clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Bummer, sort of

With my two recent posts about the possibility of scheduling UCLA, I tried to be clear that I was speculating about adding the Bruins next year, solely predicated on the fact that they are likely to have an open date in 2010. Kansas State is downgrading their schedule, and willing to forgo UCLA's visit to Manhattan, KS.

Well, according to RU alum Brian Dohn today (who is a UCLA beatwriter), the RU/UCLA series may be scheduled for further down the line.

I know someone asked this recently, and wanted to let everyone know that, yes, UCLA coach Rick Neuheisel is talking to Rutgers about a home-and-home series. Neuheisel recently spoke with Rutgers athletic director Tim Pernetti about it.
I know this is not something that will happen in the next year or two, but is more down the road.

Emphasis mine. A series with UCLA is worth pursuing even if it can't happen as soon as we'd like. Longterm scheduling is vital, and not locking these things down is how we got in this mess in the first place. Landing marquee games four to five years in advance will be a great step when it starts to happen on a regular basis.

If UCLA is not available in 2010, Rutgers still needs to to replace Army on the schedule over the next two years with a better opponent. There are good reasons to play Army, but they are vastly outweighed by how bad their football program is at the moment. It won't be easy, but being willing to go on the road first will make procuring a series easier than it would be if we needed an opponent in Piscataway next year. The reason that RU needs to drop Army instead of not scheduling a FCS game next year is because that is necessary to secure seven home games, which is vital to the athletic department's budgeting.