Will RU football or RU Mens Basketball having a winning conference record first?
- Thread starter ScarletStateofNJ
- Start date
I heard this a thousand times, but isn't it easier for your competition also.
So this means nothing.
You're right. Which means that you have to do a better job than your competition in recruiting these kids. But again just the numbers point to it being a little easier.
You guys know I predicted the 10 seed for 2017-2018
So the answer will be ...
Men's basketball, 2017-2018,
So the answer will be ...
Men's basketball, 2017-2018,
Too many moving parts in football. You have to upgraded players and strategy. One or two good players don't have the same impact in football as it does in basketball.
I really like what I see from Piekell and his staff. But, we NEVER had a winning record in our 18 years in the Big East conference in hoops, but we did so in football. I think with now playing 9 conference games in football, the football team will achieve a winning conference record first. They can go 5-4 while still losing to all of the super-powers like OSU and Mich. Even in our current rock-bottom status in football, we are a lot closer to competing with the likes of IL, Purdue, IU, MD, MN, etc. than we are in hoops.
2018 might be the year to do it for football, if Ash can get things going in his 3rd season... we play Indiana, Illinois, @Maryland, and Northwestern... and then maybe pick off one of PA St, @Wisconsin, @MSU.
Show your work. Any Top 25-30 team from a high major conference without 4 or 5 Top 100 recruits will do.
Hoops. Much easier path to victory. It will take less funds and people to close that gap.
Football is a massive, massive build.
Football is a massive, massive build.
The infrastructure for football is already built.
People really underestimate how far we are behind the top 1/2 in basketball.
People really underestimate how far we are behind the top 1/2 in basketball.
I think you underestimate the damage done by Flood. He took a sledge hammer to the program. You know it's bad when Flood would ask recruits to list Rutgers in their top 5. He was trying to save face with the public even though everyone knew Rutgers was never in it. Recruits, coaches and parents laughed at Flood. All the good will developed by Schiano was undone in a short period of time. Schiano worked things into his contract to make sure football kept up with the everyone else. Flood was just happy to be in the game.
For the next 3 years I would say neither team will have a winning league record.Its a catch 22 scenario where teams have to win prior to getting top tier recruits which is easier said than done.RIght now Rutgers is considered a bottom tier B1G program for football and mens basketball.Its a steep climb to just get into the middle of the pack because the other teams aren't standing still.
This. Lets put it this way....
This year we will have the easiest conference schedule you will seriously ever see (which is why I think we will be .500 overall). The five worst teams in the league, besides us, PSU, Northwestern, Illinois, Minnesota, and Nebraska, EVERY ONE of them, we play at home. Plus two out of the three home and homes are on this list (PSU and Northwestern). If we win all seven of them (and do you think we win all seven), we still have to find three MAJOR upsets to get above .500. And understand we will not get a conference schedule this easy for possibly decades.
So if we are talking 10-8 in conference, the real question is:
What happens first?
NCAA tournament, or 5-4 conference record?
You indicated it only takes "one or two break thru recruits" to win in basketball. I contend you need 4 or 5 Top 100ish type players on a high major roster to be a Top 25-Top 30 type team (which is around the NCAA bubble).
So I am asking you to show me an example where 1 or 2 break thru recruits have done just that. I can show you in just about every instance a roster where 50-75% of the rotation (4 or 5 players) are big time top 100ish players on high majors who dance. I can't think of any without that make up. And even that is no guarantee. Illinois, for example, had 5 Top 100 kids last season on their roster and went 15-19/5-13. Closer to home, Mike Rice had 6 Top 150 kids at one time on his roster and we never got to .500 (and Eli Carter was not one of the six).
To put it in a football perspective a basketball roster needs the equivalent of 10 four star and 12 more high three star players on its two deep to dance, in my opinion.
NOOOOOOOO! With our OOC as it stands now 10-8 probably doesn't get us in the tournament.
11-7 Ohio State did not dance last year. 10-8 Michigan got a 11 seed. 20-12 (8-10) Northwestern wasn't even near the bubble last year.
I'm a bit surprised our fans underestimate just how hard it is to dance out of a major conference. Your 19-13/11-7 Ohio State team that went to the NIT is a great example of the difficulty. That OSU team beat Kentucky, and South Carolina OOC and then won 11 B1G games. Left out.
I believe you hoops. Thanks for the info and I stand corrected. just a clarification when you mean to dance. Are you talking about just getting into the tournament or going deep?
An example I was thinking of going back a ways would be UMass. Looking at that roster outside of Camby there weren't many household names. But granted they didn't play in the Big 10. Again I defer to you on this though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995–96_UMass_Minutemen_basketball_team
Last edited:
Just getting there.
I do think you are right that a small handful of players can make a big difference (so can a really good coach I think). Didn't mean to pick on your post. One of my pet peeves are the simply boiling it down to "one or two guys" posts. No offense intended.
As an aside Donta Bright was actually a more highly regarded recruit than Camby. Calipari coached the shit out of those UMass teams. They were fun to watch.
