Reusse: Jim Delany's Rutgers/Big Ten idea was bad then and is worse now

Donate To GopherHole
KillmeNow said:
Adding Rutgers was NOT solely about improving the Conference's football or men's basketball fortunes, not even close. Those factors were a distant 2nd or probably 3rd to things like #1 Media Footprint, and #2 Research Dollars. Delany also did not want yet to chase after a school that was not geographically connected to Big Ten Territory. Both Maryland and Rutgers WERE connected geographically, as was Nebraska and also Missouri. Now I am not sure whether Missouri got turned down by the B1G or if they turned us down? But Mizzou was also in the mix. Now looking at Mizzou for example, they haven't done anything special since moving to the SEC. Their basketball has been a flop. Got overrated a few times only to embarrass themselves and the SEC in the Big Dance. Their football did ok at the beginning, mostly by way of taking advantage of some advantageous scheduling. The one year they made it high into the rankings without a single Top 25 win. Their wrestling is pretty good, but otherwise I don't know much about Mizzou that we missed out on? As for Nebraska, they were AAU rated at the time they applied, and they were connected geographically and are a good athletic school all around, with even their men's bb looking improved. I didn't love the choice to pick up Nebraska, but I don't think it was a bad pick up. Maryland had the media footprint and decent sports. They've won a Natl Title in football and one in Men's Basketball as well and have truly added to the depth of the conference for Men's BB and also football, too, as not every team can be as good as Mich/OSU/PSU. They have potential to be a good addition to the B1G over time in just about every aspect.

Now, as for Rutgers? Well, their research contribution was not much different than Maryland's and better than Nebraska's and Mizzou's I believe? They had the media footprint that helps the whole conference. As for sports? SEC fans often complain that their conference is TOO good overall, in football, and that it hurts the conference as a whole sometimes? I honestly sort of agree with the SEC fans about this. Now how do SEC teams compensate? Well, they schedule mostly crappy creampuff ooc competition and also schedule one of those games later in the season, so as to give their teams sort of a mid season break of sorts. Does this help their fan experience? I like the way the B1G, as a whole, compensates instead. Most B1G teams with legit bowl game chances tend to try to schedule at least one decent if not really good ooc opponent, which makes up for our having a program like Rutgers in the conference. Instead of having to schedule a weak creampuff mid-season, we can just hope to get Rutgers on our schedule. But Rutgers, at the time they applied or were first considered by the B1G for membership, was coming off a good couple of seasons of football, even cracking the Top 25 once or twice. Granted the BE was kind of a joke of a cfb conference and so easier opponents may have been a factor, but still, they seemed to have potential. And outside of Rutgers, is there a single program in the B1G that is otherwise a guaranteed win in football? I can't think of one? Certain teams have down years, but no team is always consistently an easy win, outside of maybe Rutgers, and that isn't necessarily a problem when the TV money they bring in makes up for other negative factors like possibly lower fan turnout at games maybe?

Now bringing up their BB and VB is silly, as the B1G doesn't need any help in VB. The B1G is easily the best conference in women's VB and I don't think it's even close? Same with wrestling. It was #1 in wrestling before Rutgers and Maryland joined and neither hurt the conf in that sport. As for BB, the only conference that can possibly do better than the B1G on a consistent and regular basis is the ACC, and that's partly because that conference focuses on basketball as it's football has always sucked for the most part. The B1G has never been a one sport conference and never will be. We struggle at spring sports but that is mostly weather related, but otherwise the B1G does pretty good overall in sports.



But bringing this back around, even though college sports seems like there is a lot of money involved and as nice as it would be to be better at football, the REAL money, and where the B1G HAS outdone other conferences, is #1 in Research money, and #2 in TV deals. They never will disregard sports, but it's not and never will be the #1 priority for the B1G conference. Not sure why it's so hard for so many sports fans to understand this aspect? I mean, I know it's easy not to care about such things, but how hard is it to simply be aware of it, lol?
Click to expand...

ZOU got turned down. Really wanted to join as I recall.
 

RememberMurray said:
Well... yeah. I'm not sure he's showing any special insight by pointing out the obvious, but... yes. He's 'right'.

Here's an idea for next week's column: The Twins aren't as good as the Yankees.
Click to expand...

No, no, no . . . It’ll be “Bye week will give Gophers an unfair advantage, unlike Penn State who has to travel way west and play in a likely icebox. Bierman’s squads didn’t take weeks off. Any successes for the locals going forward should be discounted accordingly.”
 

MnplsGopher said:
Since you likely won't answer, I'll do it for you.

Rutgers report card after year five in the Big Ten (2018-19): https://www.nj.com/sports/g66l-2019...h-in-year-5-of-big-ten-a-teambyteam-look.html

In particular, note women's basketball (3rd place in the conference). So, quite obviously, no they aren't stinking up the conference in ALL sports. Another is wrestling, finished 6th in conference, and had 2 national champions.

Pat cherry picked the two worst sports, because that's literally his job at the STrib, to be a troll.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to negate the premise that Rutgers is bad at all sports with Rutgers women basketball finished third in the conference?

Wow, not sure that sounds reasonable to anyone but you.
 

spermophilus said:
No, no, no . . . It’ll be “Bye week will give Gophers an unfair advantage, unlike Penn State who has to travel way west and play in a likely icebox. Bierman’s squads didn’t take weeks off. Any successes for the locals going forward should be discounted accordingly.”
Click to expand...

The pity party this fan base throws for itself in regards to the media is embarrassing at times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

HoustonTXGopher said:
Are you trying to negate the premise that Rutgers is bad at all sports with Rutgers women basketball finished third in the conference?

Wow, not sure that sounds reasonable to anyone but you.
Click to expand...

All

Words have definitions.
 


Spoofin said:
How do they hurt the conference?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Research grants both corporate, and government are quite competitive. Nebraska having lower standards, and less research money hurts the academic rankings, and reputations of other Big 10 schools being associated with the conference. Nebraska academically is not a good fit for Big 10 conference. Nebraaka's lack of competitive graduate programs is another hindrance to the Big 10 conference.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

MnplsGopher said:
All

Words have definitions.
Click to expand...

You are correct! A third place finish in a non revenue sport was certainly worthy of bringing in Rutgers to the BIG. I bet you don't have a whole lot of friends if you constantly nitpick them like you did this thread.
 

HoustonTXGopher said:
You are correct! A third place finish in a non revenue sport was certainly worthy of bringing in Rutgers to the BIG. I bet you don't have a whole lot of friends if you constantly nitpick them like you did this thread.
Click to expand...

False.

He said “all sports stinking up the conference”.

Proved you and him wrong. Move on
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom