+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: MACbbs (/forum-513.html)
+---- Forum: Mid-American Conference Talk (/forum-472.html)
+---- Thread: NMR: Rutgers home attendance (/thread-663828.html)
NMR: Rutgers home attendance - HuronDave - 11-27-2013 12:58 PM
I am probably going to regret this, but with all the nonsense on this board about attendance, thought it would be worth pointing out Rutgers' recent attendance at a home basketball game: 392.
http://www.dailytargum.com/sports/mens_basketball/ru-cruises-past-stillman-for-victory/article_0a75ee88-5650-11e3-905e-0019bb30f31a.html
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - MidnightBlueGold - 11-27-2013 01:09 PM
Good job on picking Rutgers, P1G!
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - axeme - 11-27-2013 01:12 PM
Illustrates the point of how inconsequential attendance is in conference makeup. There were a lot of factors that went into the Big Ten picking Rutgers. Attendance was not one of them.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - thanksjim - 11-27-2013 01:38 PM
Rutgers is trending up! They had 466 in attendance in a tough 73-72 loss to Fairleigh Dickinson.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - emu steve - 11-28-2013 05:28 AM
(11-27-2013 01:38 PM)thanksjim Wrote: Rutgers is trending up! They had 466 in attendance in a tough 73-72 loss to Fairleigh Dickinson.
Is it too late to rescind their admittance into the B1G?
The bigger story, I think, is that the B1G picked two dubious (?) schools, Rutgers and Maryland, almost solely because of television markets.
Everyone knew the B1G had to take PSU hoops to get PSU FB (B1G doesn't do FB only membership
) but what is there to like about Maryland FB or Rutgers hoops?Does the B1G think they can turn a sow's ear into a silk purse?
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - DrTorch - 11-28-2013 07:56 AM
(11-28-2013 05:28 AM)emu steve Wrote:(11-27-2013 01:38 PM)thanksjim Wrote: Rutgers is trending up! They had 466 in attendance in a tough 73-72 loss to Fairleigh Dickinson.
Is it too late to rescind their admittance into the B1G?
The bigger story, I think, is that the B1G picked two dubious (?) schools, Rutgers and Maryland, almost solely because of television markets.
I was very surprised to see the B1G take RU and UMd, I saw no point since B1G alumni in those regions are legion, and they'd want the BTN. However, given the proliferation of conference networks, I can see the B1G being pre-emptive, and not losing presence in these major markets.
Quote:Everyone knew the B1G had to take PSU hoops to get PSU FB (B1G doesn't do FB only membership
Does the B1G think they can turn a sow's ear into a silk purse?
That's the big question. UMd and RU will be horrible in virtually every sport. RU will compete in w bball. UMd will compete in lacrosse, maybe soccer, and occasionally m bball, and UMd will lose a bunch of money to as buyout to the ACC.
But, will they improve? Possibly. Years ago you could count on N'western or Vanderbilt sucking, but in the past 20 years, virtually any team can come out and compete for a conference title. Maybe UMd and RU will rise to the level of competition, but that will have to come from major improvements in out of state recruiting for fball.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - arrows80 - 11-28-2013 09:26 AM
Next year alone, Rutgers gets Penn State, Michigan, and Wisconsin at home in football.
All three of those schools travel VERY well. The Knights will sell some tickets next year, no matter how good or bad the team is. This move is a home run for them, and the $$$$$ they receive will help improve facilities and such.
Both schools will be fine - maybe Minnesota/Purdue/Illinois fine, but fine nonetheless.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - niu79 - 11-28-2013 09:55 AM
Adding Rutgers and Maryland will not help the Big 10's strength of schedule to make the Final 4 playoff, so the TV money is definitely what it is all about. Driving on 294 by O'Hare I went past the Big 10 Network TV studios. OMG.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - emu steve - 11-28-2013 10:37 AM
(11-27-2013 01:38 PM)thanksjim Wrote: Rutgers is trending up! They had 466 in attendance in a tough 73-72 loss to Fairleigh Dickinson.
Even EMU fans are snarking at Rutgers.
We're almost doubling that numberfor our last non-conference games.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - OUBobcat9092 - 11-28-2013 10:44 AM
(11-28-2013 10:37 AM)emu steve Wrote:(11-27-2013 01:38 PM)thanksjim Wrote: Rutgers is trending up! They had 466 in attendance in a tough 73-72 loss to Fairleigh Dickinson.
Even EMU fans are snarking at Rutgers.
Rutgers, when you are subject to derision from EMU, you really can't get much lower.
I've seen more fans in attendance at an ABA/D-League game....
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - NIU007 - 11-28-2013 02:27 PM
(11-28-2013 10:37 AM)emu steve Wrote:(11-27-2013 01:38 PM)thanksjim Wrote: Rutgers is trending up! They had 466 in attendance in a tough 73-72 loss to Fairleigh Dickinson.
Even EMU fans are snarking at Rutgers.
Heck, we get more than 466 and we win about as often as the Washington Generals.
RE: NMR: Rutgers home attendance - mikeinsec127 - 11-28-2013 08:54 PM
(11-27-2013 12:58 PM)HuronDave Wrote: I am probably going to regret this, but with all the nonsense on this board about attendance, thought it would be worth pointing out Rutgers' recent attendance at a home basketball game: 392.
http://www.dailytargum.com/sports/mens_basketball/ru-cruises-past-stillman-for-victory/article_0a75ee88-5650-11e3-905e-0019bb30f31a.html
Not that our attendence is great, but lets get the facts strait. This was a previously unscheduled consolation game. There was no advertising and very little notice that the game would be played.