SU should open big every year.

[nzm136]

There is a huge difference between 'playing anyone anywhere' and over-scheduling. Last year we were stuck with our schedule with teams leaving. Do you really think it's better to play 2 B1G teams, a Pac-12 team, and an SEC team (three of those on the road) AND play a conference schedule that includes Clemson, Florida St, etc? Teams need a break, and need to schedule a breather or two. Playing an OOC schedule like last year and then having to play an ACC schedule is a coach-killer. It simply makes no sense to schedule a WV/RU/CT - lose-lose situation. Although I could see doing a home-an-home with WV sometime in the future, let RU and CT rot. I would have an easier time seeing the team if they played in NJ or CT than many of the ACC sites, but that doesn't mean it's better for SU football-wise. I'm not saying schedule like RU or VT. But to over-schedule or play lose-lose games like RU/CT at this point in SU's development would be ludicrous.

Your logic is fawed for two reasons:
1. By starting weak, you decrease the time for breaks. By starting strong and then taking a game off, you inherently break up the season more than starting weak and then building up.

2. I'm not even calling for an extra elite team that we wouldn't play anyway. PSU is one of our 4 rivals (the other 3 being WVU, BC, and Pitt). Refusing to play a rival because you are scared is weak. I also never said that we had to play a 3 games on the road. I have no idea where you are getting that.

3. We are talking about Rutgers and UCONN. You're making it sound like I am calling for yearly games against Michigan and Alabama. RU and UCONN aren't coach killers. They are the breaks that you are calling for. UCONN isn't even in a major conference. Heck, they aren't even favored to win their non-major conference. In fact, there is a good chance that they will finish 3rd or 4th most years int their non-major conferences.

4. And yes, playing infront of fans is better for SU football-wise. Who do you think pays for SU football?

5. How is being afraid of Rutgers and UCONN not sceduling like RU and VT? That screams RU. Seriosuly think about that for a second. We are talking abotu RUTGERS and UCONN. UCONN didn't even has a D-IA team 10 years ago, and RU is the poster child for stinking.

 

[nzm136]

Rutgers "competitiveness" had nothing to do with their invite. Nothing. The number of cable television sets in the New york New Jersey area had everything to do with it.

I don't think that you caught my sarcasm. And the number of TV sets in NYC only matter if people watch/want to watch, and that only happens if there are fans (see the number of PSU fans in NYC)

 

[Alsacs]

With an 8 game ACC schedule my ideal OOC schedule would
1 1-AA school to get 5 home games off the bat.
1 B1G(non-RU)/SEC/Big XII team
1 MAC school
1 rover game that can be a neutral site game (like at Metlife with a Penn State this year or a game in the region where the coaching staff wants to recruit)
I wouldn't schedule MWC or Pac-12 teams as we don't get anything out of them, and we don't recruit that region.

 

[orange79]

Your logic is fawed for two reasons:
1. By starting weak, you decrease the time for breaks. By starting strong and then taking a game off, you inherently break up the season more than starting weak and then building up. What are you talking about?

2. I'm not even calling for an extra elite team that we wouldn't play anyway. PSU is one of our 4 (the other 3 being WVU, BC, and Pitt). Refusing to play a rival because you are scared is weak. I also never said that we had to play a 3 games on the road. I have no idea where you are getting that. First, they are not 'rivals'. Where did you get that idea? Second, there is a HUGE difference between being scared to play someone and understanding there is no reason to play someone. Not sure why you don't get this...

3. We are talking about Rutgers and UCONN. You're making it sound like I am calling for yearly games against Michigan and Alabama. RU and UCONN aren't coach killers. They are the breaks that you are calling for. UCONN isn't even in a major conference. Heck, they aren't even favored to win their non-major conference. In fact, there is a good chance that they will finish 3rd or 4th most years int their non-major conferences. These points still don't address the fact that there is no good reason to play these teams.

4. And yes, playing infront of fans is better for SU football-wise. Who do you think pays for SU football? How does playing at RU or UConn pay for SU football more than playing on the road anywhere else?

5. How is being afraid of Rutgers and UCONN not sceduling like RU and VT? That screams RU. Seriosuly think about that for a second. We are talking abotu RUTGERS and UCONN. UCONN didn't even has a D-IA team 10 years ago, and RU is the poster child for stinking. Again, I did not say I was scared of playing them. I said there is no good reason to play them. Huge difference. I don't know how else I can say it.

I'm done. We agree to disagree. But frankly, I do not understand any of your points when it comes to RU or UConn. As I said before, lose-lose. F them

 

[nzm136]

I'm done. We agree to disagree. But frankly, I do not understand any of your points when it comes to RU or UConn. As I said before, lose-lose. F them

Your logic is fawed for two reasons:
1. By starting weak, you decrease the time for breaks. By starting strong and then taking a game off, you inherently break up the season more than starting weak and then building up. What are you talking about?

ANSWER: Hard-Easy-Hard = a break --> Easy-Hard-Hard = no break. Starting out hard creates breaks. Starting out soft destroys them. You are calling for breaks, but wanting to start out soft. You are arguing against yourself.

2. I'm not even calling for an extra elite team that we wouldn't play anyway. PSU is one of our 4 (the other 3 being WVU, BC, and Pitt). Refusing to play a rival because you are scared is weak. I also never said that we had to play a 3 games on the road. I have no idea where you are getting that. First, they are not ' '. Where did you get that idea? Second, there is a HUGE difference between being scared to play someone and understanding there is no reason to play someone. Not sure why you don't get this...
ANSWER: We literally made "Rivalry Renewed" T-shirts when we played PSU in '08, we literally have a trophy with WVU, we are literally called "cross-division rivals" with Pitt, and we were the first BIG EAST team to play BC for a reason. You are arguing that playing PSU is too hard, so we shouldn't play them. What possible understanding of those words could mean anything but that you want us to dodge them because you're scared that we might lose.

3. We are talking about Rutgers and UCONN. You're making it sound like I am calling for yearly games against Michigan and Alabama. RU and UCONN aren't coach killers. They are the breaks that you are calling for. UCONN isn't even in a major conference. Heck, they aren't even favored to win their non-major conference. In fact, there is a good chance that they will finish 3rd or 4th most years int their non-major conferences. These points still don't address the fact that there is no good reason to play these teams.
ANSWER: No. The reason was provided in earleir posts to which you invinted a fiction that SU's new coaching staff was prioritizing Ohio for recruiting purposes. I'm addressing your claim that playing RU and UCONN are "coach killers."

4. And yes, playing infront of fans is better for SU football-wise. Who do you think pays for SU football? How does playing at RU or UConn pay for SU football more than playing on the road anywhere else?
ANSWER; Syracuse fans don't live just anywhere in large numbers. Playing near the city puts the game infron tof Syracuse fans and energizes the fan base down there. If you can't figure out how to translate that into more money, then I don't know what to say.

5. How is being afraid of Rutgers and UCONN not sceduling like RU and VT? That screams RU. Seriosuly think about that for a second. We are talking abotu RUTGERS and UCONN. UCONN didn't even has a D-IA team 10 years ago, and RU is the poster child for stinking. Again, I did not say I was scared of playing them. I said there is no good reason to play them. Huge difference. I don't know how else I can say it.

ANSWER: You said "[p]laying an OOC schedule like last year and then having to play an ACC schedule is a coach-killer. It simply makes no sense to schedule a WV/RU/CT - lose-lose situation," which is equating playing WVU, RU, and UCONN to playing the #2 OOC schedule in the nation and then saying that you don't want to do that because it's a "coach-killer." How could those word be understood in a way that doesn't invovle you beeing scared of UCONN and RU?

