The Official 'Is Rutgers a rival?' thread

[SUFaninNJ]

To be sure, we are entertained by Rutgers missteps. Rutgers has an inordinate number of missteps. And let's be honest, the whole college athletics community is laughing at Rutgers. I have lived in several states and everyone everywhere laughed at Rutgers, if they knew about Rutgers. Syracuse fans just laugh a little more because of the internet nonsense that occurred, because we share similar recruiting grounds and because they believe they pull in NYC, though there is glaring lack of proof of viewership in NYC.

Rutgers is not and probably never will be a rival. They were mediocre while Syracuse was down and won a few games, not a big deal. We will not play them annually unless there is another major shift in conferences, so no worries. I will still have fun at Rutgers expense, they are like comedians who do anything for attention and some of it too funny not to laugh at.

I would also add that they're from New Jersey. Growing up in NY, NJ was always an easy and fun target to pick on. We always looked down on most things Jersey. There was the toxic waste, SNL's "What Exit?", big hair, IROCS, Snooki, and Governor Christie to name a few. If RU was located in Mass or CT, it might not have the same comic appeal to me. Now the irony of all ironies is that now I live in New Jersey where I can see the scarlet letter on cars throughout Middlesex County on a daily basis. I like that we play BC and Pitt again. They feel much closer to an actual rival to me than RU ever did.

 

[Ky Je]

All these schools being mention in this thread aren't talked about anywhere near the amount of times or with the same vitriol that RU does. Our fan base interacts with them the most compared to any other fan base in our day to day lives. They hate us for the times we took them out back too the woodshed and we hate them because our slide to the bottom happened at the same time that they elevated from the bottom. Rivalries don't start because two teams are really competitive with one another and the fan bases respect one another because of the competitiveness. As was stated before, its because one player said something in the newspaper about the other team, or because of an excessive celebration or penalty. Their blood boils when the two teams play each other, they can't stand other teams success's and bask in their short comings.

I would also add that they're from New Jersey. Growing up in NY, NJ was always an easy and fun target to pick on.

This is part of why I think most consider it a rivalry, it goes beyond football or a specific university. we can argue if the chicken or the egg came first until were blue in the face but at the end of the day we still have chickens running around.

 

[DoctorBombay]

So now the RU vs. SU relationship was some sort of "budding Rivalry". A new category of rivalry.

We have been playing BC and Pitt for decades. They were Major Eastern Indies when RU was busy playing Lehigh and Lafayette. And we really don't have a rivalry with BC or Pitt or WVU. But Rutgers, a team that was recently added and with whom we have never played a meaningful game is a "Rival"?

You are entitled to your own definition of Rivalry.

I personally think suggesting that RU is an SU rival or would have been an SU rival is border
line insulting to the stature and history of SU athletics.
.
The basis for the hard feelings with RU fans is the nerve, the temerity of their trying to associate themselves with SU by trying to start a rivalry.

Theri previous target for this sort of nonsense was Princeton. A school with which they have NOTHING in common with except geography and which would never elevate RU to the status of rival.
Now, if you listen to them, Penn State is the "rival".

X1000
You're killin' it, Townie!

 

[SUFaninNJ]

All these schools being mention in this thread aren't talked about anywhere near the amount of times or with the same vitriol that RU does. Our fan base interacts with them the most compared to any other fan base in our day to day lives. They hate us for the times we took them out back too the woodshed and we hate them because our slide to the bottom happened at the same time that they elevated from the bottom. Rivalries don't start because two teams are really competitive with one another and the fan bases respect one another because of the competitiveness. As was stated before, its because one player said something in the newspaper about the other team, or because of an excessive celebration or penalty. Their blood boils when the two teams play each other, they can't stand other teams success's and bask in their short comings.



This is part of why I think most consider it a rivalry, it goes beyond football or a specific university. we can argue if the chicken or the egg came first until were blue in the face but at the end of the day we still have chickens running around.

I would disagree and say it's more akin to a hammer and nail relationship.

 

[Townie72]

You could make a strong argument that PSU v SU in the 70s/80s was analogous to SU v RU in the 2000s.

Bill;

But History doesn't work that way. In the 1970's we were down (except for 1970 when we beat PSU in 1970). But prior to that we had played PSU 52 times and were evenly split with them 26- 26. Many of these games were important and highly-memorable and affected bowl games and the pursuit of the Lambert Trophy.

IMO anyone who suggests a low-rent, pathetic atletic program like RU's is a suitable rival for SU has a very low regard for the history and achievements of SU athletics.

An other school having annoying fans does not translate into having a rivalry with that school.

 

[TheCusian]

Bill; But History doesn't work that way. In the 1970's we were down (except for 1970 when we beat PSU in 1970). But prior to that we had played PSU 52 times and were evenly split with them 26- 26. Many of these games were important and highly-memorable and affected bowl games and the pursuit of the Lambert Trophy. IMO anyone who suggests a low-rent, pathetic atletic program like RU's is a suitable rival for SU has a very low regard for the history and achievements of SU athletics. An other school having annoying fans does not translate into having a rivalry with that school.

You've convinced me! Let's just hate and laugh at them like we were before the "r" word.

 

[DoctorBombay]

You seem awfully angry over this issue. I would offer that perhaps you're not being honest with yourself and how you feel about Rutgers.
While we have a great football history over the decades, I'd like to see us downplay this angle a little bit. We've had only one really good year since the turn of the century. The reality is that on a national level, RU is seen as a more successful program over the last 10 years and they beat us more often than not in that time frame, so it's kind of hard to say that they didn't compete with us. All of us on here know that it's smoke and mirrors and this happened during our darkest period, but perception is reality to a lot of people. And, they started beating us when Coach P was still here, so we can't just blame it all on GRob. The fact that they beat us at all leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I have a feeling that it does the same to a lot of people on here, some of whom might be in the camp that doesn't want to call RU a rival. If there is animosity between two programs and their fans and we are consistently battling over recruits, I would consider that a rivalry. Rivals don't have to play each other on the field.

Notwithstanding the instant psychoanalysis, NO, I'm not angry in the least. More like frustrated.
I don't think one has to "lower themselves" in order to remain relevant- and yes, anointing Rutgers our instant rival falls into that category, IMO. And I also don't think we as SU fans, should lower the bar in proclaiming a "rivalry" with anyone. Indeed, why don't we proclaim new "rivals" EVERY year if that's the criteria- what difference does it make if they don't have to actually prove it on the field, and over time?
My biggest pet peeve is that Rutgers never EARNED rivalry status with SU. IMO, that has to be done on the field of play, over a number of years, with something worthwhile on the line. Maybe those "standards" are too lofty for some in our fanbase. Maybe all thats needed is for us to suck for a few years, then pick out some schlub program a' la RU, and declare that they are now our rivals. Short and sweet.
Sorry, I VALUE our program a lot more than that, and not to say that anyone else doesn't, but calling Rutgers our "rival" because a few board members decided to pay more attention to them, is ludicrous. Frankly, I think its an embarrassment to our fanbase. JMHO

 

[tep624]

Not sure if this has been posted in this thread but if you haven't seen this check it out - whomever maintains it deserves a pat on the back

https://twitter.com/RUDecommits?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

 

[dollarbill44]

Notwithstanding the instant psychoanalysis, NO, I'm not angry in the least. More like frustrated.
I don't think one has to "lower themselves" in order to remain relevant- and yes, anointing Rutgers our instant rival falls into that category, IMO. And I also don't think we as SU fans, should lower the bar in proclaiming a "rivalry" with anyone. Indeed, why don't we proclaim new "rivals" EVERY year if that's the criteria- what difference does it make if they don't have to actually prove it on the field, and over time?
My biggest pet peeve is that Rutgers never EARNED rivalry status with SU. IMO, that has to be done on the field of play, over a number of years, with something worthwhile on the line. Maybe those "standards" are too lofty for some in our fanbase. Maybe all thats needed is for us to suck for a few years, then pick out some schlub program a' la RU, and declare that they are now our rivals. Short and sweet.
Sorry, I VALUE our program a lot more than that, and not to say that anyone else doesn't, but calling Rutgers our "rival" because a few board members decided to pay more attention to them, is ludicrous. Frankly, I think its an embarrassment to our fanbase. JMHO

I sense your frustration with your usage of all caps, lol.

