(06-06-2013 05:29 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 11:07 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Of course markets are important, but let's compare the two schools using major realignment categories.

Pitt > Rutgers in almost every aspect.

Pitt vs. Rutgers

Football - Pitt
Basketball - Pitt
Football tradition - Pitt
Basketball tradition - Pitt
Fan support - Pitt
Location - Tie (Both good recruiting grounds, and both bridged ACC)
Facilities - Pitt
Market - Rutgers
Academics - Pitt

My guess is Pitt used the Big XII as leverage to get into the ACC. Syracuse likely lobbied on Pitt's behalf. Adding Pitt was also a more nationally relevant move, compared to adding Rutgers.

I'd have to disagree with you on academics. Rutgers would take the nod there. In addition, I would give Rutgers the nod over Pitt for facilities. Pitt doesn't even have a football stadium, Rutgers has a nice football stadium and facilities far superior to Pitt which uses the Steelers facilities. How Pitt got into the ACC with NO football stadium is beyond me.

No, Pitt is ranked higher by every metric in academics
U.S. News undergrad ranking:
Pitt: 58, Rutgers: 68
Endowment:
Pitt: 2.6 billion, Rutgers: 693.5 million
Research rankings:
ARWU:
Pitt: 58 Rutgers: 61

Plus, Pitt is in the top ten universities receiving federal research dollars, is in the AAU and has an elite medical school.

Pitt's facilities are better than almost any school in the country even though I disagree with the decision to move the stadium off campus.

Also, I don't have the stats in front of me but I'm almost certain I remember studies that Pitt gets much better tv ratings than Rutgers so the fans are there.

Even in a year when Rutgers was much better than Pitt, the attendance difference was only 49-41k last year. In every other year in the last five years, Pitt has had better attendance than Rutgers, sometimes by a good margin.

Wow, I can't believe everyone chitting all over Rutgers.

Wow, Rutgers wasn't mentioned in a Big XII rumor? Well neither Syracuse because neither of them made any G-D sense to go to the Big XII!

Rutgers has beaten Pitt it's fair share of times the last decade. They split the series 5-5 the last ten years so saying that Pitt is better in FB isn't exactly true.

Pitt's fans don't show up to bowl games and anyone who has been in the Big East the last ten years should know that. It's an embarrassment come bowl season when NONE of their fans make the trip ANYWHERE! Not to mention when they don't even show up to the games.



Wow...will ya look at that fan base.

Also the facilities have to go to Rutgers just because they don't have to "share" them with anyone. They built their own state of the art facilities.

Pitt hasn't had any FB tradition since Marino and Dorsett. (BTW Ray Rice has a ring like Dorsett and is one of the top rushers in the NFL. He could easily be Rutgers answer to that HoFer)

Rutgers put more players into this NFL draft than any other school.

Rutgers does have market and a rapidly growing fan base. Every year in NJ more and more cars have the block R on them. More and more hats and shirts can be seen everyday from casual fans.

There is no way that the B1G would have taken Pitt. Not...A...Chance...In....HELL. Thats because PSU would have done ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to block them. The same way no way in hell OSU would allow Cincy to be added. It would be even harder for them to get in than UConn getting into the ACC. BC was happy when the FB schools went against Tobacco Road or you could have seen the Huskies in the ACC. There is no scenario where PSU lets Pitt in.

(06-06-2013 09:46 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Wow, I can't believe everyone chitting all over Rutgers.

Wow, Rutgers wasn't mentioned in a Big XII rumor? Well neither Syracuse because neither of them made any G-D sense to go to the Big XII!

Rutgers has beaten Pitt it's fair share of times the last decade. They split the series 5-5 the last ten years so saying that Pitt is better in FB isn't exactly true.

Pitt's fans don't show up to bowl games and anyone who has been in the Big East the last ten years should know that. It's an embarrassment come bowl season when NONE of their fans make the trip ANYWHERE! Not to mention when they don't even show up to the games.



Wow...will ya look at that fan base.

Also the facilities have to go to Rutgers just because they don't have to "share" them with anyone. They built their own state of the art facilities.

