(09-21-2015 09:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  Why does every Rutgers thread evolve into a Penn State death-penalty discussion?

Because of Barry Alvarez's overplayed quote about the three eastern schools?

Another issue for Rutgers/Maryland football is its just downright insane for the Big 10 to have Michigan State in the east and Purdue in the west. Flip those school's and everybody in the east has a little easier time with the schedule.

Big 10

East: Michigan, IU, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland
West: Michigan State, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska

its just pure mismanagement on the big 10 part for putting MSU in the east.

(09-21-2015 04:58 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The reason that Maryland is in the Big Ten is because they became available to move to the Big Ten. No way the Big Ten is going to turn down a University of the caliber of Maryland.

Rutgers was the one that got lucky in the timing ... they were hanging around as a possible #14 add waiting for a compelling #13 add to show up. And then, before all of this stuff came out, a compelling #13 showed up, and they got the invite to balance out the expansion.

I agree. It's similar to Texas A&M and the SEC. In both cases there was a political/administrative window of opportunity in which the move was possible when it wasn't before, and the conference had to either invite before the window closed, or lose the opportunity.

(09-21-2015 10:36 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Another issue for Rutgers/Maryland football is its just downright insane for the Big 10 to have Michigan State in the east and Purdue in the west. Flip those school's and everybody in the east has a little easier time with the schedule.

Big 10

East: Michigan, IU, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland
West: Michigan State, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska

its just pure mismanagement on the big 10 part for putting MSU in the east.

Putting Michigan State in the west makes their path to the B1G Championship game a bit easier than Michigan's, which could diminish the Wolverines within the state.

THAT is to be avoided at all costs, and Ohio State and Michigan have always been the big political entities in the B1G.

Can we just toss the Big 10 completely out????

(09-21-2015 10:36 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Another issue for Rutgers/Maryland football is its just downright insane for the Big 10 to have Michigan State in the east and Purdue in the west. Flip those school's and everybody in the east has a little easier time with the schedule.

Big 10

East: Michigan, IU, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland
West: Michigan State, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska

its just pure mismanagement on the big 10 part for putting MSU in the east.

What would be insane is to make decisions about divisional alignment based on short term shifts in strength of individual teams. Fact is, Michigan State is further east than Purdue, and in-state rival Michigan is going to stay in the eastern division with Ohio State until hell freezes over. Leaving Sparty in the east means the league doesn't have to assign them as a permanent crossover rival to the Wolverines. That way, they are free to rotate more often thru the rest of the teams in the west.

(09-21-2015 10:04 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 09:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  Why does every Rutgers thread evolve into a Penn State death-penalty discussion?

Because of Barry Alvarez's overplayed quote about the three eastern schools?

Well .... the title of this thread is "Can the B1G toss Rutgers out?"

It will inevitably shift to a school where there was once at least some discussion of doing such a thing.

Anyway, Rutgers: they are NOT going anywhere. No chance. They're a B1G member institution now and they're part of our conference's future.

(09-21-2015 10:04 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 09:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  Why does every Rutgers thread evolve into a Penn State death-penalty discussion?

Because of Barry Alvarez's overplayed quote about the three eastern schools?

Barry Alvarez is another blowhard like Bret Belemia at Arkansas. Since Barry hired Bret at Wisconsin, Barry said that schools like TCU do not deserved to be in a National Championship even if they went undefeated. This was when TCU was in MWC. After Barry said that, TCU beat Bret and his Wisconsin team in the Rose Bowl. It seems where ever Bret coaches and things being said about other teams? It came back to haunt them. Barry Alvarez is on the Playoff committee. I wonder if he still have his prejudice against TCU still with him even if TCU is in a new conference? That is why I do not think the Playoff committee is bias at all. We already have seen Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Stanford, TCU and Baylor left out from playing for the National Championship. Plus other unbeaten teams like Tulane, Utah, Hawaii and Boise State.

(09-21-2015 05:46 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 10:04 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-21-2015 09:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  Why does every Rutgers thread evolve into a Penn State death-penalty discussion?

Because of Barry Alvarez's overplayed quote about the three eastern schools?

Well .... the title of this thread is "Can the B1G toss Rutgers out?"

It will inevitably shift to a school where there was once at least some discussion of doing such a thing.

Anyway, Rutgers: they are NOT going anywhere. No chance. They're a B1G member institution now and they're part of our conference's future.

In another thread, someone talked about the political pull Michigan and Ohio State had, and I had to wonder about maybe PSU's power being greater than perceived. Not anywhere close to Michigan or Illinois (who PSU approached back in the 80's, probably another forgotten power in the conference), but enough to open some doors (Nebraska, who leaned on PSU's then president to communicate its interest and intentions), while keeping it locked for others. Take Barry's words for what they are, but I got the impression that with the sort of executive and administrative turnover in Happy Valley after the Sandusky thing, there was a possibility of a Big Ten sans Penn State, be it through expulsion or withdrawal. And if it came to a withdrawal, then, yeah...looking east was definitely a peace offering. With both those schools added to the pot, PSU can't say that the Big Ten affiliation isolates its applicant pool from NJ and MD. It makes me wonder if either Rutgers or Maryland could EVER have such stroke...and that's something to consider given Maryland's political history within the ACC.

The idea of Rutgers getting the boot, though...maybe "encouraged to withdraw" might be in the cards if enough certain schools were to ever call upon the conference, and were Rutgers to never get their affairs in order athletically, but that's so remote, it borders fiction. And I only mull it because I've wondered about Utah's place in the PAC as a potential placeholder for others. Ironically, Utah's starting to prove their place...Colorado, the one the PAC chased, doesn't seem to have much of a pulse.