"Should the Big Ten Have Buyer's Remorse Over Adding Maryland and Rutgers?" si.com
- Thread starter Keyser Soze 16801
- Start date
Why not? They still have buyer's remorse over adding Penn State.
I think its a 30 year bet...with the thinking being: if you pay them enough, they’ll eventually hire the right staff, build the right facilities and be competitive. It would be hugely disrespectful to compare NW to Rutgers (sorry NW), but look how far their program has come.
Let's just continue to look backwards. I mean who cares, they are in, now move on to the future...
Well I don't have buyer's remorse. This PSU team needs Maryland and Rutgers this year. Could have used them earlier in the season in fact.
I think this is a good point. It's a very long game they're playing. It was never about what Maryland and Rutgers would be in 2018, it was about what they will be in 2030.
I still think Maryland is a pretty good bet because they are the only power 5 football team in the Baltimore/DC market, which is a huge and growing market.
Rutgers ... not so much. But at the time the B1G made the decision, Rutgers had been to a bunch of bowl games under Schiano and it really looked possible that they would make the leap. Now.... But again, from PSU's perspective it could be a lot worse. New Jersey, NY and Delaware produces good recruits and Rutgers doesn't compete for them.
Like a fat chick at the bar at closing time
Projecting where a school's athletic department will be in 15 years? Seriously? Tell you what: if you can do that, tell us when Barbour is going to release details of the Facilities Master Plan (the first fifteen years will be sufficient).
If anyone should have regrets, it's Rutgers. They are the laughingstock in the conference and nationally. They have been "playing" college football for 150 years and never really been worth a damn. They are pathetic, but they are our BIG RIVAL, so let's just kick the snot out of them in 2 weeks and move on.
For a couple years when the TV contract are up that will probably heat up again or the entire landscape of college football will be different.
No remorse. Playing an extra conference game is preferable to playing Toledo or Texas State.
And we are making roughly the same amount of money as the SEC, due mostly to our TV money.
Maryland and Rutgers are both bad now, but both programs have potential. Both are cash strapped at the moment but in five or so years when they are collecting a full conference share, things should begin to improve. If Northwestern can develop into a solid mid level program, there is no reason Rutgers can't as well.
And we are making roughly the same amount of money as the SEC, due mostly to our TV money.
Maryland and Rutgers are both bad now, but both programs have potential. Both are cash strapped at the moment but in five or so years when they are collecting a full conference share, things should begin to improve. If Northwestern can develop into a solid mid level program, there is no reason Rutgers can't as well.
Last edited:
Can you really see Rutgers or Maryland ever be better than Indiana or Illinois IN THE B1G? The ACC doesn't count.
Sure. Both are in a similar situation as far as recruiting to Illinois. Both are better situated than Indiana.
I could see their potential to building into something like Iowa, given enough time with the right coach. You may laugh, but do you know how long Kansas St sucked before Snyder came along? It was like 50 + years.
But if they commit negligent homicide ... the coach is retained ...at least for a while... go figure
The inclusion of MD and Rutgers has only succeeded in getting the Big Ten basketball tournament in DC and NYC the last two years, which is no place for it to be. Keep it in Chicago and Indy and if the eastern schools don't like it, tough darts kiddo.
Perhaps all that cash the dumb conference has made off of being in those markets can go back to PSU when they restore the money from the unjust fine.
Perhaps all that cash the dumb conference has made off of being in those markets can go back to PSU when they restore the money from the unjust fine.
ESPNs Bottom 10 . . .
7. In a Rut-gers (1-8)
When I was in middle school, I decided to join an after-school Duran Duran Fan Club. For decades I carried the burden of Worst Membership Decision Ever. Then Rutgers joined the Big Ten and let me off the hook.
http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...florida-state-seminoles-miami-hurricanes-lose
7. In a Rut-gers (1-8)
When I was in middle school, I decided to join an after-school Duran Duran Fan Club. For decades I carried the burden of Worst Membership Decision Ever. Then Rutgers joined the Big Ten and let me off the hook.
http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...florida-state-seminoles-miami-hurricanes-lose
Yes.
Maryland already is: Obviously
2018 Big East Ten Standings:
Michigan 6-0
Ohio State 5-1
Michigan State 4-2
Penn State 3-3
Maryland 3-3
Indiana 1-5
Rutgers 0-6
Maryland has been a consistently better program than either of those two - whichever conference they are in - for 40 years.
Rutgers, as discussed earlier, will never be (IMO)
nah. The ACC was horrible for years. MD mustered about 3 good years under Friedgen. They've been poor in B1G play. MD is no better than Indiana.