I'm not sure how many years qualifies as "over time" in your eyes. They beat us 7 out of 10 years starting in 2003. I think you are on too high of a horse that you fear getting hurt trying to get off of it. See my other post about our rich history in the last 20 years. I was a freshman at SU in 1987 and enjoyed some very good football. I was also a fan dating back to the 70s. I think there are a lot of delusional fans who are embarrassing because they can't see the SU football program for what it has been over the last 16 years. At some point, you have to realize that some things you still hold as recent events have moved into the history column for a lot of people.

I believe we will just have to disagree on this topic.

 

[Townie72]

I sense your frustration with your usage of all caps, lol.

I'm not sure how many years qualifies as "over time" in your eyes. They beat us 7 out of 10 years starting in 2003. I think you are on too high of a horse that you fear getting hurt trying to get off of it. See my other post about our rich history in the last 20 years. I was a freshman at SU in 1987 and enjoyed some very good football. I was also a fan dating back to the 70s. I think there are a lot of delusional fans who are embarrassing because they can't see the SU football program for what it has been over the last 16 years. At some point, you have to realize that some things you still hold as recent events have moved into the history column for a lot of people.

I believe we will just have to disagree on this topic.

What was our record against Pitt or BC or WVU during the same period?

We lost to pretty much every one. So are all these school's our "Rival"?

Rutgers does qualify as a particularly embarrassing loss. Pasqualoni's loss to an O-10 Rutgers team was the "Coup de Gras" on his coaching tenure.

 

[omniorange]

rivalry, schmrivalry.

Don't think of Rutgers as a rival, anymore than I think of Maryland as a rival. I just think we should play those two teams ooc more than other P5 teams.

In truth, we have no "true" rival. The closest is BC.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[dollarbill44]

What was our record against Pitt or BC or WVU during the same period?

We lost to pretty much every one. So are all these school's our "Rival"?

Rutgers does qualify as a particularly embarrassing loss. Pasqualoni's loss to an O-10 Rutgers team was the "Coup de Gras" on his coaching tenure.

Well, did we or did we not consider them our rivals?

 

[orange79]

So do we call the fans that follow Rutgirls...now called Ash holes?

SOLD!

 

[brandokc]

So do we call the fans that follow Rutgirls...now called Ash holes?

 

[DoctorBombay]

I sense your frustration with your usage of all caps, lol.

I'm not sure how many years qualifies as "over time" in your eyes. They beat us 7 out of 10 years starting in 2003. I think you are on too high of a horse that you fear getting hurt trying to get off of it. See my other post about our rich history in the last 20 years. I was a freshman at SU in 1987 and enjoyed some very good football. I was also a fan dating back to the 70s. I think there are a lot of delusional fans who are embarrassing because they can't see the SU football program for what it has been over the last 16 years. At some point, you have to realize that some things you still hold as recent events have moved into the history column for a lot of people.

I believe we will just have to disagree on this topic.

You're missing the point, Mr. $.
I could care less how many games RU "beat us", during the lowest stretch of our existence. Its never been about them, its always about us. Regardless of how low we "fell" during those years, anointing rivalry status to Rutgers diminishes us...period.
History and tradition, matter. Performance, matters.
Out of all the programs that you "rivalry guys" chose to "give it up" to, why Rutgers? How did they possibly earn that status? Did they win conference titles or tourney games at our expense like a UConn or GTown? Did they win a major bowl during our "rivalry" years? Were they pace-setters for BE football?
Shouldn't it be obvious that measuring oneself against a perennial loser program like Rutgers, despite their achieving mediocre status under Schiano, diminished us as well? Its not being on a "high horse" if you've actually EARNED a place of stature, regardless of how low you fall.
Its like the pretty girl who's insecure and starts seeing some loser who bought a new car, because she thinks it makes him more attractive. You better believe everyone looks down on HER for being insecure and lowering her standards, not him.
Its really not that hard...

But you're right- we can agree to disagree.

 

[MCC]

Have they hired a new Patheltics Director yet?

 

[Townie72]

Well, did we or did we not consider them our rivals?

This discussion is about definitions and terms. Just lay out for me your criteria for a rivalry (And I'll show you how using your criteria that there are many more schools ahead of RU to be a SU rival.

"Rival" is for me an exalted state. In order for there to be a real rivalry there has to be a long history of meaningful games played. There have to have been "incidents". There has to be "villains"

Some of you are mistaking "Competitors" for "Rivals".

Auburn and Alabama are Rivals

Ohio State and Michigan are Rivals

Duke and UNC are Rivals

Georgetown and SU are basketball Rivals.

A "Rival" is a team that if you beat them and have a sub-.500 season, the season is judged a success at one level.

The relationship between SU and RU doesn't even come close to being a Rivalry against any kind of criteria..

What we have on here is some people thinking that a few barbs traded back and forth between fan bases rises to a Rivalry. Or because their fan base is particularly annoying that that makes a rivalry.

Army and Navy are Rivals. RU and SU are just two teams that played one another a few games.

Some of you think it's a school we ought to schedule more regularly. Maybe we should, but it sure isn't because we have ever been "Rivals".

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

This discussion is about definitions and terms. Just lay out for me your criteria for a rivalry (And I'll show you how using your criteria that there are many more schools ahead of RU to be a SU rival.

"Rival" is for me an exalted state. In order for there to be a real rivalry there has to be a long history of meaningful games played. There have to have been "incidents". There has to be "villains"

Some of you are mistaking "Competitors" for "Rivals".

Auburn and Alabama are Rivals

Ohio State and Michigan are Rivals

Duke and UNC are Rivals

Georgetown and SU are basketball Rivals.

A "Rival" is a team that if you beat them and have a sub-.500 season, the season is judged a success at one level.

The relationship between SU and RU doesn't even come close to being a Rivalry against any kind of criteria..

What we have on here is some people thinking that a few barbs traded back and forth between fan bases rises to a Rivalry. Or because their fan base is particularly annoying that that makes a rivalry.

Army and Navy are Rivals. RU and SU are just two teams that played one another a few games.

Some of you think it's a school we ought to schedule more regularly. Maybe we should, but it sure isn't because we have ever been "Rivals".

We should never schedule them again. No upside. A win is a yawn, a loss is a big deal.

 

[ClkWrkOrange]

We should never schedule them again. No upside. A win is a yawn, a loss is a big deal.

Agreed.

 

[Townie72]

Agreed.

Hopefully they won't want to schedule us either. Because if they do, it means that SU football is in the crapper.

Where they are in the B1G with OSU, Michigan, PSU etc. they are going to be starved for wins. They are not going to be looking for any quality games to sell tickets to. If we can get back to a semblance of what we were in the 1990's, they won't touch us with a 10 foot pole.

They will attempt to stick with the scheduling approach that has helped them in the past. Howard, Norfolk State, Army and whatever border-line FBS programs they can attract. They'll be looking for wins to offset those routs that Ohio State is going to continue to lay on them.

 

[ClkWrkOrange]

Hopefully they won't want to schedule us either. Because if they do, it means that SU football is in the crapper.

Very good point.

 

[longtimefan]

What was our record against Pitt or BC or WVU during the same period?

We lost to pretty much every one. So are all these school's our "Rival"?

Rutgers does qualify as a particularly embarrassing loss. Pasqualoni's loss to an O-10 Rutgers team was the "Coup de Gras" on his coaching tenure.

The rumor is that Jake C. felt the same way, but Buzz wouldn't let him drop the axe.

 

[Townie72]

The rumor is that Jake C. felt the same way, but Buzz wouldn't let him drop the axe.

My impression was that at that time Jake was on the glide path to retirement and didn't want anyone to interrupt his reading of all those retirement community brochures spread all over his desk.

After reading the two part article Jake wrote on the Birth of the Big East, I came away thinking that this was a guy along for the ride. An ineffective guy with not a strategic thought in his head.

 

[tipphill]

if the ru board is accurate ash is offering nj hs players already committed to other schools. also 4* rutgers commit patrice rene is looking at other schools visited pitt recently. we had offered this kid. any chance we contact him??? he has not decomitted yet from ru.

 

[oldpinepoint]

if the ru board is accurate ash is offering nj hs players already committed to other schools. also 4* rutgers commit patrice rene is looking at other schools visited pitt recently. we had offered this kid. any chance we contact him??? he has not decomitted yet from ru.

We were on him very early but he never expressed a lot of interest in us.