ADVERTISEMENT

Would Rutgers be better off in the ACC?

Would RU be better off in the ACC?

  • No, as a whole, RU is better off in the BiG

    Votes: 157 78.9%
  • Yes, RU would be better off in the ACC

    Votes: 42 21.1%

  • Total voters
    199
To me fixing a program goes far beyond running the air raid offense. It requires a generational change of the perception of the school. When I say program I do not mean all of a sudden winning 6 or 7 games because we have a better OC or a good QB. It is about perception, it is about facilities, it is about support, game day experience, bathrooms, food etc. We do not act like big time football in many ways.

Greg is a program builder, he is not a team builder. Our defensive staff is what we need to win. Greg's next offensive staff hire is going to determine his legacy at Rutgers. His offense has to have a vision on and, more importantly, off of the field. That offensive staff is going to need 2-4 years to get the vision in place at a minimum.
I agree that the offensive staff hire is going to be a major factor whether schiano sinks or swims here. If it’s nunzio , he might be finished
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
The B10 is more than football. Almost every other sport is competitive or one of the better teams. Academically and financially it helps our school in many ways. Fixing RU football is a 10 year process minimum.
So Schiano now gets a minimum of 10 years to produce a winning record. Why don't we just offer him a lifetime contract, makes sense to me.
 
So Schiano now gets a minimum of 10 years to produce a winning record. Why don't we just offer him a lifetime contract, makes sense to me.
I never said schiano gets 10 years. But I said we are 10 hard years from being a respectable program.

I know schiano, I think he is a good guy, but he has to hire a good offensive staff to continue the rebuild.

He has grown a lot from his faults on his first time here, but he has to show more growth.
 
I agree that the offensive staff hire is going to be a major factor whether schiano sinks or swims here. If it’s nunzio , he might be finished
Depends who they bring in as assistants. I would be okay with Nunzio if we hire a true QB coach.
 
To me fixing a program goes far beyond running the air raid offense. It requires a generational change of the perception of the school. When I say program I do not mean all of a sudden winning 6 or 7 games because we have a better OC or a good QB. It is about perception, it is about facilities, it is about support, game day experience, bathrooms, food etc. We do not act like big time football in many ways.

Greg is a program builder, he is not a team builder. Our defensive staff is what we need to win. Greg's next offensive staff hire is going to determine his legacy at Rutgers. His offense has to have a vision on and, more importantly, off of the field. That offensive staff is going to need 2-4 years to get the vision in place at a minimum.
What evidence do you have that Schiano would allow an offensive staff to have a vision that risks putting pressure on the defense by not prioritizing time of possession, let alone giving someone with that vision (or any OC for that matter) 2-4 years to get it done?

You can reincarnate Mike Leach for the Rutgers OC job, and if the struggles of implementing a “new” Air Raid offense at RU meant there were a lot of three and outs he would be gone after a year or two like every other Schiano OC.

People don’t want to face that there is little chance for a good hire as a Schiano OC in 2022-23, because the principles held by the innovative offensive minds in college football are completely at odds with Schiano’s principles for coaching football.
 
Get rid of the divisions. Get the full share of payout. We’ll be respectable.
 
I agree that the offensive staff hire is going to be a major factor whether schiano sinks or swims here. If it’s nunzio , he might be finished
That would be grounds for immediate dismissal. He’s not a P5 OC by any means.
 
What evidence do you have that Schiano would allow an offensive staff to have a vision that risks putting pressure on the defense by not prioritizing time of possession, let alone giving someone with that vision (or any OC for that matter) 2-4 years to get it done?

You can reincarnate Mike Leach for the Rutgers OC job, and if the struggles of implementing a “new” Air Raid offense at RU meant there were a lot of three and outs he would be gone after a year or two like every other Schiano OC.

People don’t want to face that there is little chance for a good hire as a Schiano OC in 2022-23, because the principles held by the innovative offensive minds in college football are completely at odds with Schiano’s principles for coaching football.
I don't think we need to run an air raid offense to be successful. I think with a vision and a QB we can be successful.

Again my dream offense is everything balanced and single back. A te/h or 2 te sets. Zone stretch to create double teams and zone read. Counter. Level reads, boots, vertical stretch passing game. Rpo and s good okay action game.
 
I wish you were right man but that's just not factually correct
Top of my head, ACC per year deal is ~25-30 million below B1G, possibly more

FSU and Clemson are stuck in ACC until heads roll in 2024-2025 as GOR is in process of being reworked/eliminated and a deal struck.

Until then, they depend on boosters to offset the difference. IPTAY has a ton and has always been a force. Everyone buys in, and they know how to get it done

FSU has less than 15k boosters and dipped below 8k during the latter stages of Willy Taggert. The goal is to get 25k boosters by 2025. Booster amounts start at $85/year, so they're not making up tv money on that alone
The only way the ACC GOR is broken is if a majority of teams leave the conference. There aren't enough B1G/SEC caliber teams in the conference for that to happen, so you'd have to have Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Virginia Tech type teams voluntarily leave the conference for the Big 12 or AAC and that isn't happening.
 
I wish you were right man but that's just not factually correct
Top of my head, ACC per year deal is ~25-30 million below B1G, possibly more

FSU and Clemson are stuck in ACC until heads roll in 2024-2025 as GOR is in process of being reworked/eliminated and a deal struck.

Until then, they depend on boosters to offset the difference. IPTAY has a ton and has always been a force. Everyone buys in, and they know how to get it done

FSU has less than 15k boosters and dipped below 8k during the latter stages of Willy Taggert. The goal is to get 25k boosters by 2025. Booster amounts start at $85/year, so they're not making up tv money on that alone

Never said otherwise about ACC tv deal. You do realize there is other sources of income, especially for Major successful programs, right?

FSU and Clemson bring in 71 and 63 million a year.


7 big ten programs bring in less…


Again, please tell me what is factually incorrect what I was saying?
 
Throw away everything football related.
Now throw away everything athletic competition related.
Just the collaboration on cancer research alone with the other B1G institutions makes B1G membership worthwhile for Rutgers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yesrutgers01
Throw away everything football related.
Now throw away everything athletic competition related.
Just the collaboration on cancer research alone with the other B1G institutions makes B1G membership worthwhile for Rutgers.

Why couldn't that collaboration happen anyway?
This always seemed so weird.

Would schools really refuse to collaborate because "well they play football against other teams"?

Are we refusing a collaboration opportunities with Stanford because of athletics?
The state of the football team shouldn't be impacting academic opportunities.
 
On the flip side would Michigan really say "Rutgers? No way we can't collaborate. Oh we're playing them in football now? Ok we can work together."

Seems wildly misguided.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plum Street
Why couldn't that collaboration happen anyway?
This always seemed so weird.

Would schools really refuse to collaborate because "well they play football against other teams"?

Are we refusing a collaboration opportunities with Stanford because of athletics?
The state of the football team shouldn't be impacting academic opportunities.

No but B1G membership makes you are part of a highly exclusive academic research peer group with access to world class facilities and research teams.

Cue the old Amex theme "Membership, has it's privileges."
 
No but B1G membership makes you are part of a highly exclusive academic research peer group with access to world class facilities and research teams.

Cue the old Amex theme "Membership, has it's privileges."
How does that help football ?
 
How does that help football ?
Some fail to grasp that the B1G is an academic organization that is also a significant player in college sports. The value of the sports teams is tiny compared to the research side.

On the sports side where the B1G is a significant player in many sports it allows for better player recruitment. But as with anything, you need to manage it properly to yield the benefits. Examples of this can be seen in men's basketball, baseball, the soccer programs for example. Football can achieve it too but it's a much steeper mountain to climb.
 
Some fail to grasp that the B1G is an academic organization that is also a significant player in college sports. The value of the sports teams is tiny compared to the research side.

On the sports side where the B1G is a significant player in many sports it allows for better player recruitment. But as with anything, you need to manage it properly to yield the benefits. Examples of this can be seen in men's basketball, baseball, the soccer programs for example. Football can achieve it too but it's a much steeper mountain to climb.
But it’s not an academic organization. It’s an athletic affiliation!