Pitt hasn't had any FB tradition since Marino and Dorsett. (BTW Ray Rice has a ring like Dorsett and is one of the top rushers in the NFL. He could easily be Rutgers answer to that HoFer)

Rutgers put more players into this NFL draft than any other school.

Rutgers does have market and a rapidly growing fan base. Every year in NJ more and more cars have the block R on them. More and more hats and shirts can be seen everyday from casual fans.

There is no way that the B1G would have taken Pitt. Not...A...Chance...In....HELL. Thats because PSU would have done ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to block them. The same way no way in hell OSU would allow Cincy to be added. It would be even harder for them to get in than UConn getting into the ACC. BC was happy when the FB schools went against Tobacco Road or you could have seen the Huskies in the ACC. There is no scenario where PSU lets Pitt in.

Who said the Big Ten was ever letting Pitt in? The original poster said the ACC made a mistake by knocking Pitt so we are just responding and giving an explanation as to why Pitt was a better choice than Rutgers for the ACC. I think Rutgers is a good school and wish them the best.

(06-06-2013 09:28 AM)MKPitt Wrote:  

(06-06-2013 05:29 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 11:07 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Of course markets are important, but let's compare the two schools using major realignment categories.

Pitt > Rutgers in almost every aspect.

Pitt vs. Rutgers

Football - Pitt
Basketball - Pitt
Football tradition - Pitt
Basketball tradition - Pitt
Fan support - Pitt
Location - Tie (Both good recruiting grounds, and both bridged ACC)
Facilities - Pitt
Market - Rutgers
Academics - Pitt

My guess is Pitt used the Big XII as leverage to get into the ACC. Syracuse likely lobbied on Pitt's behalf. Adding Pitt was also a more nationally relevant move, compared to adding Rutgers.

I'd have to disagree with you on academics. Rutgers would take the nod there. In addition, I would give Rutgers the nod over Pitt for facilities. Pitt doesn't even have a football stadium, Rutgers has a nice football stadium and facilities far superior to Pitt which uses the Steelers facilities. How Pitt got into the ACC with NO football stadium is beyond me.

No, Pitt is ranked higher by every metric in academics
U.S. News undergrad ranking:
Pitt: 58, Rutgers: 68
Endowment:
Pitt: 2.6 billion, Rutgers: 693.5 million
Research rankings:
ARWU:
Pitt: 58 Rutgers: 61

Plus, Pitt is in the top ten universities receiving federal research dollars, is in the AAU and has an elite medical school.

Pitt's facilities are better than almost any school in the country even though I disagree with the decision to move the stadium off campus.

Also, I don't have the stats in front of me but I'm almost certain I remember studies that Pitt gets much better tv ratings than Rutgers so the fans are there.

Even in a year when Rutgers was much better than Pitt, the attendance difference was only 49-41k last year. In every other year in the last five years, Pitt has had better attendance than Rutgers, sometimes by a good margin.

Where's that fan base come bowl season?

(06-06-2013 09:49 AM)MKPitt Wrote:  

(06-06-2013 09:46 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Wow, I can't believe everyone chitting all over Rutgers.

Wow, Rutgers wasn't mentioned in a Big XII rumor? Well neither Syracuse because neither of them made any G-D sense to go to the Big XII!

Rutgers has beaten Pitt it's fair share of times the last decade. They split the series 5-5 the last ten years so saying that Pitt is better in FB isn't exactly true.

Pitt's fans don't show up to bowl games and anyone who has been in the Big East the last ten years should know that. It's an embarrassment come bowl season when NONE of their fans make the trip ANYWHERE! Not to mention when they don't even show up to the games.



Wow...will ya look at that fan base.

Also the facilities have to go to Rutgers just because they don't have to "share" them with anyone. They built their own state of the art facilities.

Pitt hasn't had any FB tradition since Marino and Dorsett. (BTW Ray Rice has a ring like Dorsett and is one of the top rushers in the NFL. He could easily be Rutgers answer to that HoFer)

Rutgers put more players into this NFL draft than any other school.

Rutgers does have market and a rapidly growing fan base. Every year in NJ more and more cars have the block R on them. More and more hats and shirts can be seen everyday from casual fans.

