Neutral Site Games

[Queztastic]

http://www.fbschedules.com/2015/08/indiana-louisville-schedule-three-game-football-series/

Indiana and Louisville just scheduled a neutral-site game in Indianapolis.

I have never heard any talk of us scheduling a neutral site game, but I am curious as to the board's feelings on a neutral site game. Assuming that we do not lose a home game for the neutral site game, would you support having one on the schedule? If so, what opponent and where?

 

[HeavenUniv.]

Many people on this site would love to have games at The Meadowlands.

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

home and home plus neutral or two neutral games.

Neutral with the revenue being split 50/50.

I think we should be open to these but only for legit blue blood programs otherwise home and home is always better.

 

[Rokodesh]

not in favor of any, it kills the atmosphere of a college stadium for quick money grab.

 

[MADHAT1]

not in favor of any, it kills the atmosphere of a college stadium for quick money grab.

If scheduled , money grab better have guaranteed money to exceed what RU would make if played game at home in front of full house and extra TV money added to the pot .

 

[jmc11201]

Only thing where I could see it making some sense is a one-off game where it is truly a 'neutral' site from both team's perspective.

I don't see Rutgers willing to do a game at MetLife for many opponents and think a home and home is more likely...unless it is a one-off with Notre Dame or some other national program (i.e. no return game, MetLife doesn't count as our home game in a series).

Since Rutgers isn't a real draw as a program and won't sell out an NFL stadium outside our geography as an opposing team, I would imagine the neutral site game would be more likely in our geography. About the only thing I can see making sense where both sides might be ok with it would be a one-off against a program like Syracuse or Boston College that want to play in the NY/NJ area and that the two fan bases might care enough about the game to attract a sizable crowd.

 

[Jim_from_RU]

Many people on this site would love to have games at The Meadowlands.

Lol! Good one.

 

[RUBOB72]

Many people on this site would love to have games at The Meadowlands.

I wouldn't claim MANY want the Meadowlands...rather a particular few (who dwell on this thinking ) feel it's good for the program...in perhaps 10 years it may be a viable option but let's keep ALL our home games at HPSS for the next several years...now if we somehow go to several New Years day bowl games and win a division title or three then I might join that MANY group.

 

[Jim_from_RU]

I wouldn't claim MANY want the Meadowlands...rather a particular few (who dwell on this thinking ) feel it's good for the program...in perhaps 10 years it may be a viable option but let's keep ALL our home games at HPSS for the next several years...now if we somehow go to several New Years day bowl games and win a division title or three then I might join that MANY group.

Almost nobody wants a neutral site game. I'll be pissed big time with a game at East Rutherford.

 

[HeavenUniv.]

I was just joking about The Meadowlands,unless they offer us enough money to build our new basketball/hockey arena !!!

 

[DJ Spanky]

Many people on this site would love to have games at The Meadowlands.

Well I am definitely not one of those.

 

[vkj91]

Almost nobody wants a neutral site game. I'll be pissed big time with a game at East Rutherford.

Why? If we kept 7 home games and played an 8th at MetLife why is that bad?

 

[ru8081]

No neutral site games please we graduated.

 

[nacorwin]

No neutral site games please we graduated.

I agree. We have graduated to the big boy table of college football. We are no longer in the class of Wisconsin and Alabama. Or Auburn and Louisville. Or Florida-Georgia. Or Oklahoma–Texas. Or Texas A&M–Arizona State. Or South Carolina–North Carolina. Or Missouri–BYU.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

I would be PERFECTLY willing to play a ONE and DONE in the Meadowlands without any return game

But any home game that requires a return visit is to be played in High point Solution Stadium...or don't schedule it

Next

 

[e5fdny]

Why? If we kept 7 home games and played an 8th at MetLife why is that bad?

Hmmmm.

 

[vkj91]

No neutral site games please we graduated.

Glad we passed up Alabama, va tech, ASU, OSU and all the other teams playing neutral site games. I don't want to sound like a jerk but do you know what a neutral site game is?

 

[Upstream]

I have no philosophical objections to neutral site games. I think they are a good way to augment your existing 7-game home schedule with an 8th game where you can share the revenue with the other team.

But from a practical perspective, I'm not sure what game would be a good neutral site game.

I don't think Rutgers has enough national appeal to warrant neutral site games at neutral sites that aren't in NJ or nearby states. There doesn't seem to be a point for Rutgers to play Texas in Atlanta or Chicago. So we are pretty much talking about neutral site games at the Meadowlands, Philadelphia, and maybe Baltimore.

Penn State would be a good neutral site rival if we were in different conferences. A game in Philadelphia or the Meadowlands would be a good way to accommodate fans from both schools. But since we are in the same conference, I would much prefer home-home series rather than neutral site series. Same with Maryland.

I don't think Rutgers has enough strength to force an opponent into a home-neutral series. The possible exceptions are Syracuse or Temple, where they may see a benefit of playing in Piscataway followed by neutral games in the Meadowlands or Philadelphia. But even those schools would fight hard to the the return games as home games for them, not neutral site games. And if Rutgers had the strength to force them into home-neutral series, I'd rather see us use that strength to force them into 2-for-1 series.

