Syracuse and the Big Ten

[nzm136]

The ladies and the turtles were added for PSU. Look at PSU's recruiting classes. They're extremely VA, NJ, DE, and east PA heavy. Look at their alumni bases. DMV and NYC are two of their biggest alumni concentrations. Look at their donors. DMV and NYC are where their rich donors live. Look at where they recruit students. After PA the 4 most common states of origin are NY, NJ, MD, and VA. PSU's most played opponents are #1 Pitt, #2 Syracuse, #3 WVU (who is dying to join the ACC and would have agreed to be #16 in a heartbeat, Big XII GoR or not), #4 Temple (buy game), #5 Navy (N/A), and #6 UMD (who was in the ACC at the time), a couple of nolonger relevant teams (i.e. Bucknell) or games that are there PURELY because PSU has been in the B1G for 25 years, and Rutgers at #11. Ignoring yearly B1G games (i.e. focusing on the games that they chose to play when they were indy), UNC, NCSU, and ND all score really well. Miami is a semi-rivalry game (it has a Catholics vs. Convicts vibe and has been played for a NC before), ND is very much a rivalry game, and VT 100% would be (that's why they're scheduled to play OOC in the coming years), both Clemson and FSU would be HUGE games and GREAT for recruiting, and GT would be a decent game that's also recruiting gold (Franklin even held a camp down in Georgia shortly after the RU add). The ACC also has elite basketball. Granted PSU will never be a basketball power, but their best bet at any relevance is to be able to tell kids that they play Duke, UNC, UMD, Syracuse, Pitt, ND, and UVA every year in conference and that their team gets exposure that is unrivaled amongst other low tier teams that aren't in the ACC. Finally, the ACC was an absolutely elite academic institution at the time, only eclipsed by the Ivy League.

PSU 100% wanted Rutgers and Maryland for very obvious reasons that had NOTHING to do with their TV money. And, since the ACC is EXTREMELY attractive to PSU and EXTREMELY interested in PSU (for obvious reasons), PSU could credibly threaten to leave the conference. Given that PSU has LEGIONS of fans and is a rain maker, it was cheaper to bite the bullet and add Rutgers and Maryland to keep PSU than it was to let PSU leave.

Rutgers is not a valuable TV commodity. They never were (see BIG EAST TV payout) and they probably never will be - except for their relationship with PSU. All this fretting about not adding them is crazy. Had we added the Knights, the B1G would have just offered them a HUGE payout (i.e. like they did), and they would have left the ACC, along with UMD. And, since RU alone isn't worth an ACC payout, the money withheld would have mostly come out of the existing members' payouts anyway. It mostly would have netted.

EDIT: Wisconsin's HoF coach and AD even said the add was to keep PSU from getting wandering eyes. Delaney also said something similar and expressed shock at how astonishingly unprepared RU was for the B1G.

EDIT X2: "VT" was changed to "VA." Apparently I associate Virginia Tech with Virginia - either that or Vermont.

 

[RandygoCuse]

The ladies and the turtles were added for PSU. Look at PSU's recruiting classes. They're extremely VT, NJ, DE, and east PA heavy. Look at their alumni bases. DMV and NYC are two of their biggest alumni concentrations. Look at their donors. DMV and NYC are where their rich donors live. Look at where they recruit students. .

When you say "VT" do you mean "VA?" I can't imagine there is that much talent in Vermont.

 

[omniorange]

They wanted TV HHs and some goofball claim to "NYC" which we all know is silly nonsense. SU didn't "give" then NYC anymore than Rutgers does and NJ TV HHs are more of a sure thing in terms of BTN distribution than upstate NY.

Plus Rutgers is an easier trip for the hordes of B1G fans to descend upon for football than CNY.

I think they got what they wanted. A patsy program in a high population state.

My post was designed to highlight the two different points of view expressed so far in this thread between athletic program status versus cable subscriptions.

Expansion is always about $$$. Neither Rutgers nor SU add much in terms of national tv contracts.

Everything you state above was true about Rutgers since they added PSU back more than two decades ago. But they never came close to being important enough to add until the BTN came into play. With that model, suddenly the state of New Jersey did become important to them. With the cord-cutting going on the BTN subscriptions model is in far more danger of being hurt by the new trend than either ESPN or FOX sports (which is what the headlines recently have been about since they are the big fish).

Thus, imho, the decision of the B1G regarding Rutgers over SU for TV households versus which had the better athletics programs overall is still in doubt. If the B1G somehow manages to keep the BTN successful throughout the coming sea change cord-cutting is expected to achieve, then time will tell. If it doesn't, and SU is able to return to 90s status in terms of football (something I believe Babers style can achieve actually better in the B1G - even the vaunted B1G East division) than in the ACC, particularly in the ACC's Atlantic division), then the other side presented has a case.

As for those of us, including myself, who are happy with the ACC we should all keep in mind that the future stability of the ACC is in the hands of two programs and two programs alone - FSU and UNC.

The former which would likely take an SEC invite tomorrow if offered and the latter which is embroiled in a very nasty academic scandal over several decades. And even with those two programs I think posters here are underestimating the gulf that is happening between the Greater 2 and the Lesser 3 of the P5. It is a gulf that currently is wider than the old gulf between the Big East and the ACC back in the middle of the last decade when the ACC conference distributed more $$$ to their teams than any other conference.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Scooch]

Omni, that's all great. You're completely on top of this stuff.

But honestly, I just don't care that much anymore (on a personal level). I'm over worrying about conferences. I discuss it because it kills a few minutes during the day.

It'd be awesome if the ACC is stable and flourishes. If it doesn't, then whatever. I'll calibrate my SU fandom accordingly. At this point I find the business of college sports to be thoroughly obscene. I hang on because I love game days. I'd be disappointed if SU athletics was diminished because of some conference machinations beyond our control, but life's too short. I'd move on.

 

[omniorange]

Omni, that's all great. You're completely on top of this stuff.

But honestly, I just don't care that much anymore (on a personal level). I'm over worrying about conferences. I discuss it because it kills a few minutes during the day.

It'd be awesome if the ACC is stable and flourishes. If it doesn't, then whatever. I'll calibrate my SU fandom accordingly. At this point I find the business of college sports to be thoroughly obscene. I hang on because I love game days. I'd be disappointed if SU athletics was diminished because of some conference machinations beyond our control, but life's too short. I'd move on.

Understood and a very healthy attitude. I am just not there yet myself.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Bayside44]

Syracuse is a better fit institutionally with the schools in the the ACC but a better fit for proximity to regional rivalries for those in the B1G. Especially if UConn were to go B1G.

We would draw next to no fans at BiG games. Our alumni and our transplanted CNY fans live on the East Coast, Mid Atlantic and FL. No one snowbirds from Baldwinsville to Madison.

 

[nzm136]

When you say "VT" do you mean "VA?" I can't imagine there is that much talent in Vermont.

Good catch!

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I do kind of wish the B1G would pick apart the other conferences and start their own 36 team division. The ACC, B12, and P12 are carrying too much fat.

Non SEC P5 AAU schools: Arizona, Cal, Colorado, Duke, GA Tech, Iowa State, Kansas, Oregon, Pitt, Stanford, Texas, UCLA, UNC, USC, UVA, Washington

Markets: BC, Miami, SU

Brands: BYU, Notre Dame, Oklahoma

Left out: Arizona State, Baylor, Clemson, FSU, K State, Louisville, Oklahoma State, Oregon State, TCU, Texas Tech, Utah, Wake, Washington State, West Virginia

Picked up by SEC: NC State, VA Tech

New B1G divisions:

West: Cal, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Southwest: Arizona, BYU, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
Midwest: Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State, Purdue
South: Duke, GA Tech, Maryland, Miami, UNC, UVA
East: BC, Notre Dame, Penn Sate, Pitt, Rutgers, SU

 

[HtownOrange]

The ACC is a better fit, hands down. The B1G blew their

My post was designed to highlight the two different points of view expressed so far in this thread between athletic program status versus cable subscriptions.

Expansion is always about $$$. Neither Rutgers nor SU add much in terms of national tv contracts.

Everything you state above was true about Rutgers since they added PSU back more than two decades ago. But they never came close to being important enough to add until the BTN came into play. With that model, suddenly the state of New Jersey did become important to them. With the cord-cutting going on the BTN subscriptions model is in far more danger of being hurt by the new trend than either ESPN or FOX sports (which is what the headlines recently have been about since they are the big fish).

Thus, imho, the decision of the B1G regarding Rutgers over SU for TV households versus which had the better athletics programs overall is still in doubt. If the B1G somehow manages to keep the BTN successful throughout the coming sea change cord-cutting is expected to achieve, then time will tell. If it doesn't, and SU is able to return to 90s status in terms of football (something I believe Babers style can achieve actually better in the B1G - even the vaunted B1G East division) than in the ACC, particularly in the ACC's Atlantic division), then the other side presented has a case.

As for those of us, including myself, who are happy with the ACC we should all keep in mind that the future stability of the ACC is in the hands of two programs and two programs alone - FSU and UNC.

The former which would likely take an SEC invite tomorrow if offered and the latter which is embroiled in a very nasty academic scandal over several decades. And even with those two programs I think posters here are underestimating the gulf that is happening between the Greater 2 and the Lesser 3 of the P5. It is a gulf that currently is wider than the old gulf between the Big East and the ACC back in the middle of the last decade when the ACC conference distributed more $$$ to their teams than any other conference.

Cheers,
Neil

Like you, I like the ACC and believe the ACC is a much better fit for Syracuse. I discuss the B1G's decision to sit on their laurels when they were clearly in the driver's seat and doing so they missed the boat. However, I do differ in that the cord cutting will most likely hit the B1G the hardest of all conferences as they have forced their channel on the average consumer who could care less about the BTN. The SECN is probably safest as they have the T-shirt fans regardless, either via the cord or as a premium/pay service on the web. However, the SEC faces the issue that if they are the only conference raking in big dough, the remaining P4 could easily enhance the NCAA investigation of academics. All of this is just fun speculation, and ultimately, i think there will be an NFL/MLB type of arrangement where the P5 contract with TV as a group and each school gets a share, with some incentive for playoff teams and champions...yet it would remain out of the hands of the NCAA.

 

[Scooch]

You guys overstate the impact cord cutting will have on conferences. They aren't going from 80 million subscribing households to zero. Even if they lose 25% of their subs in the next decade they're still making gobs more money than they did pre-network.

These nets are all owned by major media companies, too. They'll find a way to persist.

 

[orange79]

They wanted TV HHs and some goofball claim to "NYC" which we all know is silly nonsense. SU didn't "give" then NYC anymore than Rutgers does and NJ TV HHs are more of a sure thing in terms of BTN distribution than upstate NY.

Plus Rutgers is an easier trip for the hordes of B1G fans to descend upon for football than CNY.

I think they got what they wanted. A patsy program in a high population state.

Who cares, really. We're where we should be. Rutgers can enjoy trips to the midwest.


M

Not to mention essentially zero in-state competition for high-level recruits.

Did I say 'essentially'? I meant absolutely.

 

[Hoo's That]

Didn't the ACC increase the buy-out figure for schools leaving the conference to something ridiculous?

How much is it?

It's actually a percentage of conference income, that is currently >$31 MM per another post I saw today, rather than a fixed number.

 

[HtownOrange]

You guys overstate the impact cord cutting will have on conferences. They aren't going from 80 million subscribing households to zero. Even if they lose 25% of their subs in the next decade they're still making gobs more money than they did pre-network.

These nets are all owned by major media companies, too. They'll find a way to persist.

I'm not saying anyone will go broke, just saying that the B1G will not be collecting from everyone. They will always have their fans, but the gravy train of millions of payers who never watch will come to an end. Since most NYC fans have no interest, the whole purpose of taking Rutgers will have been a waste of time and resources other than as a freebie win for everyone else.

 

[Townie72]

I'm not saying anyone will go broke, just saying that the B1G will not be collecting from everyone. They will always have their fans, but the gravy train of millions of payers who never watch will come to an end. Since most NYC fans have no interest, the whole purpose of taking Rutgers will have been a waste of time and resources other than as a freebie win for everyone else.

The idea has always been that IF Rutgers becomes competitive, then there will be a groundswell of interest and the birth of some sort of Jersey pride.

The RU faithful cling to this concept. Eventually we are going to be good and when we are we relatively small group of fans will have been in on the ground floor.

The spike in Metro interest in RU football around 2006 wasn't real support.It was based on the curiosity of it, the uniqueness of it.

My experience is that in NJ and NY, just being competitive isn't enough. You have to play against and win against what they see are "The Big Boys".

Rutgers immediate problem is becoming even competitive in football. Going up against OSU and Michigan would be a huge challenge for any program. Who in NJ is going towant to tune into a 50pt rout after the curiosity of RU being in the B1G wears off.

 

[Alsacs]

The idea has always been that IF Rutgers becomes competitive, then there will be a groundswell of interest and the birth of some sort of Jersey pride.

The RU faithful cling to this concept. Eventually we are going to be good and when we are we relatively small group of fans will have been in on the ground floor.

The spike in Metro interest in RU football around 2006 wasn't real support.It was based on the curiosity of it, the uniqueness of it.

My experience is that in NJ and NY, just being competitive isn't enough. You have to play against and win against what they see are "The Big Boys".

Rutgers immediate problem is becoming even competitive in football. Going up against OSU and Michigan would be a huge challenge for any program. Who in NJ is going towant to tune into a 50pt rout after the curiosity of RU being in the B1G wears off.

I would agree with you but I would say like any program if they became an annual 9 win team it would help drive interest in NYC.
They just will never achieve that consistency so it is moot. They may have a good season every once in a decade but that won't be enough to be the blimp on the radar as you said.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I would agree with you but I would say like any program if they became an annual 9 win team it would help drive interest in NYC.
They just will never achieve that consistency so it is moot. They may have a good season every once in a decade but that won't be enough to be the blimp on the radar as you said.

They also have a marketing issue. They should change to NJU or NJ State. People in NJ would be more willing to buy NJU or NJ State gear than RU gear. How can you represent the state and not have the name of the state? It doesn't make any sense. Let Rutgers be within NJU or NJ State as a highly selective part of the university. Let it be elite like it used to be. I would bet that more of the country think Rutgers is private and SU is public. Trenton State change to TCNJ in the mid 90s so it wouldn't be crazy for RU to do the same. How can you have NJ pride wearing for a school named Rutgers? People want something saying Jersey, so give them what they want.

 

[Alsacs]

They also have a marketing issue. They should change to NJU or NJ State. People in NJ would be more willing to buy NJU or NJ State gear than RU gear. How can you represent the state and not have the name of the state? It doesn't make any sense. Let Rutgers be within NJU or NJ State as a highly selective part of the university. Let it be elite like it used to be. I would bet that more of the country think Rutgers is private and SU is public. Trenton State change to TCNJ in the mid 90s so it wouldn't be crazy for RU to do the same. How can you have NJ pride wearing for a school named Rutgers? People want something saying Jersey, so give them what they want.

Yeah I don't know why they aren't the University of New Jersey. There has to be some reason. That branding would help it appears but who I am to say.

Syracuse is not perceived as public IMO.

I would say if RU were any good they would get some juice from NYC. They would need to be consistently decent though not just a fluke season.

 

[Scooch]

Yeah I don't know why they aren't the University of New Jersey. There has to be some reason. That branding would help it appears but who I am to say. Syracuse is not perceived as public IMO. I would say if RU were any good they would get some juice from NYC. They would need to be consistently decent though not just a fluke season.

Per Wikipedia, the school only became the state's flagship public university relatively recently. Note the part about how it's name is protected from change...

Originally chartered as Queen's College on November 10, 1766, Rutgers is the eighth-oldest college in the United States and one of the nine "Colonial Colleges" chartered before the American Revolution.[8][9] The college was renamed Rutgers College in 1825[10] in honor of Colonel Henry Rutgers (1745–1830), a New York City landowner, philanthropist and former military officer, whose $5000 [11] bond donation to the school allowed it to reopen after years of financial difficulty. For most of its existence, Rutgers was a private liberal arts collegeaffiliated with the Dutch Reformed Church and admitted only male students. The college expanded its role in research and instruction in agriculture, engineering, and science when it was named as the state's sole land-grant college in 1864 under the Morrill Act of 1862.[12]It gained university status in 1924 with the introduction of graduate education and further expansion.[12] However, Rutgers evolved into a coeducational public research university after being designated "The State University of New Jersey" by the New Jersey Legislature in laws enacted in 1945 and 1956.[13] It is one of only two colonial colleges that later became public universities.[a] Rutgers, however, remains something of a public-private hybrid, in particular retaining certain "private rights" against unilateral changes in its governance, name, and structure that the state might otherwise want to impose.[14]

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Per Wikipedia, the school only became the state's flagship public university relatively recently. Note the part about how it's name is protected from change...

I would think they can keep Rutgers College as an elite part of NJU. Maybe not, who knows. The Rutgers academic brand has been going downhill for decades. Separating Rutgers from the rest of the NJ riff raff would improve things academically and help both brands.

 

[RandygoCuse]

For people to be interested in Rutgers, three things need to happen:
1) Rutgers needs to be good
2&3) The Jets and Giants have to be bad.

I just can't see this happening. First off, the Big 1o has made it harder to pad your schedule with easy wins. On top of that, you're relying on two NFL franchises to flounder at the same time. How often could all of this occur?

 

[KaiserUEO]

For people to be interested in Rutgers, three things need to happen:
1) Rutgers needs to be good
2&3) The Jets and Giants have to be bad.

I just can't see this happening. First off, the Big 1o has made it harder to pad your schedule with easy wins. On top of that, you're relying on two NFL franchises to flounder at the same time. How often could all of this occur?

ridiculous.

2 & 3 are set attendence wise.

or at least 3 is.

a drop in wins wont affect anything other than their own attendence, there is no real spill over.

plus, no team is really 'out of it' in the NFL till after college football is over...baring a 0-the schedule type season.

rutgers does need to get more competitive, but right now they 'out butts in the seats' Syracuse by about 20k and they are quite popular amongst the folk in northern NJ.

i cant walk into a bar without seeing some kind of rutgers paraphernalia, 1 in every 4 cars it seems has big stupid Fn red R on it...and they do extremely well in getting families through the pop warner programs to all go.

make fun of them all you want, the last AD was a freakin joke and they really need to make a splash HC hire in the big 2 sports, but theyre not going away.

 

[Alsacs]

ridiculous.

2 & 3 are set attendence wise.

or at least 3 is.

a drop in wins wont affect anything other than their own attendence, there is no real spill over.

plus, no team is really 'out of it' in the NFL till after college football is over...baring a 0-the schedule type season.

rutgers does need to get more competitive, but right now they 'out butts in the seats' Syracuse by about 20k and they are quite popular amongst the folk in northern NJ.

i cant walk into a bar without seeing some kind of rutgers paraphernalia, 1 in every 4 cars it seems has big stupid Fn red R on it...and they do extremely well in getting families through the pop warner programs to all go.

make fun of them all you want, the last AD was a freakin joke and they really need to make a splash HC hire in the big 2 sports, but theyre not going away.

Nothing says splash like a DC with no HC experience in Chris Ash. We are lucky we got Dino Babers with his resume versus Chris Ash.

I agree Rutgers has potential to be atleast relevant in NYC with CFB. If they were winning 7-9 games annually they would get some attention. They aren't going to touch the NFL but they getting a little of attention in NYC is huge when you scale it.

Rutgers BB is a joke they haven't made the NCAAs since 1991 which older than the kids coming up now. They should have hired Hurley from URI but they stuck with Jordan. Not worried about RU hoops as they would need a decade of top 25 to scare Syracuse but CFB they are ahead of us perception wise now which sucks.

 

[TheCusian]

Nothing says splash like a DC with no HC experience in Chris Ash. We are lucky we got Dino Babers with his resume versus Chris Ash. I agree Rutgers has potential to be atleast relevant in NYC with CFB. If they were winning 7-9 games annually they would get some attention. They aren't going to touch the NFL but they getting a little of attention in NYC is huge when you scale it. Rutgers BB is a joke they haven't made the NCAAs since 1991 which older than the kids coming up now. They should have hired Hurley from URI but they stuck with Jordan. Not worried about RU hoops as they would need a decade of top 25 to scare Syracuse but CFB they are ahead of us perception wise now which sucks.

I don't know, man. Perception wise we landed a well respected coach, followed up by a decent short recruitment period where we had a good class. They got an unproven guy who hemorrhaged recruits and has no HC experience.

I'd say we've passed them.

 

[MSOrange]

Nothing says splash like a DC with no HC experience in Chris Ash. We are lucky we got Dino Babers with his resume versus Chris Ash.

I agree Rutgers has potential to be atleast relevant in NYC with CFB. If they were winning 7-9 games annually they would get some attention. They aren't going to touch the NFL but they getting a little of attention in NYC is huge when you scale it.

Rutgers BB is a joke they haven't made the NCAAs since 1991 which older than the kids coming up now. They should have hired Hurley from URI but they stuck with Jordan. Not worried about RU hoops as they would need a decade of top 25 to scare Syracuse but CFB they are ahead of us perception wise now which sucks.

At least Jordan graduated. That's progress - kinda.

 

[Alsacs]

I don't know, man. Perception wise we landed a well respected coach, followed up by a decent short recruitment period where we had a good class. They got an unproven guy who hemorrhaged recruits and has no HC experience.

I'd say we've passed them.

No we haven't. Both teams have struggled but they have been to more bowls the last decade and what NFL talent have we put into the NFL besides Chandler and Pugh recently?

They are ahead of us until we have a productive 3 year run.