RE EARLEIR POST: 1) I never said that we should play RU in the Meadowlands and 2) you do realize where Conencticut is, right? No, there isn't much talent in CT, butCT is so close to NYC that much of NYC actually spills over into CT. We wouldn't be playing CT to get CT recruits. We would be playing CT to get NYC/North NJ recruits, and even you admitted that you wanted those.

 

[orange79]

Your logic is fawed for two reasons:
1. By starting weak, you decrease the time for breaks. By starting strong and then taking a game off, you inherently break up the season more than starting weak and then building up. What are you talking about?

ANSWER: Hard-Easy-Hard = a break --> Easy-Hard-Hard = no break. Starting out hard creates breaks. Starting out soft destroys them. You are calling for breaks, but wanting to start out soft. You are arguing against yourself.

2. I'm not even calling for an extra elite team that we wouldn't play anyway. PSU is one of our 4 (the other 3 being WVU, BC, and Pitt). Refusing to play a rival because you are scared is weak. I also never said that we had to play a 3 games on the road. I have no idea where you are getting that. First, they are not ' '. Where did you get that idea? Second, there is a HUGE difference between being scared to play someone and understanding there is no reason to play someone. Not sure why you don't get this...
ANSWER: We literally made "Rivalry Renewed" T-shirts when we played PSU in '08, we literally have a trophy with WVU, we are literally called "cross-division " with Pitt, and we were the first BIG EAST team to play BC for a reason. You are arguing that playing PSU is too hard, so we shouldn't play them. What possible understanding of those words could mean anything but that you want us to dodge them because you're scared that we might lose.

3. We are talking about Rutgers and UCONN. You're making it sound like I am calling for yearly games against Michigan and Alabama. RU and UCONN aren't coach killers. They are the breaks that you are calling for. UCONN isn't even in a major conference. Heck, they aren't even favored to win their non-major conference. In fact, there is a good chance that they will finish 3rd or 4th most years int their non-major conferences. These points still don't address the fact that there is no good reason to play these teams.
ANSWER: No. The reason was provided in earleir posts to which you invinted a fiction that SU's new coaching staff was prioritizing Ohio for recruiting purposes. I'm addressing your claim that playing RU and UCONN are "coach killers."

4. And yes, playing infront of fans is better for SU football-wise. Who do you think pays for SU football? How does playing at RU or UConn pay for SU football more than playing on the road anywhere else?
ANSWER; Syracuse fans don't live just anywhere in large numbers. Playing near the city puts the game infron tof Syracuse fans and energizes the fan base down there. If you can't figure out how to translate that into more money, then I don't know what to say.

5. How is being afraid of Rutgers and UCONN not sceduling like RU and VT? That screams RU. Seriosuly think about that for a second. We are talking abotu RUTGERS and UCONN. UCONN didn't even has a D-IA team 10 years ago, and RU is the poster child for stinking. Again, I did not say I was scared of playing them. I said there is no good reason to play them. Huge difference. I don't know how else I can say it.

ANSWER: You said "[p]laying an OOC schedule like last year and then having to play an ACC schedule is a coach-killer. It simply makes no sense to schedule a WV/RU/CT - lose-lose situation," which is equating playing WVU, RU, and UCONN to playing the #2 OOC schedule in the nation and then saying that you don't want to do that because it's a "coach-killer." How could those word be understood in a way that doesn't invovle you beeing scared of UCONN and RU?

RE EARLEIR POST: 1) I never said that we should play RU in the Meadowlands and 2) you do realize where Conencticut is, right? No, there isn't much talent in CT, butCT is so close to NYC that much of NYC actually spills over into CT. We wouldn't be playing CT to get CT recruits. We would be playing CT to get NYC/North NJ recruits, and even you admitted that you wanted those.