Do you think today the Michigan and Ohio state message boards are posting how great the BIG is with academic collaboration ?? Lol
 
But it’s not an academic organization. It’s an athletic affiliation!

Do you think today the Michigan and Ohio state message boards are posting how great the BIG is with academic collaboration ?? Lol
Laugh away, self proclaimed legend, what you don't know is what you don't know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSGS
Well, answer my question . But you won’t because you know I am right
What the legend isn't aware of one of the biggest aspects of the B1G....lol. Go to Google and educate yourself a bit. The academic research between the schools is a very big thing.
 
What the legend isn't aware of one of the biggest aspects of the B1G....lol. Go to Google and educate yourself a bit. The academic research between the schools is a very big thing.
Ok you didn’t answer my question . Good avoidance
 
Why couldn't that collaboration happen anyway?
This always seemed so weird.

Would schools really refuse to collaborate because "well they play football against other teams"?

Are we refusing a collaboration opportunities with Stanford because of athletics?
The state of the football team shouldn't be impacting academic opportunities.
Membership into the B1G conference is not all about sports. It is a University membership
 
there were many that hoped for a B1G invite and brought up location, not the state of program, as the reason the B1G should and would take RU as a member.

Others , with doom and gloom attitudes, were willing to settle for the ACC , because they felt that conference was the best RU could hope for

But prior to 2001, most ( in my opinion) weren't looking at other conferences , because the Big East was considered a top conference and most were satisfied belonging to it, except the way Rutgers couldn't seem to be competitive .
Regardless of "attitudes" nobody wanted to settle for a conference most would've been happy for a landing place after the big east started to implode. I wanted the ACC because i'm more interested in playing schools in the mid atlantic and southeast then the midwest. I'm always down to follow the $$$ though....
 
  • Like
Reactions: yesrutgers01
Regardless of "attitudes" nobody wanted to settle for a conference most would've been happy for a landing place after the big east started to implode. I wanted the ACC because i'm more interested in playing schools in the mid atlantic and southeast then the midwest. I'm always down to follow the $$$ though....
Very fair statement. BE was falling apart and we all would have loved the ACC but hit the lotto with B1G.
Anyone questioning it is a fool. Anyone that thinks we would be any better on the field, is a bigger fool.
We are not where we are because of B1G competition- we are here because our school can’t figure out how to build a football team in the highest revenue conference there is. How would we be better with 10’s of millions less per year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSGS and miket007
I don't think we need to run an air raid offense to be successful. I think with a vision and a QB we can be successful.

Again my dream offense is everything balanced and single back. A te/h or 2 te sets. Zone stretch to create double teams and zone read. Counter. Level reads, boots, vertical stretch passing game. Rpo and s good okay action game.
Air raid was just an example. The point is that Schiano is all about the defense, and has no patience for any kind of offense which puts pressure on his defense, so he would has never shown the same patience for an OC building his offense that people expect us to show for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
Membership into the B1G conference is not all about sports. It is a University membership

There is the Big Ten Academic Alliance.
Which coincidentally has the exact same membership as the Big Ten Athletic Conference.

Could a school join the BTAA and not the BTAC?
It doesn't seem you can be in one without the other.
 
Never said otherwise about ACC tv deal. You do realize there is other sources of income, especially for Major successful programs, right?

FSU and Clemson bring in 71 and 63 million a year.


7 big ten programs bring in less…


Again, please tell me what is factually incorrect what I was saying?
Yep

And if either one of those them was out of the ACC and in the B1G/SEC, that number would be much higher

Ticket prices, booster donations, apparel etc would all immediately dramatically increase

The ACC is absolute dog shit - and getting worse by the year

I should know - my school has been in the league for 30 years and carried it football wise damn near half the time
 
The only way the ACC GOR is broken is if a majority of teams leave the conference. There aren't enough B1G/SEC caliber teams in the conference for that to happen, so you'd have to have Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Virginia Tech type teams voluntarily leave the conference for the Big 12 or AAC and that isn't happening.
I think the number is 9 if I remember correctly

Big 4 are FSU, Clemson, UVA & UNC
Next rung = Miami, NC State, VT, Duke
Tweeners = GT, Ville + Pitt

Wake, BC, and Cuse have no shot
 
All those talk about "higher conference revenue" is meaningless.

