B1G

[NickyNewark]

I don't have to act defensive and I'm not Jealous. Rutgers was not invited to the Big Ten for anything except potential eyeballs in the greater New York City Metropolitan region. Get the BTN on an expanded basic cable package and off the a la carte specialty sports tier. That is it.

UConn can still compete for its 4th Men's basketball title in the AAC. They are not even close to NC caliber in football, so I will enjoy the games just the same. Rutgers is going to get slaughtered by the likes of OSU, Wisc. MSU and UM on a regualr basis. Rutgers may be in the Big Ten, but on the field they are in no better position.

Good day, Sir.

So??? Would you like to trade places?Just shut up and do it on the field!!Are you a child?We'll sir,your certainly acting the part!!If Ru's gonna get slaughtered how do you justify UConn?

 

[UPitt]

I gave you a like because you explained yourself. You're not trolling...

WBB, was strongest at the turn of the century, but I understand your point because competition was stronger these past 10 years.

Thanks. I'm clearly not the best one to speak for Uconn's fanbase in Hartford which existed before I was born, but I think a younger national fanbase has formed over the past 15 years for reasons I listed above. Also, I think the success of WBB at Uconn has captured a new demographic (young athletic women) over the past 15 years as well.

 

[NickyNewark]

Would you like that lineup on your schedule?We'll never get better in the AAC!!Have fun playing Mich and RU next year!!lol..is that what you wanted?To bring me down in the dirt with you?Grow up and learn to use fact's instead of hope's as a weapon!Rrrr children!!!

 

[NickyNewark]

Thanks. I'm clearly not the best one to speak for Uconn's fanbase in Hartford which existed before I was born, but I think a younger national fanbase has formed over the past 15 years for reasons I listed above. Also, I think the success of WBB at Uconn has captured a new demographic (young athletic women) over the past 15 years as well.

yes ,that and the fact he finally read my post about respect!I enjoy your visit's to the BY even as an RU fan for staying out of the dirt! I commend you sir!!

 

[NickyNewark]

Husky25, how do I know your young?The spelling of semantic's!!You spelled it "symantic's"!!!

 

[NickyNewark]

I don't have to act defensive and I'm not Jealous. Rutgers was not invited to the Big Ten for anything except potential eyeballs in the greater New York City Metropolitan region. Get the BTN on an expanded basic cable package and off the a la carte specialty sports tier. That is it.

UConn can still compete for its 4th Men's basketball title in the AAC. They are not even close to NC caliber in football, so I will enjoy the games just the same. Rutgers is going to get slaughtered by the likes of OSU, Wisc. MSU and UM on a regualr basis. Rutgers may be in the Big Ten, but on the field they are in no better position.

Good day, Sir.

RU IS the NY/NJ metropolitan region and you finally understand that!!That alone make's them valuable!What more is their to say?I'd hardly hang my hat on FF county and claim Storrs for being in NY...or Boston!!

 

[upstater]

Only recently in men's hoop's!!RU has a much more impressive FB history and proud history in WBB well before Auriemma!!Don't pull my leg too hard my bell's are ringing!Talk about smug!

If Uconn's bball is only recent, that means Rutgers hoop history is non-existent.

 

[Fishy]

No one in New York City gives a flying f--- about Rutgers' athletics.

If RU was a horse, it'd been shot decades ago.

 

[upstater]

In the 70's RU done amazing thing's as an eastern player like getting to the Final 4 and put load's of players into the pro's until the mid 80's so if I remember it's not exactly "eon's ago"!Naturally RU hadn't reached UConn's status but were national new's for at least near a decade when Uconn was what UMass is to FB today!!Connecticut resident but Brooklyn native Phil Seller's and Roy Hinson were big star's then!

You have a short version of history. UConn made 3 Sweet 16s and a Final 8 in that period. The fanbase for bball was in-built, despite what you say. UConn packed the Civic Center. To say UConn bball was like UMass FB today is ridiculous. UMass isn't appearing in any BCS bowl game.

