason...RU has been on the B1G radar for what seems like forever as most RU fan's relate more with the B1G than the ACC!Heck RU had golden era's in football and hoop's in the 70's! Not so long ago to us boomer's and REMEMBER it only take's a couple of guy's to turn a hoop's program around unlike football!!

 

[upstater]

You know, if Calhoun was a few years younger and still around & you didn't have the whole APR thing happen last year you probably would've been a shoe-in for the ACC spot that Louisville took. Beyond just winning UConn also needs to hold on to the talent that got them to the top...at least until after the musical chairs end.

Most presidents and ADs know very well what a joke the APR is, and I doubt it was mentioned in the ACC given UNCs troubles. But surely you realize that Louisville football also was on probation and had scholarships docked for APR. They had fallen under the score the year before and were serving the addt'l year of probation last year under the old punishment rules. I think you're right about Calhoun leaving though.

 

[woomba]

Man - you have a lot of anger for a fan of a team that punched their golden ticket.

Looking at your team's all-time record it doesn't look all that flattering if you look at its entire body of work. That said, Rutgers has been on doing much better this past decade and I think the team can be a decent mid-tier Big Ten team eventually.

 

[woomba]

Most presidents and ADs know very well what a joke the APR is, and I doubt it was mentioned in the ACC given UNCs troubles. But surely you realize that Louisville football also was on probation and had scholarships docked for APR. They had fallen under the score the year before and were serving the addt'l year of probation last year under the old punishment rules. I think you're right about Calhoun leaving though.

APR is a joke but honestly the bar for avoiding post season ban (a level two/three violation) isn't really all that high. I don't really know the specifics of what happened at UConn but it's a bit of a black eye. Louisvile's probation is also an issue, but less severe than UConn's since the fact that they were eligible for the post-season means that they met the 4-year 900/2-year 930 hurdle.

 

[whaler11]

@nickynewark ifyouaregoingtotrollusbringbettergame

 

[NickyNewark]

Man - you have a lot of anger for a fan of a team that punched their golden ticket.

Looking at your team's all-time record it doesn't look all that flattering if you look at its entire body of work. That said, Rutgers has been on doing much better this past decade and I think the team can be a decent mid-tier Big Ten team eventually.

@Is angry the way I come across?Well maybe on a subliminal level cause I'm just tired of the way some seem to disrespect my home state and state U though I'm not an alumnus I still hold Rutgers in high regard!Maybe it's just my generation?Thank's for making me aware of it!!Some thing's just don't project as well as other's over the internet!Especially sarcasm seem's to go over people's head's tho in this case no sarcasm intended!I really wish the best for you guy's and I'm confident your ticket is next!!

 

[upstater]

APR is a joke but honestly the bar for avoiding post season ban (a level two/three violation) isn't really all that high. I don't really know the specifics of what happened at UConn but it's a bit of a black eye. Louisvile's probation is also an issue, but less severe than UConn's since the fact that they were eligible for the post-season means that they met the 4-year 900/2-year 930 hurdle.

No, Louisville fell afoul the year before. They were punished for it with a two year docking of scholarships. The punishments were changed the year after (retroactively). So, the offense was the same for both UConn and Louisville (and many others including BCS schools). Only UConn received the ban however because the punishments were changed retroactively for the year in which UConn fell afoul. The problem with the APR is that it's anti-academic and encourages schools to track bball players especially into set courses, because the APR has little to do with grades, nothing to do with advancing in your major or with graduating.

 

[NickyNewark]

@Is angry the way I come across?Well maybe on a subliminal level cause I'm just tired of the way some seem to disrespect my home state and state U though I'm not an alumnus I still hold Rutgers in high regard!Maybe it's just my generation?Thank's for making me aware of it!!Some thing's just don't project as well as other's over the internet!Especially sarcasm seem's to go over people's head's tho in this case no sarcasm intended!I really wish the best for you guy's and I'm confident your ticket is next!!

@Did you read the *disclaimer? It only reflect's the team's when they were considered MAJOR? D1 not D1AA so I stopped right there and is Stassen credible?Is he the only source you found?Every lifetime stat I found the record was about .525% lifetime but that link was a new one..not saying its wrong..

@nickynewark ifyouaregoingtotrollusbringbettergame

@ WHAT?IF you think I'm trolling please ignore sir! Thank you..btw, have you ever heard of putting a period at the end of a sentence?