Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 3283622, member: 622"] Than you for responding. You prove my points. Rutgers failed to win the big game against WVU and win the Big East title. A share of a title is far less a bragging point than an outright title. Furthermore, one can safely argue that pollsters regarded the Louisville victory a fluke, rather than a statement game. Louisville lost to Rutgers and should have dropped much further, while Rutgers should have risen much higher than the bump they got from beating Louisville had the pollsters been impressed. Yet, the pollsters were not impressed. To add to my argument, the pollsters were proven right by Rutgers falling the following week to what was to be a 6-5 Cincy Bearcats team. Thus, Rutgers best victory is considered a fluke and always will be. But, hey, the ESB was lit up in red, so Rutgers has that going for them. A minor point, but your argument that the Big East had three top 15 teams sounds impressive, but Rutgers was the third team and actually dropped out by the season's end, leaving the Big East with two top 15 teams (yes, Rutgers was still a top 20 team). The point being that Rutgers split against the two top teams, winning one (a fluke by all opinions and verified with a loss to a mediocre team the following week) and failing to sink the nail in the coffin in what would have been a statement win for Rutgers. History does not care how close a team was to a title. I understand why you believe that Rutgers' administration is fully supportive of Schiano. However, they were "fully" supportive of Flood and Ash, too. Schiano will be given 5-6 years to prove himself a winner. In the B1G, particularly in the B1G East. He starts with four built in losses in his division (UM, tOSU, PSU, MState) and most often a built in loss or two with cross division play (UNL, Wiscy, UM, Iowa. This assumes that IU and UM roll over, which they won't, nor will the remainder of the B1G West. Generally, Schiano has 5-7 losses built in annually. As to his recruiting, he didn't win a ton of recruiting battles against PU, or most others. He only a few against a down SU by lying (you are free to disagree, but the record is clear that he was a shady recruiter). Further, his shady lies will not work now that kids have ability to do much more research, analyze his history, and look at his character from many others. Rutgers has not bee able to recruit at a higher level and they have ben in the B1G for several years. Sure, blame Flood and Ash, but the truth is, if they had better players, they would have won at least a couple of closer games and kept the blowouts to tighter scores, but they did not get the higher recruits. Schiano will get the recruit "rankings" increased as Rutgers has a built in skew master for the ratings. Finally, you argue the money. Money does not cure all ills. Besides, Rutgers AD' is in the hole to the tune of about half a billion dollars (we know it will never be paid back). Check the shortfalls annually going back about 20 years! The B1G checks don't matter as much as you think, faulty management is costly no matter how you slice it. I agree with your last point, we will see in a few years. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?