 

[Stinger92860]

In the 70's RU done amazing thing's as an eastern player like getting to the Final 4 and put load's of players into the pro's until the mid 80's so if I remember it's not exactly "eon's ago"!Naturally RU hadn't reached UConn's status but were national new's for at least near a decade when Uconn was what UMass is to FB today!!Connecticut resident but Brooklyn native Phil Seller's and Roy Hinson were big star's then!

You forgot Dabney.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

I agree Uconn had a strong fanbase for basketball before 15 years ago, but you can not say that it did not grow significantly in the past 15 years. That growth will be multiplied with the next generation. I'm not comparing to Pitt and don't know about Rutgers. Speaking for Pitt BB, we barely sell out 12500 and only follow it in good years. Pittsburgh is not a BB town, and Pitt's history is way to short to have a strong fanbase.

As for football, the Rent only holds 40K and Pitt has averaged over 40K fans every year since moving to Heinz Field in 2001. In most years Pitt has average upper 40K with a few years over 50K. I agree the attendance could be better for Pitt football, but its not terrible.

UConn basketball has built its fanbase gradually over the last 65 years. UConn has been among the most successful teams in every league it has belonged to over that time.

There are two exceptions to this gradual growth curve - both were brief periods of rapid inflation of that base. The first was the mid-sixties; its zenith was when UConn gained notoriety for beating Bill Bradley's Princeton Tigers in the NCAA Tournament. The second zenith is often referred to as The Dream Season, 1989-90, when UConn shot to the top of the Big East for the first time.

The narrative our rivals tell is wrong. We are not New Blood. We have been winners, mostly, throughout. The 80's represent what is for us the abnormal stretch, not the norm. The norm is we are Champions.

 

[pj]

The narrative our rivals tell is wrong. We are not New Blood. We have been winners, mostly, throughout. The 80's represent what is for us the abnormal stretch, not the norm. The norm is we are Champions.

That's pushing it. We were a regional power prior to 1989. We've been Champions since. On the national scene, UPitt is right, we weren't on most people's radar.

 

[upstater]

UConn basketball has built its fanbase gradually over the last 65 years. UConn has been among the most successful teams in every league it has belonged to over that time.

There are two exceptions to this gradual growth curve - both were brief periods of rapid inflation of that base. The first was the mid-sixties; its zenith was when UConn gained notoriety for beating Bill Bradley's Princeton Tigers in the NCAA Tournament. The second zenith is often referred to as The Dream Season, 1989-90, when UConn shot to the top of the Big East for the first time.

The narrative our rivals tell is wrong. We are not New Blood. We have been winners, mostly, throughout. The 80's represent what is for us the abnormal stretch, not the norm. The norm is we are Champions.

And even the 80s is a not filled with only losing. Most would be surprised to learn that Uconn did not have a losing season in its first 4 years in the Big East. And the decade ended with a couple winning seasons. There was a bad 5 year stretch.

 

[upstater]

That's pushing it. We were a regional power prior to 1989. We've been Champions since. On the national scene, UPitt is right, we weren't on most people's radar.

That's not UPitt's argument. We're not discussing national success. We're talking about Uconn's fanbase here. It was there for bball. If we were discussing national success, then UPitt would not have said that UConn's fanbase (in bball) did not compare to Rutgers' or Pitt's until recently. It would have made no sense since none of these schools were winning national championships.

 

[buggsy]

#3. That's where. UConn had a long history prior to the BE, made a couple deep tourney runs. During the early years of the BE, for the first 3 or 4, UConn was one of the better teams in the BE. When I went to games, the civic Center was jam packed and rocking. The team was followed by a ton of media. Dave Gavitt knew exactly what he was doing. UConn had ne of the best fanbases around back then, and they even held the Big East tournament in Hartford. Calhoun took over in 86-87 and turned the fortunes around after a brief spell. Seriously, if you diminish what Uconn did prior to 2004 or even 1999, then you're essentially saying that Rutgers and Pitt are in nowheresville, because neither school has reached the heights that Uconn did prior to the period of your cut-off dates. Look at the history a little bit.

Last, I'm not so impressed really by the long traditions (of losing mostly, Rutgers) or the great traditions (Pitt) since those traditions have not put the two schools out in front of UConn in terms of fans. All 3 schools have had about the same level of interest for a decade, and the same relative success and failure. The only difference with Uconn is that it doesn't have that long tradition, but that lack of tradition certainly isn't hurting UConn in competing with Pitt and Rutgers on the field or for fans. This likely means, as Pitt and Rutgers have shown, that moving up in the football world in terms of interest and in terms of winning is a long hard slog.

Are you really saying there is no difference in football fan support between Rutgers, which now gets over 50K fans for games against Norwich State, and UCONN which now gets in the low 30's for top conference games?

And you are like most others that post about Rutgers so-called losing history. Unlike UCONN, Rutgers has more winning seasons than losing seasons, and has won more games in their history than they've lost.

It is so hysterical to me that people from UCONN knock RU's history, when their own school's history is worse.



Right now you are NOT competing with RU for football fan support.

 

[UConnDan97]

Husky25, how do I know your young?The spelling of semantic's!!You spelled it "symantic's"!!!

Dude, the spelling of "semantic's" is "semantics." If you are going to correct someone, correct them correctly...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics



EDIT: By the way, I really should have also commented on your use of "your" instead of "you're." But why bother...

 

[upstater]

Are you really saying there is no difference in football fan support between Rutgers, which now gets over 50K fans for games against Norwich State, and UCONN which now gets in the low 30's for top conference games?

Right now you are NOT competing with RU for football fan support.

Right now, Rutges has jumped well ahead. So, the answer: no, we are not talking about right now. First off, I was referencing the results on the field as well as the fanbase. Secondly, we were talking about the development of a fanbase over time. The 100 year head start for Rutgers and also a long history for Pitt haven't given these schools an in-built advantage over UConn. Over the last decade (until your expansion) the schools were even. UConn sold out in a rainstorm against Murray State! So we had our Norwich St. too. The fact you've jumped now does not speak to a historical development of a fanbase. You had 43,000 fans in 2011. You've jumped from there. Presumably, your 100 year head start should have given you a bigger lead over a school with an 8 year history. Instead, it was a 5k lead.


Here's a link to the prior period:

http://realanalytics.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/rutgers-football-attendance-stats-y-o-y/

Interesting comment:
….What’s the point of providing statistics if the data is false? If you went to the games you would have seen that Rutgers embellished their attendance numbers nearly every week after their first game. For a number of factors Rutgers hasn’t been able to sell out all year long (weak opponents, Friday night games, unmet expectations…) but it’s in the best interest of Rutgers’ football program to inflate the ticket receipt numbers to justify their recent stadium expansion.
If you didn’t go to the games and didn’t know about the invisible fans that’s another thing, but then why do a study on it? RU’s attendance numbers are skewed on purpose and are not factual and that isn’t to say your statistics are incorrect… but I will say that the stats you provided don’t show the actual picture of RU 2008 to 2009 football attendance-
I would love to know what the true attendance bump was from 2008-2009, but Rutgers released those numbers solely to justify their stadium project. I know that has nothing to do with you, but why even use those numbers if they’re obviously wrong.

Then there's this guy:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ight-will-always-struggle-to-maintain-fanbase
Rutgers Football: Scarlet Knights Will Always Struggle To Maintain Fanbase


I'm not saying UConn is better. UConn has gone from selling out 40k to struggling. Thanks Pasqualoni!

There's also the unmentioned big factor. Football revenue. How much do you charge for tix?