Rutgers is and will always be a doormat. Interesting thought though, what if Maryland had promoted Franklin as originally planned. With the way he recruits we might just be looking up at them as a better program then us at this point in time.
All evidence to the contrary..... obviously
Top 20 NATIONAL Rankings since 1970:
Illinois - 6
Indiana - 3
Maryland - 13
Conference records since Maryland joined B10:
Maryland 13-27
Indiana 10-30
Illinois 9-31
LOL
How hard do you work at being stoopid?
"How hard do you work at being stoopid"
This is funny coming you of all people norm. The ease with which you display your stupidity each and every day is amazing. It's appears effortless.
Your B1G sample size is 4 seasons and the difference is 3 wins. To suggest that this constitutes MD being better than Indiana is, well, stoopid, as is trying to compare 48 years of play which include MD in the horrendous ACC and most of the statistical success coming before 1987.
On broader terms, you are taxing the brain that creates threads with a vague statement and no supporting details, trying to split hairs on the success of Maryland relative to Indiana. Don't overdo it little buddy!
Buyer's remorse? The schools were never invited for their athletic programs but for their geography, which has resulted in a lot of $$$ coming to the conference.
The Big Ten schools (ignoring Rutgers/Maryland) have around 500,000+ alumni in the D.C. and NYC/NJ areas with Penn State the largest followed by Ohio State/Michigan/Michigan State/Indiana and then the rest.
There's tens of millions of people that live in the DC to NYC corridor. The Mid-Atlantic up to Jersey is one of the best recruiting areas in the country, and the one from which recruits can be brought into the Big Ten most easily.
Maryland and Rutgers are both large universities that are dominant in their states. All of those reasons are why they were added. They bring in extra TV revenue for the rest of the schools. They let the other schools (especially Penn State) visit alumni in the region for football/basketball games.
No, they aren't going to win Big Ten championships in football, perhaps never in this divisional setup where one of Ohio State, Penn State, or Michigan will almost always be "up" and if none of those are, Michigan State would probably take it.
I think Maryland by virtue of its recruiting position and spending support can probably get off the mat quickest and at least become a respectable 6-8 win a year team.
Rutgers has good recruiting grounds but top Jersey kids have always left that state (like Illinois' top recruits leaving Illinois). Rutgers' long-term record feels like it'll be sorta like Indiana. 2-3 decent seasons a decade with lots of losing in-between.
I don't understand the buyer's remorse stuff? Leave Penn State on an island out east as the lone eastern school? That never made much sense.
There's tens of millions of people that live in the DC to NYC corridor. The Mid-Atlantic up to Jersey is one of the best recruiting areas in the country, and the one from which recruits can be brought into the Big Ten most easily.
Maryland and Rutgers are both large universities that are dominant in their states. All of those reasons are why they were added. They bring in extra TV revenue for the rest of the schools. They let the other schools (especially Penn State) visit alumni in the region for football/basketball games.
No, they aren't going to win Big Ten championships in football, perhaps never in this divisional setup where one of Ohio State, Penn State, or Michigan will almost always be "up" and if none of those are, Michigan State would probably take it.
I think Maryland by virtue of its recruiting position and spending support can probably get off the mat quickest and at least become a respectable 6-8 win a year team.
Rutgers has good recruiting grounds but top Jersey kids have always left that state (like Illinois' top recruits leaving Illinois). Rutgers' long-term record feels like it'll be sorta like Indiana. 2-3 decent seasons a decade with lots of losing in-between.
I don't understand the buyer's remorse stuff? Leave Penn State on an island out east as the lone eastern school? That never made much sense.
Rutgers does not understand college football or what it takes to win at a high level. Two significant issues: The move to the B10 was solely based on money and never improving the product on the field. The professors wield tremendous influence and often undermine the football program. I was staunchly opposed to hiring Chris Ash since he no head coaching experience or recruiting ties in NJ or the Northeast. His demeanor and personality leave very little to be desired. Rutgers would have been much better off putting Kyle Flood on a short leash and keeping him as a head coach. The man finished 9-4 in the Big East and 8-5 in the B10. He beat Michigan, Indiana, Arkansas, Maryland, UNC and gave Penn State a heck of a game. He was a profoundly better head coach than Chris Ash and most importantly the players loved playing for him.
Last edited:
And you know this how? The incremental revenue from the BTN contract after Rutgers and Maryland joined is considerably less than the conference revenue-sharing distribution to each school. Yes the value of the contracts with Fox/ESPN/CBS has increased significantly, but how much is directly attributable to the addition of those schools? Just a note, in case you hadn't noticed, but telecasts of Rutgers games have largely been relegated to the BTN.
