(06-06-2019 10:18 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 09:40 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 09:13 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 08:53 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 11:27 AM)esayem Wrote:  I believe Syracuse is a more prestigious university than Maryland, but UMd has the location advantage when you are considering modern day athletics and their relationship to markets.

Syracuse has been on the Big Ten’s radar since the early 90’s (when the mere thought of inviting Maryland would have brought roaring laughter from the Big Ten officials), but I think Paterno wielded some heavy opposition against the Orangemen due to the proposed Eastern Conference fiasco.

Syracuse dropped out of the AAU before being kicked out like Nebraska. Maryland is a powerhouse research university. From the viewpoint of college presidents, who value research, Maryland is much more prestigious.

That’s fine, and I’m well aware of all that info, but Syracuse is more prestigious overall.

The Big Ten practically begged Notre Dame to join multiple times, how’s their research?

Notre Dame is a pretty good research school.

Perhaps it is more research focused now, I’m not sure. Traditionally, Notre Dame has been regarded as a tremendous place to earn a bachelor’s degree.

They are Carnegie Tier One.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Quote:It's a matter of not bluffing, but literally being able to walk away and not look back. That's what Nebraska couldn't do. Delany knew that Nebraska would take any deal that got them into the Big Ten, that he didn't have to give an inch.

And the Big Ten can thank the former president of Penn State, the Sandusky enabler, for doing good scouting for the conference. Had he not passed on such encouraging reports about the conference strongly wanting them, maybe Nebraska makes some other calls.

How you can lose with a winning hand to someone with a stone face who hasn’t even anted up.

(06-08-2019 09:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The entire summation of this thread boils down to this:
Big 10:
New Jersey: Population 9 million / Rutgers AAU
Maryland: Population 6 million / Maryland AAU

SEC:
Missouri: Population 6 million / Missouri AAU
Texas: Population 28 million / Texas A&M AAU

If Jim Delany had an option to pick up a contiguous state with a population of 28 million with a State Flagship University which was AAU he would have done it.

Maryland opened up the possibility of reaching Virginia and North Carolina. Missouri did not. Score one for the Big 10.

Texas A&M was contiguous and a historic rival of L.S.U.. Texas has 28 million people and it opened the possibility of the SEC reaching other major brands. Score one for the SEC.

I think all things considered, especially the dominance at the time of the footprint pay model, that Delany did as well as he could do.

Slive did as well considering ESPN would not have paid the SEC to take ACC schools.

And that's pretty much it.

The Maryland addition was not in lieu of Missouri, it was Nebraska chosen instead of Missouri.
If The B1G had taken Missouri instead of Nebraska, the Big 12 would not have become unstable. Instability in the Big 12 almost prompted a major move west by two of the most powerful brands. This would have benefited the B1G/PAC relationship and kept both Oklahoma and Texas away from the SEC and the ACC respectively.
The worst case scenario for the B1G would be the ACC with Syracuse/Pitt/Notre Dame enticing Penn State to join the ACC and completely remove the NE market fro the B1G. Now the B1G with Maryland/Rutgers/Penn State have roughly a 50% presence in that market with the ACC.

This is not to say that you are not generally correct JR, just not 100% accurate.

Who was taken in lieu of whom is fan conjecture. Nebraska was taken because Osborne wanted in. That would be like the SEC taking an Oklahoma or Texas if we were actually looking elsewhere. When those opportunities knock you welcome them even if they mess up your plans.

Nebraska took them to 12. Maryland and Rutgers took them to 14 and for the very simple reasons listed. They were populated states in the direction that the Big 10 intended to move. ESPN encouraged Missouri to the SEC to protect the product that they were interested in keeping away from the Big 10. The extended ACC GOR did their work to the East and Missouri in the SEC and Colorado in the PAC made Big 10 expansion in the West more difficult, which helped to protect Texas's position.

But the SEC and Big 10 took the schools that added the most to their bottom lines based upon the pay model at the time.

(06-08-2019 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Slive did as well considering ESPN would not have paid the SEC to take ACC schools.

I don't think there's any doubt that all things considered - strength of school, strength of athletics, market value, and fit with existing conferences - that the only A+ slam dunk acquisition in the 2010 - 2012 realignment was the SEC picking up Texas A&M.

That was a grand slam.

(06-08-2019 10:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 09:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The entire summation of this thread boils down to this:
Big 10:
New Jersey: Population 9 million / Rutgers AAU
Maryland: Population 6 million / Maryland AAU

SEC:
Missouri: Population 6 million / Missouri AAU
Texas: Population 28 million / Texas A&M AAU

If Jim Delany had an option to pick up a contiguous state with a population of 28 million with a State Flagship University which was AAU he would have done it.

Maryland opened up the possibility of reaching Virginia and North Carolina. Missouri did not. Score one for the Big 10.

Texas A&M was contiguous and a historic rival of L.S.U.. Texas has 28 million people and it opened the possibility of the SEC reaching other major brands. Score one for the SEC.

I think all things considered, especially the dominance at the time of the footprint pay model, that Delany did as well as he could do.

Slive did as well considering ESPN would not have paid the SEC to take ACC schools.

And that's pretty much it.

The Maryland addition was not in lieu of Missouri, it was Nebraska chosen instead of Missouri.
If The B1G had taken Missouri instead of Nebraska, the Big 12 would not have become unstable. Instability in the Big 12 almost prompted a major move west by two of the most powerful brands. This would have benefited the B1G/PAC relationship and kept both Oklahoma and Texas away from the SEC and the ACC respectively.
The worst case scenario for the B1G would be the ACC with Syracuse/Pitt/Notre Dame enticing Penn State to join the ACC and completely remove the NE market fro the B1G. Now the B1G with Maryland/Rutgers/Penn State have roughly a 50% presence in that market with the ACC.

This is not to say that you are not generally correct JR, just not 100% accurate.

Who was taken in lieu of whom is fan conjecture. Nebraska was taken because Osborne wanted in. That would be like the SEC taking an Oklahoma or Texas if we were actually looking elsewhere. When those opportunities knock you welcome them even if they mess up your plans.

Nebraska took them to 12. Maryland and Rutgers took them to 14 and for the very simple reasons listed. They were populated states in the direction that the Big 10 intended to move. ESPN encouraged Missouri to the SEC to protect the product that they were interested in keeping away from the Big 10. The extended ACC GOR did their work to the East and Missouri in the SEC and Colorado in the PAC ma'
But the SEC and Big 10 took the schools that added the most to their bottom lines based upon the pay model at the time.

There is no conjecture at all.......Nebraska joined the B1G in 2011 while Maryland and Rutgers didn't join until 2014.

(06-08-2019 10:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Slive did as well considering ESPN would not have paid the SEC to take ACC schools.

I don't think there's any doubt that all things considered - strength of school, strength of athletics, market value, and fit with existing conferences - that the only A+ slam dunk acquisition in the 2010 - 2012 realignment was the SEC picking up Texas A&M.

That was a grand slam.

The A&M addition is the strongest of the recent bunch, though I would not say grand slam. The grand slams haven't happened.

Most of these realignment moves are a lot like coaching searches for the "big name" college teams.

We've all seen these coaching searches. Fans and boosters, and maybe administrators, start out thinking, "We just fired our coach, we're going to get Nick Saban, we're going to get Urban Meyer, and if those two don't take it, then Bob Stoops would absolutely come out of retirement for us because our program is so awesome..." etc., etc. And then you can't get those guys, and you end up with Willie Taggart or Clay Helton.

And when people have their realignment dreams, they start out thinking (maybe the Big Ten started out thinking), "We announced that we're considering expansion, we are irresistible, we're going to get to choose between Texas and Notre Dame, and we're going to turn down five other top-20 football programs, unless we decide to expand all the way to 16 teams." But Texas and Notre Dame don't happen. They end up choosing between Nebraska and Missouri. Next go-round, they think they're going to take any or all of the ACC's most valuable programs, but they end up with Maryland and Rutgers.

Dreams vs. reality.

