Maryland and Rutgers shouldn't even be used in the same sentence. They aren't even close. Maryland will beat Rutgers by 40 when they play. Rutgers is the worst D1 team in the country. It's sad and embarrassing how bad their football program is.
Rutgers needs to go....
- Thread starter LMTLION
- Start date
Ash may know football, but he doesn't seem to have a personality. A large part of being a successful college coach is the ability to sell your vision to recruits. Ash hasn't been able to do that.
I believe Rutgers could have the success of Iowa with the right coach. When they are receiving their full cut of Big Ten money in about three years, it will be interesting to see if they invest it into football.
I believe Rutgers could have the success of Iowa with the right coach. When they are receiving their full cut of Big Ten money in about three years, it will be interesting to see if they invest it into football.
There is enough talent is DC and Tidewater along with PA and Ohio to keep two programs elite level competitive. PSU is lucky geographically as MD and VT are main competition. VT's loss and MD's bad press will help keep an already dominant recruiting performance in the area.
This. I don't think PA high school football is what it was 20+ years ago. Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought I read somewhere that out of all of PSU's 2019 scholarship offers, only like 10% are to kids from the state of Pennsylvania. And with Pitt it's only like 18%.
You guys have been hitting the mid-Atlantic region (MD, VA) for years, but now with Franklin and his ties to Maryland and southern ties from his days at Vandy even more so. The whole NJ high school football talent thing is a myth. Yes, there are enough good players to cherry pick the state (and that's exactly what the power programs do), but it's not enough to stock an entire elite P5 roster. Even if RU was getting all those kids, it still wouldn't be enough from a depth standpoint when schools like OSU, Michigan and now even Penn State are recruiting nationally.The number of legit OL, DL and QB recruits from the state is severely lacking.
I think we are heading to the point where the "Power 5" will become the "Power 4" and the number of schools competing at that level will be reduced even lower. In long standing conferences such as the Big Ten, SEC and ACC, you may get an "A" division and a "B" division when it comes to football. There's no reason for Vanderbilt and Kentucky to be playing Alabama in football. Kentucky just beat Florida for the first time in 32 years. That is just stupid.
You can say all you'd like that Rutgers has no excuse to be this bad in football, and I'd somewhat agree. But this is what DECADES of poor management...at the state and institutional levels...brings you. We should have NEVER jumped from being an independent in football/A10 in basketball directly into the Big East. Rutgers should have gone into the MAC and should have remained there unless they had unfathomable success in that conference in both revenue sports. In fact, I wouldn't mind going to the MAC now although with the B1G $$$ you can't put the genie back into the bottle.
Last edited:
RU will never rehire Schiano. Never! Barchi.and Hobbs won't want to deal with the criticisms leveled by those of the "Me Too" movement and have to explain away Greggies recruitment and signing of Reggie Dixon.
pardon my French, but f**k Rutgers, in perpetuity.
they are a damn embarrassment to the conference. almost a worse fan base than Pitt:
they are a damn embarrassment to the conference. almost a worse fan base than Pitt:
pardon my French, but f**k Rutgers, in perpetuity.
they are a damn embarrassment to the conference. almost a worse fan base than Pitt:
High water mark for that program
I wonder if those morons chanted F Penn State on Saturday while Buffalo was kicking their - never understood that stupidity. They are a joke program stealing money form the Big 10.
Brunetti: When Rutgers become full B10 members they will indeed invest all of the B10 revenue into the football program but they will simultaneously reduce all state support, Bob Barchi has made that clear from the very beginning. Again, they want the football program to be revenue neutral, so as B10 revenue increases NJ State appropriations will be diverted and used for other University business. I warned everyone on the Rutgers site back in 2014 that Chris Christie sold this invite to Barchi on the premise that he could divert millions form the athletic department to the academic side. This was nothing more than a money grab.
On November 19th both Chris Christie and Rutgers made the UMDNJ-Rutgers merger official, handing Rutgers the most lucrative components of the Medical school. On the very next day, November 20th, 2012 Jim Delany and Rutgers held a conference to announce the B10 invite. Pure coincidence?
I think they're doing exactly what was intended. Opening up the BTN in NJ and NYC and increasing the recruiting territory for the conference. Its worked out in every way except for Rutgers going backwards. Once they get a full conference share they'll be ahead of 90% of other P5 programs when it comes to conference revenue. I think Ash was obviously not the best hire.
Rutgers doesn't get a full share of BT money? Are they being phased in? When does it become 100%?
I think the "New York market" thing counts more if people are forced to carry certain cable channels, which nowadays is becoming less and less the case. My classic example is, there are about as many people in the Boston metro area, which BC has alone, as there is in the state of Alabama, which Auburn and Alabama share, so theoretically BC should be a way better add than either of those others. But would they be? It seems doubtful.
