To be honest there were many injury time outs which needed immediate attention.
Not to mention the 20 something penalties called on a dirty Maryland team.
Who do we play next week?
- Thread starter armenius
- Start date
To be honest there were many injury time outs which needed immediate attention.
Not to mention the 20 something penalties called on a dirty Maryland team.
Nothing is fair about this year. A percentage system makes way more sense then a win total. Your 1-0 scenario is just silly and irrelevant as everyone has played at least 5 games.
Exactly.
Hope the B1G does not screw RU.
Nebraska vs. RU would be a fine match up.
of course it is silly and just an example of how silly it is to use a stat that is meaningless under the circumstances and how it is inconsistent with all the other changes to the self proclaimed rules the B1G put in place.
Its is silly that a team Rutgers just beat and has 1 less win should be ranked ahead of them (and PSU) simply because they played 3 less games
The problem, if you want to call it that, is that the B1G wants to save as many rivalry games as it can. One of them is Indiana-Purdue, which is E2 vs W5. That obviously dictates a corresponding matchup of W2 vs E5, or close to it.
yes I get that too and frankly don't have an issue with it cept us getting Iowa under the circumstances. But if that is the hand dealt....
I just wish the B1G had enough smarts to have started this a week earlier (at least) and not put out such "rules" so as to have to go back and reverse all the things they said.
Nobody wants to play Iowa, but somebody's got to. Given the no rematch policy, and the apparent desire to preserve rivalry games, there are only two possible opponents for Iowa. They are Michigan and Rutgers, and Rutgers has the better record.
That’s a good point, however I was concerned about the team being banged up. I was thinking the more time at home would make a better recovery for players.
I too was surprised at how long our game with Maryland took, although I think it came in at four hours exactly. One of the problems yesterday was that there had to be an unusually high number of injury timeouts, especially for our players. I don't have the expertise to judge whether Maryland was dirty (although the ankle-twist on Vedral sure seemed like it on tape), but I wouldn't be surprised. Keep in mind also that overtime (even one overtime) takes time, but I agree the game had already lasted a long time by then.
I normally wouldn't have cared at all about length (after all, it was a fun game to watch) , but yesterday was a nice day and I wanted to take a walk before the sun went down. I'm glad to say I succeeded, but I sure had to rush to get out the door in time,
If it's Iowa, I wonder if Marsette-Smith will play. He and his coach didn't seem concerned that he injured himself showboating.
Here’s the thing . The injury timeouts can become media timeouts. That means they can take less media timeouts. it’s a pathetic money grab
When I saw Jerry McGinn was going to be the referee, I said to someone, "Be prepared for a four-hour game and a LOT of stoppages."
I understand the lure of preserving rivalry games... but the original intent of the matchups was to provide competitive games for everyone at the end of the year. 1 v. 1. 2 v 2. etc. I don't think the intent was to have us @ 3-5 play Iowa @ 6-2. Just another example of the conference screwing the new guys.
Given the no rematch policy and the decision (we think) to preserve rivalries, there are only two teams that Iowa can play. Michigan and Rutgers. Rutgers has the better record, and are therefore the logical opponent IMO.
My recollection is that when a player was down, the network would cut away for a 30 or (at most) a 60-second commercial. Sometimes the player was still down after the commercial. Nobody (except maybe a sadist) likes to see a player down, so it's not surprising there are ads at such a time. And the ads don't really delay anything -- they don't go that much beyond when the player is removed from the field. I do agree that maybe the media should give up a media timeout, but I think the ads that show then are already contracted for and set in stone.
Michigan might disagree. Given the choice between mismatching (aka screwing) Michigan or Rutgers, I'm surprised we got the more competitive game. Pleasantly surprised, but still surprised.
F Michigan! They will probably call the Covid card again. Like I said no one got screwed. They avoided playing Ohio State.
Exactly. Bet Warren punished Michigan on purpose and gave them a red hot Iowa team for ducking OSU.
I think ESPN had a voice in this. Strictly from a branding standpoint, Michigan-Iowa is a more attractive prime time matchup than Rutgers-Iowa
Huh ESPN?? Do they really have a say? ESPN gets the leftovers. Fox and BTN gets the better games. Michigan will likely opt out.
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report
Six Years Later, Rutgers Football has quietly transformed the Offensive Line room
-
02
The Knight Report
WAR ROOM: Latest Recruit Scoop and Team News on Rutgers Athletics
-
03
The Knight Report
Rutgers Baseball lands 2028 left-handed pitcher Nate Kessell
-
04
High School
2027 QB Jalen Parker transferring to Washington Township (N.J.)
-
05
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football's new-look defense forming around newcomers in training camp