There is no way that the B1G would have taken Pitt. Not...A...Chance...In....HELL. Thats because PSU would have done ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to block them. The same way no way in hell OSU would allow Cincy to be added. It would be even harder for them to get in than UConn getting into the ACC. BC was happy when the FB schools went against Tobacco Road or you could have seen the Huskies in the ACC. There is no scenario where PSU lets Pitt in.

Who said the Big Ten was ever letting Pitt in? The original poster said the ACC made a mistake by knocking Pitt so we are just responding and giving an explanation as to why Pitt was a better choice than Rutgers for the ACC. I think Rutgers is a good school and wish them the best.

My bad, i thought i saw someone post that. Just skimming through too quick.

(06-06-2013 07:42 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 10:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  By all reports, the ACC was motivated to go after Pitt when it added Syracuse in response to rumors that the Big XII would be going after Pitt. Apparently the ACC didn't want to allow the Big XII to get a foothold in the Northeast and saw Pitt as a firewall against encroachment any farther east than West Virginia.

But did they really overthink this one?

No.

Quote:Gordon Gee now says that the B1G went after Rutgers and Maryland to grab the heart of the Middle Atlantic and to block the ACC.

Block the ACC from what? Crabcakes? And, we're really going to take what Gordon Gee says to heart?

Quote:Think about the implications. If the ACC takes Rutgers instead of Pitt, the B1G leaves Maryland alone and the ACC controls the Boston - Washington corridor with BC, Rutgers, & Maryland with a little help from Syracuse. Penn State remains on an island. The B1G still has Philly and some interest in NYC but they really don't have any physical presence on the East Coast in that big population corridor.

You realize that:

a) the ACC could have invited Rutgers at any time between 2004 and yesterday, but they believed Syracuse, VT, Pitt, Miama and BC were more valuable, and

b) the B1G HAD to take a school to pair with Maryland (who most of us believe will regret leaving within 5-10 years) -- the choices were basically Rutgers and UConn.

The B1G chose Rutgers.

Your beef should be with Delaney. Or the officials in Connecticut who sued the ACC and several member schools following the first expansion.

Quote:The ACC might claim to be better off with the athletics at Pitt and Louisville than at Rutgers and Maryland, but that ignores the 3 rules of Real Estate:

1. Location
2. Location
3. Location

Just as you can't teach height in basketball, you can't change location. Athletic success comes and goes, but location remains the same. The ACC may have really shot themselves in the foot with this one because they have now conceded the 3 states of PA, NJ, & MD with a combined population of 26 million to the B1G.

The B1G really didn't need the NYC ties although it's obviously nice to have, but the ACC did. Schools like Duke and Miami bring in a lot of students from the Northeast and send a lot of alums to NYC. Even schools like Clemson, North Carolina, and Virginia have become attractive to Northeasterners and have their share of NE kids in their student body.

Did the ACC need Pitt? Not really. Had the Big XII taken Pitt, the conference still wouldn't have moved farther east if the ACC tied up Syracuse & Rutgers. The B!G wasn't interested in Pitt.

So, what did the ACC gain? Louisville football and not much else.

1) 5 FB games w/ Notre Dame per season
2) Louisville's basketball program
3) Addition by subtraction (no more Maryland basketball)
4) Better bowl games
5) We'll take Pitt, TYVM

Maryland basketball is addition by subtraction? Maryland won the NCAA tournament 11 years ago. Give me a flipping break on that one.

Here's my take on the Rutgers stuff in this thread:
We've been given a golden opportunity and a life raft by being added to the Big Ten. Additionally, we have been mentioned as an expansion target for the Big Ten from time to time for many many years. Go do the Google searches on it. We may not have been first on the list but the fact is we've been on the list. Everyone's entitled to their opinions on our fanbase and entitled to say we've sucked for 100 years in football and basketball (even if that's complete hyperbole), but the truth of the matter is we're still in a major conference and have the ability to grow. That's good enough for this Rutgers fan.

