The case for Rutgers

Submitted by WolvinLA2 on

Although I certainly haven't read every comment on the board the last 48 hours regarding expansion, I have read a number of comments expressing displeasure for Rutgers, a setiment I originally shared.  However, the devil's advocate in me got thinking of the counter argument, and after a little research, I have changed my own mind.  Rutgers certainly isn't the slam dunk that Nebraska was, but if the conference is set on expansion (as most of them are), then we could do worse than Rutgers (and maybe not a lot better).  Let's start with the numbers:

Rutgers is a huge school.  42,327 undergrads and 14,541 grad students, for a total student body of 56,868.  This makes it the 5th largest school in the country, larger than all Big Ten schools outside of OSU.  That fits the Big Ten mold of "huge, state school" and means that Rutgers is pumping out alumni at a rate matched by few.  The state of New Jersey has a population of 8.8 million people, which obviously excludes nearby NYC and Philadephia.  The number of people within a decent drive of Rutgers is greater than nearly all (if not all) D1 football programs. 

One of the gripes about Rutgers is that their football attendance is low.  At 43,761 in 2011, that's above both NW and Indiana, and a few thousand below Illinois and Minnesota.  To compare them to other prospective programs, Maryland is 42,355, Syracuse is 40,504 and GT is 48,232.  Their attendance isn't crazy low, but would almost certainly be much higher if they moved to the Big Ten.  In 2011, Rutgers had 7 home games, only WVU Pitt were decent draws, and every other home game was against a team you'd expect a poor draw from (Army, Navy, Ohio U, North Carolina Central, USF and Cincinnati).  Even the decent teams on that list don't travel well.  The Big Ten has the benefit of playing teams who bring fans to the stadium, something Rutgers would experience in a big way.  Not only would a Big Ten schedule be more appealing to Rutgers fans, but it would bring opposing fans that weren't there in the Big East. 

In terms of football quality, Rutgers isn't as bad as is being purported.  To start, Rutgers is currently ranked #19 and #21 in the two polls, ahead of all but 3 Big Ten teams.  They've had an easy schedule, but they won at Arkansas and at Cincinnati, and beat Syracuse at home.  The last 6 years they've finished 9-4, 4-8, 9-4, 8-5, 8-5 and 11-2.  They went to five bowls and won all five. 

For the future, Rutgers has promise as well.  NJ is becoming a hot bed for football recruiting, and Rutgers has been cashing in on that.  Over the last 3 years, Rutgers has finished 64th, 32nd and 24th in the Rivals team rankings.  The 24th in 2012 was behind only M and OSU among Big Ten teams despite only having 19 commits.  That class included a 5 star and 4 four star recruits.  Rutgers already has 17 commits for 2013. 

In basketball, Rutgers is certainly no powerhouse, and typically finishes around .500 for the season.  The Big East is a very difficult basketball conference, so that won't improve in the Big Ten.  They'd be a Penn State/Northwestern/Nebraska type team who will steal some games but not many.  Where they would make up for this is in lacrosse.  I think lacrosse will be the third revenue sport in the NCAA, and Rutgers has an established but not elite lacrosse program.  The real benefit here is that if the Big Ten added two lacrosse programs (with Maryland, for example) they could be playing Big Ten lacrosse almost right away, growing TV dollars and enabling Big Ten schools to play regularly in lax hotbed states.  There is very little live sports on BTN in the spring, and having 5 Big Ten lacrosse teams would be a boon for BTN coverage and certainly $$$ moving forward.  Having a Big Ten lacrosse league will also encourage other Big Ten schools to add lacrosse as a D1 sport, which could be a semi-major revenue earner for the conference within a decade from now. 

In the end, I don't think there is another ND out there that would be a slam dunk addition to the league.  If expansion is necessary or desired, than I think Rutgers would make a quality choice.

OrangeWolverine

November 18th, 2012 at 7:07 PM ^

I don't understand why some people think Rutgers is located in the middle of New York City, Rutgers is in New Brunswick, New Jersey. Yes, it is close to the city, but I don't think Rutgers considers itself "New Yorks Football Team" and neither does New York.

Now, Rutgers doesn't need to attract the NY market, like the OP said, NJ is one of the most populated and richest states in the country, all it needs to do is attract the people in NJ. NJ does not have many sports teams to rally around, give Rutgers more exposure, get it out of the Big East, and I think the Big Ten and Rugers can fit well together. 

Monocle Smile

November 18th, 2012 at 7:11 PM ^

If Rutgers is better than "other expansion options" (and I say that with a bit of a smirk), then you need better expansion options. Rutgers is a steaming shitpile in every way but school population, as far as I'm concerned.

P.S. OP, you must be really, really bored.

93Grad

November 18th, 2012 at 7:11 PM ^

I wish I could give you -15,071 for this.  Rutgers is terrible in every way and adding them to the B1G would represent everything that is bad about money's domination of college athletics.

 

neoavatara

November 18th, 2012 at 7:11 PM ^

Rutgers frankly is not a bad expansion candidate.  Basically the equivalent of a state school, academically strong, although their athletics are mediocre.  They add just enough of the east coast markets to be valuable.

I am just against expansion is all.  

Brodie

November 19th, 2012 at 2:07 AM ^

shh, it's a lot better to be arrogant asswipes about the quality of other universities while pretending that Purdue is somehow better since we've been playing them longer or that Central Pennsylvania has more to do with Big Ten country than north Jersey since PSU football is better 

Victor Hale II

November 18th, 2012 at 7:17 PM ^

My only concern is whether it would help Michigan in recruiting or not.  I've followed recruiting for a couple of years now and have seen many top prospects hail from NJ and MD.  With these two schools the Big Ten is possibly adding, does that increase Michigan's recruiting clout with some of those kids?  Are they more likely to go a bit farther west, knowing that there could be a game or two that their friends/families could easily attend each year?

 

Oh, and BEAT OHIO.

Leaders And Best

November 18th, 2012 at 7:24 PM ^

is if the divisions are reorganized and the protected crossover eliminated in order to face schools in other division more often to avoid the current SEC setup. My ideal scenario if Maryland & Rutgers are added:

Central Division: Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana

NW/East Divsion: Nebraska, Penn State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Maryland, Rutgers

In this setup, most traditional major rivalry games are preserved within division (except Little Brown Jug) and creates natural East Coast partners with Penn State in their division. The NW/East division is a little awkward, but I think both sides will be happy not to be cut off from rivals (like Wisconsin is right now) that any other division breakdown would cause. Eliminating the protected crossover would allow 2 rotating interdivisional games per year versus 1 per year like the SEC has right now.

FreddieMercuryHayes

November 18th, 2012 at 7:21 PM ^

All I really care about in conference expansion is that schedules get more competive for our rivals and main competition.  MSU and Ohio both have peaches of cross-over schedules coming up the next two years, while Nebraska also misses Ohio the next two years.  We get to miss Wisconsin, but UM really ended on the short end of the stick during the conference re-ailgnment.  Whatever happens, I want MSU, Ohio, and Neb to get tougher schedules. 

FreeKarl

November 18th, 2012 at 7:23 PM ^

Another positive: If we bring Rutgers in the fold we could probably swing the whole cast of the Jersey Shore coming to a game in the Big House, not just The Situation. Take that Mark Hollis /s

TyrannousLex

November 18th, 2012 at 7:26 PM ^

Especially with the implementation of the playoff, the logical direction is the formation of a handful of super-conferences. Those will be split into divisions, essentially expanding the playoff system by way of conference championship games.

So we're likely to see a "Big Ten" of 14-16 schools, which will hopefully be split into logical divisions (think geography) that provide the bulk of a regular season schedule. It is, though sometimes painful to contemplate, a reasonable way to develop the crowning of a national champion by means other than algorithms or voting. A secondary benefit could be that "non conference" scheduling might include more out-of-division conference games than MAC schools which would return some of the old opponents in a different way. And an early season UM/Nebraska game will put more asses in seats than UM/UMass.

Of course we'll lose the cosy nature of the conference composed of Midwestern state universities of mostly high academic caliber, but things like that will always lose to money. Are Rutgers and Maryland the best fits? Maybe not, but first choices might  not be available either.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:45 PM ^

I hear you, and I understand exactly what you are saying.



I will be negged by what I am about to say, but I firmly believe that the big 12 is tenuous at best, and better schools will be who are better fits both geographically and academically will be available. I see both the academic and athletic entente BiG wants to form, however, several schools from the dismantled big 12 would be better when the time comes, both economically and competitively.



Again, I know nothing!

Brodie

November 19th, 2012 at 2:12 AM ^

There is one school in the Big 12 currently with a better academic profile than Rutgers

seriously, it's ranked higher than 3 or 4 current B1G schools... let's stop pretending it's Buttfuck Community College and Beauty School because it's not as good as Michigan 

DarkWolverine

November 18th, 2012 at 7:29 PM ^

Born and raised in Mi, but worked for many years in NJ and northern VA. Rutgers and Maryland have never had respect in their own back yards and bring little to the Big Ten. Just No!

mgoblue15

November 18th, 2012 at 7:30 PM ^

Rutgers, Maryland and GT are all bad for the big ten. They bring nothing sports wise to the table. Rutgers has a decent team once every 5-6 years. Maryland Used to begood at basketball and haven't been for a while now and GT has a couple decent years in football and thats about it. All three would be bad for the big ten. I don't want either of them. 

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:09 PM ^

I don't get why you are so hell bent on expanding as if there is a mandate from the NCAA or do it for the sake of doing it.



Corporate parallelism: Don't reorg and fire all your talent and then wonder why your biggest competitor hired all those people away from you. Well, cuz that would be bad for business and alienate the people you want to keep around and cultivate.



That's why everyone is getting pissed off about this topic. To hell with expanding if it means watering down the great product you already have. BIG had a down year, so what?!? who is to say we don't win the next five MNCs. What's more possible that scenario or Rutgers and the band of merry brothers from the acc doing more for our conference geopolitically.



Can I come to willy wonkas place and sip from the chocolate river too!?!? F me! So sick of it...

Brodie

November 19th, 2012 at 2:15 AM ^

I don't think ANYBODY here is hell bent on expansion. Jim Delaney is, apparently. And I'd guess he has reasons for wanting to do this, and I'd guess they make sense to him and the conference presidents and ADs. So none of the above isn't really an option at all.

 

 

Geary_maize

November 18th, 2012 at 7:46 PM ^

Agree 100% with your statements. Rutgers doesn't bring any excitement on the field, but off the field is another matter. It's not often you get to add the dominant instate school in a talent rich state with a 9 million population, very high median income. and close to major media markets. Academics are decent to boot.

In the long run, the trickle down effects of this expansion should benefit every team in the B1G.

Buck Killer

November 18th, 2012 at 7:47 PM ^

Wow, what a stupid post. Rutgers is always shitty and has not played a single good team. Please delete this crap and fuck that shit. WMU has more respect than Rutgers football.

Perkis-Size Me

November 18th, 2012 at 7:52 PM ^

This is expanding for the sake of expanding. If the B1G can't pick up some quality like what it got in Nebraska, then don't bother expanding. Wait for the next wave of realignment, see what conferences are falling apart, what schools are looking to make a move, and if there is a good target, go after it.



I know Big Ten football isn't at it's finest these days, but seriously, this conference can and should do better than Rutgers and Maryland.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 7:59 PM ^

You made the case for them not to be a member of the BIG. The same ole greener pastures argument.



Average to terrible football program, which drives all revenue in this conference and at each and every school athletically. No added value!



They are a big school that offers little in add value. Name one major undergrad, graduate or gov funded research program that above and beyond what we do in the BIG? Zero!!



They blow assholes in every other sport!!! Another no added value!!



New Jersey is a hot bed for recruiting? That's is a weak ass argument. Illinois produces as much talent. Northeast isn't a highly regarded recruiting territory, not to say there is nothing but seriously there is no comparison to even the Midwest. Are people salivating to get into New Jersey for recruiting purposes? What PSU!!?!? They can have it! They have some quality, but not quality plus quantity annually. No added value!



They are a horrible choice and seriously everyone get off it!! If we let them in, we all should be irate at how low this conference will stoop to grab an extra million. That's all it will be. No one, and I mean no one on the east coast gives a rip about Rutgers. I lived on the coast so I would know! Their tv revenue increase would be so minimal, in actuality it would hurt us more to add them.



BIG be smart and stand pat! We have a great conference now! There isn't greener pastures! If expansion is absolutely necessary, I will bet my lot we can find better schools. Mark it down!

Geary_maize

November 18th, 2012 at 8:10 PM ^

You really need to read how the BTN revenu model works. Maryland and New Jersey are more lucrative states than Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Indiana. High school talent wise they are also better than those states.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:30 PM ^

If the conference only cares about money and TV ratings then we are all doomed. Seriously, business is business, a buck is a buck, but what we love will die a slow death and we all will hate it.



Dude, you are just like me, you know nothing about internal BIG network strategic planning and branding.



But you must be... the guy behind me Saturday exclaiming to the whole section how Denard isn't draftable to nfl scouts. You know all! Lol!



Horrible decision if this comes true. Absolutely horrible.

WolvinLA2

November 18th, 2012 at 8:10 PM ^

OK, your 20 exclamation points shows you are against Rutgers. But terrible football? Blows assholes? I think you went a little too extreme the other way. By the way, Ohio State, Penn State, ND, Auburn, UNC and Wisconsin all have commits from NJ so far this year.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:27 PM ^

I honestly don't care about my exclamation points. May be you should get a clue and quite pointing out how horrible this is for all of us.



And so what about jersey recruits. Should we all start pointing out how many Ohio based recruits are on dI rosters champ!?!?



Yeah good luck with that logic.

maizenbluedevil

November 18th, 2012 at 8:01 PM ^

I absolutely hate this.

Rutgers? Maryland? Are you kidding me?  Do. Not. Want.

The article I just read on ESPN talks about Rutgers "offering up the New York market," a meme that gets repeated so tirelessly when Rutgers is mentioend in B1G expansion speculation that it's apparently become fact-y enough for actual media outlets to state it as if it's real.

Guess what?  NO ONE, and I mean no one in NYC gives a fuck about Rutgers.  

Newsflash: Rutgers isn't even in the same state, it's in Jersey which may as well be on a different planet than NYC.

Saying Rutgers will offer up the NY market is akin to saying Arizona St. would offer up the LA market.  Vague geographic proximity does not equal "offering up" a market.

Rutgers (and Maryland) in the B1G is absolutely retarded, unless one thinks that watering down our product and making it less of an actual "conference" is a worthwhile trade-off for the illusion of gaining a market.

That's the reality of what's going on here. Ruining the conference in exchange for smoke and mirrors.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:17 PM ^

My head is going to explode with anymore talk of jersey and Maryland being fertile recruiting grounds.



Not even close! Midwest produces far more talent annually. Just cuz someone says it doesn't make it true. Reminds me of that state farm commercial where the chick says it can't be wrong if is on the Internet. Enter French model...

Geary_maize

November 18th, 2012 at 8:26 PM ^

Seriously, just go to Rivals and check how many 4 stars New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania pumps out yearly.

I know 4 stars isn't exact, but you'll be surprised to see New Jersey has 1 more 4 star than Michigan this year, the same number last year, and 1 more 4 star the year before that.

We really are adding 2 very decent high school football states.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:33 PM ^

You are lost dude, east coast doesn't give a crap about these schools. To hell with star ratings on a couple recruits.



They don't care. I lived in metro dc, they don't care how many times must it be said!



If this happens I would email Brandon day and night voicing displeasure. I am tired of hearing brand image and then we go and grab two or three no name schools that do nothing for us as a conference. I don't know what you are smoking or drinking but pease tell so we can all live in your world.

Geary_maize

November 18th, 2012 at 8:47 PM ^

You obviously have no idea how the Big Ten Network generates revenue, nor are you willing to listen.

Email Brandon email Delaney all you want and they won't care because they've looked at this with a fine tooth comb and concluded that in the long run this expansion will benefit every school in the B1G

Just know that all the hundreds of millions dollars of renovation going around in the B1G is directly due to the same motivation that is driving this expansion.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 8:57 PM ^

No, sorry not appease your need to be right, but you are convinced it is good out of some machevalian don't pick on the little guy complex, rather than look at what's right in front of all of our faces: horribly mediocre members who will marginally increase revenue and our national or world wide brand.



Will no name recruit from jersey that you desperately want chose a big ten team because it will come to bischaotway New Jersey twice in a decade to play Rutgers on the big ten network?



Seriously, that's what you pinning your hopes on to benefit the conference and Michigan!?!?



You know what will generate some revenue champ? And I am calling out my alma mater as well, win some damn games and especially in the bcs or playoffs. You know what will get those big time recruits you covet from jersey, win some damn big games!

mgoblue0970

November 18th, 2012 at 10:25 PM ^

Fuck New York.

Seriously.  

What is redeeming about that city/state?  They ship their shit to A2 to be bitchy sorostitutes and douchebag frat boyz. 

Jersey shore douches are New Yorkers.

I went to B school with a bunch of kids who did their undergrad at Rutgers and Columbia.  Assholes.  Every single one of them.

bac2therac

November 18th, 2012 at 10:27 PM ^

Rutgers fan here. Rolling my eyes at the hate here and omg so much flat out wrong information, lots of ignorance.

 

First of all NJ is part of the NYC Market...thats 8 million people so when NYC market is brought up yes it includes NJ and thats alot of people. You dont necessarily have to have the 5 boroughs. RU has steadily increased its attention on NYC evening news. Their game Saturday was the lead on all the NYC stations. To say no one cares is wrong. Ratings wise, RU has brought the highest ratings for any ESPN game in NYC and I believe have about 7 or 8 of the top 10 ESPN broadcasts.

 

As far as on field performance, RU did not fully invest in the program until around 2000. We are a young program but have grown alot in the last 12 years. This year will be our 7th trip to a bowl game in 8 years. We have won 5 of those 6 bowls. We are ranked 18th in the BCS poll and are on the verge of winning our first BE title and a getting a BCS bowl bid probably to the Orange. Our APR is in the top 10. The school has a squeaky clean image until two current Big 10 schools. We bring in top notch academics and are a large state school fitting very well with the mission of the Big 10.

 

Attendance this year is avg about 47-48K which is our highest ever in a 52K seat stadium we expanded 5 years back. The current BE slate does not really excite the area but with Big 10 schools coming in sellout are a virtual lock.

 

I see other schools like Virginia and Syracuse brought up..huh? What do they bring you. They are not good in football and bring no market. Syracuse cares only about basketball and has no market and no football fans

 

So yeah you guys are skeptical. Our program is hardly as bad as you make it out to be. Given the chance RU can be very successful and has a very high ceiling right now

West German Judge

November 19th, 2012 at 12:15 AM ^

12 Northwestern

29 Michigan

41 Wisconsin

46 Penn State

46 Illinois

56 Ohio State

**57.583 conference average

**57.615 conference average plus Maryland

58 MARYLAND

**58.357 conference average plus Maryland and Rutgers

**58.385 conference average plus Rutgers

65 Purdue

68 RUTGERS

68 Minnesota

72 Iowa

72 Michigan State

83 Indiana

101 Nebraska

I can't condone taking a shot at Rutgers' academics, using USNWR rankings, without taking a shot at the conference overall.

mgoblue0970

November 19th, 2012 at 1:13 AM ^

Let's see, Half of the B1G is in the top 50ish where the top 25 are mostly private schools.

In the context of my post, it was right on.  I compared Rutgers to Moo U.  For some reason, you decided to get on your high horse and change the comparison.

 

ProfMurdoc

November 18th, 2012 at 8:16 PM ^

No one in NY cares about Rutgers, but as an alum in NYC I wouldn't mind turning games @Rutgers into de facto home games like @ Northwestern can be for the Chicago area fans.