So you're saying it's full of Goth kids.
Either that, or Aes Sedai.
HA HA HA! I AM A GENIUS YOU! PROBABLY DON'T GET IT
Let me provide some excessively late opinion on the recent flurry of Big Ten expansion articles. Article one indicates that a very expensive consultant has given the thing a thumbs-up with five schools mentioned as primary targets:
A source inside the league told the Tribune that the report, prepared by the Chicago-based investment firm William Blair & Company, analyzed whether five different schools would add enough revenue to justify expanding the league beyond 11 teams.
"The point was: We can all get richer if we bring in the right team or teams," the source said.
The five analyzed were Missouri, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Rutgers. The source, though, called those five "the obvious suspects" and cautioned that other universities could earn consideration.
Someone got paid for this. I bet they yoinked the Grid of Judgment.
Anyway, that article comes with a big photo of the Rutgers mascot. Wha? Well, Teddy Greenstein—who I am suspicious of in this matter since he's the guy throwing those blind quotes about a 14 or 16 team Big Ten around—then claims Rutgers as the most likely school according to "consensus among Big Ten sources, officials from other conferences, and TV executives." I've also gotten some emails from a guy plugged into what's going on at Rutgers who says there have already been serious talks.
I don't get it. You look at this list of criteria proposed by Greenstein and try to find a way in which Rutgers makes the most sense:
Literally the only thing Rutgers brings to the table is the New Jersey/New York media market, and it's unclear how much pull RU actually has there. The Big Ten had to fight tooth and nail to get the BTN on in places where the college kids are the biggest game in town. Rutgers is at best the tenth banana in the NYC/NJ pecking order. They are behind the Jets, Giants, Knicks, Rangers, Islanders, Yankees, Mets, Devils, Nets. Maybe they're more important than the Nets.
An area cable company could risk ignoring the BTN. Then what do you have? A school whose grandest bowl victory was probably a Texas Bowl demolition of Kansas State. Meanwhile, the basketball team hasn't made the tournament since 1991. I'm all for laughing maniacally as the Big Ten methodically steals a dollar a month from 18 million New Yorkers who don't even know what the BTN is, but I doubt Rutgers has that kind of cachet. Greenstein tries to prove that they do by citing that one game against Louisville which drew an 8.1. Sure, "when Rutgers wins" they are popular. They have been popular once since 1869.
Greenstein's other reasons are meaningless: they have an airport. They played a football game in 1869. Delany is from New Jersey. And they would leave the Big East. They've got some tenuous ability to bring TV markets. In literally every other way they are inferior to Missouri.
There is also a fawning profile in a Chicago business magazine that Orson should definitely not read unless he wants blood to run out of his eyes:
Colleagues describe Mr. Delany as restless and fearless. Those traits were apparent in 2007, when he formed the Big Ten Network, the nation's first conference-owned cable channel.
Anyway, that article has some quotes in direct opposition to Greenstein's "this is definitely happening" stance. Penn State president Graham Spanier:
"The folks in the media have gone a little bit crazy with this," he says. "There's a very good chance we won't expand at all. This is just a question we ask ourselves every few years. We don't feel we're under any pressure to expand."
"A little bit crazy" indicates that Spanier hasn't delved into the real speculation where Texas joins the Big Ten, brings half of the Big 12 along with it, and invades Mars.
So you're saying it's full of Goth kids.
Either that, or Aes Sedai.
for taking ND off the schedule. They want all the benefits of playing Big 11 schools but won't join the conference. They are the only team that really makes sense but feel no pressure to make this decision. Since nothing will change, I'd rather see UM play an SEC or Big 12 team on a regular basis.
we get it.
One other thing Rutgers has going for it: their program believes in keeping on the up and up, and their fans are not jerks. Also: they're a public state university, which fits the M.O. of most of our schools
Academically, they would be Big Ten, but bottom half of the Big Ten and, notably, below Pitt. They'd still beat Indiana, Iowa, and Little Brother (the latter two didn't make the Top 200)
|3||19||University of Michigan|
|4||32||University of California, Los Angeles|
|6||39||University of California, Berkeley|
|7||61||University of Wisconsin-Madison|
|8||63||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign|
|9||76||University of California, San Diego|
|10||76||University of Texas at Austin|
|11||78||University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill|
|12||80||University of Washington|
|13||86||Georgia Institute of Technology|
|16||105||University of Minnesota|
|17||112||University of Southern California|
|18||114||University of Pittsburgh|
|19||120||Pennsylvania State University|
|20||122||University of Maryland, College Park|
|21||128||University of Virginia|
|22||129||Ohio State University|
|24||166||University of Arizona|
|25||179||Texas A&M University|
|26||183||Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey|
|27||186||University of Colorado at Boulder|
|28||193||Indiana University Bloomington|
|29||199||University of Notre Dame|
Essentially, it'd be like adding another Indiana with a potential in to the New York market, but without the Gene Hackman movie.
