Should Rutgers join the Big Ten or the ACC?
by On the Banks on Sep 18, 2011 7:49 PM EDT
in Rutgers football
Email
PrintThere shouldn't have been any doubt in the minds of Rutgers fans that athletic director Tim Pernetti would rise to the occasion, and that's exactly what he did at a 5 pm press conference earlier. Probably the critical quote there concerns how Pernetti and Rutgers were not blindsided at all by what happened. Why would they be? Rutgers was teaming with West Virginia and Pittsburgh for months to do everything possible to save a Big East conference on a verge of collapse. The basketball schools and John Marinatto made their choice to not compromise, and now they're left with nothing. Your goons Tim Higgins and Jim Burr couldn't steal this one. Couldn't have happened to a more detestable bunch. Watching the ACC tournament in Madison Square Garden would be a final delicious, well-deserved coup de grace.
With our own personal Michael Corleone moment realized, there's a decision left to make, which Tom Luicci lays out very well in a wonderful Ledger article. The first dominoes are Texas and Oklahoma, whose cold feet ultimately killed RU's chances to join the Big Ten in 2010. If they jump, and presumably the ACC offers, RU accepts without hesitation, no questions asked. The thought of being left out in the cold is unfathomable. While we wait for Snidely Whiplash to finish twiddling his mustache however, the Big Ten has a very important decision to make. If they don't act now and approve further expansion, the Big Ten could find itself permanently checked in the Rust Belt without any room for future growth.
As indicated in the article, Rutgers's preference is to join the Big Ten, which they've been trying to do for a good twenty years. The Big Ten cares about money, television markets, football, and academics; which just happen to be in perfect symmetry with the RU athletic department's priorities. Let's compare and contrast both options rumored to be on the table.
The Big Ten:
- Moneymoneymoneymoneymoneyyyyyyyyy
- Easier basketball conference. No one really disputes this, although it's not like the Big Ten is a wasteland in that respect. They would take an easy back seat to the ACC however, with the lure of the latter conference certain to draw top recruits. Rutgers would have a fair easier road to the top in the Big Ten, with the downside of trying to sell an inferior conference and playing far away from home to recruits.
- An easier football conference. Yep, this shouldn't be at all controversial although traditionalists opposed to statistical analyses will dispute it. While the Big Ten is better at the top, from one to twelve the average ACC team is far better. Year-to-year, Rutgers will win more games in the Big Ten. They'll have a better chance of going to a BCS conference game in the ACC.
- Like Rutgers, the Big Ten prioritizes football first. That, more than anything else, is why it's the first choice for heavy hitters Schiano and Pernetti.
- Travel will be a logistical nightmare in this conference, although $22 million dollars a year will go a long way towards assuaging any concerns. Basically every Olympic sport besides wrestling would much rather be in the ACC though, for both quality and travel reasons.
The ACC:
- It's a better logistical and cultural fit, having most of the traditional Northern schools in their ranks to band together against any attempts at Tobacco Road dominance.
- Better than the Big Ten in every sport besides wrestling. Better football, far better basketball, infinitely better lacrosse, baseball, soccer, etc...
- Remember how Boston College's basketball team was treated like the 1995 New York Knicks when they entered the ACC? E.g., Craig Smith throws one elbow, and it's "OH MY GOD, THEY'RE SO PHYSICAL, IT'S LIKE HE'S THE SECOND COMING OF CHARLES OAKLEY OUT THERE!" BC was just a middle-of-the-road Big East team, not Mike Rice's bad boys serving double secret probation under direct orders from Providence. Rutgers wouldn't challenge threaten the traditional Tobacco Road powers as other Northern schools would, but their physical play style would quickly establish a headway in the middle of the conference.
47 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hard to pass up yearly contests with Michigan and PSU on the gridiron,
be them at MetLife Stadium or High Point Solutions Stadium. Seeing the Big Ten lineup year in and year out has a lot more appeal than simply retreading the ‘old Big East’ schedule in the ACC. A Big Ten membership would also likely lead much quicker to the next round of stadium expansion (approaching 80k) as well as RAC 2.0 (not just from conference revenue, but explosion in demand for tickets).
