Worst in Big Ten? Hardly

[BuckeyeLegion]

At present Indiana has not completed a winning season. Yes they will but that's not what I was counting. Now that we have concluded arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, I couldn't care less if Midwestern fans think Rutgers is deserving or not. Never have. Always found it funny how the entire football conference thinks it's royalty when it really comes down to two teams, and recently just one. Fortunately for you, that's your team.

My point was for Rutgers' fans that all the recent shrieking about Rutgers' football performance by midwestern blogs and all media is rather hypocritical considering the historic records of many Big Ten teams. Four losing seasons is nothing compared to the down periods of several Big Ten teams. I would further submit that if certain West Division schools were in the East, their records wouldn't be much better. If midwestern fans want to use the past four seasons (while ignoring our first season in the Big Ten) as confirmation of their "worthiness" beliefs, like I said, I couldn't care less. It won't last long, especially if Schiano is confirmed. Since a team with Schiano's recruits, two years after his departure had a successful first year in the Big Ten, I think Rutgers' fans can look forward to the future with confidence.

I don't think it's about fans of programs think they're royalty. I think it's more about history and objection to change. As I mentioned, a significant number of B1G fans didn't want teams 13 and 14, no matter who they were. A significant number didn't want Penn State or Nebraska. It's about tradition, about playing the same teams you've played for 100 years and not having to give up playing those games to play Rutgers and Maryland.

And here's why they're shrieking about Rutgers' football performance. The B1G is 120+ years old. Rutgers joined and in year 2 started the (at the time) eighth longest conference losing streak in B1G history, 16 games. They then won 3 out of 4, and then started the current 18 game losing streak which is now the sixth longest in conference history (and virtually guaranteed to be the second longest when all is said and done). That's 3-35 over the past 38 conference games, the second worst record in B1G history over that span of games, after Northwestern's 0-38 late 70s to early 80s. Four losing seasons is not particularly noteworthy, but the amount of losing done in those seasons is almost unprecedented.

That said...obviously they'll right the ship sooner or later. Schiano would be a great hire to get things moving on the right path.

BIG fans seem to forget or under appreciate two things.

1. The payout is much larger for them with NYC and DC in the mix.
2. The BIG was starting to diminish in appeal without a national power for a number of years. The sEC was widening the gap between it and everyone else. While RU did not bring cache, expanding east to include the Ny metro market and DC increased its appeal broadly and to recruits.

B1G fans don't really care about the payout, except where they can use i tto brag. It's not like all the programs mentioned at the top of the thread have been spending that revenue to put winning programs together.

Without a national power for a number of years? Which years were those?

You misunderstood the OP? Don't be that guy.

At present, Indiana is guaranteed a winning season. There is no way they cannot have a winning season. That's what is happening, "at present".

So which is it?

Not every program is getting beatdowns like the football team. Or going 3-33 over two years like men's basketball. Women's soccer and basketball are doing well, lacrosse seems competitive. But...

Conference titles[edit]
For Big Ten championships, by year, see footnote[56]

Institution # of[57]
University of Chicago 73
University of Illinois 252
Indiana University 179
University of Iowa 108
University of Maryland 20
University of Michigan 396
Michigan State University 96
University of Minnesota 167
University of Nebraska 14
Northwestern University 75
University of Notre Dame 2
Ohio State University 216
Pennsylvania State University 79
Purdue University 73
Rutgers University 0
University of Wisconsin 197

not only would you not have helmet stickers, you wouldn't even be playing football if it weren't for Rutgers.
Say thank you and brace yourself for what's coming.
(otherwise I agree with everything you said)

Consider me braced. :Wink:

I suspected as much, but like I said, Notre Dame isn't sharing their revenue and neither is the Longhorn Network for that matter. I just thought that was common knowledge.

No, their not. Even though Indiana and Purdue both make more from TV revenue than Notre Dame.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

So already the perception is they're undeserving, a cold cash grab.

Cold cash grab BY THE BIG TEN MEMBERS and MANAGEMENT.

The decision was not made by Rutgers and Maryland. We did not force them to add us. And the harsh terms of joining meant we'd have to pay a significant amount to join.. an open-ended amount. They set for use what revenue would we see over the joining period.. but the value of the conference, after we joined, went up by.. maybe 20% over what they predicted. So, essentially, the cost to join went up 20%.

Cold cash grab by THEM.

 

[BuckeyeLegion]

Cold cash grab BY THE BIG TEN MEMBERS and MANAGEMENT.

The decision was not made by Rutgers and Maryland. We did not force them to add us. And the harsh terms of joining meant we'd have to pay a significant amount to join.. an open-ended amount. They set for use what revenue would we see over the joining period.. but the value of the conference, after we joined, went up by.. maybe 20% over what they predicted. So, essentially, the cost to join went up 20%.

Cold cash grab by THEM.

Naive, and intellectually dishonest. It wasn't a hostile takeover, or a crusade with an occupying army. No one forced Rutgers or Maryland to join the B1G either. If they didn't like the terms, they were welcome to stay in the AAC and ACC.

It was a cash grab by the conference, yes. Don't pretend like it wasn't a cash grab by Rutgers and Maryland as well, who saw dump trucks full of money coming to bail out their cash strapped athletic departments.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Cold cash grab BY THE BIG TEN MEMBERS and MANAGEMENT.

The decision was not made by Rutgers and Maryland. We did not force them to add us. And the harsh terms of joining meant we'd have to pay a significant amount to join.. an open-ended amount. They set for use what revenue would we see over the joining period.. but the value of the conference, after we joined, went up by.. maybe 20% over what they predicted. So, essentially, the cost to join went up 20%.

Cold cash grab by THEM.

Maybe you should back out and take UConn's place in the AAC?

 

[graystork]

[

I don't think it's about fans of programs think they're royalty. I think it's more about history and objection to change. As I mentioned, a significant number of B1G fans didn't want teams 13 and 14, no matter who they were. A significant number didn't want Penn State or Nebraska. It's about tradition, about playing the same teams you've played for 100 years and not having to give up playing those games to play Rutgers and Maryland.

And here's why they're shrieking about Rutgers' football performance. The B1G is 120+ years old. Rutgers joined and in year 2 started the (at the time) eighth longest conference losing streak in B1G history, 16 games. They then won 3 out of 4, and then started the current 18 game losing streak which is now the sixth longest in conference history (and virtually guaranteed to be the second longest when all is said and done). That's 3-35 over the past 38 conference games, the second worst record in B1G history over that span of games, after Northwestern's 0-38 late 70s to early 80s. Four losing seasons is not particularly noteworthy, but the amount of losing done in those seasons is almost unprecedented.

That said...obviously they'll right the ship sooner or later. Schiano would be a great hire to get things moving on the right path.

B1G fans don't really care about the payout, except where they can use i tto brag. It's not like all the programs mentioned at the top of the thread have been spending that revenue to put winning programs together.

Without a national power for a number of years? Which years were those?

At present, Indiana is guaranteed a winning season. There is no way they cannot have a winning season. That's what is happening, "at present".
Not every program is getting beatdowns like the football team. Or going 3-33 over two years like men's basketball. Women's soccer and basketball are doing well, lacrosse seems competitive. But...

Conference titles[edit]
For Big Ten championships, by year, see footnote[56]

Institution # of[57]
University of Chicago 73
University of Illinois 252
Indiana University 179
University of Iowa 108
University of Maryland 20
University of Michigan 396
Michigan State University 96
University of Minnesota 167
University of Nebraska 14
Northwestern University 75
University of Notre Dame 2
Ohio State University 216
Pennsylvania State University 79
Purdue University 73
Rutgers University 0
University of Wisconsin 197


Consider me braced. :Wink:

No, their not. Even though Indiana and Purdue both make more from TV revenue than Notre Dame.

The 8th and 6th longest losing streaks? Sorry not a very compelling argument to support the unworthiness of Rutgers. Seems to make my point that in recent history there are a lot of "original" Big Ten teams that have been a lot worse.

But your first paragraph agrees with what I've thought all along. Big Ten fans didn't want Rutgers in the conference. And that makes perfect sense because I feel the same lack of interest in playing most Big Ten teams. Sure everybody would like a shot at Michigan and Ohio State every year, but for me, the thrill of playing Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State and the rest has never been there. Quite frankly I'd rather play our traditional rivals Penn State, West Virginia, Pitt, BC, etc. And obviously Big Ten fans feel the same way. To me that's perfectly normal. Rivalries are geographical and developed over the years. So I have no problem with Big Ten fans saying we're not interested in playing Rutgers because I feel the same way about most Big Ten teams.

So it's all about money why we're stuck together. Fine, I'm a realist and can deal with that. Rutgers makes money, the Big Ten made money that's what drove this.

But the idea that the Big Ten is somehow a conference that Rutgers has "sullied" is absurd. We've had a bad run of two incompetent coaches, (the worst of which who was a DC at your school and came highly recommended from both Urban Meyer and Barry Alvarez.) To claim that Rutgers has had an adverse effect on the Big Ten when it has historically been the home of a team that went 23 years without a winning record, or presently has a team that has had one (and by the end of the year two- ok?) in 24 years is ridiculous. Rutgers has never even come close to that level of futility. Big Ten fans didn't like the addition of Rutgers and would rather play their traditional foes. Fair enough so would I. But don't make us out to be some historical anchor to Big Ten football. It's just not true.

 

[cubuffsdoug_rivals]

BuckeyeLegion, first learn a little about the way we think out here in Jersey. We don't want to be the next Ohio St. or Iowa. This is Jersey Baby! Don't forget it. When we start kicking *** and taking names, the B1G is going to hate us even more.:WideSmile: