powered by Google  
  Track your favorite teams and players.
Free membership, Register Now
Already a member, Log In
 


Community | Help
Rutgers says NO. Sports News
  Home   Fantasy     NFL  |  MLB  |  NBA  |  NHL  |  College FB  |  College BK  |  Golf  |  Racing  |  Tennis  |  Cycling  |  MMA  |  More CBS College | High School | Mobile | Shop  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Horses Home
 Live Racing
 Youbet Update
 Carryovers
 Free Selections
 Contests
 U. of BET
 Message Board
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cycling Home
 Results
 Standings
 Stages
 Teams
 Riders
 Message Board
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Arena Football
 Boxing
 CBS College Sports
 CBS Sports TV
 College Baseball
 College Hockey
 Horse Racing
 Collegiate Nationals
 Message Board
 Poker
 Soccer
 SPiN
 Tour de France
 Video
 WNBA
 Women's Coll BK
 World Sports
 
 Site Index
 
 
 CBS College Sports
 Coll Sports Tonight
 Get CBS Coll Sports
 XXL - Watch Now
 Talent Bios
 Schedules
 School Sites
 
 
 Find your School
 '08 Football Preview
 Football Rankings
 Football Stats
 Hoops Recruiting
 Hoops Rankings
 Hoops Stats
 Video Highlights
 
 
 Featured Application
 Mobile Web
 Alerts
 Applications
 Video
 
 
 Home
 NFL
 NCAA
 MLB
 NBA
 NHL
 Fantasy
 
Community Home | My Profile | My Blog | Groups | My Settings | My Account | Member Search | Blog Search | About Community
 

Rutgers says NO.


View Message Board ·  Go to Team PageViews:      


Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 17, 2006

April 25, 2008 4:30 pm

Rutgers turned down a 6 year contract to play ND. The deal would of been for Rutgers to play ND at ND 3 times and 3 Times at the Meadowlands. The reason ND doesnt want to play at Rutgers stadium is because they dont hold enough seats.  Rutgers wanted 2 home games. I think this is a big mistake by Rutgers because this could of helped them out in Recruiting and be on National TV.  I understand that Rutgers wanted to play at home but they would of still played in NJ and they would have a bigger crowd.  I am pissed because I live in NJ and it would of been nice to see ND play. Also the contract could of ended up being a 9-10 year deal if Rutgers stays as a Top team in the Big East.  I think Rutgers dropped the ball on this one.  This would of brought them alot of money.   When ND plans there schedules they want to make sure they get something out of it and by playing at the Meadowlands they would of got some money out of that.

I think to make it a little fair ND should of counter offered by saying they would of played 1 game at Rutgers and 2 at the meadowlands. They have played there in the past but that last deal was to play Rutgers once at there house and 2 times at ND.


Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 17, 2006

April 25, 2008 5:33 pm
I made a mistake. Meadlowlands not Meadowlands. Also ND wanted to play at the New Giants Stadium.


Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Oct 4, 2006

April 25, 2008 6:05 pm

Rutgers program has improved big time. They would be taking a step back by playing Notre Dame. Rutgers needs to measure how far they have come by playing more Top 20 programs.

 

We all know Notre Dame days of glory have passed them by..


Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:98
Level:Superstar
Since:Nov 6, 2006

April 25, 2008 7:19 pm
It is bad Rutgers rejected this offer. The Rutgers program has exploded along with other Big East teams. If Navy can play Notre Dame in Baltimore for their home games against Notre Dame, then why can't Rutgers except this offer? Piscataway (sp?) is not that far from the where Giants Stadium will be and it is still in New Jersey. But what can you do?

Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Sep 15, 2006

April 25, 2008 11:21 pm

A couple of points:

1. Rutgers is expanding the stadium to 56,000 and needs to play games at the stadium to generate revenue to pay for the expansion. Parking alone would generate $300,000 to say nothing of the concessions. I know the Meadowlands/New Giants Stadium holds more seats but Rutgers would have to pay to rent the stadium and bus the students to the game.

2. Rutgers has a loud crowd that creates a homefield  advantage. Playing ND at Giants Stadium would be a neutral game.

3. Navy's stadium holds 33,000 the New Rutgers Stadium will hold almost twice that. Navy has everything to gain by playing ND at a bigger venue. Last year excepted Navy doesn't have a realistic chance of beating ND so why not take more money. Besides Army how many games does Navy have on National TV? Every Rutgers Big East game is on ESPN/ABC. Rutgers will also be playing Fresno and UNC on ESPN. Rutgers doesn't need to play ND to get exposure.

4. Notre Dame will be playing BC on their campus in a stadium that seats 44,000. Why is their 44K seat stadium acceptable but RU's 56K seat stadium isn't?

 


Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Dec 1, 2006

April 26, 2008 1:25 am
I have a couple of questions for ND fans.

#1. Since when does a 3-9 team have any right to give an ultimatum like "Play at Giants stadium, or don't play," to a BCS team that not only went to a bowl game, but won it?
We are not Buffalo. You play at our place, or you don't play. You are in no position to boss us around. Your name means nothing.

#2. If Boston College's 35,000 seat stadium (or whatever it is) is good enough for you, why is what will be a 56,000 seat stadium not?
It's not as if RU doesn't treat our visiting opponents well. The opposing fans get two of the best views in the stadium, and there's no sun in their eyes at all if it's an afternoon game.

Playing at Giants Stadium would be in effect a road game for RU. All the Irish Catholic fans would grab up all of the seats. Getting students from RU to the Meadowlands would be an absolute nightmare.
In reality, it's not much of an improvement in terms of revenue, when you consider all the advertising money RU makes off of signs, etc. in their stadium. If we were to play at Giants Stadium, we'd have to pay them for the use of the stadium, plus we'd have no control over the advertising during the game. The financial benefits (maybe 15,000 tickets) would not outweight the financial losses (losing the advertising money), plus ESPN not being on campus for the game takes away from our publicity.

We don't need any help in recruiting from Notre Dame, thank you. You steal enough players from NJ. We're not about to bend over backwards to let you steal some more.

I couldn't be happier we told them to shove their ultimatum. Play on campus, or don't play. We don't need their "help". We are not making a mistake but not bending over for the guys that are too good to be in our conference for football, but ride our coattails in every other sport.

Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Oct 4, 2006

April 26, 2008 1:40 am

Irish Catholics and Notre Dame??????

I dont see too many men if Irish background or Catholics on the football team????? haha

 

Also Rutgers should be looking to rekindle games against Alabama, Tennessee, from the SEC.

 

Even a California from the Pac 10 or Oregon.

Texas A and M also.  Lets live now in the present and not 20 years ago.

 

 


Rutgers says NO.
-
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:May 17, 2007

April 26, 2008 2:09 am
as an ND fan I can agree with the points of view expressed from Rutgers; I think a great point is made when they say: "Don't dictate to us, play on our campus, or get lost."
I agree with that, but there's no need to get all pissy like this jerk Jerseyballa. Hey, stupid, if you can't make a valid point, why not just shut up and let the Rutgers fans with some brains do the talking?

As for Irish Catholics on the ND team, get real. Let's hope there are too many REALLY Scarlet Knights in the Rutgers shower room, or the players won't want to bend over and pick up the soap.

Rutgers says ND is superior.
-
Reputation:97
Level:Superstar
Since:Apr 9, 2007

April 26, 2008 5:01 am
RU is mule crap.