Why is Rutgers even mentioned in any conference expansion?

[orangebabe]

Seriously, why does the word Rutgers even keep coming up? They are one of the worst football and basketball schools in the Country.

The last NCAA B-ball tourny they made was like 15-20 years ago, when they had two SU transfers in Earl Duncan and Keith Hughes who were their two best players. The only time they've been competitive in football was when Coach P got fired, and they stole our commitment, Ray Rice. He and another SU would-have, Brian Leonard, were the only reason they were somewhat respectable for 3-4 years.

They are losers and always have been since their days of the Atlantic 10. What have they ever done in the last 38 years (since I've been around) to even be mentioned? I never even wanted them in the Big East, because all they did was bring our RPI down every year. They probably were the reason we didn't make the tourny in 2006, because our RPI was too low for playing them twice that year.

I am embarrassed the Big East even kept them as long as they did. I am flabbergasted that any conference such as the Big Ten or ACC even mentions them in the same breath.

I don't want them in the ACC, simply because I'm honestly tired of hearing about the school, when they have not won in any sport that anyone really even cares about. I don't know about their academics, because that is how little I care about them. I do know the 2 or 3 times we lost to them in -ball and the 1 time we lost to them in b-ball, it made me wonder why our conference would even put the rest of the real schools in a position to make themselves look bad.

 

[690West]

This is a fantastic and accurate post

 

[Chip]

It will die down soon. If Rutgers was nearly as attractive a candidate as they thought they were, they wouldn't be playing in the Big East right now.

Their only chance now is if everyone thinks they have to get to this perfect even # of 16 and they start pulling names out of hats. But keep me on the list that says 4 X 16 isn't happening anytime soon. I think the people that want it most aren't the people in power to make such decisions.

 

[orangehomer]

i propose that we refer to rutgers as francesa would pronounce it, rutgiz, from now on.

rutgiz will get a look by any conference because of tv sets, and new jersey recruiting. hopefully they get left out because of douchebaggery.

 

[rrlbees]

Location, location, location. Nothing more. Not academics, not athletics, not history, not tradition.

 

[orangebabe]

uhhhh, just another hanger on, which I thought the ACC wanted to avoid. If bball is important to the ACC, they will definitely want to avoid taking on this conference dragger. I'm sure they are smarter than that, but I am tired of this Atlantic-10 caliber team following us everywhere we go...Big East, Big 10 mention and now ACC. Why can't they find someone else to cling to.

 

[sufan]

Seriously, why does the word Rutgers even keep coming up? They are one of the worst football and basketball schools in the Country.

The last NCAA B-ball tourny they made was like 15-20 years ago, when they had two SU transfers in Earl Duncan and Keith Hughes who were their two best players. The only time they've been competitive in football was when Coach P got fired, and they stole our commitment, Ray Rice. He and another SU would-have, Brian Leonard, were the only reason they were somewhat respectable for 3-4 years.

They are losers and always have been since their days of the Atlantic 10. What have they ever done in the last 38 years (since I've been around) to even be mentioned? I never even wanted them in the Big East, because all they did was bring our RPI down every year. They probably were the reason we didn't make the tourny in 2006, because our RPI was too low for playing them twice that year.

I am embarrassed the Big East even kept them as long as they did. I am flabbergasted that any conference such as the Big Ten or ACC even mentions them in the same breath.

I don't want them in the ACC, simply because I'm honestly tired of hearing about the school, when they have not won in any sport that anyone really even cares about. I don't know about their academics, because that is how little I care about them. I do know the 2 or 3 times we lost to them in -ball and the 1 time we lost to them in b-ball, it made me wonder why our conference would even put the rest of the real schools in a position to make themselves look bad.

------------

1) Maybe because they are the state university of NJ, which is a large state

2) maybe because by being located near NYC and combined with SU, Pitt and BC and interesting ACC football teams like FSU, VT, Miami, may help create the basis of a strong TV deal

3) maybe because they are respected AAU university and well rated in USNews

4) maybe because UT, PSU, ND may not be teams 15-16 in the ACC

5) maybe because the ACC wants to be a unchallenged Atlantic coast conference for marketing and potential network

6) maybe because the ACC wants 16 teams to create regional divisions.

The ACC mentioned RU and UConn and 16 teams as a possibility. The decision is in their hands.

 

[44USMC]

------------

1) Maybe because they are the state university of NJ, which is a large state

2) maybe because by being located near NYC and combined with SU, Pitt and BC and interesting ACC football teams like FSU, VT, Miami, may help create the basis of a strong TV deal

3) maybe because they are respected AAU university and well rated in USNews

4) maybe because UT, PSU, ND may not be teams 15-16 in the ACC

5) maybe because the ACC wants to be a unchallenged Atlantic coast conference for marketing and potential network

6) maybe because the ACC wants 16 teams to create regional divisions.

The ACC mentioned RU and UConn and 16 teams as a possibility. The decision is in their hands.

Edit: 7) Maybe because it's fun to guarantee an ass whooping to another school every year

 

[orangebabe]

1) Maybe because they are the state university of NJ, which is a large state-who cares? They do nothing outside of the state for major college athletics.

2) maybe because by being located near NYC and combined with SU, Pitt and BC and interesting ACC football teams like FSU, VT, Miami, may help create the basis of a strong TV deal-I get the NYC thing, but honestly, no one in NYC cares about Rutgers.

3) maybe because they are respected AAU university and well rated in USNews-I don't follow Rutgers academic reputation as stated above. I am a college b-ball and football fan and could care less about Rutgers, because they are irrelevant in that category. If this is the case, maybe they belong in the Ivy League like someone else stated.

4) maybe because UT, PSU, ND may not be teams 15-16 in the ACC-so rush to carelessly add a team just for the sake of adding? This is exactly where the Big East went wrong when inviting a bunch of RPI draggers that did nothing for the conference except add to travel expenses.

5) maybe because the ACC wants to be a unchallenged Atlantic coast conference for marketing and potential network-again- I would understand the reasoning if Rutgers actually had a market, but they don't.

6) maybe because the ACC wants 16 teams to create regional divisions.-again, adding RPI draggers for the sake of filling up slots is nonsense.

The ACC mentioned RU and UConn and 16 teams as a possibility. The decision is in their hands.

 

[sufan]

Edit: 7) Maybe because it's fun to guarantee an ass whooping to another school every year

8) with additional northeast school, the chances of an ACC BB tournament regularly being at MSG just gets more likely.

(Of course RU is unlikely to be one of the qualifying teams, but they can watch SU and Pitt and hopefully UConn)

 

[44USMC]

8) with additional northeast school, the chances of an ACC BB tournament regularly being at MSG just gets more likely.

(Of course RU is unlikely to be one of the qualifying teams, but they can watch SU and Pitt and hopefully UConn)

9) The chances of holding the ACC Football Championship game in front of 80,000 + screaming NYC fans increases significantly.

 

[sufan]

1) Maybe because they are the state university of NJ, which is a large state-who cares? They do nothing outside of the state for major college athletics.

2) maybe because by being located near NYC and combined with SU, Pitt and BC and interesting ACC football teams like FSU, VT, Miami, may help create the basis of a strong TV deal-I get the NYC thing, but honestly, no one in NYC cares about Rutgers.

3) maybe because they are respected AAU university and well rated in USNews-I don't follow Rutgers academic reputation as stated above. I am a college b-ball and football fan and could care less about Rutgers, because they are irrelevant in that category. If this is the case, maybe they belong in the Ivy League like someone else stated.

4) maybe because UT, PSU, ND may not be teams 15-16 in the ACC-so rush to carelessly add a team just for the sake of adding? This is exactly where the Big East went wrong when inviting a bunch of RPI draggers that did nothing for the conference except add to travel expenses.

5) maybe because the ACC wants to be a unchallenged Atlantic coast conference for marketing and potential network-again- I would understand the reasoning if Rutgers actually had a market, but they don't.

6) maybe because the ACC wants 16 teams to create regional divisions.-again, adding RPI draggers for the sake of filling up slots is nonsense.

The ACC mentioned RU and UConn and 16 teams as a possibility. The decision is in their hands.

-----------------------

So are you saying, you believe that the ACC shouldn't invite RU???????????

 

[orangebabe]

8) with additional northeast school, the chances of an ACC BB tournament regularly being at MSG just gets more likely.

(Of course RU is unlikely to be one of the qualifying teams, but they can watch SU and Pitt and hopefully UConn)

I can see your point there, but I don't think it's going to take Rutgers to make MSG find the ACC attractive. SU fills up MSG and the Rack when we are in town. I can see adding Uconn, because they actually bring teams that win and would close the gap on the coast. Rutgers, however, does nothing for me, and I cannot believe I've spent all of this time even talking about them.

 

[orangebabe]

-----------------------

So are you saying, you believe that the ACC shouldn't invite RU???????????

Yes, lol with an !!!! I just think Rutgers brings nothing to the table and have proven that in both the Atlantic 10 and Big East. They've dragged down the rest of the conference with the DePauls, Providence's, Seton Halls, etc. Even though they offer -ball, I would rather have a team out of philly that borders jersey like Villanova. They are great in basketball every year, and they have the same potential to be good in football. Only problem with Nova is they don't have an established -ball program. Most of our b-ball recruits are from Philly, and I sure would like to keep that pipeline.

 

[sufan]

9) The chances of holding the ACC Football Championship game in front of 80,000 + screaming NYC fans increases significantly.

-----------

10) The opportunity for SU's NYC regional alumni, fans, potential students, recruits to watch SU's football and BB teams play an interesting "warmup" game in preparation for ACC conference competition.

 

[orangebabe]

-----------

10) The opportunity for SU's NYC regional alumni, fans, potential students, recruits to watch SU's football and BB teams play an interesting "warmup" game in preparation for ACC conference competition.

Okay, you got me there

 

[stuckinbig11]

Rutgers once had a women's basketball team that made national news, but not for how they played.