Would Rutgers be better off in the ACC?

[JayDogSmooth]

I disagree. A middle of the pack top 25-15 team would be huge for the program and the fanbase.

Ehhhh
Possibly, hard to say
Either way, w the way things are currently going, we’d be lucky to be middle of pack in the ACC
We’d need huge changes to be in the top 3/4

 

[mikemarc1]

Ehhhh
Possibly, hard to say
Either way, w the way things are currently going, we’d be lucky to be middle of pack in the ACC
We’d need huge changes to be in the top 3/4

True..but I think we can agree it would be MUCH EASIER to be in the top 3/4 in the ACC than the BIG

 

[JayDogSmooth]

True..but I think we can agree it would be MUCH EASIER to be in the top 3/4 in the ACC than the BIG

Absolutely
Agree 10000 %

 

[NickRU714]

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.

I would actually agree.

If the AD got their shit together and cleaned up their football spending and overall philosophy, I think (maybe foolishly) that we could easily compete for the top of the Big Ten in football.

Does extra money make it easier for OSU and UM to gloss over their mistakes? Sure. That’s why we need to be smarter and make less mistakes than they do.

 

[17Q66]

While some RU sports have been able to compete and win in the BiG, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Rutgers football will not be able to have sustained competitive success in the conference (I’ll define that with a low bar of averaging 6 wins over a 5 year period).

After 9 years, things are not improving for RU football. Without NIL money in the pipeline, the future for Rutgers football looks bleak.

So here’s the question, would Rutgers be better off competitively, culturally and financially (relative to what net costs are to be competitive in each conference) if the university was part off the ACC? Not just for football (which drives the bus for Athletic programs), but for all sports.

What the hell is "the BiG?"

 

[yesrutgers01]

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.

You answered your own question. The football team allowed RU to enter the most prestigious University alignment in the USA outside of IVY.

 

[AntiG]

I disagree. A middle of the pack top 25-15 team would be huge for the program and the fanbase.

This program isn't middle of pack regardless of conference after Ash decimated it. We'd be middle of the pack at best whether in the AAC, ACC, B1G where the best we'd do at this point is 6-7 wins. There were plenty of games this past season such as Nebraska, Michigan State or Maryland that we should have been winning instead of either losing close or getting blown out. They are no better than any of the middle to bottom tier programs in the AAC or ACC, so the results wouldn't be any different. Rebuilding the reputation and attraction to the school takes awhile and requires several years of getting the right recruits, regardless of what conference we are in. In the end we are still competing with the top dogs for the same top recruits in the area and not winning enough of them. At least we are really cashing in as a member of the B1G and don't have to worry about the conference imploding when the current TV deal end or expansion cycle occurs. ACC is on a path to be blown apart with leftovers merging with the AAC or B12, and same goes for PAC. B12 is probably the third most stable conference right now. Only the B1G and SEC are in good shape long term.

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

While some RU sports have been able to compete and win in the BiG, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Rutgers football will not be able to have sustained competitive success in the conference (I’ll define that with a low bar of averaging 6 wins over a 5 year period).

After 9 years, things are not improving for RU football. Without NIL money in the pipeline, the future for Rutgers football looks bleak.

So here’s the question, would Rutgers be better off competitively, culturally and financially (relative to what net costs are to be competitive in each conference) if the university was part off the ACC? Not just for football (which drives the bus for Athletic programs), but for all sports.

Maybe yes
NO
NO

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

This program isn't middle of pack regardless of conference after Ash decimated it. We'd be middle of the pack at best whether in the AAC, ACC, B1G where the best we'd do at this point is 6-7 wins. There were plenty of games this past season such as Nebraska, Michigan State or Maryland that we should have been winning instead of either losing close or getting blown out. They are no better than any of the middle to bottom tier programs in the AAC or ACC, so the results wouldn't be any different. Rebuilding the reputation and attraction to the school takes awhile and requires several years of getting the right recruits, regardless of what conference we are in. In the end we are still competing with the top dogs for the same top recruits in the area and not winning enough of them. At least we are really cashing in as a member of the B1G and don't have to worry about the conference imploding when the current TV deal end or expansion cycle occurs. ACC is on a path to be blown apart with leftovers merging with the AAC or B12, and same goes for PAC. B12 is probably the third most stable conference right now. Only the B1G and SEC are in good shape long term.

Agree with all of this except the comment at the end on the relative stability of Big 12. I don't think they are any more stable than the ACC or P12 and have had a lot more turmoil and changes over the years. There are only two flagship state universities represented - Kansas and West Virginia.

 

[AntiG]

Agree with all of this except the comment at the end on the relative stability of Big 12. I don't think they are any more stable than the ACC or P12 and have had a lot more turmoil and changes over the years. There are only two flagship state universities represented - Kansas and West Virginia.

The reason I have them more stable is because they've already lost the expansion candidates from their conference. The ACC can be torn apart by the B1G and SEC, and the B1G and B12 will probably tear apart the PAC eventually.