I am not even sure why I am responding to this, but I will point out that I NEVER called for a 'break'. Please show me where I said this. I NEVER said that playing PSU is too hard. Please show me where I said this. Also, I never said playing RU or UConn were coach-killers. Please show me where I said this. I admit I did not make myself clear when I listed OH MAC teams, but later clarified that I meant we were emphasizing the Midwest. And once again, please read and understand this, I NEVER said I was scared of playing RU or UConn. I said there was no good reason to play RU or UConn. Do you see the difference? I never said we should play RU in the Meadowlands either. Please show me where I said this. And let's be truthful, neither CT or NYC are loaded with football talent. And yes, Sparky, I know where CT is. And we can agree to disagree that playing CT would be a way to get NYC recruits. This time I'm really done. Unless of course your reading comprehension improves a bit.

 

[Dnyr85]

I couldn't agree more. 1-=0 is a lot better than 0-1. If you want to get the casual fan back, get them excited by wins. Who they are, don't matter as much to the casual fan.

I agree, but I remember several posters alone griping about playing StonyBrook, Rhode Island, Wagner(upcoming), Maine, Cornell hell even Tulane. What makes it any different with the casual fan?

I think most fans want to see the bigger named schools, and wins or losses against them, mainly the anticipation of going 1-0 against them instead of the potential of starting 1-0(or even, dare I say it a loss) against a lower caliber school, that's just how the local casual fans seem to be.

 

[nzm136]

I am not even sure why I am responding to this, but I will point out that I NEVER called for a 'break'. Please show me where I said this. I NEVER said that playing PSU is too hard. Please show me where I said this. Also, I never said playing RU or UConn were coach-killers. Please show me where I said this. I admit I did not make myself clear when I listed OH MAC teams, but later clarified that I meant we were emphasizing the Midwest. And once again, please read and understand this, I NEVER said I was scared of playing RU or UConn. I said there was no good reason to play RU or UConn. Do you see the difference? I never said we should play RU in the Meadowlands either. Please show me where I said this. And let's be truthful, neither CT or NYC are loaded with football talent. And yes, Sparky, I know where CT is. And we can agree to disagree that playing CT would be a way to get NYC recruits. This time I'm really done. Unless of course your reading comprehension improves a bit.

1. "I am not even sure why I am responding to this, but I will point out that I NEVER called for a 'break'." --> Yes you did. your exact words were "Teams need a break, and need to schedule a breather or two." Please elaborate how that isn't calling for a break?
2. "I NEVER said that playing PSU is too hard." --> "Playing an OOC schedule like last year and then having to play an ACC schedule is a coach-killer..." is what you sid in reference to my suggestion that SU play PSU/WVU and RU/ND and either regional games or confernce-scheduled games. PSU is clearly top dog on that list. Claiming that you think WVU, RU, and UCONN are too hard, but not PSU is silly.
3. "but later clarified that I meant we were emphasizing the Midwest" --> but we aren't. We recruited 4 players from the entire region. We have 4 players from Cali and 4 players from the notheast and 7 players from the southeast. Given that the coaches were hired at the last minute, and not from the northeast, the northeast is probs underrepresented and since most of the coaches came from the midwest, the midwest is probs overrepresented. that means, in all likelihood, the midwest is #4 on our list of recruiting grounds, and only beats out the southwest.
4. " 1) I never said that we should play RU in the Meadowlands" is what I said. I never accused you of saying that SU v. RU shouldbe played in the Meadowlands.
5. "And yes, Sparky, I know where CT is." --> Apparently you didn't, given that you overlooked it's proximity to NYC. I would quote your post about the importance of NYC, but your grammar wasn't strong enough to make sense out of the context of your entire post (and no, I'm not beng a grammar nazi - i'm simply stating why I can't give a quote to substantiate my claim). However, i would be more than happy to direct you to a roster so you can count the kids from NYC if you don't think that it is well-reprsented (notice I said "if").
6. If you don't think that games within short traveling distance that are aired on local TV help recruiting, then I won't try to change your mind.
7 Gems like "Teams need a break, and need to schedule a breather or two." followed by "I am not even sure why I am responding to this, but I will point out that I NEVER called for a 'break'." make you rcomemnt about my reading comprehension cute.

