Junc, I posted you links to the New York Post covering every Rutgers game with two articles from a staff writer as far back as the archives will go. If you still don't believe it it's because you refuse to. I know I haven't been hallucenating for the past 25 years seeing Rutgers on TV. Not every game, but a lot of them, because they are the local team. I can't believe you're even still trying to dispute this. Let's recap--you said they weren't in the NY market, I proved you wrong. You compared them to the Nets and Devils until I pointed out that those teams have rivals in Manhattan who dominate the coverage. Then you said the papers don't cover them, I posted links to disprove that, then you claimed they weren't on NY radio and you were wrong, then you tried to diss the station that carries them that you weren't even aware of. Now you're telling me I haven't seen them on TV my whole life when I have, on NY stations. There are no NJ stations, so they had to be NY stations, mostly channel 7. You're just continuing to argue for the sake of arguing and most if not all of what you're throwing out here is nonsense.
You posted Lenn Robbins articles, he is the college sports writer fopr the Post NOT the RU beat reporter. You said they had a beat reporter. he posts a recap of the RU game that week- big deal, he's not following them every day. I don't know what TV stations you get but I have every channel you could imagine and RU games haven't always been on TV. They have had a few games a year but not every single game. You didn't prove anything wrong, they are NOT a NY team. They are as NY as Monmouth is in basketball. A somewhat local tam that the NY media will adopt if they have some success. and what does this prove? There are bandwagon fans everywhere, just look at the Mets this year. All of a sudden everyone is a Met fan- why didn't that happen w/ the Nets and Devils especially when the rangers and kinics have been so bad for so long? The papers DO NOT cover them, why aren't there RU pages at the post, news and Newsday websites? why are there not articles every day? yesterday in Newsday there was an article about Butch davis to UNC(not an AP story) but no RU news. The NY press does NOT cover RU, sure they will cover a big game like UL and they might have game recaps but they don't cover them daily. There will be more prss on the OSU-Mich game this week than RU has seen all year. As for the radio station I was wrong about that but again I am very in tune to NY sports and had no idea so I don't think most people know RU is on WOR and they don't generate any ratings. Again, ND was on WFAN for about a decade while RU could never dream of being on WFAN. You say they are on every week, that was not true before the BE TV deal where they syndicated the coverage w/ ESPN on various local channels. You are the one claiming RU will be huge in NY(and already is big) yet I am posting nonsense:rofl: NO ONE cares around here, NO ONE! RU will never be big in NY. When they have bat reporters at all the papers, when they have articles every day, when they have web pages for them at the local news websites then I'll admit I was wrong but that will never happen. RU was big news this week b/cof the UL game. RU nearely won a bowl game last year and no one around here would have known as there was barely any coverage in the papers and on TV. if they were that big their 1st bowl game in 30 years would have been big news.
Ok, junc, this is going nowhere. You keep trying to twist the whole argument around just to have something to say. Forget it. I'm going to go bang my head against a wall now, why don't you pull yours out of your ass and we'll call it even.
And USF beat North Carolina. And Texas lost to Kansas State. And Clemson lost to Maryland. And California lost to Arizona. And Pittsburgh lost to Connecticut. And...
I haven't noticed new Mets fans. I've seen as many Mets fans this year as any other year. I did notice a change in the number of Jets fans circa 1998, however.
Toughest Schedules This is as of today's date. The rankings are based on past opposition and future opposition. 1. Cincinnati 2. Michigan 3. Connecticut 4. Minnesota 5. Southern California 6. South Carolina 7. Maryland 8. Florida 9. Texas 10. West Virginia Three Big East teams. One ACC team and that one ACC team was pummelled by West Virginia. Also of interest: 29. Notre Dame 37. Rutgers
This thing says Michigan has the 2nd toughet sched? if it had any credibility all goes out the window. Michigan's only real quality win was at ND. other than that beat Wisconsin who is now ranked onyl b/c they are beating up on the bad Big 10 teams. They must include the OSU game before it's played and that must weigh alot into it. Michigan's sched has been a joke b/c the Big 10 is so down this year. I don't buy the rankings at all. The BE teams are in there b/c the top 3 beat up on the dregs of the conference and look better than they are.
Here's an idea. Everyone rank each conference's teams individually and then combine the two lists to form your own ACC/Big East ranking of teams.
You just don't understand the concept at all or you are just arguing to argue and aggravating people to aggravate people. "This thing" is the NCAA, by the way. If you read my post I wrote the toughest schedules rankings takes into account past opposition and future opposition in this 2006 season.
How is it that OSU isn't on that list then? they will have played TWO #2 teams and the rest of the bad Big 10 teams like Mich. it's a joke. congrats to WVU on the W last night, Pitt isn't good BUT it's a rivalry game and anything can happen. They took care of business in the 2nd half.
anyway, transitioning to basketball. A mid of the pack ACC team humiliated a mid of the pack BE team last night when Maryland beat St. John's at the Garden 92-60(and it wasn't as close as the score indicates).
I likely will not participate in the basketball debate just because I don't care enough about it. In my opinion, that would be better off in another thread, but in the bullshit section.
34th. Their opponents, including Michigan, have a 59-50 record. Not sure I would call cold, hard facts a joke. I wouldn't call it the greatest thing, but it is better than your speculative comments. "Rutgers and WV would have 2-3 losses if they were in the SEC etc." I don't think any SEC teams are clearly better than Rutgers or WV and feel it is ludicrous for you to make the sorts of comments you have been making.
Michigan has played nobody outside of ND and will play nobody outside of ND and OSU. They have closer to the 2nd weakest sched in the Country then 2nd toughest. they have beaten ONE quality opponent. You'll throw out Wisconsin but Wisconsin is ranked b/c of how bad the Big 10 is and they are beating up bad teams. Wisconsin doesn't have a single quality win. the Big 10 is pitiful this year and that's the biggest reason why Mich is undefeated. I Their sched has been a joke.
ill just say this....... ACC-Miami and FSU , even VT have had uncharacteristic years. FSU's problem will be fixed with Jeff Bowdens departure, and Miami has the talent, but can it find its way on the field? This in turn has led to the re-emergence of Maryland and Clemson. overall off year for the conference as a whole. Big East-USF will only continue to get better, Louisville made its mark. Rutgers is finally becoming a program worth mentioning. and WV will be the top of the class for now. still a blooming conference with teams prospering fast that definitely deserve attention anyone can debate what they want, id still say SEC is toughest conference in NCAA. but just to let you guys know my team is FSU. so theres no bias when I'll be saying the Big East had the more impressive leading teams, but for now ACC still has the better programs........for now.