I think the "New York market" thing counts more if people are forced to carry certain cable channels, which nowadays is becoming less and less the case. My classic example is, there are about as many people in the Boston metro area, which BC has alone, as there is in the state of Alabama, which Auburn and Alabama share, so theoretically BC should be a way better add than either of those others. But would they be? It seems doubtful.
As an AD, you don't turn down Big Ten money for MAC money. The AD is responsible for ALL sports, not just football and men's basketball.
Christie wanted Barchi for the sole purpose of insuring that the integration of UMDNJ into Rutgers not blow up. It didn't, but not because of any efforts on the part of Barchi, who remains essentially in retirement since he took the Rutgers job.
As it is, Rutgers subsidizes the athletic department, most recently to the tune of $33mm. Barchi has said that when Rutgers begins to receive its full share of Big Ten revenue the athletic department will be self-sufficient, and the numbers largely support that. So are you saying that by eliminating the need for the University to subsidize the athletic Department, it would be taking away resources from the athletic department? If so, that's simply foolish.
They’ve beaten penn state twice in the past 100 years. Not sure they double that win total by 2118.
Here's what I'm trying to say. Many including myself thought that once we became a full B10 member that for a period of time a significant portion of the State Appropriations would remain intact for the football program/AD department. This would help us hire an established head coach and assistants, maybe bring in a recruiter and upgrade the training facilities etc. etc. etc. If Barchi's intent is to reduce appropriations on a dollar for dollar basis as B10 revenue increases how does that help the football program? It helps Trenton (NJ taxpayer), it may help Rutgers re-budget appropriations to help alleviate student tuition, perhaps help pay for some of the 116 million it cost to facilitate the merger but it really does nothing to help the football program. Right or Wrong?
Exactly. And before the BTN existed you had access to a full slate of Big Ten games every weekend through ABC, your local ABC affiliate, ESPN and ESPN2. I can count on one hand the number of PSU games that weren't televised in my area between 1998 and 2007, and this was before ESPN used football "overflow" channels like they do today with ESPNU, ESPN News, etc. Clearly somebody in the television business at ABC knew Big Ten football was an attractive ratings draw in the NYC area before Delaney came up with his brilliant idea of expanding the footprint.
I'll be the first one to admit I don't know diddly about network negotiations. What I do know is the commonly held belief that Jim Delaney somehow introduced or expanded Big Ten football into the NYC market with the addition of RU and MD is laughable.
And once again, the "I hate all things Big Ten magician" diverts everyone's attention to what is in one hand (BTN), while the other hand has ESPN's John Skipper frantically calling Delany and literally begging him to renegotiate our 1st and 2nd tier TV rights deal two years ago.
Without the Big Ten now having teams directly within the New York City and Washington DC DMA's, and, for all intents and purposes, the Baltimore and New Jersey parts of the Philadelphia DMA, we don't sign a combined $2.64 billion dollar 1st and 2nd tier television rights deal with FOX and ESPN.
That's just the tip of the iceberg as to what Rutgers and Maryland have done for the Conference as a whole. Another thing to think about (along with many others): WE (Penn State) had NO 1st or 2nd tier Grant of Rights in 2011 when the crap hit the fan. Our only television Grant of Rights at that time was with BTN (3rd tier).
Without getting into a lot of detail, Delany and most of the other Presidents were in a quandary thanks to our piece of crap Governor and own BOTs. The Big Ten was basically forced to punish us for what happened based on the info they were getting from our own people. But they also were petrified that if they punished us too severely, the ACC might be more than happy to jump in and play the good guy. We were a money machine for the Big Ten, and they knew it.
If they could get Rutgers and Maryland into the fold (and at the time, Virginia and North Carolina), that would keep us from jumping. Rutgers and Maryland jumped, that did the job, so they got addition by no subtraction so to speak.
I could go on and on, but Rutgers and Maryland have served their purpose up to this point, and if Rutgers ever even gets back to what they were in the Schiano and Flood era, where they went to 9 Bowl Games in 10 years, that will only be icing on the cake (from the Big Ten's point of view).
Last edited:
ESPN tried to lowball us in the 2004 Contract negotiations and Delany called his bluff. That's when BTN was born so to speak. In other words, you got your programming, but ESPN didn't want to pay us squat for it.
There is no part of Rutgers's state appropriation that is specifically earmarked for support of the football team, or, more accurately, the athletic department. Subsidy comes from the general fund and student fees.
When Rutgers begins to receive the full amount of Big Ten revenue sharing, it it allocates correctly bothe the football and basketball teams will be profitable. The problem is that the non-revenue won't be. Big surprise! That's why they are called non-revenue. At PSU, those sports are funded by the surpluses generated by the football and men's basketball programs. Not the greatest piece of thinking, but we are dealing with university administrators here, so it's par for the course. For Rutgers, the question is why use the general fund and student fees to subsidize non-revenue sports (which PSU and all schools with football/basketball surpluses do indirectly).
This is as much urban legend as "Southern speed".
In 2017, there were roughly 23% more NFL players born in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Ohio as there were in the entire state of Texas which basically populates the entire Big 12 minus West Virginia. That means there were 23% more NFL players born in an area of the Big Ten footprint roughly only 35% as large in area as the state of Texas.
Do you know the difference between causal and coincidental? How much of the increase in value of the Big Ten's media rights deals is directly attributable to the additions of Rutgers and Maryland and how much would have happened anyway? Got news for you: the Big Ten was being broadcast in the NYC DMA prior to the addition of Rutgers.And Rutgers was so valuable to Fox and Disney that its games appeared twice in 2017 on their channels.
Stick to selling insurance. I'll hazard a guess that you're minimally competent at tht.
For starters, 'lern to spel' RUTGERS! It is a negative image for a supposed PSU grad.
It will take another five years of concentrated recruiting efforts for RUTGERS to close the talent gap. Dittos for the entire West Division.
OSU, PSU and UM remain at the very top of the heap -- in that order too.
And on FIOS it wasn't. Believe it was on some sort of sports tier on Comcast (which has no presence in NYC) as well.
The BTN media rights contact was increased when Rutgers and Maryland joined. Don't recall the actual number, but it was nowhere near the $70mm p.a. that would have made the addition of the two schools non-dilutive at the time. Now the Big Ten is at a point where the two schools are taking $100+mm p.a. Are they contributing that much too the pot? My guess is no, but I can't say with any certainty. The scary thing is that neither can anyone at the Big Ten offices.
For starters, 'lern to spel' RUTGERS! It is a negative image for a supposed PSU grad.
It will take another five years of concentrated recruiting efforts for RUTGERS to close the talent gap. Dittos for the entire West Division.
OSU, PSU and UM remain at the very top of the heap -- in that order too.
For starters I'll learn to spell it when they do.For starters, 'lern to spel' RUTGERS! It is a negative image for a supposed PSU grad.
It will take another five years of concentrated recruiting efforts for RUTGERS to close the talent gap. Dittos for the entire West Division.
OSU, PSU and UM remain at the very top of the heap -- in that order too.
Google it....they actually played a game once with RUTGRES on their jerseys.
It's a running joke here.... try to keep up
Not being a full-time 'reglar' here, I now know how you play the games. I won't remind you what others said what the "P" meant a few years ago.For starters I'll learn to spell it when they do.
Google it....they actually played a game once with RUTGRES on their jerseys.
It's a running joke here.... try to keep up
I was trying to be nice, but now I think I'll just say.....fvck off.
Yes but that highlights one reason people hate the cable company so much, namely it makes people pay for stuff they don't want. That model is gradually changing and it's moving in the direction of people paying for what they want to watch and not for what they don't.
Hmmm. Don't remember using either term. But I can always tell you're pi$$ed and ready to go off the rails when you use the "insurance" line.
So it looks like FOX got their money's worth out of Rutgers, didn't they. They received top billing in the NYC DMA for all of Rutgers's games against Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, the Washington Huskies, Maryland (Washington DC and Baltimore DMAs), Nebraska, etc. As you say, 10 of those 12 games were televised by BTN. Not a bad deal at all for the Network!!!
At least you are right about being "less than competent" wrt the insurance part. Don't sell it at all.
Hmmm. Don't remember using either term. But I can always tell you're pi$$ed and ready to go off the rails when you use the "insurance" line.
So it looks like FOX got their money's worth out of Rutgers, didn't they. They received top billing in the NYC DMA for all of Rutgers's games against Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, the Washington Huskies, Maryland (Washington DC and Baltimore DMAs), Nebraska, etc. As you say, 10 of those 12 games were televised by BTN. Not a bad deal at all for the Network!!!
At least you are right about being "less than competent" wrt the insurance part. Don't sell it at all.
So how much is FOX paying for a bunch of Rutgers games shown on BTN which don't register in the ratings? We know it's not more than $300mm a year.
So you're not competent to sell insurance? That's a pretty sad admission.
This is correct. Neither school generated sufficient revenue to cover their 1/14th share, hence not increasing any other members share either. This was known when the two schools were invited and the invite had nothing to do with eyeballs on TV's in NYC or DC, nor recruiting territory. Fox wanted desperately to gain a larger share of the College Football viewership. Getting to 14 teams with a Championship game, provided the volume/quality of content that Fox was interested in, creating a more valuable package for the BigTen to sell to Fox/BTN/ESPN.
Now, whether each school has truly seen revenue increases that they otherwise would not have...
Look at it from another perspective: someone has to finish last and RU does this very well. If losing builds character then you can use that to attract quality individuals though lower quality athletes.
There is enough talent in NJ with fillins from surrounding states for Rutgers to support a respectable Iowa/Northwestern level program. As such, they have no excuse and need to perform, or else move to a mid tier conference. It is time to upgrade the conference.
