Can anyone shed some light on why this program is so awful? I caught some of the Maryland game last night and Rutgers looked dreadful. Somehow they only have 6 scholarship players available (if I heard right), which is the same situation they were in last season if memory serves. I would think you could find some solid talent in New Jersey and surrounding areas. Bishop Daniels is a great player, but the rest of the guys look like athletes who got offered basketball scholarships. It seems like Eddie Jordan has been rebuilding since they joined the big ten.
Rutgers
- Thread starter Ihawkhoops
- Start date
Inviting Rutgers into the B1G is still a very questionable decision. The FB program is barely competitive, but the BB program under Jordan is awful. Easiest pick is which team will finish last in the conference in BB.
An old topic for me as I was complaining last season about Rutgers. I'll try to recall the defenses that were given.
1) Money. By having Rutgers it puts the Big Ten Network in New York homes. The Big Ten gets paid for that just for having the network available no matter if people watch or not.
2) Money. Obviously when the Big Ten opened a second office in New York City and even arranged to have the Big Ten Tournament played at Madison Square Garden (Although a week early due to scheduling conflicts.) Our fine leaders feel that the East Coast is going to fall in love with Big Ten basketball.
3) Rutgers won't get a full share of Big Ten cash for a few years, and when they do apparently if they can get past New Jersey politics they just might decide to upgrade facilities.
4) It's not all about sports and Rutgers is a jolly old academic place that is peachy.
OK, that's a half-hearted attempt to recall why it was such a great idea to add Rutgers. I don't see why we couldn't have held out for a better find such as maybe Syracuse? I don't know. Must be a reason. But I remain skeptical that Rutgers will ever be more than a Northwestern of the East and in the end I can't believe cable networks and such won't get cheap if the product isn't good. Oh well, what do I know.
I get a little miffed because I feel like the Big Ten is way to focused on the East side of the Mississippi River. All this great new recruiting territory will help schools out East and make things tougher for schools in the West. Besides, that stupid pop up map that appears in Big Ten commercials during games just reminds me of how everything is aiming towards the rising sun! What's next? Schools in Great Britain?
1) Money. By having Rutgers it puts the Big Ten Network in New York homes. The Big Ten gets paid for that just for having the network available no matter if people watch or not.
2) Money. Obviously when the Big Ten opened a second office in New York City and even arranged to have the Big Ten Tournament played at Madison Square Garden (Although a week early due to scheduling conflicts.) Our fine leaders feel that the East Coast is going to fall in love with Big Ten basketball.
3) Rutgers won't get a full share of Big Ten cash for a few years, and when they do apparently if they can get past New Jersey politics they just might decide to upgrade facilities.
4) It's not all about sports and Rutgers is a jolly old academic place that is peachy.
OK, that's a half-hearted attempt to recall why it was such a great idea to add Rutgers. I don't see why we couldn't have held out for a better find such as maybe Syracuse? I don't know. Must be a reason. But I remain skeptical that Rutgers will ever be more than a Northwestern of the East and in the end I can't believe cable networks and such won't get cheap if the product isn't good. Oh well, what do I know.
I get a little miffed because I feel like the Big Ten is way to focused on the East side of the Mississippi River. All this great new recruiting territory will help schools out East and make things tougher for schools in the West. Besides, that stupid pop up map that appears in Big Ten commercials during games just reminds me of how everything is aiming towards the rising sun! What's next? Schools in Great Britain?
Money. Academics. Money. Population. Money. Rutgers will come around. They have the resources and people.
IMHO adding Nebraska was a mistake. 1.3 million people? "But they have such a winning traditional and are nationally known". You lose, and people will forget about you. Period. Now we are stuck paying for them.
You can throw Notre Dame in a conference. No ESPN, two losing seasons later and you have a has-been. An average Joe. As soon as ND joins a conference, people will forget about them. Guaranteed. Just like Nebraska. They would be a very bad decision for the B1G, long-term... Three teams in Indiana? Yeah, that makes sense.
Americans are VERY short sighted anymore. Have been for last 25 years. We are a "what have you done for me lately" society anymore. Kind of sad really.
Back on topic. Rutgers will come around. It is NOT Ames. They have the resources. They have the population. Now they have the B1G money.
One other note, who was Wisconsin the 20 years prior to Barry? For that matter, who was Iowa the 19 years before Hayden...?
IMHO adding Nebraska was a mistake. 1.3 million people? "But they have such a winning traditional and are nationally known". You lose, and people will forget about you. Period. Now we are stuck paying for them.
You can throw Notre Dame in a conference. No ESPN, two losing seasons later and you have a has-been. An average Joe. As soon as ND joins a conference, people will forget about them. Guaranteed. Just like Nebraska. They would be a very bad decision for the B1G, long-term... Three teams in Indiana? Yeah, that makes sense.