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/despite_success_on_the_field_b.html

One of the more surprising findings shows that an increasingly smaller percentage of fans at home games now pay for tickets, because to offset declining attendance, the university hands out fistfuls of complimentary passes to fill seats. While the stadium may look more filled, there is still less revenue for the cash-strapped program. This year, roughly 59 percent of the fans bought a ticket, down from 76 percent in 2009. And despite a liberal use of complimentary tickets, the team still played in front of thousands of empty seats this year, even though it went into its final home game with a chance to win its first Big East title.

Despite $30m in direct institutional support from the academic side, your AD was still even with UConn in revenue. UConn does the same thing, but only to the tune of $10m a year. There used to be a $20m funding difference between the schools, and it favored UConn. Presumably, that's a measure of fan interest. I can't see any other way to account for it. Now that you're in the Big10, it will be impossible to do such comparisons in the future (since the TV take between RU and UConn will be entirely different) but I imagine you guys are going to do much much better.

 

[upstater]

Dude, the spelling of "semantic's" is "semantics." If you are going to correct someone, correct them correctly...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics

Plus, he claimed to know the guy's children!! ("How do I know your young?") Pretty scary, if you ask me.

 

[uconnfan68]

Are you really saying there is no difference in football fan support between Rutgers, which now gets over 50K fans for games against Norwich State, and UCONN which now gets in the low 30's for top conference games?

And you are like most others that post about Rutgers so-called losing history. Unlike UCONN, Rutgers has more winning seasons than losing seasons, and has won more games in their history than they've lost.

It is so hysterical to me that people from UCONN knock RU's history, when their own school's history is worse.



Right now you are NOT competing with RU for football fan support.

We're also not giving tickets away.

 

[buggsy]

We're also not giving tickets away.

yes you are. DO I really need to educate you on that?

 

[buggsy]

No one in New York City gives a flying f--- about Rutgers' athletics.

If RU was a horse, it'd been shot decades ago.

A lot more people in NJ care about Rutgers than UCONN, and a hell of a lot more people in NYC demo care about Rutgers than UCONN.

If no one gives a flying duck__about Rutgers, than no one in NYC even knows UCONN has a football team....your presence is so weak.

 

[itgoeslike]

I agree Uconn deserves more credit than I gave it, but I associate Uconn dominance as starting in 1999 with the NC, right or wrong. That NC is what caught the eyes of many newer members of the Uconn fanbase (myself included). These new members will mostly associate the recent history since 1999 since they may not have watched much before then. My point is that in 1999 Uconn finally reach the top and that caught the eyes of many new members. Also Uconn WBB has become more dominant each year with the past 8-9 being really strong.

The spark that grew UCONN's fan base was beating Ohio State University in the 1988 NIT championship game. The victory opened the eyes of fans, both old and new, to the potential of UCONN basketball and the excitement it generated. If UCONN basketball didn't catch your eye until 1999, you missed out on an incredible journey that saw UCONN scrap its way to becoming a national power. You never saw the exceptional talent and gritty play of Ray Allen, Rip Hamilton, Donny and Donyell Marshall, Chris Smith, Doron Sheffer and even Kevin Ollie. There were great BE tournament victories, conference championships, rivalry games, the last second shot over Clemson, and UCONN and Duke going at it in the tournament. The 1999 NC didn't just happen, it was the culmination of 11 years of building on one success after another. In 1999, it was fitting that we faced Ohio State in the national semi finals and then followed it by beating Duke in the national championship game. I think it's great that UCONN's first championship caught the eye of so many new fans. For me, it was was a storybook ending to a great decade of basketball.

 

[UPitt]

That's not UPitt's argument. We're not discussing national success. We're talking about Uconn's fanbase here. It was there for bball. If we were discussing national success, then UPitt would not have said that UConn's fanbase (in bball) did not compare to Rutgers' or Pitt's until recently. It would have made no sense since none of these schools were winning national championships.

I did not compare Uconn's BB fanbase to that of Pitt or Rutgers. In fact I stated that Pitt has a very weak BB fanbase and sighted lack of history as a factor. I used an example of the football success Pitt had in the 70s and 80s to show that I believe fanbase is passed on from generation to generation as it was in my house.