(06-08-2019 11:14 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 10:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 09:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The entire summation of this thread boils down to this:
Big 10:
New Jersey: Population 9 million / Rutgers AAU
Maryland: Population 6 million / Maryland AAU

SEC:
Missouri: Population 6 million / Missouri AAU
Texas: Population 28 million / Texas A&M AAU

If Jim Delany had an option to pick up a contiguous state with a population of 28 million with a State Flagship University which was AAU he would have done it.

Maryland opened up the possibility of reaching Virginia and North Carolina. Missouri did not. Score one for the Big 10.

Texas A&M was contiguous and a historic rival of L.S.U.. Texas has 28 million people and it opened the possibility of the SEC reaching other major brands. Score one for the SEC.

I think all things considered, especially the dominance at the time of the footprint pay model, that Delany did as well as he could do.

Slive did as well considering ESPN would not have paid the SEC to take ACC schools.

And that's pretty much it.

The Maryland addition was not in lieu of Missouri, it was Nebraska chosen instead of Missouri.
If The B1G had taken Missouri instead of Nebraska, the Big 12 would not have become unstable. Instability in the Big 12 almost prompted a major move west by two of the most powerful brands. This would have benefited the B1G/PAC relationship and kept both Oklahoma and Texas away from the SEC and the ACC respectively.
The worst case scenario for the B1G would be the ACC with Syracuse/Pitt/Notre Dame enticing Penn State to join the ACC and completely remove the NE market fro the B1G. Now the B1G with Maryland/Rutgers/Penn State have roughly a 50% presence in that market with the ACC.

This is not to say that you are not generally correct JR, just not 100% accurate.

Who was taken in lieu of whom is fan conjecture. Nebraska was taken because Osborne wanted in. That would be like the SEC taking an Oklahoma or Texas if we were actually looking elsewhere. When those opportunities knock you welcome them even if they mess up your plans.

Nebraska took them to 12. Maryland and Rutgers took them to 14 and for the very simple reasons listed. They were populated states in the direction that the Big 10 intended to move. ESPN encouraged Missouri to the SEC to protect the product that they were interested in keeping away from the Big 10. The extended ACC GOR did their work to the East and Missouri in the SEC and Colorado in the PAC ma'
But the SEC and Big 10 took the schools that added the most to their bottom lines based upon the pay model at the time.

There is no conjecture at all.......Nebraska joined the B1G in 2011 while Maryland and Rutgers didn't join until 2014.

Which is precisely my point. Missouri would have been passed over to 12 had the SEC had 11 and Oklahoma had suddenly wanted in. It was no different for the Big 10 when Nebraska wanted in. Missouri was off the board when Maryland was taken and it wouldn't have mattered. The Big 10 had been looking East toward the population centers. Both had a population of 6 million but Maryland was in the direction they wanted and next to other important targets. I never said that the Big 10 took Maryland in lieu of Missouri, you did. The Big 10 wasn't taking Missouri at that time period. Fan conjecture is that the Big 10 probably thought Missouri would be there if ever they wanted them. ESPN made sure they wouldn't be because their priorities were different than those of Delany.

Language is precise. Nebraska couldn't be passed up. East was where Delany wanted to go. Missouri simply didn't fit that plan, not in 2011 and wouldn't have in 2014. I mentioned Missouri because of all that had been said about them in the thread. There was no "in lieu" involved. Maryland had been flirted with already, the Big 10 simply responded when they wanted out. If they had wanted out in 2012 they would have taken them then. Maryland gave them a much greater presence in the Beltway and was the bridge to Virginia and North Carolina that they eyed. Rutgers brought 9 million and a bigger slice of N.Y..

It's simple. Sorry if it doesn't fit your agenda. And given the pay model at the time Delany didn't botch anything. Who could have known the rules for payouts would have changed so soon?

The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Cuz...Notre Dame!

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Well that AAU thing was sort of overlooked for Nebraska since they knew they wouldn't remain AAU when they took them. The Notre Dame allure was in part due to the fact that with them their dominance within their footprint would have been complete and they are a historic brand. I see the ACC had no problem hiking a skirt to take them while you dished out a special deal. So I wouldn't use the Irish to cast aspersions.