Americans are VERY short sighted anymore. Have been for last 25 years. We are a "what have you done for me lately" society anymore. Kind of sad really.
Back on topic. Rutgers will come around. It is NOT Ames. They have the resources. They have the population. Now they have the B1G money.
One other note, who was Wisconsin the 20 years prior to Barry? For that matter, who was Iowa the 19 years before Hayden...?
No rivalries between Rutgers and anyone. Pretty sparse crowd at MD last night and not a game any traditional big ten team fan is going to circle on the calendar and New Jersey is why terms like gar hole were invented IMO, so not a destination game. I work with a couple Rutgers grads and they have 0 interest in sports other than lacrosse.
Rutgers is not the Northwestern of the East. They are New Jersey's state school. Not sure why it's called Rutgers and not UNJ or NJSU?
I'm hoping the crowd for Maryland is equally sparce when we go in there in 3 weeks. I'm hoping to attend but it's sold out, so it would be nice if there's boat-loads of tix available outside.
+1 Per US News, Rutgers is overall the worst academic school (140) in the B1G, and Northwestern is the best (12).
Context. "But I remain skeptical that Rutgers will ever be more than a Northwestern of the East and in the end I can't believe cable networks and such won't get cheap if the product isn't good." Northwestern takes their share of Big Ten money, but have you looked at their facilities? That's what I meant.
IMHO adding Nebraska was a mistake. 1.3 million people? "But they have such a winning traditional and are nationally known". You lose, and people will forget about you. Period. Now we are stuck paying for them.
--------------------------------------
Agree with that. Rutgers and Nebraska were both huge mistakes that will never redeem themselves. At best, Rutgers might hope for mediocrity some day, but how many programs have dramatically transformed themselves over the past 20 years? Not many.
I would have been much happier with Missouri and Pittsburgh. They both fit the Big mold better and have more to offer. I admit some bias, I was hoping Missouri would be added so that I could see Iowa play more often.
--------------------------------------
Agree with that. Rutgers and Nebraska were both huge mistakes that will never redeem themselves. At best, Rutgers might hope for mediocrity some day, but how many programs have dramatically transformed themselves over the past 20 years? Not many.
I would have been much happier with Missouri and Pittsburgh. They both fit the Big mold better and have more to offer. I admit some bias, I was hoping Missouri would be added so that I could see Iowa play more often.
My joking take on the recent Big Ten expansions: it's all about Iowa and women's basketball. Nebraska was added so their coach from Ankeny can come back to Iowa. Rutgers was added so that Coach C. Vivian Stringer can visit her old haunt Iowa City more often. Maryland was added so that their coach Brenda Frese from Cedar Rapids can be booed every time she steps onto the court in Carver. Besides, all three teams are good to excellent.
Pitt would have been a much better addition for athletic competitiveness in men's b-ball and football.
I personally hate the breakup of the Big East and the recent trend of massive conference realignments. I think everyone can see it for what it is: the pursuit of maximizing profits.
I understand change happens and in some cases makes perfect sense. With that said, one of the great things about college sports is the so-called tradition and pageantry that once existed because of the strong emphasis on conference pride. To me, that in large part is related to geography.
For me, the Big Ten will always be about the Midwest. Nothing personal against Maryland or Rutgers, but they belong in a conference out east. If that's old-fashioned and archaic thinking, so be it. One of the things I applaud the NFL for is realigning the divisions based upon some sensible regard for geography after the last expansion. Prior to the realignment, I had no answer for the fourth grade geography student who asked me to explain why the New Orleans Saints were in the NFC West or why the Phoenix Cardinals were in the same division as the New York Giants.
I understand change happens and in some cases makes perfect sense. With that said, one of the great things about college sports is the so-called tradition and pageantry that once existed because of the strong emphasis on conference pride. To me, that in large part is related to geography.
For me, the Big Ten will always be about the Midwest. Nothing personal against Maryland or Rutgers, but they belong in a conference out east. If that's old-fashioned and archaic thinking, so be it. One of the things I applaud the NFL for is realigning the divisions based upon some sensible regard for geography after the last expansion. Prior to the realignment, I had no answer for the fourth grade geography student who asked me to explain why the New Orleans Saints were in the NFC West or why the Phoenix Cardinals were in the same division as the New York Giants.
Rutgers needs Delaney to manufacture a rivalry for them with someone else. Things have really heated up between the Boilers and us the past five years...
Many short-sided views in this thread.
Rutgers and Maryland both extend the B1G footprint to the far eastern reaches of the United States which remains a large population center. In addition both universities are huge research facilities. Rutgers is ranked about #5 in the B1G followed by Maryland at #6. Both are in the top 35 in the US. The U of Iowa did not make the list of the top 50.