So the only way a neutral site game would work for Rutgers is for a purely neutral game at the Meadowlands, with no return trip. But for that to work, the opponent needs to have enough fans in the NY area to fill half the stadium. Otherwise Rutgers is filling the stadium and giving half the revenue to the opponent. In that case, we should play in Piscataway and keep all the revenue.

I can only think of a handful of non-B10 teams with enough fans in the NY area to fill half of the Meadowlands: Notre Dame, Syracuse, UConn, and West Virginia. And for all except Notre Dame, I think it will be a stretch for them to fill half the Meadowlands. And for all of them, I don't see the advantage for Rutgers to play a neutral site game where Rutgers gets 40,000 seats vs playing a home-home series where Rutgers gets 50,000 seats in Piscataway.

 

[Knight_Light]

not in favor of any, it kills the atmosphere of a college stadium for quick money grab.

Depends...the atmosphere (for the entire weekend, let alone the game) in Atlanta for their kick-off games have been off-the-charts.

Two of the best annual games per year are neutral site games: Florida/Georgia and Oklahoma/Texas...with tix split right down the middle.

Maybe its a Northern thing (i.e. college games at the generic Meadowlands suck, especially since most don't sellout), but it seems more and more teams are signing up for neutral site games (instead of true non-conf road games, i.e. they still get to play 7 home games per year).

Most Kickoff classics are great because they are basically a great bowl game that is many times scheduled years in advance in fun locations. (i.e. Louisville is playing Auburn in Atlanta this year, then plays Purdue in Indianapolis in 2017, then Louisville is playing Alabama in Orlando in 2018).

 

[RU-ROCS]

I have no philosophical objections to neutral site games. I think they are a good way to augment your existing 7-game home schedule with an 8th game where you can share the revenue with the other team.

But from a practical perspective, I'm not sure what game would be a good neutral site game.

I don't think Rutgers has enough national appeal to warrant neutral site games at neutral sites that aren't in NJ or nearby states. There doesn't seem to be a point for Rutgers to play Texas in Atlanta or Chicago. So we are pretty much talking about neutral site games at the Meadowlands, Philadelphia, and maybe Baltimore.

Penn State would be a good neutral site rival if we were in different conferences. A game in Philadelphia or the Meadowlands would be a good way to accommodate fans from both schools. But since we are in the same conference, I would much prefer home-home series rather than neutral site series. Same with Maryland.

I don't think Rutgers has enough strength to force an opponent into a home-neutral series. The possible exceptions are Syracuse or Temple, where they may see a benefit of playing in Piscataway followed by neutral games in the Meadowlands or Philadelphia. But even those schools would fight hard to the the return games as home games for them, not neutral site games. And if Rutgers had the strength to force them into home-neutral series, I'd rather see us use that strength to force them into 2-for-1 series.

So the only way a neutral site game would work for Rutgers is for a purely neutral game at the Meadowlands, with no return trip. But for that to work, the opponent needs to have enough fans in the NY area to fill half the stadium. Otherwise Rutgers is filling the stadium and giving half the revenue to the opponent. In that case, we should play in Piscataway and keep all the revenue.

I can only think of a handful of non-B10 teams with enough fans in the NY area to fill half of the Meadowlands: Notre Dame, Syracuse, UConn, and West Virginia. And for all except Notre Dame, I think it will be a stretch for them to fill half the Meadowlands. And for all of them, I don't see the advantage for Rutgers to play a neutral site game where Rutgers gets 40,000 seats vs playing a home-home series where Rutgers gets 50,000 seats in Piscataway.

Good points. I think the only non-conference foe you mentioned that can fill half of the Meadowlands is ND. Syracuse has failed to even come close to selling out half the stadium in their neutral site games in NJ (see game v. USC). UConn is struggling to sell out their own stadium and has no demonstrated travel record for football. WVU has a rabid fan base, but little alumni in the area. Not sure they could expect 40,000 to travel to NJ to a regular season tilt.

 

[Mr_Twister]

Neutral site games are the sports equivalent of a destination wedding. They suck. A bad idea in almost every way.

 

[vkj91]

Neutral site games are the sports equivalent of a destination wedding. They suck. A bad idea in almost every way.

Destination weddings are the greatest thing ever invented. Who the hell wants to pay 150 a plate for their moms boss and best friend?

 

[Knight_Light]

Good points. I think the only non-conference foe you mentioned that can fill half of the Meadowlands is ND. Syracuse has failed to even come close to selling out half the stadium in their neutral site games in NJ (see game v. USC). UConn is struggling to sell out their own stadium and has no demonstrated travel record for football. WVU has a rabid fan base, but little alumni in the area. Not sure they could expect 40,000 to travel to NJ to a regular season tilt.

Why are most fans in this thread fixated on the Meadowlands?

Many of these neutral site kickoff type classics involve teams from hundreds of miles away (i.e. Michigan vs Alabama in Dallas or Louisville vs Alabama in Orlando, etc...).

RU should look for top Kickoff type games vs National Powers out-of-state/region...not the also-ran nearby P5's to play at the Meadowlands.

