PonyFans.com

I'd like SMU to pick these games up. Pretty sure the Mustangs need games for 20 and 21.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/nba/la-sp ... story.html

We definitely need to play a power 5 team every year, and 2019 is the last year we have tcu scheduled. I might be in the minority, but I would rather see us play teams like Michigan, UCLA, etc. than tech and A&M.

Definitely go after them, a game in LA and in the Rose Bowl. That's hard to beat. Is TCU not renewing? Hadn't heard that.

As of right now, TCU has not renewed.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/aac/smu-mustangs.php

Won’t Patterson still be in jail then?

As most knows Rutgers joined the Big 10 roughly 4 years ago blinded mainly for the money. They have never in their history had any semblance of top basketball or football programs. In addition, they will never commit to spending money on sports programs. They face huge faculty opposition for everything sports and spending any money for sports is always met with much resistance. The decision to join the Big 10 was perplexing at best as they were aware of the vast sums of $$$$ spent by Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State and Wisconsin and would never commit the money to actually compete in football. Tough to enter a conference understanding you would never compete and always be relegated to the bottom half. This article provides a little flavor of their situation and looks a little bit like SMU. They would have been better off in the AAC which is much more commensurate with their historical attitude and support.


> http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index ... iver_index

games with Syracuse or Boston College or UConn make a lot more sense for Rutgers

Charleston Pony wrote:games with Syracuse or Boston College or UConn make a lot more sense for Rutgers

Or maybe they want to rekindle some of their rivalries from The American?

DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:

Charleston Pony wrote:games with Syracuse or Boston College or UConn make a lot more sense for Rutgers

Or maybe they want to rekindle some of their rivalries from The American?

So UConn or Temple...or consider playing Army or Navy to keep things more regional for them. Big 10 gives them all the travel they need and it's not like they are trying to put together a schedule to attract national attention

PoconoPony wrote:They would have been better off in the AAC which is much more commensurate with their historical attitude and support.

They get like $35M a year being in the Big Ten. I think they’re OK

Real question is why did the Big Ten take Rutgers? I think Syracuse would’ve been a better fit in terms of being competitive in revenue sports

AusTxPony wrote:Definitely go after them, a game in LA and in the Rose Bowl. That's hard to beat.

UCLA may be interested as they like to play in Texas, but I'm not sure they would agree to play at Ford.

East Coast Mustang wrote:Real question is why did the Big Ten take Rutgers? I think Syracuse would’ve been a better fit in terms of being competitive in revenue sports

Rutgers "gave" them the NJ/NY market for the Big 10 Network while Syracuse doesn't deliver the NYC market. It was a media landscape grab, had nothing to do with performance or fit.

UCLA played at Robertson stadium (UH) twice in the last 20 years (1998, 2011) so I don't think they would object to Ford.

mustangxc wrote:UCLA played at Robertson stadium (UH) at least twice in the last 20 years so I don't think they would object to Ford.

Their fans could get 20,000 tickets fairly cheaply

With such a meaningful decision, you have to think the Big10 did their due diligence on Rutgers, yet they still selected them for the TV market CA alluded to. Gives at least a little hope for SMU as I suspect we dominate our market about as much as Rutgers does theirs.

It would be really interesting to see the crowd at Ford for a UCLA - SMU game. I doubt the Bruins would bring even 4K.

Could we sell-out Ford???