Despite the US World News ranking of 140 that was quoted for Rutgers there are many other rankings including world rankings that have Rutgers ranked significantly higher.
Here's a write up on Rutgers research ....
Research at Rutgers is vast and many of the university’s research is world-renowned. Rutgers University Cell and DNA Repository is the largest university based repository in the world and has received over $57.8 million from the National Institutes of Health......... spends nearly $744 million per year in research and development
One of the key issues on the athletics side is facilities. From what I understand Rutgers is carrying some athletic department debt as is Maryland and I do not believe either university is receiving a full share of revenue from the B1G. It's standard practice when you join to be phased in. As they slowly receive an infusion of cash, this will permit them to pay off old debt and begin upgrading their facilities to attract better coaches & players. They both have access to players without going very far as we know.
Although Rutgers basketball has been bad for extended period, the football team has had recent success and their first year in the conference they did reasonably well and won a bowl game against UNC 40-21. This year was not good at all but most likely a reflection of major graduation losses which happen. By the way we have lost 4 straight bowls at Iowa.
I think these 2 additions were strategic additions and could be dramatically improve themselves in stature when you look ahead 10 years. There's a reason the ACC did not want to relinquish control of Maryland and why there are rumors about the viability now of the ACC despite having 16 members. The B1G also stands to benefit from the market sizes they play in with future TV/Media contracts.
The brass in the B1G are not a bunch of bozo's that just threw some darts at the wall to pick these 2 teams. They were strategic acquisitions as a part of a longer term plan to put the B1G in the best possible position. It is also looking at potential of not where an asset is now, but where it could grow to.
I'm excited to see who the next 2 teams will be and have enjoyed having some new members in this conference.
Rutgers and Maryland both extend the B1G footprint to the far eastern reaches of the United States which remains a large population center. In addition both universities are huge research facilities. Rutgers is ranked about #5 in the B1G followed by Maryland at #6. Both are in the top 35 in the US. The U of Iowa did not make the list of the top 50.
Despite the US World News ranking of 140 that was quoted for Rutgers there are many other rankings including world rankings that have Rutgers ranked significantly higher.
Here's a write up on Rutgers research ....
Research at Rutgers is vast and many of the university’s research is world-renowned. Rutgers University Cell and DNA Repository is the largest university based repository in the world and has received over $57.8 million from the National Institutes of Health......... spends nearly $744 million per year in research and development
One of the key issues on the athletics side is facilities. From what I understand Rutgers is carrying some athletic department debt as is Maryland and I do not believe either university is receiving a full share of revenue from the B1G. It's standard practice when you join to be phased in. As they slowly receive an infusion of cash, this will permit them to pay off old debt and begin upgrading their facilities to attract better coaches & players. They both have access to players without going very far as we know.
Although Rutgers basketball has been bad for extended period, the football team has had recent success and their first year in the conference they did reasonably well and won a bowl game against UNC 40-21. This year was not good at all but most likely a reflection of major graduation losses which happen. By the way we have lost 4 straight bowls at Iowa.
I think these 2 additions were strategic additions and could be dramatically improve themselves in stature when you look ahead 10 years. There's a reason the ACC did not want to relinquish control of Maryland and why there are rumors about the viability now of the ACC despite having 16 members. The B1G also stands to benefit from the market sizes they play in with future TV/Media contracts.
The brass in the B1G are not a bunch of bozo's that just threw some darts at the wall to pick these 2 teams. They were strategic acquisitions as a part of a longer term plan to put the B1G in the best possible position. It is also looking at potential of not where an asset is now, but where it could grow to.
I'm excited to see who the next 2 teams will be and have enjoyed having some new members in this conference.
Rutgers is 2nd rate academics and 3rd rate sports. Really stupid to bring in a door mat team in all sports. They won't bring eyeballs.
MIssouri and Pitt were the clear best choices. Nebraska is kind of lame. Rutgers is just stupidity.
Missouri would have been a good one. With 6 million pairs of eyeballs, and bordering 2 B1G states that would have been much better than Nebraska , in the long run. No question.
Pitt wouldn't have been bad either. Although with the state is already wrapped up with Penn State, not much would have been added in the eyeball department.
New Jersey has 9 million people. And is just across the river from New York & another 8+ million. That's a lot of eyeballs to gain.
Rutgers had to commit to improving their facilities to join the B1G. That is happening. Build it and they will come, right? It's possible. Turn any of their programs around and they will have the people to fill the stands. All it takes is one not-so-good coach to ruin a program(see previous Iowa bball coach), and one very good coach to turn a program into a success (see current Iowa bball coach). It can happen with the right hire. Just ONE hire. You simply need to look towards Iowa City for examples.
Want another? Manhattan, Kansas... Bill Snyder has made something out of nothing in lil ole KSU. And he did it TWICE. Imagine a coach like Bill at Rutgers, 40 miles from the Real Manhattan. Tell me you don't see dollar signs $$...?
The real problem with RU is lack of tradition and historical relevancy imo. They cannot build that overnight. You can say all it takes is "ONE hire" but that hire is going to need a decade or more to turn the ship around and build up the tradition. That's if he decides to stick around once his name becomes a hot commodity after a few years and a blue blood doesn't come knocking on his door.
Rutgers doesn't have football tradition? Didn't they invent the game?
I agree with the poster that said most of you are incredibly short sighted. There was a real push and still is to minimize the Big Ten by organizations such as ESPN. Delaney basically took control by adding these two institutions.
As nice as athletics is they are really nothing compared to research dollars. Rutgers sits in a tremendous location for research especially in pharmaceuticals. Maryland is in Washington DC.
Not everything is about sports but I would expect that both of these schools will end up doing quite well.
The east coast snobbery concerning academics does not mean much compared to the reality of the quality of education. Rutgers is a good school as is Maryland. While competition with pro sports will likely mean that there wont be a fanbase like many other big ten schools that doesn't mean it wont happen over time.
I agree with the poster that said most of you are incredibly short sighted. There was a real push and still is to minimize the Big Ten by organizations such as ESPN. Delaney basically took control by adding these two institutions.
As nice as athletics is they are really nothing compared to research dollars. Rutgers sits in a tremendous location for research especially in pharmaceuticals. Maryland is in Washington DC.
Not everything is about sports but I would expect that both of these schools will end up doing quite well.
The east coast snobbery concerning academics does not mean much compared to the reality of the quality of education. Rutgers is a good school as is Maryland. While competition with pro sports will likely mean that there wont be a fanbase like many other big ten schools that doesn't mean it wont happen over time.
Not going to besmirch the academics at the university, but Rutgers has been an embarrassment to the Big Ten athletically both on and off the field and court.
A decade? Not many programs have a Jamie Pollard as an AD that eill alow their coach to wallow in the swill for that long. None in the B1G, for certain. Regardless, it takes one coach. But the right coach. And the right coach will not take a decade to turn things around.
American football was started at Rutgers. They have a history. They will have a winning team someday. It is just too bad that they do not play in the west, for them.
Do you think 1-2 or even 4-5 winning seasons equates to "tradition"?
I'm not talking Iowa State level "tradition" ....they will eventually (near future) slide back to mediocrity and remain there for a while, just like UNLV. That's what you get for building a house of cards with JUCOS and transfers. I'm talking about the kind of tradition that is built over a sustained period and can withstand a few down years (ex. Syracuse or UConn or Georgetown).
Last edited:
I guess I wasn't talking about a tradition... Just winning. Getting to a bowl game or the NCAAs. It will happen. The B1G needs it to happen for revenue growth. Just a couple years of winning would be huge to the market.
But if not, everyone needs their Vanderbilt. We lost ours when Northwestern decided to win. ;}
But if not, everyone needs their Vanderbilt. We lost ours when Northwestern decided to win. ;}
No worries, I guess you must have misread my original post. My point is that it was a tremendous risk by the conference to bring in a school without any tradition...(not even some really)...in either of the two revenue sports. Could RU begin to build some?...sure. It will take a while and that's where the risk of just "ONE hire" is probably not going to work. Unless that hire is someone with strong loyalty to RU, and will not jump after a few winning seasons to a big dog with its own tradition.
That means virtually nothing now. At least not in a way that translates to energizing a fan base and generating excitement, attendance, donor dollars.
How much interest would there be in Iowa football if the peak of the program was with Nile Kinnick in the 30s and ever since it had been more like the 70s?
Iowa has a great past history, but it also has a relevant recent history in the memories of people who were actually alive to appreciate it.
I know many fans want to hang on to the Big Ten as we have always known it as strictly a Midwestern conference but you have it right that the Big Ten brass made a very strategic decision to add these two big markets in the East as we move forward in the era of the super conferences. I never had any illusions that Rutgers would not have a messy situation to work through as they entered the Big Ten although I had it wrong that Eddie Jordan seemed the right guy to turn around their basketball program and I don't expect him to survive there.
If you have paid attention to recent events Rutgers seems to have entered into a new era on the athletic side. Patrick Hobbs looks like a good fit there for Athletic Director coming from Seton Hall and replacing the fired AD who went out along with the football coach. He appears to have made a very good move in football bringing in Ohio State co-defensive coordinator Chris Ash. If we see movement on the basketball front then I think we'll know he means business.
If you allow yourself to take the long view I think over time Rutgers will seem like a worthy addition to the Big Ten. Just too easy too get caught up in the messiness of the current moment.