That said, ACC feels like it makes more sense, if only because of the geographic proximity to the other universities. And there is a somewhat comfortable feeling being back with old friends. Plus, it just wouldn’t be the same laughing at Syracuse every time they try to convince the world they are NYC’s team if Rutgers wasn’t in the same conference as them.
End of the day, either scenario represents a dramatic upgrade from current state – it doesn’t matter which one plays out, so long as one plays out.
One has to think that being the ONLY major all-sports university in the greater NY Metro area (aka media capital of the universe) has to be something that conference commissioners cannot afford to leave on the table during this latest go-round of expansion.
ARE YOU COMPLETELY INSANE ?
the ACC is a better footbal conference than the Big ten ? You must have mental retardation running in the family…FSU, clemson, and Miami (not for long) are your only three legitimate football players and the big ten, SEC, and even the Big east stomp on those “Powerhouse” schools you have like wake forest and duke…The Big ten has OSU, Michigan, MSU, Penn State, iowa, and Nebraska, all football powerhouses that would stomp down the ACC any day and have.Minnesota, the big tens worst school by far almost defeated USC…Where is your top to bottom theory now ? And although the ACC has a better top in basketball, the Big ten is probably the best top to bottom league in the US. If you knew about big ten basketball youd know that it has powerhouses like OSU, Purdue, Wisconsin, MSU, and programs like Indiana and Michigan who have experienced historical greatness…Last year they had 7 of its 11 members selected for the NCAA tourney which is the highest percentage of ANY conference, not to mention they had the #1 overall seed.And the ACC is better at every sport except wrestling !!!the jokes get better and better. the big ten kills the ACC at soccer, swimming,rowing, gymnastics, and track, AND NOT TO MENTION THE THIRD MOST REVENUE PRODUCING SPORT IN THE NCAA HOCKEY. Hockey makes MUCH more money than college baseball, thats for sure. Its utterly ignorant people like you that i just want to bash their face in.
FSU, Clemson, and Miami?
It’s more like FSU and Virginia Tech as the only major football powers. Georgia Tech can be when they have an actual threat to pass. Clemson and Miami are both middle of the pack teams in a rather mediocre conference outside of the top two teams.
Quick! To the Schianocopter
Its utterly ignorant people like you that i just want to bash their face in.
And how exactly would you qualify yourself based on that kind of comment?
As this article correctly states:
(The Big Ten) an easier football conference. Yep, this shouldn’t be at all controversial although traditionalists opposed to statistical analyses will dispute it. While the Big Ten is better at the top, from one to twelve the average ACC team is far better.
Look at the numbers year over year, and you can’t rationally discredit that response. Now, fly of the handle and present yourself as an impulsive, immature individual, and you say just about anything you want.
Is Minnesota really that head and shoulders worse than Indiana in football? And what kind of powerhouse is Temple now to have nearly beaten PSU this past weekend? Didn’t Michigan St just get pummeled by an 0-2 Notre Dame team that couldn’t stop a cardboard box the previous 2 weeks? And what happened to Ohio State this past weekend when they played Miami?
Not exactly what I would consider to be ‘powerhouse’ performances.
Wow
Really? Bash their face in? Calm down dude. It’s an opinion. He’s entitled to his just as you are entitled to yours. Also, nobody cares about rowing. But if you really did, you’d know that ACC and Big1G rowing is abysmal.
The more I think about this, the more I am inclined to think the Big Ten is going to make a play at RU
If the Big Ten ever wanted to have a footprint in the NY market, now may be their only chance. Syracuse is off the board. Rutgers is not going to wait around for multiple invitations – the first conference that grants RU the ‘green’ light will be the new conference home. Both the Big Ten and ACC know this.
But with Syracuse already in the fold, the ACC likely feels it is playing with house money and can afford to go for broke by entertaining conversations with Texas (and Tx Tech), Notre Dame, etc. – bottom line, they have time and don’t need to rush into extending an invite to Rutgers just yet.
The Big Ten however, may not feel such a luxury if they truly want to expand beyond the rust-belt and its aging, declining population. Before the ACC officially kicked off the latest expansion free-for-all, the Big Ten had the luxury of enjoying its manageable 12 team conference. No need to rush into adding questionable inventory (e.g., Rutgers) to the Big Ten Network. So long as the option was there when/if they wanted to exercise it, that was good enough. But now that option is at serious risk of being taken off the table – thank you very much, ACC.
Sure the Big Ten could go after the D.C. Metro area by targeting Maryland, but 1) It’s not anywhere close to being comparable to the NY Metro area for advertisers 2) Maryland is suddenly much happier in an ACC which just got a lot more northern attitude to ‘compliment’ the southern drawl – with potentially more yankees on the way. Bottom line, I just don’t see Maryland shelling out the $20 million needed to abandon the ACC.
So that leaves the BIGGEST MEDIA MARKET IN THE WORLD there for the taking. All the Big Ten has to do is ask and they shall receive. I don’t think they can afford to sit on the sidelines and let that slip away.
My .02 – The Pac-12 figures out how to get the Long Horn Network to work for both Texas and the conference clearing the way for Texas/Texas Tech and Oklahoma/OK State to join. As soon as Texas is off the board, the SEC, ACC look to round out their leagues to 16 and the Big Ten joins the latest round of expansion with NY Metro as one of it’s targets. The Big Ten will be forced into expansion before they ideally wanted to venture into this, but outside circumstances will threaten to take away every viable expansion option for the conference if they don’t act now.
Prediction 1: Rutgers gets the Big Ten invite before the ACC invite materializes and RU is introduced as a future member of the B1G before the end of this month.
Prediction 2: UConn and WVU end up in the ACC. Once Rutgers comes off the board, ACC feels the addition of WVU’s strong presence in both football and basketball outweigh its lack of desirable television market. Plus WVU will strengthen regional rivalries in the conference with Pitt and Va. Tech.
Prediction 3 Notre Dame will maintain football independence (for now), but will change it’s conference affiliation in all other sports to B1G, leaving open the option to join the conference in football
The big questions for Rutgers to the Big 10 are 1. Does Rutgers’ membership allow the Big Ten to get on the standard digital tier in NYC for Time Warner and Cablevision? The scenarios that the Big 10 ran last year showed that Rutgers didn’t provide enough leverage to do that. What has changed this year? 2. Does the Big 10 value the NJ cable markets enough to invite Rutgers? They either didn’t last year or couldn’t find an acceptable partner with Rutgers to go to 14.
The most likely thing to happen to the Big Ten right now is no change. Unless ND wants to join, the conference has a huge money machine in the BTN that they have no interest to split further unless the new member brings significant numbers of new customers on the basic digital tier.
If ND decides they’re going to be shut out in the new world, then the Big 10 goes shopping for another member (I think they’ll stop at 14 at any rate). In this situation, the Dolans and Time Warner will determine a lot of what happens. Rutgers then becomes a possibility, but there’s a good chance that ND provides enough leverage on its own to get the BTN on the NYC cable lineups. In that case, Mizzou becomes the most likely expansion candidate for the Big 10.
On WVU: The ACC cares about academics. I have a hard time seeing the presidents of Duke, UVA, UNC, and GT signing off on the Tier 3 academics of WVU. WVU knows that and is trying to get into the SEC.
Rutgers' best bet is to work (clandestinely)...
…with Maryland, which would love a Big Ten invitation (yes, it’s happy now that the ACC has expanded, but it would be ecstatic with Big Ten membership, as it would vault College Park into the top tier of state land-grant flagships, just as it would Rutgers). You need two members for expansion, and Notre Dame will only join the Big Ten as a last resort, meaning it likely would be in #15-16. Maryland and Rutgers both complement Penn State and give the Big Ten the three principal state universities between New York and Washington. Obviously, Maryland now has to approach this in a top-secret manner, but its president has Big Ten ties (Iowa), so he likely knows the process.