More money doesn't mean better AD.
Because every other school gets the same money.
For every additional dollar we receive from the conference - every other team is getting the same to spend.

More money is only beneficial if the AD is smarter at spending those additional dollars than the other ADs.


Money outside of conference revenue is where it matters (donations to AD) compared to conference members.
And according to most - we are behind the rest of the Big Ten in that money.
 
Rutgers is the only fan base that:

lived through the disfunction of playing football in a conference that cared more about basketball

with the result that it was never viewed as the equal of the big football conferences and never made close to the money those schools did

then suffered through the years of uncertainty as conference peers left for better options

And finally everything fell apart and the school faced an even more bleak future….

that still has people who wish we would repeat the experience by going to the ACC.
Not the only one. Connecticut and South Florida come to mind. And they would kill to be in the Big Ten.
 
Yep

And if either one of those them was out of the ACC and in the B1G/SEC, that number would be much higher

Ticket prices, booster donations, apparel etc would all immediately dramatically increase

The ACC is absolute dog shit - and getting worse by the year

I should know - my school has been in the league for 30 years and carried it football wise damn near half the time

I agree with you. Don’t get you keep comparing BIG and ACC.

I’ve said many times BIG >>>> ACC financially. We agree.

I think RU is in a different scenario than your team. We are in the NY market which is a front-running city that loves winners. The popularity of Rutgers in the big east when they were good…much larger than the popularity of Rutgers now.

A competitive RU team in the ACC will bring in more donations, tickets, apparel revenue than a shitty RU team in the BIG, imo
 
I agree with you. Don’t get you keep comparing BIG and ACC.

I’ve said many times BIG >>>> ACC financially. We agree.

I think RU is in a different scenario than your team. We are in the NY market which is a front-running city that loves winners. The popularity of Rutgers in the big east when they were good…much larger than the popularity of Rutgers now.

A competitive RU team in the ACC will bring in more donations, tickets, apparel revenue than a shitty RU team in the BIG, imo
It depends on the level of success

We’d have to roll through the ACC like Clemson the last 7 years and FSU before that

Mid pack wouldn’t move the needle for our fan base
 
It depends on the level of success

We’d have to roll through the ACC like Clemson the last 7 years and FSU before that

Mid pack wouldn’t move the needle for our fan base

I disagree. A middle of the pack top 25-15 team would be huge for the program and the fanbase.
 
I think we’d be comparable to an NC State in the ACC.

Looking at their last 8 seasons, or fanbase would love those results. And think casual fans would jump on bandwagon
 
Not the only one. Connecticut and South Florida come to mind. And they would kill to be in the Big Ten.

Just because they would kill for it doesn’t mean it’s a good decision.

With the 12 team playoff and guaranteed G5 spot it’s not such an easy decision.

UConn or USF could win the AAC and go to the CFP (with all the attention and fanfare that brings) or go to Big Ten with making a low level bowl at 6-6 the ceiling.
Is that really worth the additional money?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikemarc1
Just because they would kill for it doesn’t mean it’s a good decision.

With the 12 team playoff and guaranteed G5 spot it’s not such an easy decision.

UConn or USF could win the AAC and go to the CFP (with all the attention and fanfare that brings) or go to Big Ten with making a low level bowl at 6-6 the ceiling.
Is that really worth the additional money?

Obviously for the schools and athletic departments (they are businesses after all)….yes, it’s CERTAINLY worth the additional money.

For us fans??? I’d rather see a successful team. And I think we’d have more success in the ACC
 
Just because they would kill for it doesn’t mean it’s a good decision.

With the 12 team playoff and guaranteed G5 spot it’s not such an easy decision.

UConn or USF could win the AAC and go to the CFP (with all the attention and fanfare that brings) or go to Big Ten with making a low level bowl at 6-6 the ceiling.
Is that really worth the additional money?
It's worth the additional everything. Unlike a lot of Rutgers fans, who aim fir mediocrity and don't think winning a lot is possible, other people think their teams can compete, deluded or not. They don't back down based on such calculations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickRU714
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT