It is only six pages for me so far. I have different settings. Anyway, I read that thread in full. I'm still looking for him to list which teams are actually good. I think he likes Florida. He doesn't care for Ohio State or Michigan because, and I'm paraphrasing, "they didn't play anybody good." He is allergic to the Big East. I really don't know who he thinks is a good team besides SEC teams.
No, I think OSU is the best team in the Country even thought hey have played a soft sched. I am not sold on Michigan even though I want them to win this week and I think it will be a travesty if the loser gets a rematch in the title game. I think this is an incredibly down year for CFB, I don't see any UT's or USC's in this group but I think OSU, UF, USC & Arkansas are the best teams in the Country. I do think Rutgers will be title game worthy if they win out b/c they will have beaten 2 quality teams including 1 in a place that's near impossible to win. go back and read my post on Clemson, I said the way they were playing they were as good or better than those teams. Up until the Va tech game they were playing great w/1 loss at BC. of course the win at FSU looked much better at the time and clouded my judgement a bit but they were playing great.
Italian Seafood: Where is the Rutgers beat reporter today? The only story in the Post is an AP story. http://www.nypost.com/seven/11142006/sports/rutgers_ignores_hype_sports_.htm
They play the games on weekends and that's when they send writers. Keep grasping at straws, though. The fact that there's a Rutgers article in an NY paper on a Tuesday should tell you something. Well, maybe not you but most anyone else.
Really? Did the Jets play a game yesterday? they are all over the back pages and have a million articles. Did the Giants play a game yesterday? they have a bunch of articles. A beat writer follows the team they cover and reports on them every day. Do you think at Miami they don't ahve an artcile about the Canes today? do you think at FSU, USC, Ohio Stae, etc... they don't have artciles today b/c the game isn't unril Saturday?
In the Miami herald they have a seperate page for UM(Rutgers doesn't in the News or the Post) http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/colleges/university_of_miami/ In the sun Sentinel they have a UM page: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/college/hurricanes/ I see fresh articles and do not see AP articles. Do I need to go on to show you other big time schools?
What the hell is wrong with you? How many ways are you going to try and twist this argument before you realize you are wrong? Once again, the question was is Rutgers part of the NY market? Not are they as big (yet) as Miami is in Florida, or Nebraska or anyone else. You claimed they are not part of the NY market, then why is the Post even devoting space to them on a Tuesday? In a market with two NFL teams, three NHL teams and two NBA teams in season and two MLB teams with all kinds of off-season news going on? Show me another media market with all that going on. And again, you're comparing a relatively new factor in the market, Rutgers, to established programs with much less competition in their markets. But spin it all you like, you obviously have nothing better to do than to try and piss on peoples' fun, so go ahead.
they are as part of the NY market as Columbia is or Fordham or Hofstra. If they win they'll get a little press, if not they'll have their scores in the papers but that's it. YOU are the one who said RU was big right now, if they are so big why don't they have pages at the papers websites? why don't they have articles during the week?
I said they are part of the NY market and now you've just said it. Where last week you said they weren't. Of course any time you win more you get more coverage, but RU is and has been part of the NY market all along, that's what I've been trying to explain to you.
They are not a New York team- they are an area team but are like a million somewhat local colleges, we don't have coverage devoted to them in our papers except during extreme cases like after the UL win.
I didn't say they are a New York team, but they are part of the New York market, and the only major D-1 football team in that market. Why is that so hard to understand? Their games have been covered by the NY media for years, even when they were bad--on channel 7 and WOR radio for years. Obviously as they get good the story is bigger and the peripheral coverage increases, but they have always been in the market and have always been the only major D-1 football program in the market.