I understand that Uconn has a long history of BB success and was not disputing it. I was explaining how I think the recent success over the past 15 years has planted new fanbase seeds to expand the fanbase now and that in another 10 years that fanbase will begin passing Uconn onto another generation both national and locally. I find the past 15 years most important because Uconn reached milestones that drastically impact fanbase growth. Winning a mens BB NC in my mind was most important in reaching new fans. Adding D1 football was an important milestone or we wouldn't be having this conversation. Womens BB reached new demographics and developed a reputation similar to UCLA. During this time Uconn also improved.

This is just my opinion of how I think recent success at Uconn has been beneficial to developing new roots for expanding the Uconn fanbase that will have an even greater impact in the years to come.

 

[Fishy]

A lot more people in NJ care about Rutgers than UCONN, and a hell of a lot more people in NYC demo care about Rutgers than UCONN.

Nah.

You're a punchline. Given that Rutgers has never won anything in anything, and has an unfortunate tendency to slam its own d--- in the door, it really can't be any other way.

It's cool, though - I wouldn't admit it either if I were you.

 

[buggsy]

Right now, Rutges has jumped well ahead. So, the answer: no, we are not talking about right now. First off, I was referencing the results on the field as well as the fanbase. Secondly, we were talking about the development of a fanbase over time. The 100 year head start for Rutgers and also a long history for Pitt haven't given these schools an in-built advantage over UConn. Over the last decade (until your expansion) the schools were even. UConn sold out in a rainstorm against Murray State! So we had our Norwich St. too. The fact you've jumped now does not speak to a historical development of a fanbase. You had 43,000 fans in 2011. You've jumped from there. Presumably, your 100 year head start should have given you a bigger lead over a school with an 8 year history. Instead, it was a 5k lead.


Here's a link to the prior period:

http://realanalytics.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/rutgers-football-attendance-stats-y-o-y/

Interesting comment:
….What’s the point of providing statistics if the data is false? If you went to the games you would have seen that Rutgers embellished their attendance numbers nearly every week after their first game. For a number of factors Rutgers hasn’t been able to sell out all year long (weak opponents, Friday night games, unmet expectations…) but it’s in the best interest of Rutgers’ football program to inflate the ticket receipt numbers to justify their recent stadium expansion.
If you didn’t go to the games and didn’t know about the invisible fans that’s another thing, but then why do a study on it? RU’s attendance numbers are skewed on purpose and are not factual and that isn’t to say your statistics are incorrect… but I will say that the stats you provided don’t show the actual picture of RU 2008 to 2009 football attendance-
I would love to know what the true attendance bump was from 2008-2009, but Rutgers released those numbers solely to justify their stadium project. I know that has nothing to do with you, but why even use those numbers if they’re obviously wrong.

Then there's this guy:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ight-will-always-struggle-to-maintain-fanbase
Rutgers Football: Scarlet Knights Will Always Struggle To Maintain Fanbase


I'm not saying UConn is better. UConn has gone from selling out 40k to struggling. Thanks Pasqualoni!

There's also the unmentioned big factor. Football revenue. How much do you charge for tix?

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/despite_success_on_the_field_b.html




Despite $30m in direct institutional support from the academic side, your AD was still even with UConn in revenue. UConn does the same thing, but only to the tune of $10m a year. There used to be a $20m funding difference between the schools, and it favored UConn. Presumably, that's a measure of fan interest. I can't see any other way to account for it. Now that you're in the Big10, it will be impossible to do such comparisons in the future (since the TV take between RU and UConn will be entirely different) but I imagine you guys are going to do much much better.

RU's attendance has been on an upswing over the last 10 years, with one down year thrown in there.

If our stadium held 70,000 we would have sold it out for Louisville last year. The difference is light years now, not years.



And your whole "100 year headstart" rant shows your ignorance of college football and Rutgers football, since RU was D1AA until 1979. Same division as UCONN. At least we had an all-time winning record in D1AA.
You guys have an abysmal all-time losing record.