 

[Arizona Knight]

Why not a home-away-neutral (Met Life) arrangement with a Syracuse, VaTech, or WVU? If the $$$ is right and it doesn't cost us a home game I'm all for it.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Glad we passed up Alabama, va tech, ASU, OSU and all the other teams playing neutral site games. I don't want to sound like a jerk but do you know what a neutral site game is?

If RU was going to play (insert P5 team) several states away and not lose a home game like those teams have done, I would be all for it. That is not what any Meadowlands game would be. The Meadowlands idea is basically RU is not "on the level" which is BS considering if TTFP fans couldn't take over our stadium, ND or any other delusional fanbase that is further away thinks they can, won't either.

Indiana gives up home games because they are a weak program. Alabama plays neutral site games because they are invited out of excitement. Where is RU in that equation?

 

[vkj91]

If RU was going to play (insert P5 team) several states away and not lose a home game like those teams have done, I would be all for it. That is not what any Meadowlands game would be. The Meadowlands idea is basically RU is not "on the level" which is BS considering if TTFP fans couldn't take over our stadium, ND or any other delusional fanbase that is further away thinks they can, won't either.

Indiana gives up home games because they are a weak program. Alabama plays neutral site games because they are invited out of excitement. Where is RU in that equation?

The OP clearly asks if we would support if we DIDN'T lose a home game. It's his question and has nothing to do with what you think a meadowlands game would look like. Also, I believe we talked about having a neutral site game with Oklahoma a few years ago.

 

[NotInRHouse]

Has there ever been a discussion of a neutral site game involving RU that did not involve the Meadowlands? If we are going to play Oklahoma where would it be? I think this discussion hinges on location. Play them in Ireland sure. Play in Jerry's World it's a home game for them.

 

[78CollegeAve]

" ... would you support having one on the schedule?"

I'd prefer to schedule a couple of red-hot two penny nails being banged into my eyeballs with an appropriately weighted ball-peen hammer.

So, yeah, I guess that's a no.

 

[vkj91]

Has there ever been a discussion of a neutral site game involving RU that did not involve the Meadowlands? If we are going to play Oklahoma where would it be? I think this discussion hinges on location. Play them in Ireland sure. Play in Jerry's World it's a home game for them.

Who care if it's played at the meadowlands or anywhere else. We would still get a huge payday and and keep our 7 home games. It would simply replace an away anyway...there is no down side.

 

[MADHAT1]

Who care if it's played at the meadowlands or anywhere else. We would still get a huge payday and and keep our 7 home games. It would simply replace an away anyway...there is no down side.

Having 7 home games and a neutral site game shouldn't be a problem for any RU fan, but wonder how easy it would be to do.

 

[vkj91]

Having 7 home games and a neutral site game shouldn't be a problem for any RU fan, but wonder how easy it would be to do.

Easiest way would be to use part of the profits and buyout of a return trip to a place like Temple.

 

[REDRICH65]

Home & home versus the Jets. Essentially two home games and victories to boot.

 

[MADHAT1]

Easiest way would be to use part of the profits and buyout of a return trip to a place like Temple.

Buyout would be one way, but would the profit gained be enough to justify a buyout of a school that's close enough that it came be considered another home game travel wise.
I understand what your getting at , but it might not be as easy as you think to buyout an opponent in order to have 7 home games and a neutral site game the same year .

 

[vkj91]

Buyout would be one way, but would the profit gained be enough to justify a buyout of a school that's close enough that it came be considered another home game travel wise.
I understand what your getting at , but it might not be as easy as you think to buyout an opponent in order to have 7 home games and a neutral site game the same year .

Then do it on a year we only have six. As for buyout, it's quite easy because it's written into the contract and as long as you follow agreement the other team has no choice. It can also be a win for the other school. Say we owe Temple 850 they can take half of that and buy a 1 and done. They get the cash and still keep their home game.

 

[Mr_Twister]

Destination weddings are the greatest thing ever invented. Who the hell wants to pay 150 a plate for their moms boss and best friend?

Destination weddings are the greatest thing ever invented ... OK. Whatever you say.

 

[RUONTHERISE]

Neutral site game is OK as long as it does not take away a home game for us. can't lose our home field advantage

 

[vkj91]

Destination weddings are the greatest thing ever invented ... OK. Whatever you say.

What's wrong with them? Besides the fact they aren't in the same 10 venues everyone in NJ uses and they don't cost 100k

 

[Rutgers 2004]

Destination weddings are the greatest thing ever invented. Who the hell wants to pay 150 a plate for their moms boss and best friend?

Much rather have the option of going to a destination wedding or saying "sorry, can't get the time off from work" vs. going to the same boring local wedding again....

 

[vkj91]

Much rather have the option of going to a destination wedding or saying "sorry, can't get the time off from work" vs. going to the same boring local wedding again....

How many times am I supposed to be impressed by a chocolate fountain and cotton candy.

 

[Knight_Light]

How many times am I supposed to be impressed by a chocolate fountain and cotton candy.

Good news...you don't have to wait for weddings anymore! [laughing]

Diabetic Coma