(06-08-2019 05:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Well that AAU thing was sort of overlooked for Nebraska since they knew they wouldn't remain AAU when they took them. The Notre Dame allure was in part due to the fact that with them their dominance within their footprint would have been complete and they are a historic brand. I see the ACC had no problem hiking a skirt to take them while you dished out a special deal. So I wouldn't use the Irish to cast aspersions.

Well said!

(06-08-2019 05:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Well that AAU thing was sort of overlooked for Nebraska since they knew they wouldn't remain AAU when they took them. The Notre Dame allure was in part due to the fact that with them their dominance within their footprint would have been complete and they are a historic brand. I see the ACC had no problem hiking a skirt to take them while you dished out a special deal. So I wouldn't use the Irish to cast aspersions.

Good point in pointing out the B1G 10 hypocrisy in their own expansion criteria

The Big 10 wants 1. AAU schools, and 2. the states have to border the footprint

After analyzing expansion for nearly 20 years, I just think these rules are dumb and outdated. Who cares about the footprint...

Instead of Nebraska, Rutgers, and Maryland, the Big 10 could have gone after someone like Texas A&M. Their own self-imposed rules don't even make sense, especially with Nebraska out of the AAU

Is the Big 10 making oodles of money? Could they have done better?

Yes to both

(06-08-2019 07:04 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 05:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Well that AAU thing was sort of overlooked for Nebraska since they knew they wouldn't remain AAU when they took them. The Notre Dame allure was in part due to the fact that with them their dominance within their footprint would have been complete and they are a historic brand. I see the ACC had no problem hiking a skirt to take them while you dished out a special deal. So I wouldn't use the Irish to cast aspersions.

Good point in pointing out the B1G 10 hypocrisy in their own expansion criteria

The Big 10 wants 1. AAU schools, and 2. the states have to border the footprint

After analyzing expansion for nearly 20 years, I just think these rules are dumb and outdated. Who cares about the footprint...

Instead of Nebraska, Rutgers, and Maryland, the Big 10 could have gone after someone like Texas A&M. Their own self-imposed rules don't even make sense, especially with Nebraska out of the AAU

Is the Big 10 making oodles of money? Could they have done better?

Yes to both

I see no hypocrisy at all. We all know Notre Dame is not AAU and the BIG would have loved to have added them. Same with Oklahoma, I'm sure the conference would overlook academics for name alone with them.

Border states? I mean is that so uncommon with conferences?

(06-08-2019 07:04 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 05:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Well that AAU thing was sort of overlooked for Nebraska since they knew they wouldn't remain AAU when they took them. The Notre Dame allure was in part due to the fact that with them their dominance within their footprint would have been complete and they are a historic brand. I see the ACC had no problem hiking a skirt to take them while you dished out a special deal. So I wouldn't use the Irish to cast aspersions.

Good point in pointing out the B1G 10 hypocrisy in their own expansion criteria

The Big 10 wants 1. AAU schools, and 2. the states have to border the footprint

After analyzing expansion for nearly 20 years, I just think these rules are dumb and outdated. Who cares about the footprint...

Instead of Nebraska, Rutgers, and Maryland, the Big 10 could have gone after someone like Texas A&M. Their own self-imposed rules don't even make sense, especially with Nebraska out of the AAU

Is the Big 10 making oodles of money? Could they have done better?

Yes to both

Tastes like haterade

(06-08-2019 07:04 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 05:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Well that AAU thing was sort of overlooked for Nebraska since they knew they wouldn't remain AAU when they took them. The Notre Dame allure was in part due to the fact that with them their dominance within their footprint would have been complete and they are a historic brand. I see the ACC had no problem hiking a skirt to take them while you dished out a special deal. So I wouldn't use the Irish to cast aspersions.

Good point in pointing out the B1G 10 hypocrisy in their own expansion criteria

The Big 10 wants 1. AAU schools, and 2. the states have to border the footprint

After analyzing expansion for nearly 20 years, I just think these rules are dumb and outdated. Who cares about the footprint...

Instead of Nebraska, Rutgers, and Maryland, the Big 10 could have gone after someone like Texas A&M. Their own self-imposed rules don't even make sense, especially with Nebraska out of the AAU

Is the Big 10 making oodles of money? Could they have done better?

Yes to both

Well, let's at how ACC expansion did. The ACC did just as you said with one school, even though they were outside the ACC's footprint (see Boston College). And what happened??? BC felt like they were on an island, and a lot of ACC schools wanted little or nothing to do with BC. It took the inclusion of Syracuse and Pittsburgh to really incorporate BC into the conference, and some ACC schools still view BC, along with Syracuse and Pittsburgh now too, as outsiders.

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

Because when you have faith, you don't need to do scientific or medical research.

(06-08-2019 04:41 PM)esayem Wrote:  The universities of North Carolina and Virginia decided that the ACC was the better conference for them. I know their fans agree.

And for all this AAU talk about the Big Ten: Notre Dame is not and was not a member of this prestigious research cohort. Yet, the Big Ten chased them for thirty some years.

The AAU is a convenient proxy for schools that will be considered OK for the majority of faculty politicians in the upper rungs of University administrations who don't give a damn about sports but who live or die by academic prestige. Some schools are prestigious enough without having massive research budgets. EG, The dean of your college of Engineering might not be impressed by Notre Dame, but the dean of your Law School will be.

And adding the standard disclaimer that academic prestige is not a reason for expansion, it's a hurdle to get over when a school otherwise presents some reason to be invited. And it's Notre Dame we are talking about ... as long as you can find enough advocates for its quality as an institution and they have some ammunition to make a case, you are going to go ahead and take a school with the media value of Notre Dame.

(06-07-2019 09:37 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 04:23 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 10:03 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 09:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 12:19 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse still maintain regional identity and cohesion, even if stretching the boundaries to the max, that 2 schools near the Atlantic Ocean cannot.

If they needed Maryland for DC, they should’ve jumped on Syracuse sooner before getting stuck with Rutgers. Syracuse still has a large NYC presence and brings content value Rutgers does not (eg. Rutgers being the only team BTN didn’t air a football classic for this past week, Delany needing to publicly distinguish Maryland’s competitiveness from Rutgers, etc).

UMD is closer to NYC than Cuse. They don't have that much a NYC market besides their LIRR alumni. You people are funny

Hasn't Rutgers been relegated to 1-AA? I swore I read that somewhere.

No one cares about Rutgers in NYC. You had your one night miracle moment back when current recruits were preschoolers. Rutgers is irrelevant in 2019. Your season ticket base has eroded down to less than 15K...you are probably one of the few who still drives on the turnpike with your Block R magnet.

Cool! Our one night was still bigger than any you'll have in NYC. The Empire State building isn't lighting up Orange for the Cuse. No on in NYC gives a rats ass about anything north of Westchester including you guys.

Still very much butthurt that we ended up in a better conference and better division than you. Better hope no one poaches your coach after this season, gonna suck to go back to your 3-9 seasons again huh? Oh and look out Jimmy B is getting up there, then just a few years away from being UConn post Calhoun. At least the Huskies have multiple championships to keep them satisfied.

Its both sad and funny seeing a Rutgers fan living vicariously thru Uconn so that he can talk smack to a Syracuse fan about winning. Its embarrassing. Why dont you try posting something thats worthwhile some time instead of constantly hurling insults at folks? I know other Rutgers fans wish you would quit.

Okay once you Cuse losers quit it i'll stop responding in kind.

If you want to know whats really embarrassing is the butthurt coming from our former Big East partners who left for more money and are now jealous we're in a better conference where we'll make more money than all our former partners.

(06-07-2019 11:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 04:19 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 09:36 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 09:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  UMD is closer to NYC than Cuse. They don't have that much a NYC market besides their LIRR alumni. You people are funny

There you go again, thinking that the only thing that matters for college football fandom is distance from a campus to a city. You probably think the Longhorns have no fans in Texas except within 50 miles of Austin.

Cuse is not the same as Texas. It's like saying Texas Tech has major pull in Dallas. I wasn't joking, it's faster to drive to U of Maryland from NYC than it is to drive to Cuse. You have no idea what you're talking about here. Cuse doesn't have anything close to the pull of UT in the state of NY and not anywhere close to that in NYC.

But Rutgers has pull in NY? The same Rutgers team that only had one appearance on any Nielsen-rated TV outlet last season? (source -- see for yourself)

What does national ratings have to do with anything? Rutgers has pull in NYC because it has the largest alumni base in that city, it sits inside the actual NYC TV market, is 40 minutes from NYC and actually gets covered by the local press. Wow, a bad team didn't do good in ratings last year! Thats some good research right there.

(06-07-2019 10:41 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 04:23 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 10:03 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 09:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 12:19 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Pitt and Syracuse still maintain regional identity and cohesion, even if stretching the boundaries to the max, that 2 schools near the Atlantic Ocean cannot.

If they needed Maryland for DC, they should’ve jumped on Syracuse sooner before getting stuck with Rutgers. Syracuse still has a large NYC presence and brings content value Rutgers does not (eg. Rutgers being the only team BTN didn’t air a football classic for this past week, Delany needing to publicly distinguish Maryland’s competitiveness from Rutgers, etc).

UMD is closer to NYC than Cuse. They don't have that much a NYC market besides their LIRR alumni. You people are funny

Hasn't Rutgers been relegated to 1-AA? I swore I read that somewhere.

No one cares about Rutgers in NYC. You had your one night miracle moment back when current recruits were preschoolers. Rutgers is irrelevant in 2019. Your season ticket base has eroded down to less than 15K...you are probably one of the few who still drives on the turnpike with your Block R magnet.

Cool! Our one night was still bigger than any you'll have in NYC. The Empire State building isn't lighting up Orange for the Cuse. No on in NYC gives a rats ass about anything north of Westchester including you guys.

Still very much butthurt that we ended up in a better conference and better division than you. Better hope no one poaches your coach after this season, gonna suck to go back to your 3-9 seasons again huh? Oh and look out Jimmy B is getting up there, then just a few years away from being UConn post Calhoun. At least the Huskies have multiple championships to keep them satisfied.

Mmmm they lit up the Empire State Bldg Syracuse Orange...BFD in fact it was done a couple times. I know your sports history is one night back in 2006 but try to stay up.

BTW, Dino signed an extension after last season...try again. Cuse in hoops will be fine after Boeheim...elite programs usually don't stay down long after an icon leaves.

Wrong again: the vast majority of Syracuse fans are not wishing to be in the Big Ten. As stated numerous times our school fits in much better with the ACC. Our fans and Alumni live near the Atlantic Seaboard not in the Midwest.

Better conference? The one that gets paid more isn't showing it in championships won. If you are happy as a Rutgers fan getting paid eventually a full share and losing badly enjoy your better division and be happy. All I see is a declining fan base watching bad football in a nearly empty stadium. Cuse is on their way adding close to 10K new season ticket holders for 2019 and Rutgers might keep a total of 12-15K season ticket holders this year. Congrats

HAHAHAHAHAHA they lit up the Empire State building for Syracuse...and the other three teams who made the final four that year. Yeah, so not really specifically for you but hey you got it lit up on one side of the building!

https://cuse.com/news/2013/4/6/EmpireState4613.aspx

Quote:At sunset on Saturday, ESB displayed the school colors of Final Four teams:
North Side: Syracuse University (orange) East Side: University of Michigan (navy blue and yellow) South Side: University of Louisville (red and white) West Side: Wichita State (yellow and black)

Oh wait...you shared the empire state building with another team!

https://cuse.com/news/2010/12/28/FB_1228102957.aspx

Quote:The Empire State Building will split its world-famous tower lights for Syracuse and Kanas State on Wednesday, Dec. 29 to celebrate the first-ever New Era Pinstripe Bowl

So they don't actually lit it up FOR you but the events you take part in. Cool.

Oh yeah and coaches contracts are written in stone right? No one ever broke one of those before have they? Glad you finally hired a decent coach after 20 years of sucking.