I'm guessing that you didn't go to Syracuse. Am I right?

EDIT:
Scratch that. I don't really care. We aren't going to agree, no matter what I say. I'm done responding to you. This isn't worth arguing about.

 

[WickedOrange]

We should play Rutgers and Uconn because the away games are close. It's not a lot of travel for the players. For a big % of the team, it's an easy trip for their family and friends. Plus easy access for tri-state area alumni and fans. Sometimes this gets lost in conference chase for $$$.

IMO we should try and schedule Rutgers, Uconn, Temple, Army and Navy in the future.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

I live in NJ and have no desire to see SU schedule Rutgers again. There are enough games at Met Life if I am too lazy to drive more than an hour. When people were complaining about playing Stony Brook, Wagner, etc. that was before SU played an ACC schedule. I would hope the casual fan would be more impressed, or interested in playing Miami, Clemson, FSU, etc, than the previous schedule of Cincy, UCONN, and USF. I prefer starting with an easier team to start the season and work out the kinks before getting into conference play. I've always liked the idea of playing the service academies. I'd much rather play them than RU.

 

[Chris02M]

With an 8 game ACC schedule my ideal OOC schedule would
1 1-AA school to get 5 home games off the bat.
1 B1G(non-RU)/SEC/Big XII team
1 MAC school
1 rover game that can be a neutral site game (like at Metlife with a Penn State this year or a game in the region where the coaching staff wants to recruit)
I wouldn't schedule MWC or Pac-12 teams as we don't get anything out of them, and we don't recruit that region.

I wouldn't be against playing usc every once in a while in 2 game series other pac 12 teams no chance. Since this is a scheduling thread anyone hear if we are having any success in starting fill our future out of conference games since its pretty barren .

 

[Chris02M]

if we were to play any of our former conference mates in football id play usf or cincy or temple

 

[bnoro]

F RUTGERS

I never want to play these parasites again.

 

[kirbivore]

Disagree. We should be opening with a cupcake every year.

Sent using my Commodore 64

I wish I could give this 1000 likes. SU is in a stable, quality conference. They should open up with the type of games that 99% of BCS level schools open with. A punching bag team will be fine by me on Labor Day weekend.

 

[kirbivore]

With an 8 game ACC schedule my ideal OOC schedule would
1 1-AA school to get 5 home games off the bat.
1 B1G(non-RU)/SEC/Big XII team
1 MAC school
1 rover game that can be a neutral site game (like at Metlife with a Penn State this year or a game in the region where the coaching staff wants to recruit)
I wouldn't schedule MWC or Pac-12 teams as we don't get anything out of them, and we don't recruit that region.

I mostly agree. The only west of the Mississippi game I want to see in the future is UNLV.

 

[FAL]

Thank you nzm136 and orange79 for a very entertaining exchange. It is this type of debate that makes this forum a pleasure to read. Also, it also goes to show you that you really can agree to disagree without resulting to insults or name calling (nothing wrong with a little snide sarcasm, though). Both parties made valid points and defended their positions well, imho. Good job, guys!

 

[All4SU]

Sure there is. It's a cheap way to get fans. Playing RU is great. We get a home game and SU fans come to see Syracuse play and then we get an away game in NYC, where the largest collection of SU fans outside of CNY can see Syracuse play. It also give us exposure to NJ/NYC recruits who are an important part of building our team. NJ produces a lot of talent and there is some decent talent in NYC. A very similar argument could be made about UCONN's proximity to the city as well.

Also, who else are we going to play. Does SU v. WF/NW sound any better? Any way you slice it, it's SU v. a team that I don't care about. That team that I don't care about might aw well be close to an area that we target for recruiting and in an area where a bunch of SU fans (and donors live).

Anyway, at the very least, it's an easy win. you can't play Texas/Alabama/Michigan/LSU/Georgia/Florida every week.

Syracuse fans weren't interested in seeing SU play Ruggers when they were a conference opponent. Why would they now?

 

[IthacaMatt]

Your logic is fawed for two reasons:
1. By starting weak, you decrease the time for breaks. By starting strong and then taking a game off, you inherently break up the season more than starting weak and then building up.

2. I'm not even calling for an extra elite team that we wouldn't play anyway. PSU is one of our 4 (the other 3 being WVU, BC, and Pitt). Refusing to play a rival because you are scared is weak. I also never said that we had to play a 3 games on the road. I have no idea where you are getting that.

3. We are talking about Rutgers and UCONN. You're making it sound like I am calling for yearly games against Michigan and Alabama. RU and UCONN aren't coach killers. They are the breaks that you are calling for. UCONN isn't even in a major conference. Heck, they aren't even favored to win their non-major conference. In fact, there is a good chance that they will finish 3rd or 4th most years int their non-major conferences.

4. And yes, playing infront of fans is better for SU football-wise. Who do you think pays for SU football?

5. How is being afraid of Rutgers and UCONN not sceduling like RU and VT? That screams RU. Seriosuly think about that for a second. We are talking abotu RUTGERS and UCONN. UCONN didn't even has a D-IA team 10 years ago, and RU is the poster child for stinking.

Here's what you don't seem to understand about UConn and Rutgers. They were never relevant until 10 years ago. These are still fledgling programs that are weak and vulnerable. In the Big East, they could compete, and were in the process of making a name for themselves. Their success directly impacts our success.

Go back more than 10 years ago, and you will see a run of excellent football from Syracuse going back from 1986 to 2001. Rutgers sucked and UConn was division 1A. Our decline allowed them to establish themselves as programs. Before that, they didn't exist on the national scene. The Big East gave them a foothold. The Big East did the same thing for Virginia Tech, back in 90s, allowing them to become a national program. We helped make them as a program. We don't want to repeat that mistake.

Now that Rutgers is off to the Big 10, they are going to compete with Northwestern for last place every year. Eventually their recruiting is going to decline again, after they have about 5 to 10 last place finishes in a row, and several years without going to a bowl game. (We've been there recently and it ain't fun.)

As others have noted in this thread, we are getting absolutely nobody out of NJ right now. Go back to the 80s and 90s, and that used to be one of our major recruiting grounds. Same thing with CT - we got Freeney, Joe Morris (IIRC) and several other players out of there, because UConn essentially didn't exist.

Now, let's see UConn fall back into the toilet of irrelevance. Our recruiting will improve in the Tri-State area. It's going to take 5-10 years of those other 2 programs regressing to the norm. We want UConn and Rutgers to fail. Neither has any significant "history" to their programs. We want them to die. We *legitimize* them as opponents by scheduling them. We want them to turn into second rate programs that elite recruits would never consider.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

Here's what you don't seem to understand about UConn and Rutgers. They were never relevant until 10 years ago. These are still fledgling programs that are weak and vulnerable. In the Big East, they could compete, and were in the process of making a name for themselves. Their success directly impacts our success.

Go back more than 10 years ago, and you will see a run of excellent football from Syracuse going back from 1986 to 2001. Rutgers sucked and UConn was division 1A. Our decline allowed them to establish themselves as programs. Before that, they didn't exist on the national scene. The Big East gave them a foothold. The Big East did the same thing for Virginia Tech, back in 90s, allowing them to become a national program. We helped make them as a program. We don't want to repeat that mistake.

Now that Rutgers is off to the Big 10, they are going to compete with Northwestern for last place every year. Eventually their recruiting is going to decline again, after they have about 5 to 10 last place finishes in a row, and several years without going to a bowl game. (We've been there recently and it ain't fun.)

As others have noted in this thread, we are getting absolutely nobody out of NJ right now. Go back to the 80s and 90s, and that used to be one of our major recruiting grounds. Same thing with CT - we got Freeney, Joe Morris (IIRC) and several other players out of there, because UConn essentially didn't exist.

Now, let's see UConn fall back into the toilet of irrelevance. Our recruiting will improve in the Tri-State area. It's going to take 5-10 years of those other 2 programs regressing to the norm. We want UConn and Rutgers to fail. Neither has any significant "history" to their programs. We want them to die. We *legitimize* them as opponents by scheduling them. We want them to turn into second rate programs that elite recruits would never consider.

Just to clarify, Morris was from Ayers, Mass. Tebucky came from CT. Still, point well taken.

 

[nzm136]

Here's what you don't seem to understand about UConn and Rutgers. They were never relevant until 10 years ago. These are still fledgling programs that are weak and vulnerable. In the Big East, they could compete, and were in the process of making a name for themselves. Their success directly impacts our success.

Go back more than 10 years ago, and you will see a run of excellent football from Syracuse going back from 1986 to 2001. Rutgers sucked and UConn was division 1A. Our decline allowed them to establish themselves as programs. Before that, they didn't exist on the national scene. The Big East gave them a foothold. The Big East did the same thing for Virginia Tech, back in 90s, allowing them to become a national program. We helped make them as a program. We don't want to repeat that mistake.

Now that Rutgers is off to the Big 10, they are going to compete with Northwestern for last place every year. Eventually their recruiting is going to decline again, after they have about 5 to 10 last place finishes in a row, and several years without going to a bowl game. (We've been there recently and it ain't fun.)

As others have noted in this thread, we are getting absolutely nobody out of NJ right now. Go back to the 80s and 90s, and that used to be one of our major recruiting grounds. Same thing with CT - we got Freeney, Joe Morris (IIRC) and several other players out of there, because UConn essentially didn't exist.

Now, let's see UConn fall back into the toilet of irrelevance. Our recruiting will improve in the Tri-State area. It's going to take 5-10 years of those other 2 programs regressing to the norm. We want UConn and Rutgers to fail. Neither has any significant "history" to their programs. We want them to die. We *legitimize* them as opponents by scheduling them. We want them to turn into second rate programs that elite recruits would never consider.

1. UCONN is in the AAC. Beating them down every year isn't going to make them any more legit than Penn State stomping Temple into the ground, LSU destroying Tulane, or Tennessee crushing Memphis. UCONN also has a stadium that's under 10 years old and about 30 miles from campus. That stadium won't move for at least another 40-50 years. How high do you think that their ceiling is? VT turned into a national power by beating easy teams and by having really, really low instate tuition which allowed them to field a JV team, so they had a ton of players with experience on campus. UCONN is a very different story. They aren't in a major conference, they can't field extra teams, and their stadium is really, really lacking. If we were talking about UMASS, then you might have a point, but UCONN is very different.
2. Rutgers became relevant by scheduling Army-level teams 5X and then playing a BIG EAST schedule so they could make a bowl every year. That won't happen in a 9 game B1G season, especially 1/3 of their OOC games (that season) is against SU. RU is in a conference with Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan State. Do you really think that a game against Syracuse once every three years is going to turn them into a national power by making their schedule legitimate when it otherwise wouldn't be? Honestly...

 

[nzm136]

Syracuse fans weren't interested in seeing SU play Ruggers when they were a conference opponent. Why would they now?

The ones in CNY weren't, but we have a ton of fans outside CNY...

 

[All4SU]

The ones in CNY weren't, but we have a ton of fans outside CNY...

Yes we do. None of them want to see Buttgers.

 

[nzm136]

Yes we do. None of them want to see Buttgers.

It's not about seeing Rutgers. It's about seeing the Orange in a location close to home. Change RU to Army.

 

[All4SU]

It's not about seeing Rutgers. It's about seeing the Orange in a location close to home. Change RU to Army.

Perfect. I'm all for playing Army.

 

[rrlbees]

The ones in CNY weren't, but we have a ton of fans outside CNY...

Where?

Sent using my Commodore 64