General

Big Ten Expansion Talk Veers Towards Rutgers, For Some Reason

Mar 8, 2010, 9:15 PM UTC

â†µâ†µTo date, Big Ten expansion has undergone two distinct phases. Phase I:â†µMissouriâ†µand Pitt seem like reasonable combinations of academics andâ†µathletics. Let’s add them! Phase II: Let’sâ†µannex Texas. And Notre Dame. And the Big East. And Canada.â†µ

â†µâ†µAs of a few days ago, Phase II officially ended with a leakedâ†µstudy in which a consulting firm evaluated five choices and gave aâ†µgeneral thumbs up to the idea of adding a 12th team. None of the candidatesâ†µwere Texas or the entirety of South America. One was long-term pipedreamâ†µNotre Dame. The others were the usual, fairly boring suspects: Missouri,â†µPitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers. How does thisâ†µdiffer from Phase I?â†µ

â†µâ†µâ‡¥â†µâ‡¥The consensus among Big Ten sources, officials from other conferencesâ†µâ‡¥and TV executives is that Rutgers offers the bestâ†µâ‡¥package. Missouri is second and Pittsburgh third.â†µâ‡¥

â†µâ†µâ†µRutgers is now the media favorite based on this. Penn State fan bete noir and grudge-holding columnist David Jones goes back to aâ†µ1992(!) column about adding the Scarlet Knights: â†µ

â†µâ†µâ‡¥â†µâ‡¥Rutgers, I was told with some condescension, was in a pro area fullâ†µâ‡¥exclusively of pro fans. That people in New Jersey didn’t even careâ†µâ‡¥about Rutgers, let alone the sought-after New York City metro sports fanâ†µâ‡¥of my rationale.â†µâ‡¥
â†µâ‡¥â†µâ‡¥Well, more than 17 years later, the idea seems to be gaining someâ†µâ‡¥steam.â†µâ‡¥

â†µâ†µâ†µIt’s early yet, but in the next week or so expect a half-dozen moreâ†µarticles like this, each of them pitching Rutgers’ “potential”â†µbased on the 2006 Louisville game, which drew an 8.1 rating. It’s theâ†µcrux of Jones’ argument.â†µ

â†µ

â†µThat's a big rating. It, however, is exactly one game. Rutgers lost a couple late that season and has settled down into a respectable, ifâ†µuninspiring, program. Their ratings are now in the tank. Jones' ownâ†µnewspaper provides a damning look at how Rutgers draws when it's not having a historic Cinderella season,â†µplaying an undefeated opponent, and provided an exclusive Thursday nightâ†µwindow. The four non-ND schools in this report ranked by average ratingsâ†µfor nationally televised games:â†µ

â†µâ†µâ‡¥Pitt: 3.31 (7 games)
â†µâ‡¥Missouri: 2.04 (7 games)
â†µâ‡¥Rutgers 1.51 (6 games)
â†µâ‡¥Syracuse 1.31 (1 game)

â†µâ†µâ†µObviously, Pitt’s successful season made their games more compellingâ†µbut Missouri was a bleh 8-5. Rutgers was 9-4. Other schools on that listâ†µwho did not have much in the way of season but still killed RU in theâ†µratings: â†µ

â†µâ†µâ‡¥Nebraska: 3.57 (9 games). The Cornhuskers went 10-4 and made the Bigâ†µâ‡¥12 Championship game, so that’s not surprising.
â†µâ‡¥UConn: 2.23 (4 games). UConn was 8-5 and plays in the sameâ†µâ‡¥conference as Rutgers.
â†µâ‡¥Aaaand most damningly, Colorado: 2.02 (5 games). Colorado was 3-9.â†µâ‡¥

â†µâ†µâ†µSo Rutgers did a huge number once when it was a temporary media darling for fighting against 130 years of incompetence deep into that one season when the Big East was relevant. That is a one-time event that will never be replicated. And the 8.1 that game got isn’t astounding for a late-season game between undefeated opponents. Michigan-OSU 2006 did 14.3. Texas Tech-Texas didâ†µa 7.5 in 2009. â†µ

â†µâ†µRutgers is basically equivalent to the other schools underâ†µconsideration academically. They are not a good geographic fit. Theâ†µclosest school is Penn State four hours away. Everyone else in theâ†µconference is ten or more hours distant and will have to fly. They haveâ†µno historic rivalries with anyone in the Big Ten, unlike Missouri andâ†µPitt, and their basketball program may be the worst in the BCSâ†µconferences. They haven’t been to the tournament since 1991. They bringâ†µonly one thing. â†µ

â†µâ†µAnd they probably don’t even bring that. The only reason to addâ†µRutgers is if the Big Ten Network can get on a basic tier in New Jerseyâ†µand New York, and it’s here that the basketball program is a killer. Noâ†µone on the entire planet cares about Rutgers basketball, which meansâ†µthat an extremely small proportion of the New York metro area will haveâ†µto head to a bar a few times a year to catch Rutgers against some Bigâ†µTen team. One game in 2006 does not change the basic non-notability ofâ†µRutgers athletics in the New York market. The Big Ten will be taking aâ†µhuge, probably unsuccessful risk if they add them. â†µ

â†µâ†µThere’s only one way adding Rutgers makes sense: sign the cableâ†µcompany contracts first. Given the year-long war the BTN prompted inâ†µareas where the local college is the main attraction and not competingâ†µwith the Nets to be ninth-most popular, that will happen the day after Notre Dame dropsâ†µall this Catholicism business and joins the Big Ten as an Indiana stateâ†µschool.â†µ

â†µ

This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.

See More: