Is Rutgers football becoming a top Big 10 program?
- Thread starter jaywillbee
- Start date
Are you paying just ticket price and parking price?
Nope.
You are donating to the school through all the additional "mandatory donations".
Do the Giants charge $1000 "donation" to pay $30 for parking?
Your ire should be at the schools not the players.
They want their cake and eat it too.
Make fans "donate" to support the program and also "donate" to support the players.
It's also a little funny seem to think the universities are the "loyal" ones.
Or somehow more loyal than players.
First off, they mandate annual donations from their fans above and beyond ticket/parking price.
They complain about not having any money depsite rapidly increasing revenues.
Yes, our "Rutgers man" QB left. After the HC had his most successful season since returning and immediately sought out an upgrade.
HC Pike literally recruited 5 players for 3 spots. Guarante that 2 returning must leave regardless of if they wanted to return.
Or somehow more loyal than players.
First off, they mandate annual donations from their fans above and beyond ticket/parking price.
They complain about not having any money depsite rapidly increasing revenues.
Yes, our "Rutgers man" QB left. After the HC had his most successful season since returning and immediately sought out an upgrade.
HC Pike literally recruited 5 players for 3 spots. Guarante that 2 returning must leave regardless of if they wanted to return.
Disagree, the Iowa QB made big plays all game long.
PSU QB’s have killed us with arm and legs.
Wisconsin QB’s have made big plays forever against us.
You do need a QB capable of driving you down the field in the last two minutes with no timeouts.
Wimsatt couldn’t do that, i hope AK can.
Don't think we can be too hard on the institutions either. What are pike and schiano supposed to do? If you want to be a national championship level team then you're probably going to need better play than what they've been getting. Pike's bringing in 2 of the top 3 prospects in the nation; has to try and capitalize with a strong supporting cast. While I feel wimsatt and monangai rushing combo was a safer bet for this year. With the influx of receiving talent you have to take the chance and try to get someone that can get them the ball. Wimsatt was having trouble with the short throws although I feel his deep ball was decent. In this era you have the option of bringing in new experienced guys, only smart to take advantage. If you want to be competitive
Not sure what you're disagreeing with. I said certain teams do not rely on their QB to win games single handedly. Nothing you say above refutes that.
I think we do agree we need better QB play to continue our climb. Completely different statements. Apples and oranges to what I said above.
It used to be that ending the season with a top 25 recruiting class every year likely meant (assuming competent coaching) a top 25 team on the field. Now HS recruiting is only half the story with the transfer portal being the other half.
We are focusing on HS and not the portal. Some schools don't have to choose.
Not sure how it balances out yet, but a good way to measure talent will likely be some combo of HS recruiting rank and portal recruiting rank.
We are focusing on HS and not the portal. Some schools don't have to choose.
Not sure how it balances out yet, but a good way to measure talent will likely be some combo of HS recruiting rank and portal recruiting rank.
I like our strategy so far. We’re not likely to be a transfer destination for too many premier linemen. Those are positions we need to tap into in high school.
It's the best strategy we could chose and I like what GS is doing. But in terms of assessing what current recruiting momentum means in terms of being a top program, the assessment has to be different post Transfer Portal.
Politi had a good article today that sheds some light on the two reasons why recruiting is going so well.
1. Greg Schiano
2. A lot of the big schools are focused on the “proven commodities” in the transfer portal more so than taking a chance on a high school kid.
As you guys already know, we aren’t throwing big bucks at these kids, but it seems that unless you’re a 5 star or can’t miss 4 star, no high school kids are being offered big NIL bucks. RU is targeting “high 3, low 4” star recruits with fantastic results.
I guess the only thing that can hurt us if if some of these guys have outrageous senior years and then some NIL could lure them away. We’ll see how it goes. One thing I'm not worried about is the class imploding because the team has a poor season ala Kyle Flood.
1. Greg Schiano
2. A lot of the big schools are focused on the “proven commodities” in the transfer portal more so than taking a chance on a high school kid.
As you guys already know, we aren’t throwing big bucks at these kids, but it seems that unless you’re a 5 star or can’t miss 4 star, no high school kids are being offered big NIL bucks. RU is targeting “high 3, low 4” star recruits with fantastic results.
I guess the only thing that can hurt us if if some of these guys have outrageous senior years and then some NIL could lure them away. We’ll see how it goes. One thing I'm not worried about is the class imploding because the team has a poor season ala Kyle Flood.
Stop.... you were just looking to troll someone's post... unbelievable.... let people have their opinions... TRUTH, my ass... it was about what could happen.... well you got your popularity going and really zinged me... Congratulations.. you are the best .....🤣😂😅😂
since the subject is a question...and states "becoming" not asking if we "are"
It is a fair question
Trolls such as yourself need to get a life!!!
Yes, and my OP asks “is it conceivable” and “over the next few years”. I didn’t anticipate that opening the possibility for discussion would be so flatly rejected by our most engaged and loyal fans!
The ability to purchase quality players is just one factor which goes into developing a successful team. But not the only one.
Huh?? That's the reason??
+1 How much of that record happened when the Ivy League was the equivalent to the Big 10 (about 1880 -1930) and college football was not big money?
The modern day (if you can say it's modern) high water mark for the Ivies was 1970 when Dartmouth was ranked #13 and Yale #16 in D1, which had a single division. Yale Bowl sold standing room tickets for the game between those teams. There have been some fine individual players since, but no team with anywhere near the depth to take on the big boys.
Is it a syndrome if you actually have a little dick? Asking for a friend.
it is only if you do have a little dick and your wife has been lying to you about it. lol
Recruiting rankings are just HS recruits, right?
Are we in a new world where the Bamas of the world don't waste their time with HS students, they just pull out the money bags and buy the best fresh/ soph after they have demonstrated their ability at the college level?
If so, 2nd tier (and lower) schools like RU will consistently get elite recruiting classes, but may struggle to retain talent.
Are we in a new world where the Bamas of the world don't waste their time with HS students, they just pull out the money bags and buy the best fresh/ soph after they have demonstrated their ability at the college level?
If so, 2nd tier (and lower) schools like RU will consistently get elite recruiting classes, but may struggle to retain talent.
Yes, that is the primary reason. If Rutgers had adequate support for its athletic teams, Rutgers Football would have been on par with Penn State, and we would have blown Princeton into the weeds.
it is why GS has consistently said his NIL money goes toward retention. it is easier to convince a kid to stay home with his starting position for 100k than for a kid to take 150-200k to go to an elite with no idea if they would start.
Ah. Well, no worries then. My, uh, my friend sold his wife years ago. 🙂
Let's drop Crappy Valley out of the discussion as my focus, based on your comment, is about Princeton. Rutgers first played Princeton in 1869 and stopped playing them in 1980, almost 45 years ago. Here is your original comment:
"Rutgers fans never donated adequately when it was school kids playing for ol Alma Mater, which is why Princeton owns an overall 53-17-1 win advantage over Rutgers."
Number one, I'm guessing Rutgers and Princeton didn't make athletics a major priority in the time they competed against each other. So I will put them on equal footing in that regard. Number two, you specifically stated it is because the RUTGERS FANS NEVER DONATED ADEQUATELY that Princeton owns a much better record. Do you really think the primary reason for Princeton's dominance from 1869 to 1980 was because Rutgers fans didn't donate adequately? I'm not the only one scratching my head over your OP.
Your guess would be wrong. Princeton took football very seriously, till football was de-emphasized and claims 28 National Championships, the last being in 1950.
Yes, Rutgers fans have never donated adequately. Let’s start with the fact that Palmer Stadium was built with a substantial donation from Edgar Palmer, in 1914. Capacity was 45,725. With removable stands in the open area of the stadium, attendance was over 50K.
Rutgers Stadium was built in 1938, with a helping hand from the Government. Prior, Rutgers played football at dilapidated Nielsen Field.
The date was Nov. 7, 1934, and Little was looking to move Rutgers' football, baseball, lacrosse and track teams to more modernized playing fields. As part of the study, Little proposed building a football stadium on the 256-acre tract of land partly owned by the Vermeule family and by the New Brunswick Country Club.
At the time, the Rutgers football team played its games at dilapidated Neilson Field.
"It is our expectation that this project will contribute greatly to the effectiveness of our program of physical education, which has been handicapped through inadequate playing fields,'' Clothier told reporters after the university acquired the tract of land off the Raritan River in Piscataway on Jan. 15, 1935.
Nearly three years to the day that Little first proposed a new field to replace 3,500-seat Nielson Field, Rutgers opened its 23,000-seat stadium on Oct. 22, 1938.
Rutgers was a very small , poor, private college, and then a very small, poor, private college with a land grant school in those days. By the time the Ivys de-emphasized football, Rutgers was still a small school, although now an underfunded State University, that was expanding with lots of WWII surplus buildings and a growing student body filled with veterans under the GI bill.
Rutgers didn’t really begin to transform into a large school until RC went co-ed in 1980.
Princeton always drew largely from elite society while Rutgers was often where the first one in a family to attend college went.
Comparing historical alumni donations between PU and RU is not a fair comparison.
Because their HCs actually let them play the modern QB role. The playbook disparity between us and all other FBS is stark.
Some think investing in this program with with this coach is wasted money. Basketball is a better investment. Just a couple of players can make a huge impact on winning
No, we don’t need that. TDs and XPs are only worth 7. We need a QB who can convert 3rd and 6, which has been a running play for us, often enough so that we are within 7 late in the game.
We can always have the discussion…that is all it is. The OP didn’t make a statement just asked a question