(06-06-2013 10:07 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(06-06-2013 07:42 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 10:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  By all reports, the ACC was motivated to go after Pitt when it added Syracuse in response to rumors that the Big XII would be going after Pitt. Apparently the ACC didn't want to allow the Big XII to get a foothold in the Northeast and saw Pitt as a firewall against encroachment any farther east than West Virginia.

But did they really overthink this one?

No.

Quote:Gordon Gee now says that the B1G went after Rutgers and Maryland to grab the heart of the Middle Atlantic and to block the ACC.

Block the ACC from what? Crabcakes? And, we're really going to take what Gordon Gee says to heart?

Quote:Think about the implications. If the ACC takes Rutgers instead of Pitt, the B1G leaves Maryland alone and the ACC controls the Boston - Washington corridor with BC, Rutgers, & Maryland with a little help from Syracuse. Penn State remains on an island. The B1G still has Philly and some interest in NYC but they really don't have any physical presence on the East Coast in that big population corridor.

You realize that:

a) the ACC could have invited Rutgers at any time between 2004 and yesterday, but they believed Syracuse, VT, Pitt, Miama and BC were more valuable, and

b) the B1G HAD to take a school to pair with Maryland (who most of us believe will regret leaving within 5-10 years) -- the choices were basically Rutgers and UConn.

The B1G chose Rutgers.

Your beef should be with Delaney. Or the officials in Connecticut who sued the ACC and several member schools following the first expansion.

Quote:The ACC might claim to be better off with the athletics at Pitt and Louisville than at Rutgers and Maryland, but that ignores the 3 rules of Real Estate:

1. Location
2. Location
3. Location

Just as you can't teach height in basketball, you can't change location. Athletic success comes and goes, but location remains the same. The ACC may have really shot themselves in the foot with this one because they have now conceded the 3 states of PA, NJ, & MD with a combined population of 26 million to the B1G.

The B1G really didn't need the NYC ties although it's obviously nice to have, but the ACC did. Schools like Duke and Miami bring in a lot of students from the Northeast and send a lot of alums to NYC. Even schools like Clemson, North Carolina, and Virginia have become attractive to Northeasterners and have their share of NE kids in their student body.

Did the ACC need Pitt? Not really. Had the Big XII taken Pitt, the conference still wouldn't have moved farther east if the ACC tied up Syracuse & Rutgers. The B!G wasn't interested in Pitt.

So, what did the ACC gain? Louisville football and not much else.

1) 5 FB games w/ Notre Dame per season
2) Louisville's basketball program
3) Addition by subtraction (no more Maryland basketball)
4) Better bowl games
5) We'll take Pitt, TYVM

Maryland basketball is addition by subtraction? Maryland won the NCAA tournament 11 years ago. Give me a flipping break on that one.

Louisville won this year.

(06-06-2013 05:29 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I'd have to disagree with you on academics. Rutgers would take the nod there. In addition, I would give Rutgers the nod over Pitt for facilities. Pitt doesn't even have a football stadium, Rutgers has a nice football stadium and facilities far superior to Pitt which uses the Steelers facilities. How Pitt got into the ACC with NO football stadium is beyond me.

Pittsburgh is definitely ahead of Rutgers when it comes to academics.

(06-06-2013 09:28 AM)MKPitt Wrote:  Plus, Pitt is in the top ten universities receiving federal research dollars, is in the AAU and has an elite medical school.

Rutgers is in the AAU. The Big Ten is not going to add a school if they aren't.

(06-06-2013 10:23 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(06-06-2013 10:07 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(06-06-2013 07:42 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 10:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  By all reports, the ACC was motivated to go after Pitt when it added Syracuse in response to rumors that the Big XII would be going after Pitt. Apparently the ACC didn't want to allow the Big XII to get a foothold in the Northeast and saw Pitt as a firewall against encroachment any farther east than West Virginia.

But did they really overthink this one?

No.

Quote:Gordon Gee now says that the B1G went after Rutgers and Maryland to grab the heart of the Middle Atlantic and to block the ACC.

Block the ACC from what? Crabcakes? And, we're really going to take what Gordon Gee says to heart?

Quote:Think about the implications. If the ACC takes Rutgers instead of Pitt, the B1G leaves Maryland alone and the ACC controls the Boston - Washington corridor with BC, Rutgers, & Maryland with a little help from Syracuse. Penn State remains on an island. The B1G still has Philly and some interest in NYC but they really don't have any physical presence on the East Coast in that big population corridor.

You realize that:

a) the ACC could have invited Rutgers at any time between 2004 and yesterday, but they believed Syracuse, VT, Pitt, Miama and BC were more valuable, and

b) the B1G HAD to take a school to pair with Maryland (who most of us believe will regret leaving within 5-10 years) -- the choices were basically Rutgers and UConn.

The B1G chose Rutgers.

Your beef should be with Delaney. Or the officials in Connecticut who sued the ACC and several member schools following the first expansion.

Quote:The ACC might claim to be better off with the athletics at Pitt and Louisville than at Rutgers and Maryland, but that ignores the 3 rules of Real Estate:

1. Location
2. Location
3. Location

Just as you can't teach height in basketball, you can't change location. Athletic success comes and goes, but location remains the same. The ACC may have really shot themselves in the foot with this one because they have now conceded the 3 states of PA, NJ, & MD with a combined population of 26 million to the B1G.

The B1G really didn't need the NYC ties although it's obviously nice to have, but the ACC did. Schools like Duke and Miami bring in a lot of students from the Northeast and send a lot of alums to NYC. Even schools like Clemson, North Carolina, and Virginia have become attractive to Northeasterners and have their share of NE kids in their student body.

Did the ACC need Pitt? Not really. Had the Big XII taken Pitt, the conference still wouldn't have moved farther east if the ACC tied up Syracuse & Rutgers. The B!G wasn't interested in Pitt.

So, what did the ACC gain? Louisville football and not much else.

1) 5 FB games w/ Notre Dame per season
2) Louisville's basketball program
3) Addition by subtraction (no more Maryland basketball)
4) Better bowl games
5) We'll take Pitt, TYVM

Maryland basketball is addition by subtraction? Maryland won the NCAA tournament 11 years ago. Give me a flipping break on that one.

Louisville won this year.

Plus Louisville has two more titles with 3 Overall Men's Basketball Titles & 10 Total Final Fours...only 5 other school have double digit Four Four Appearances & 3 NCAA Men's Basketball Titles...they are UCLA, Kentucky, Kansas, Duke & North Carolina...

(06-06-2013 07:42 AM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 10:35 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  By all reports, the ACC was motivated to go after Pitt when it added Syracuse in response to rumors that the Big XII would be going after Pitt. Apparently the ACC didn't want to allow the Big XII to get a foothold in the Northeast and saw Pitt as a firewall against encroachment any farther east than West Virginia.

But did they really overthink this one?

No.

Quote:Gordon Gee now says that the B1G went after Rutgers and Maryland to grab the heart of the Middle Atlantic and to block the ACC.

Block the ACC from what? Crabcakes? And, we're really going to take what Gordon Gee says to heart?

Quote:Think about the implications. If the ACC takes Rutgers instead of Pitt, the B1G leaves Maryland alone and the ACC controls the Boston - Washington corridor with BC, Rutgers, & Maryland with a little help from Syracuse. Penn State remains on an island. The B1G still has Philly and some interest in NYC but they really don't have any physical presence on the East Coast in that big population corridor.

You realize that:

a) the ACC could have invited Rutgers at any time between 2004 and yesterday, but they believed Syracuse, VT, Pitt, Miama and BC were more valuable, and

b) the B1G HAD to take a school to pair with Maryland (who most of us believe will regret leaving within 5-10 years) -- the choices were basically Rutgers and UConn.

The B1G chose Rutgers.

Your beef should be with Delaney. Or the officials in Connecticut who sued the ACC and several member schools following the first expansion.

Quote:The ACC might claim to be better off with the athletics at Pitt and Louisville than at Rutgers and Maryland, but that ignores the 3 rules of Real Estate:

1. Location
2. Location
3. Location

Just as you can't teach height in basketball, you can't change location. Athletic success comes and goes, but location remains the same. The ACC may have really shot themselves in the foot with this one because they have now conceded the 3 states of PA, NJ, & MD with a combined population of 26 million to the B1G.

The B1G really didn't need the NYC ties although it's obviously nice to have, but the ACC did. Schools like Duke and Miami bring in a lot of students from the Northeast and send a lot of alums to NYC. Even schools like Clemson, North Carolina, and Virginia have become attractive to Northeasterners and have their share of NE kids in their student body.

Did the ACC need Pitt? Not really. Had the Big XII taken Pitt, the conference still wouldn't have moved farther east if the ACC tied up Syracuse & Rutgers. The B!G wasn't interested in Pitt.

So, what did the ACC gain? Louisville football and not much else.

1) 5 FB games w/ Notre Dame per season
2) Louisville's basketball program
3) Addition by subtraction (no more Maryland football)
4) Better bowl games
5) We'll take Pitt, TYVM

Fixed it for you, ecuacc4ever (or is that uncacc4ever? hmm).

Rutgers would not have kept UMD in the conference, they're a much better fit in the Big 10 anyway.

Georgetown puts us right back in that market, if it's a major threat, but I think UVA can carry just as much weight in DC. Let the Big 10 have Baltimore.

I actually agree with the St. John's flamer. I think the Ray Rice vs. Tony Dorsett debate really embodies the Rutgers vs. Pitt debate.

I am a big proponent of Ray Rice's, just as I am RU. However, Rice rushed for 4,926 career yards in college and once led his team to a second place finish in the Big East.

Conversely, Dorsett graduated as the NCAA's all-time leading rusher and remained so for the next 22 years. He still ranks third on the NCAA's all-time rushing list. Additionally, Dorsett won the Heisman Trophy in 1976 and also led his team to the national championship.

Do those seem like comparable collegiate careers to sane individuals?

One was exceptional, the other was legendary.

As pros, Rice and Dorsett are/were both exceptional. However, Dorsett is the NFL's eighth all-time leading rusher, about 7,000 yards ahead of Rice.

Not. even. close.

Pitt's all-time record vs. Rutgers is 22-8.

I'll tell you what, St. John's flamer:

List for me the top 10 greatest players in the history of Rutgers football - and you can go all the way back to 1869 if you like - and I will submit a list comprised only of players that graduated AFTER Marino and Dorsett left (meaning no Tony Dorsett, Dan Marino, Mike Ditka, Marty Schottenheimer, Joe Walton, Joe Schmidt, etc.) and I guarantee you that my list will STILL absolutely blow the doors off yours.

Want to play?

(06-06-2013 11:54 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'll tell you what, St. John's flamer:

List for me the top 10 greatest players in the history of Rutgers football - and you can go all the way back to 1869 if you like - and I will submit a list comprised only of players that graduated AFTER Marino and Dorsett left (meaning no Tony Dorsett, Dan Marino, Mike Ditka, :cheers:Marty Schottenheimer, Joe Walton, Joe Schmidt, etc.) and I guarantee you that my list will STILL absolutely blow the doors off yours.

Want to play?

THat list right there is why I've always been a fan of Pitt Football. Basketball also has an impressive history.

(06-06-2013 10:56 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Fixed it for you, ecuacc4ever (or is that uncacc4ever? hmm).

Last I checked my esteemed college degree, it read "East Carolina University" (aka ECU).

arg.

Am I the only one here that's never heard of "Joe Schmidt"...? I do know of Joe Walton, if it's the guy who used to coach the Jets? Schottenheimer (played before my time) was in the middle of that outstanding "Boston Pops" Patriots defense that went 2-12. That gave us the #1 pick where we drafted Jim Plunkett.

When Ray Rice passes Curtis Martin, talk to me. Start a little smaller and work your way up.

(06-06-2013 11:38 AM)esayem Wrote:  Rutgers would not have kept UMD in the conference, they're a much better fit in the Big 10 anyway.

Georgetown puts us right back in that market, if it's a major threat, but I think UVA can carry just as much weight in DC. Let the Big 10 have Baltimore.

Add Georgetown for all-sports but football and raid AAC for Navy as football only.