The BE has a network deal, that's why they have been on. RU doesn't have a deal to show their games here. W/ so many networks needing programming we have IVY league, Northeast conf, Big 10 and BE games on every week. WOR obviously needs programming, there's a reason the Giants left WOR. No one even knew what a Rutgers was around here until last week so them being on TV and radio obviously hasn't helped them. My point now and it's always been that RU will never be big in the NYC area. They never have been and they never will be. IF they bet WVU and IF they play for a title it will be covered well but that's what they need in order to get coverage.
Your point last week was that Rutgers is not in the NY market so it isn't a factor in recruiting, which is obviously false. I've been watching Rutgers football on NY TV channels since long before the Big East had football, because Rutgers is the local D-1 team in the NY market. Period. And say what you want about WOR, it is a NY radio station that has been around forever, hence---Rutgers is part of the NY market and always has been. You didn't even know they were on WOR, you said they weren't on NY radio at all, so I'm supposed to still take you seriously? You have an ax to grind, obviously. People here know "what a Rutgers is", it's the state university, not a small private college.
Interesting because you weren't saying that about the prospect of WVU going undefeated. WVU going undefeated would have meant three wins over ranked opponents, with a road win in Louisville. Rutgers going undefeated would mean two wins over ranked opponents, with a road win in Morgantown. You are simply not consistent. At the time when West Virginia was undefeated the argument from you was that a number of 1-loss teams were better than them. You provided Clemson as one such example. "The way they are playing they are as good or better than West Virginia" is basically what you wrote. How exactly is that different from saying "they are better than West Virginia"?
When I was saying that about WVU I wasn't convinved Ru was for real. They proved they are for real since then. Again I said the way they were playing, it's a pretty simple comment. They havnen't played well since the the ga tech game and I said it after they killed a good Ga tech team.
Where do you get these papers and TV stations that carry all this Rutgers stuff? In YOUR editions of the NY Post they have all these RU articles w/ an RU beat writer yet my edition doesn't have those. RU was RARELY on TV before the BE deal w/ ESPN which is syndicated on various channels in NY. No one in NY cares about Rutgers nor will they ever. They might have some interest when they have a big game now and then but it will never be the interest you think it will be- just lik the Ntes, just like the Devils, just like any NJ team.
You gave me something here. One win over a highly ranked team will sway you. I'll note this because this is future ammo. The inconsistency in your statements is still maddening, however. "The way they were playing"- Yeah, I suppose you could find a team that started 0-4 and won 5 straight. I guess you could then say, "the way this team is playing they are as good as anybody." But that wasn't the case. You were talking about Clemson in the context of all the other 1-loss BCS conference teams. Why bother? You'll spin it again.
Nothing I have said has been inconsistent. Things change, Rutgers now has a great win and showed they are a good team. If WVU had beaten UL and RU then I think they would have been worthy. I didn't think so 2 weeks ago b/c RU hadn't proven anything. I said the way Clem was playing at the time I thought they were better at the time. It's not my fault you misinterpret comments. I said a month ago MD wasn't good and I still say that, they have taken advantage of a bad ACC but they are not a good team. The WVU win oer them looks better now but I still don't think WVU has a quality win. They had a chance at ULa nd they were beat up, they can get one over RU but the Championship dreams are gone. One win can sway when a program like Rutgers was unbeaten having played no one and that program hadn't beaten a ranked team in 20 years so yeah they had something to prove and they did so. They showed me they are GOOD.
Wow with the Clemson thing. It's also notable that the Louisville win swayed you so much when all along you have had great disrespect of the Big East. All Rutgers beat last Thursday was just another lowly Big East team, right? Louisville's not any good, right? All they beat out of conference was Miami and Kansas State and those two teams suck, right?
Once again I think the top 3 of the BE are all GOOD teams, none of them are great but all are good. The rest of the conference plays HS football and none of them earned a high ranking based on the crappy scheds they played. The only quality wins btw the 3 teams are UL over WVU and RU over UL. The conf still sinks but the top 3 are good teams, the top 3 are living off the bottom feeders of the conf. Put any of those 3 teams in the SEC and they all have at least 2-3 losses if not more.