I really don't understand why people place so much emphasis on Academic ranking. I also can't understand how people can blindly assume Rutgers isn't a great school academically. As a native New Yorker, I can tell you that Rutgers would be in the middle to top academically.
I know anecdotal evidence isn't quite solid, but the folks I know out of Rutgers are on par with folks I've met from other schools in the big ten, including Michigan.
Let me go on the record to say I don't think Rutgers is the best fit. I guess it's just annoying that people get all elitist all of a sudden when it comes to academics in the Big Ten. IMO, no conference is academically more stacked (aside from "ivy") than the ACC.
At any rate, I mostly agree with your list; except Kansas St over UConn...Really? I think UConn belongs in the top 10 (particularly if you consider b-ball)
I grew up in NJ. No one went to Rutgers unless they had to. Why do you think there are so many kids from New Jersey in Big Ten and other East Coast schools like UNC, Duke, Maryland, Delaware and places like Lehigh, Lafayette etc. Its because they don't want to go to Rutgers!
I stopped reading after "I grew up in NJ."
Just kidding. I think my point is essentially, I never thought about going to Rutgers when i was in HS. Fact, but I knew a few smart kids in my grade who went there. When I graduated from U of M (class of '06) and began working, I met a lot of folks who went to RU. My general perception is they're fun and smart people.
I also went to an RU/WVU game. They took pride, (not like we do, but still) and they had some funny chants about WVU and what not.
Perhaps my experiences are skewed (given the particular field I'm in, I work primarily with engineers and CS folks.)
As to why so many people from NJ don't go to Rutgers... I don't know... it is the most densely populated state in America though. Why do so many people from NYC/LI go to Michigan when they can go to NYU, Columbia, Syracuse, Binghamton, Fordham, etc.
Personally, I didn't want to go to NYU because I'd wind up living at home and walking to school. Also, I needed to get away from the east coast for mere sanity's sake.
Most of the schools you mentioned are private so they would pay the same tuition as an out-of-stater at another state's flagship University.
NYU - private and no sports and tough to get into
Columbia - Private and Ivy so super expensive and very tough to get into
Syracuse - Private
Fordham - Private with almost no sports and very little sense of a campus life (looked at it for law school and hated it).
SUNY Binghamton - Thats a public school but no sports, crappy town, supercold.
Basically the only publics in NY are the SUNY system (Buffalo, Albany, Downstate, Binghamton, etc).
Minor quibble, Fordham Law is in Manhattan, Fordham actually has a decent campus in the Bronx (more so than, say, NYU.)
Aside from Princeton, where else in NJ would you go? Paterson? It's not like the reason people don't go to Rutgers is because there are many other preferable in-state destinations. I'm not saying Rutgers is world-renowned; I'm just saying people underestimate Rutgers, period.
Let's step back and look at this conversation so we can get a sense of what we're actually looking at with Rutgers. In-staters, tell me if you recognize this convo:
First guy says:
"I know anecdotal evidence isn't quite solid, but the folks I know out of [School X] are on par with folks I've met from other schools in the big ten, including Michigan."
A guy replies:
"[School X] is the safety school you have in case you didn't get into your safety school."
Another guy replies:
"I grew up in [only State where anyone knows anything about School X]. No one went to [School X] unless they had to."
First guy retorts that [School X] is really accomplished in [certain field] where he works.
Omigod people, we're dealing with another Michigan State!!!
Don't do it Rutgers! You've got a neat little fan niche right now that people respect. You're the easiest team to like in the Big East. But mark my words, a few years in the Big Ten, and you'll be "Penn State's Little Brother," and all self-identity will be thrust aside into defining yourself against your rival.
Pitt is PSU's little brother; Rutgers is like a distant cousin with mental issues.
I'm not saying Rutgers belongs in the big Ten. In fact I don't think they belong in the big ten. My point is simply that academics is not a reason why they wouldn't fit, because it actually is a good academic school.
I live in NJ and spent most of my childhood there. Rutgers is definitely a "safety" school. Also, NJ has a large Catholic population and there are a lot of middling Catholic schools in the area.
Does anyone remember the place at Rutgers called the "Hall of Broken Dreams" or something? Enough said.
Rutgers is the safety school you have in case you didn't get into your safety school.
As long as we're talking schools that are ridiculously far away from the rest of the conference, why don't we consider Oxford University in Oxford, England?
FACT: Oxford is a very good school, from what I've been told.
FACT: The Big Ten would add the entire 'European' market to its Media Empire.
FACT: We should be able to get over the language barrier once we all realize we're speaking English.
FACT: Oxford University has a football club, although they call them 'footballers' there instead of 'football players,' but we can probably iron out any misunderstandings as we go.
I dare you to refute these FACTs.
Their football club is terrible. And they'd never leave their Cambridge rivalry.
Plus -- and I kid you not -- they would most likely insist on holding a costume ball before every football game, every basketball game, you name it.
On the plus side, if you put the 10 best bars in the Big Ten up against the 10 best pubs in Oxford, they'd have us licked after two pints.
But don't kid yourself: the London market doesn't care any more poop nuggets about Oxford sports than New York does for Rutgers.
Edinburgh, on the other hand, now THAT's a big program. More historic than Michigan, bigger than Ohio State, more academic than Northwestern, and they can drink like Michigan State.
I didn't say more academic than Michigan. I said more academic than Northwestern.
he he he
Remember: Everybody try the waitress, and tip the veal.
This is, honestly, the best crowd I've had tonight. Y'all drive safe!
This means we could potentially play both the Irish and the Scottish in the same season.
median income in the country. Control for cost of living and you're still not down there w. Missouri, a very poor state.
Nobody cares about Rutgers here. The only reason I'd want them to join the Big 10, is that I could see M play every other year.
I went to a Rutgers game this year. Terrible fan base IMO. They have a 50,000ish stadium, and only 2/3 showed up. And this was when they were had a winning record and were playing archrival (and ranked) West Virginia. Sure it was raining, but that's no reason why most of the people left at halftime. There was maybe 15,000, if that, that stayed until the end of the game (and it was a very close and competitive game).
No, taking Rutgers would be stupid. That is all.
I'd rather us take Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma.
*That* would be bitchin!!!
Big Ten Southern Division:
BT Northern Divison,
It preserves rivalries, and would that arrangement not kick-ass?
Now onward to the Mars invasion!!!
Rutgers brings NOTHING to the table Footbal wise!
but they really need to take the "R" "R" off their helmets first, Mmkay?
The only reason the Big Ten wants this is for the championship game in football. NO OTHER SIGNIFICANT REASON!! They'll make a bundle more just for that one game.
So if that, in and of itself was reason enough to do it, why, if you were a Big Ten A.D. would you want to bring in a school that was an actual threat to beat you on the field/hardwood in the revenue sports? (Like a Texas!) No one is afraid of Rutgers on the field. The academics are solid (not spectacular but MSU will still be the worst academically) and maybe they bring in a little more of the east cost/NY market.
I just don't get everyone who keeps talking about adding a powerhouse athletics school. Think like an A.D.! These are the very same people who schedule people like the directional Michigan Universities and Baby Seal University to take an asswhooping while they collect millions for a home game. They're not going to bring in someone who is a threat.
Plus, if we get Rutgers, maybe Snooki and The Situation will be on the sidelines for their home games. I'm psyched for all the guidos to roll down Route 80 in their IROC's blazing the hair metal to visit Da' Big House.
While the main consideration for expansion may be the 12th FB team and the championship game, that doesn't mean that they'll take anybody - if they would, why not add a baby seal school?
Anyway, in the end the ADs don't make the decision about expansion, the presidents of the schools do. My suspicion is that they won't want a baby seal school, and that, once certain athletic requirements are met, they'll want the best academic school they can get. Which isn't Rutgers.
i live in nyc and currently get BTN-HD for football games despite having no sports packages. the channel is blocked out at other times. (i think. actually i haven't even tried to watch at other times, because, well...) i suppose adding rutgers would unblock BTN at other times. if this excites you, i'm sorry to hear.
I want to see the sun glistening through Dave Wannstedt's mustachery in Michigan Stadium one day.
Living in Pittsburgh, I'd rather see Rich Rod in Heinz Field once again, this time pulling out a victory.
Watch the Big East Tournament next week and then tell me who New York's team is. Syracuse has the largest fanbase on the east coast this side of Penn State.
Rutgers gets outnumber by Syracuse fans in their own 8,000 seat building (and Georgetown, Providence, St. Johns, and this year Florida as well). This is Syracuse... 34,616, the college basketball 'Big House'.
Isn't it also where they play football?
I'm sensing a wee bit of hyperbole from you, that or extreme bias. I'll grant you that there are a lot of Syracuse fans in NYC, so much so that they would make a strong showing at Rutgers, maybe even coming close to outnumbering the Rutgers faithful. However, the other four are laughable. Unless you were there, which I doubt since then you would know the Florida game was at a holiday tournament in AC, I don't know what facts you would use to base your opinion. St. Johns doesn't even fill there own tiny fieldhouse, barely draw lower bowl numbers to MSG, and certainly aren't crossing two rivers to watch their crappy team play another crappy team in NJ. Providence and Georgetown are small catholic schools that draw ok at home, but I'd be shocked if they travel in the numbers you suggest.
There's plenty of reasons to bash Rutgers as a sports school, but at least keep the statements reasonable.
I was at the Georgetown game and the Providence game and any game at MSG is never even close. Just watch next week at MSG. The Florida game was in Tampa, and even ESPN said it shouldn't count as a road game since there were more SU fans than Florida.
I offer some examples, starting with Syracuse at Rutgers itself...
Syracuse at Rutgers
Syracuse at Georgetown
And yes, the Syracuse-Florida game was in Tampa.
I also submit to you:
Syracuse at St. John's
Syracuse at Georgetown (I went with a friend who went to G'town, she was absolutely embarassed by how outnumbered they were in their own building, and that 7th St. was like Bourbon St. full of SU fans after the game)
And yes, I went to Syracuse.
re-read your first post, it sounds like you're using all those schools as examples of schools outdrawing Rutgers, not schools who had their own stadiums overrun by Syracuse fans.
I agree that Syracuse fans travel well, they're obnoxious, but they do support their basketball team.
It works both ways.
I don't see any postives dealing with Rutgers to the Big Ten to be honest.
It's not just what Rutgers can do for the Big Ten but what the Big Ten can do for them. New Jersey is one of the top three recruiting states along with Florida and Texas. The Big Ten would elevate Rutgers and most likely increase the fan base in the largest TV market in the US. This would increase the stature of the Big Ten and also increase the number of recruits from NJ to attend Big Ten Schools which would increase the level of play in the Big Ten. This would help the Big Ten regain the reputation of superiority that we once held.
Not Ohio, California, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia..
potential as what Rutgers brings to the table now--good recruiting state, wealthiest state, most densely populated. Pennsylvania and Missouri are much harder hit by the Great Recession, and it's hard for me to figure why ANYONE thinks they're so much sexier than Rutgers.
Plus no one here wants to talk about the academics involved, although it's been indicated repeatedly that the school leaders see that as equally or more important.
Look at the Rivals recruiting map. The big 3 are clearly Florida, Texas and California. The SEC states are also pretty strong. Ohio and PA are just okay.
There is a lot of raw talent in NJ, but it still has a long way to go before reaching elite status. Funny, because Rodriguez and Schiano hate each other because they were competing for the scraps from Florida. There's a reason Schiano desperately wants Florida recruits.
Any decent player in NJ is recruited hard by PSU. Just skimming the PSU roster there is 8 kids from NJ.Joe is already being hurt by Pitt getting better and instate kids are not an automatic for PSU anymore.
Losing NJ would hurt PSU, which would hurt the B10 along with adding a meh school.
Edit: Hit the O instead of P.
People are focusing a lot on the downside of Rutgers's potential entry. Here's the upside: they are the flagship school in a state of 8.5 million people, which produces a decent amount of talent. They have a lot of money and a desire to raise their program's profile. They would effectively seal up the Philadelphia market for the conference (at least for football), and get us a toehold (however tenuous) in the NYC market. I would not mind this.
1. Add Rutgers
rutgers blows at everything. so does jersey in general