I saw an interesting item on Brian Bennett’s blog yesterday. Pitt’s athletic department has done a wonderful job of putting together quality OOC schedules over the next several years. I’ve spoken before (sorry, can’t find the post at the moment) about how I look at Pitt as an ideal model for the Rutgers athletic department – in terms of success, academic prestige, and fiscal discipline. They’ve done a masterful job with fundraising (and Tim Pernetti has made the first of many strides here with that), and give their athletic teams all the needed tools to succeed. I look at Pitt though, and I’m still green with envy.
Now, I understand that these deals need to be put together years in advance. Realistically, it’ll be at least five years between when a series is announced and the games are actually played. Still, if Pittsburgh can do it, there’s no good reason why Rutgers cannot. It’s very simple really: they’re using the exact same model for scheduling that I’ve advocated numerous times. Three home and home series games every year (either with BCS conference teams, or “good” mid-major programs like Navy and Utah), arranged in a way to buttress the unbalanced Big East schedule. For instance, two of those OOC games come to Pitt when they only have 3 conference games, and only one OOC team comes in when they have four. To fill out the schedule, buy two games against patsies.
It’s not a mystery. The big obstacle to Rutgers playing a competitive out of conference schedule in the near future is Army. They may or may not be on the level of Navy in the coming years, and I wish them well in those pursuits. Right now, treating Army as an equal partner, whatever the secondary benefits, necessarily must result in Rutgers playing a bad out of conference schedule.
I think Tim Pernetti is off to a great start, and he’s surrounded by K-Mac and other capable people. After 2009, they have to know what’s up (presumably they did earlier, with all the big series announcements several months back). There’s a hunger for Rutgers football in New Jersey, but no one wants to pay $70 a ticket to watch a scrimmage. We want good, competitive games. I understand that what happened with the 2009 schedule was a worst case scenario that everyone tried to avoid, but it’s bound to happen again without implementing the proper changes. That means, a commitment to long-term scheduling, and jettisoning the Army series once and for all. Please, live up to fan expectations by giving Rutgers football the challenges that it deserves over coming seasons. Give our Scarlet Knights the opportunity to show the world what they can do.
5 responses so far ↓
JerseyJoe // November 24, 2009 at 3:34 pm |
Had you posted this after the USF game, it may have had more of a lasting impact. However, after watching that Syracuse debacle, reading quotes like:
” Give our Scarlet Knights the opportunity to show the world what they can do.”
elicits only laughter, regretfully.
bs // November 24, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
It shouldn’t. That game was a special circumstance.
JerseyJoe // November 24, 2009 at 8:36 pm |
You really think it was a special circumstance? If games like that were not an annual occurrence with this program, I would tend to think that myself.
However, they seem to have at least 1 of these games every year. To me that’s not ’special’, it’s more systemic in nature.
bs // November 24, 2009 at 9:14 pm |
Weird upsets happen all the time, but
A) they happen to plenty of other teams
B) with Schiano, they are balanced out by the surprise victories
I meant though that the specifics of the Syracuse game were unique and don’t hold any bearing on how the team would look in a big OOC game. Additionally, this year’s squad has major, major issues on offense, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they will in the future. Talent will keep getting better.
JerseyJoe // November 25, 2009 at 1:30 pm |
I understand what you’re saying. But games like Syracuse had nothing to do with the talent of Rutgers on the field. Athletically, Rutgers was by far the more talented team on the field – on both sides of the ball.
Talent is just another word for potential. It’s the coaching that turns talent into results. I’m not implying that Schiano and staff are bad coaches, nor that they will not improve.
But I am not one for discounting games – good or bad. Rutgers play against Syracuse (and Fresno State last year for example) is not a unique occurrence – because it happens every year. In my opinion, every game has bearings on the development of your program.
And in the case of RU / Syracuse it was the fact that Rutgers was completely dominated in the game which is the concerning part – not the loss itself. You’re right, upsets happen all the time. But very rarely is an upset the result of a complete ass-kicking by the underdog.
As I’ve said before, losses happen and are expected to a certain extent – even accepted. Being non-competitive in games is not acceptable.
So let’s noot confuse the real storyline from Rutgers latest miscue. It’s not that Rutgers lost to Syracuse – it’s HOW they lost.
And that kind of recurring annual theme, in my opinion, signals this coaching staff is not yet ready to show the world what Rutgers talent can actually do – regardless of who the opponent is.