Just joined to reply...
as an ND and Purdue fan (I went to one, Mom and a lot of family to the other), two points:
- Actually, Rutgers joining the B1G would have to make it more attractive (read, “dimly palatable”) for ND to join. We don’t want to get caught in the Midwest. Rutgers and, in an ideal universe, Texas Tech or another Texas school (TCU?) would get us out of that box a little bit.
- The B1G is NOT, to all appearances, able to find its anal regions with both hands and a flashlight. The idea of them seeing the need for a strategic play for the NYC market…I’d be shocked if the idea had gotten serious consideration. I’d be shocked if they have “Big Board” with prospective 16 team rosters. They just don’t think ahead like that.
"Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." --Churchill
I'd prefer the B1G
I’m just not excited about playing in the ACC, but the thought of playing Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Wisconsin is exciting (and a bit scary). Plus all that BTN money will give us a leg up on Cuse, Pitt, and UConn.
Quick! To the Schianocopter
Poor Rutgwrs.
There is not going to be a choice btw B1G and ACC because no body is going to invite RU
Sad. But true
Ok, pardon my typo
but seriously, why do u think RU is getting an invite from B1G or the ACC? why do you all think either is even a remote possibility? RU is not even popular in NJ (and I know I lived in NJ for 10 years!) and the football program is very weak. Basketball does not help make the case either.
Do tell!
when were you in NJ
water,
You probably lived in NJ a while ago, say 10 years or more ago. RU is far more popular and relevant now than it was in the past.
I know NJ very well. my relatives are RU grads, and I visit NJ all the time.
Yes, Schiano 9contrary to my expectations) did work miracles a few years ago, but in the post-Ray Rice era, RU seems to be back to old ways. Personally, I like RU and would luv to see them become the new Penn State or even an ACC member. I just do not see either as a possibility.
RU might get shafted in this latest round. I really would not want to see that.
Congrats, guys...
Banks: Terrific article though I tend to favor the Big Ten, should RU get the invite.
Jomo, just a great follow-up post, quite honestly, one if the best I’ve read anywhere.
I would have to concur: when UT, OU and their brethren head to the PAC soon-to-be 16, RU has a great shot at getting invitations from both the ACC and B1G.
When all is said and done, the Big Ten would be impossible to turn down and look for ND, Mizzou and Kansas to follow.
"Yep, this shouldn't be at all controversial although traditionalists opposed to statistical analyses will dispute it."
I definitely need to see the statistical analyses that prove this claim. I’m also interested to see how the analysis accounts for the lack of many common opponents between the leagues. Please enlighten this “traditionalist”.
That is sooooo not funny - Maize N Brew Dave
look at any statistical metric from the past few years
the Big Ten is almost always at the bottom of the big six.
by On the Banks on Sep 19, 2011 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Show us.
Show us. It’s your article – not being a dick, but prove it to us, don’t say “go look it up”.
by Good Ol' Oakley on Sep 19, 2011 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m not sure where you get your “statistical analyses,” but it seems like you are suggesting that the Big Ten is a weaker football conference just because they’ve fallen on hard times this year. You do acknowledge that the top of the Big Ten is must stronger than the ACC, but I’m interested to know where on earth you found your other “statistical analyses.”
That being said, I think you are really over-confident in Rutger’s market power over the tri-state area. I’m a New Jersey native myself (and a Michigan Alum), but it seems like has enough trouble pulling in New Jersey fans, let alone the pro-sport dominated New York area.
It's not really about Rutgers, per se
It’s about consistent, direct access to the NY Metro media market. Television inventory which carries consistent direct access in the NY Metro area is more expensive (and desirable) to advertisers than inventory available in the greater Indianpolis metro area, for example.
If the landscape of conference expansion was not taking place at the moment, there is no way in hell that the Big Ten would be considering expansion now. However, the Big Ten realized they would need to expand at some point in order to maintain and justify their premium associated with broadcasting their conference games – for that you need eyeballs, eyeballs which are consistently (though slowly) leaving the middle of the country.
The problem is, the potential expansion locations are quickly drying up. ACC is making it cost prohibitive to leave and eating up the eastern seaboard schools. Pac-12/16 is pulling teams from the middle of the country. If the Big Ten sits on the sideline too long, the left overs are not going to do anything now, or in the future, to dramatically impact BTN’s revenue streams.
I won’t argue that adding Rutgers is a slam-sunk, no questions asked instant revenue generator for a conference. However, Rutgers is the ONLY major all-sports university in the immediate Metro NY-area – the LARGEST MEDIA MARKET IN THE WORLD. Adding Rutgers to a conference is not necessarily about the payout today, but the investment potential it offers and the direct access to the NY media market.
Two months ago, hell two weeks ago, for the potential that Rutgers and the NY media market offers, it wasn’t worth the investment hassel for conferences to consider yet. However, things have changed. In the era of super conferences, there is no more ‘next round’ of expansion. All of the viable universities will have been accounted for after this go-round. The option of expanding into the NY metro area for a conference when the are ready is no longer an option. It’s either act now, or miss out.
Does Rutgers get the BTN on the standard digital tier in NYC or NJ? That’s the key question. That placement is what has driven the huge revenue gains of the BTN. Unless Rutgers can convince Big Ten executives that they provide the leverage to up the BTN’s placement on Time-Warner and Cablevision (it’s already available on the sports tiers), what motivation do they have to bring Rutgers on board. If they can’t do that, their membership forces a revenue split with little appreciable revenue gain. If the Big 10 thought that was likely last year, we’d likely have a 14 team Big 10 already (with Mizzou).
The best thing that Rutgers has going for it is actually its academic standing, which are a natural fit for the Big Ten’s Research 1 orientation (far more than UConn).
It's not so much about Rutgers convincing the Big Ten
It’s more of the Big Ten deciding on whether or not they want a NY metro / east coast presence. If they do, they have to bite the bullett and fight the battles with Cablevision and TimeWarner to get the BTN in the standard tier. This is the ‘investment’ that the Big Ten would have to make in bringing Rutgers aboard. The investment that previously wasn’t worth the hassel. Dynamics have changed however, and the possibility of expanding into the NY area market on their own schedule is no longer an option.
And it’s not just about cable subscription fees. Being the media capital of the world is more than just television. Print, advertising and radio are also part of the equation. There is a reason the Pac-12 has started holding its preseason media days in NYC. The exposure and brand awareness driven out of the ny media market is unlike anywhere else in the world. There is a reason the top global marketing, PR and advertising agencies are based out of NYC.
At the end of the day, the Big Ten may decide that the investment cost in time and money isn’t worth the hassel of having a true, permanent east coast presence. The Big Ten has already recognized there is value in having Rutgers part of the Big Ten – just not enough under previous circumstances to warrant extending the invite. Circumstances have changed though, and my guess is that so too will the Big Ten’s reluctance to finally take up residence on the east coast.
I agree with you that Rutgers is a good speculative investment, however, I don’t think that bodes well for an invite from the Big Ten given the conference’s recent expansion history. The Big Ten’s last two expansions (Penn State and Nebraska) already held significant (arguably dominant) market-value in their regions. The fact that the Big Ten passed up adding Rutgers for Nebraska last year should speak volumes about the conference’s business model.
I don’t discount the possibility of Rutgers being added in the future, but it has a lot of work to do in order to become an expansion target. Think about what Rutgers Athletics has to compete with – Giants, Jets, Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Rangers, Devils… Rutgers is arguably below all of these teams in market value in the NY area. If history is any indicator, Rutgers will have to make a lot of inroads into this difficult market to gain a Big Ten invite.
Don't think Big Ten gets another chance at an east coast presence unless they act now
Don’t know that I agree that previous expansion models for the Big Ten are valid going forward. In the previous rounds, the Big Ten always had the luxury of operating on their own timeline with the ability to stop and start as they best saw fit. There was always the potential of a ‘next round’ of expansion.
That’s no longer the case. The Big Ten is watching as one-by-one, potential expansion targets are being taken off the board. The longer they wait, the less options they have.
Expansion is no longer on a timetable being dictated by the Big Ten.
Basing your judgement on RU as a power in the tri-state media market on what they’ve done here-to-date is really inane. You base it on A. The appeal of Division 1 football IN the tri-state area, B. The competition for that media attention in the tri-state area by other Div I teams, and C. RU’s ability to meet that market given a Big Ten moniker (the heightened ability to recruit, etc.).
RU does draw
haphauli,
I am not sure why you thinjk that RU doesn’t draw fans from NJ, NYC or even Philly. They do now, and if RU got into tte Big 10, an RU game vs a Big 10 temas would draw far more fans that two Big 10 teams, say like Illinois vs Northwestern. Besides, it is about potential viewers and the cable tie-ins, and that gives RU a leg up.
Personally, I prefer the idea of playing in the ACC. RU has done fine against Big 10 teams they have played so I am fine with either.
wrong question
hapahuali,
You are asking the wrong question. Is isn’t whether RU can outdraw Yankees/Mets/Knicks etc. It is whether RU can expand the current viewership of Big Ten or ACC football in the NY metropolitan areas, and maybe even in the Philly area for South Jersey.
How is it wrong?
How am I asking the wrong question? I’m questioning the ability of Rutgers to expand the viewership of the Big Ten on a significant level. Don’t forget that the Big Ten Network would need a carrier and enough viewers to make Rutgers a profitable acquisition.
A significant part of the concern is Rutger’s ability to compete against pro-sport brand names in the NY area, especially since that competition limits Rutgers ability to grow in market value.
Let’s see …
Rutgers is a member of the AAU – the 59 best universities in the country. The Big Ten “only” admits schools in the AAU. Nebraska was in it when they were admitted a year ago, and since then were dropped, causing a lot of consternation with the league.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Universities
Rutgers and the tri-state media market – Surely you remember the Louisville game a few years ago – The Empire State Building lit in scarlet red?
Rutgers ranks in the top-3 schools in the academic performance of its team.
Did you read the article? The AD has “said” he’s been in discussions for a long time with other leagues. So you evidently discount all of that?
Lastly, my initial comment was to point out your lack of basic spelling comprehension – “nobody” is one word. You’re kidding us, right?
What the NYC/Philly area craves is big time sports unfortunately the current big east slate does not provide that. However an annual Penn State/RU rivalry game would make everyone in the area pay attention and will compete with any area sporting event sans the NFL. But that’s why NCAA plays on Saturdays. Big ten are you interested in this annual rivalry game? Or will you pass it up and let the ACC snatch it up? If so that’s fine we’ll have our annual rivalry game with Maryland.
by StyleKnight on Sep 19, 2011 2:54 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
"Yep, this shouldn't be at all controversial although traditionalists opposed to statistical analyses will dispute it."
Yeah all those traditionalists opposed to statistical analysis like Jeff Sagarin, whose rankings have the Big Ten as better on average than the ACC in both basketball and football
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkc1011.htm?loc=interstitialskip
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc10.htm?loc=interstitialskip
Lousy traditionalists. I hate them all.
small sample size
look at the past few years.
by On the Banks on Sep 19, 2011 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
The Big Ten was higher
ranked in basketball in 05-06, 08-09 and 10-11. It had a higher average in football in 05, 06, and 10. So in the last 6 years, it’s been 3-3 in both sports.
Rutgers to ACC
Come on guys!
Rutgers belongs is the new north division of the ACC along with UCon.
I much prefer traveling up and down the East Coast than going to Lincoln, Neb.—- Champlain, Ill.—- Bloomington, Ind. - Columbus, OH. Should I quite now or list other rust belt sites on the Big Ten map. Don’t forget about the great food you get to enjoy in the Midwest on your road trips. (NOT They don’t know how to cook!)
Rutgers is an East Coast school. Do you people have any idea of the cutural differences with the Midwest?
You may hate Pitt and Syracuse, but at least they understand Jersey speak.
No east coasters know anything about the cultural differences of the midwest.
They can’t be bothered to care about anything other than their precious east coast. Hence the unwarranted superiority complex and the outright dismissal of anything outside the original colonies.
That is sooooo not funny - Maize N Brew Dave
no one has a bigger inferior complex than midwesterners
if you have to constantly remind yourself about great and morally superior you are, you probalby aren’t, which would have descended into cannibalism by this point if not for heavy subsidies from the federal government. The midwest is a declining cultural wasteland.
by On the Banks on Sep 20, 2011 7:03 AM EDT up reply actions
This might be another post altogether
But I’d like to actually see what statistics you’re using to show that the ACC is the better football conference. To me – and again, this is just “traditionalist” stuff as you put it, I haven’t looked up the stats – Big10 has OSU, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Penn State, Michigan State who are all anywhere from pretty good to national-title contending good depending on year. You can excise Michigan out of there if you want, but they’re still a powerhouse recruiting program etc.
ACC has Virginia Tech, Clemson, Miami, Florida State…and who else? Besides – now I could be wrong – I don’t recall any of these ACC schools competing for a national title recently. FSU maybe awhile back.
Either way, I’d appreciate seeing whatever measurement you’re using to declare the ACC better than the Big Ten. I’m not trying to be a Big Ten fanboy, but on the surface, I’d say the Big Ten is a MUCH better football conference than the ACC, but maybe you’re right and the #’s say differently…
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."
-H.L. Mencken
http://maizenbrew.com
I'm starting to lean towards the ACC
Wasn’t excited about it at first and loved the idea of some Big 10 football matchups, but the ACC just makes more sense. I’m certainly no expert in the matter, but from what I’ve read, the ACC logistically makes so much more sense. Sure, we may leave some money on the table, but we join a conference with teams on the Atlantic Coast, which by coincidence happens to be where RU is (because nowadays, geography and conference names don’t appear to be synonymous anymore). Travel wouldn’t be such a nightmare, especially when you consider that teams like volleyball would need to travel out to some of these schools, one reason why a Big East and Big 12 merger makes that much less sense. On that subject, I liked the potential that the Big East had and certainly loved the basketball (BE Tournament at the Garden?), but getting stuck in a potentially new Big East would clearly be detrimental to RU.
As exciting as those Big 10 football teams are, and as much as I’d like to potentially beat PSU, the ACC’s still no joke, and we would potentially have a reuniting of four Big East teams in there too, with three of those teams bringing great basketball programs to a conference with some already scary teams, and that doesn’t include a hopefully on-the-rise Mike Rice Rutgers squad. If Rice could get some kids to hang in with the big boys of the Big East, I have plenty of faith that his squad would match up very well against plenty of teams and hopefully improving over the years to hang in with the Dukes and UNCs. Also heard some rumour about an ACC tournament at the Garden? I think these football squads will also add to the overall quality of the conference. Its well-rounded play will give RU an immediate chance to make an impact, and its bigger name teams will always help draw more attention and respect. It’s gotta be better than what we have right now either way.
I’m still fairly new to college sports, having never really gotten into them until I enrolled at RU a few years ago, so as I said, I’m certainly no expert. My opinions simply reflect my gut feelings based on what I’ve seen and concluded out of the mess of information we’re getting. The Big 10 would be exciting and profitable, but I see it as too much of a logistical headache, and I think we owe it to our lesser appreciated sports to give them a more logistical and competitive conference. One thing on which we can all probably agree is that staying in the Big East is not an option.
I don’t know if we will even be let into the ACC. If we are, it is a tough choice for me, though I obviously don’t have a say. The ACC basketball might be too hard, to the point that we don’t even have a chance. That’s not something I want to see. Football is fine either way for me. To be honest, my preference is that the Big East adds ND football and stays the way it is, maybe even with UConn, but I know there is a 0% chance of that happening.
Follow me on twitter @nyybrandonc
Writer/Editor for Pinstripe Alley, Blueshirt Banter
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball."
"Every day is a great day for hockey."
RUTGERS
Look the ACC and Big 10 are only considering Rutgers because of where they’re located!!!! They’ll get there face kicked in in Football and Basketball no matter where they go!!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
