Skip to content

Rutgers ‘in contact with’ Big Ten, ACC

Cliff

Big East, you may have a problem.

With Pittsburgh and Syracuse out the door… and UConn reportedly aggressively looking to do the same… and with West Virginia training their eyeballs southward, the basketball conference that dabbles in football is now standing at the precipice, staring straight down at gridiron oblivion.

And now this.

Tom Luicci of the Newark Star-Ledger is reporting that Rutgers has been involved in talks with the ACC over the past two days about potential membership in that suddenly proactive conference.  Additionally, Luicci writes that Rutgers’ “lines of communications with the Big Ten have remained opened and ‘are active’.”

How open are those lines of communication with the Big Ten?  So open that Rutgers is comfortable in showing Jim Delany some very public leg.

“The bottom line as it relates to Rutgers, this is not the kind of thing that causes us to get to work,” RU athletic director Tim Pernetti said earlier today about the upheaval in his current conference. “We continue to and have since I started on the job been very active in this space.

“And I think given our assets and our location, the New York TV market, our AAU status and strong academic standing, and most of all — given all the nonsense that’s gone on out there — running a clean program (with) integrity. We have great assets and we will continue to be a player nationally during this time as the landscape continues to shift.”

Bravo, Mr. Pernetti. You worked that like you owned the prestigious academic television market.

Regardless of whether it’s the Big Ten or ACC that’s the main object of flirtation, it’s clear Rutgers is “aggressively pursuing” a conference they feel could save it from the instability in its current conference.  And would love nothing more than for a Midwestern savior to come a callin’.

Permalink 30 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten Conference, Rumor Mill, Top Posts
30 Responses to “Rutgers ‘in contact with’ Big Ten, ACC”
  1. bender4700 says: Sep 18, 2011 8:16 PM

    New Markets.

    That’s the two words every person needs to know when talking which conference gets what team.

  2. mz1383 says: Sep 18, 2011 8:26 PM

    Big Ten needs to get started….Pitt & Syracuse are gone, Rutgers brings the NY market (big money). But then who to make it 14? Pick another Big East team or Big 12? Mizz is a good option but staying east for another 2 for markets is good too. Watching all of this is so much fun……

  3. fitz66 says: Sep 18, 2011 8:31 PM

    Crappy football teams must be in high demand

  4. pabstman says: Sep 18, 2011 8:45 PM

    Rutgers has always been the “under achiever” of the Big East. Good, not great, recruiting classes but they never seemed to get over the hump, specifically the one in the middle of Mountaineer Field, and win the BE.

    I agree bender4700 this move has everything to do with new TV markets and little to nothing to do with adding a quality football or basketball opponent.

  5. thefiesty1 says: Sep 18, 2011 8:46 PM

    @fitz66

    That’s right. These crappy football teams need to form their own conference or division. Put all the schools with low budgets, facilities etc in a league of their own for football anyway.

    You know who they are – Rutgers, Duke, Wake, Baylor, Rice, Vandy etc – they can’t compete on a regular basis and shouldn’t be in a super conference with the big boys.

  6. maninmo says: Sep 18, 2011 9:00 PM

    Rutgers & MIZZOU will would a great fit for the Big 10. New York/Newark & St Louis & KC TV markets.

  7. honolulublue says: Sep 18, 2011 9:28 PM

    Rutgers, Missouri, Kansas, and then one from Louisville, West Virginia, Kansas State, U Conn, Temple, Iowa State, Cincinnati, Notre Dame.

  8. chobes68 says: Sep 18, 2011 9:30 PM

    “You know who they are – Rutgers, Duke, Wake, Baylor, Rice, Vandy ”

    ===========

    The “Enjoy kicking our asses now , because you’ll eventually be working for us, conference.”

  9. fitz66 says: Sep 18, 2011 9:31 PM

    Wvu to sec is all but done- waiting on aTm

  10. chobes68 says: Sep 18, 2011 9:32 PM

    “Rutgers & MIZZOU will would a great fit for the Big 10. New York/Newark & St Louis & KC TV markets.”

    ==========

    ND needs to wake up, and realize the 80s are over, and they’re no longer the big dog in football, and should join a conference in full. The B1G reportedly has an open invite. I’d also expect Kansas to get an invite, even though they suck at football, their basketball success would be an upgrade. Although I would have preferred Pitt or Syracuse, reportedly they both already turned the B1G down.

  11. sklein11 says: Sep 18, 2011 10:12 PM

    Virginia and Maryland would be great Big 10 fits. Idon’t know what the ACC football deal is, but it can’t be close to the big 10 dollars.

  12. centexhorn says: Sep 18, 2011 10:19 PM

    ZOMG, teh superconferencepocalypse has begun.

    Mah hed is spinnin.

  13. cdwains says: Sep 18, 2011 10:20 PM

    Cincinnati would be a good fit for for Big 10 geographically, plus would be an upgrade for Big 10 basketball. Cincy could also be a fit for the SEC geographically. Cincy would be competitive in basketball, and a punching bag in football. It would also open the talent rich Ohio market.

  14. stairwayto7 says: Sep 18, 2011 10:50 PM

    Joe Pa always wanted another eastern school or 2 so get Rutgers and possibly Temple then get Kansas and K-State! West Virginia will never go where PSU is and Notre Dame had thier chance!

  15. paulbrownsrevenge says: Sep 19, 2011 12:11 AM

    Rutgers has been traditionally terrible. If the bigTen wanted the NY market they should have went for Syracuse. Rutgers brings nothing to the table. No Hoops team as well.

  16. frug says: Sep 19, 2011 1:01 AM

    Rutgers may be located in the NYC media market but in way does the school “deliver” it in the way the Big 10 requires. In order to get the BTN onto the basic level of the local cable provider a school needs fans who are passionate enough to either boycott providers who will not or switch to Direct TV (which carries the network). People NYC just do not care that much about Rutgers’ sports teams.

  17. sportsinhd says: Sep 19, 2011 1:07 AM

    Rutgers might not be worth a whoopdeedoo, but the Big Ten now finds its self in a position where they can’t be too choosey. Two of the more likely targets for Big Ten expansion, Syracuse and (especially) Pitt are now out of the picture. The only teams it makes sense for the Big Ten to grab are teams that increase the media footprint of the Big Ten Network.

    I’m not sold on Rutgers being a waste of TV space either. When they went to their first bowl game in a century back in 2005 they drew a 3.7 rating in New York, which is the highest college football ranking in New York on ESPN since 2000.

    Even a small piece of the pie in the New York and New Jersey markets is a lot of television. Rutgers makes sense for the Big Ten in a way that a team like Kansas State does not.

  18. halo81 says: Sep 19, 2011 7:27 AM

    The next person that mentions Rutgers as a “NY media” and that Notre Dame needs to “wake up” and join a conference needs smacked in the f’ing head.

    Rutgers has had ONE regular season game shown outside of New Jersey in 22 contests. That’s how much people give a crap about them.

    No one cares about Rutgers in New York City. Hell, people in NYC thought Steve Slaton was their RB when ESPN interviewed random people in Manhattan years back.

    Notre Dame can do whatever they want.

    Every time one of you ND haters brings that up and then says “but I don’t care and hope they fail” it’s obvious you’re just begging for Notre Dame to bring the highest selling college sports “franchise” into your conference and share with you.

    They’re Big East in every single sport except for three and you ain’t getting them.

    Have Rutgers … they’re awesome!

    About as awesome as a dose of the clap.

  19. halo81 says: Sep 19, 2011 7:34 AM

    I’m not sold on Rutgers being a waste of TV space either. When they went to their first bowl game in a century back in 2005 they drew a 3.7 rating in New York, which is the highest college football ranking in New York on ESPN since 2000.

    ——————————————————

    “Their first bowl game in a century”

    Yep, I’d strive for that excellence.

    Check their ratings since.

    1.3
    1.42
    1.8
    etc

    Also, they pulled a 3.33 in ’05 against the Sun Devils according to the BCS release.

    http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819384

  20. pastabelly says: Sep 19, 2011 8:19 AM

    The ACC would do better to take UConn than Rutgers and that all relates to basketball and the fact that the Connecticut market supports UConn better than NJ/NY supports Rutgers. Of course, they may come in together. But there have to be better options than Rutgers and that is clear by the first options of Syracuse and Pittsburgh.

  21. halo81 says: Sep 19, 2011 10:02 AM

    Haha, the Notre Dame haters are thumbs downing it as much as possible.

    Funny thing though … every single time conference expansion comes up you all want Notre Dame.

    Must stink not to be ND or Texas.

  22. sdelmonte says: Sep 19, 2011 10:49 AM

    No one in NYC cares about college football. This is axiomatic.

  23. pdmjr says: Sep 19, 2011 2:38 PM

    there are more ND fans in NYC than Rutgers,
    but bringing the Big 10 would attract viewers.

    It’s all about exposure and TV sets

  24. whartonone says: Sep 19, 2011 2:51 PM

    To the “axiomatic” comment. NYC “would” care about Division I football is they had a good conference and regional team – that’s axiomatic. You need to supply the product to get the demand – duh. Saying the region doesn’t like college ball is axiomatic is inane at best.

  25. whartonone says: Sep 19, 2011 2:52 PM

    Also, I’d add … the B10 wants schools that are in the 59 best universities of the AAU (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Universities)

    Rutgers is, UConn isn’t.

  26. mhalt99 says: Sep 19, 2011 4:16 PM

    Crappy football teams must be in high demand

    Michigan needs someone they can consistently beat. New Hampshire and Richmond were too tough so they will be pushing for Rutgers.

  27. TxGrown says: Sep 19, 2011 4:34 PM

    NYC is not a very good college football market.

  28. polegojim says: Sep 19, 2011 6:38 PM

    Wow… so many commenters on this post don’t have a CLUE what they’re talking about.

    1) Big 10 doesn’t ‘need’ anybody elses money. Big 10 IS the carrot for teams like that.
    2) Rutgers would be an excellent addition to the Big 10 and in the same ‘academic class’. ARWU rankings: Michigan 22, Northwestern 29, Rutgers 54, Ohio State 59
    3) Notre Dame will be in the Big 10…although they have some ground to catch up academically… and now on the field too … ; )

  29. waynefontes says: Sep 21, 2011 9:33 AM

    Rutgers? Ahahahahahaha….. yeah, they have lots of leverage.

    For all this talk about TV markets.. this is 2011.

    Not 1981. In 2011, we have things like the Internet and cable TV is in a wide majority of houses across the entire United States.

    Rutgers would be great if the NCAA had a Quiz Bowl national championship, but they’re consistent in that they’re terrible in almost every sport other than women’s basketball.

    And the only reason anyone knows/cares about Rutgers in women’s basketball is because of Don Imus.

  30. Derty Ernie says: Sep 22, 2011 5:02 PM

    Yes its Rutgets, Notre Dam and Missouri for the big ten. Nebraska needs to bring and old foe into the big ten. Oh that makes only 15. How about Cincinatti with there basketball power, that would aline the big ten all the way through the midwest down to the coast.
    Lets do it Delaney

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!