Based on a Star Ledger article Rutger's is likely to be playing Temple in football.The likely start date is 2007,after Temple joins the MAC for football.The series will be a 2-1 in favor Of Rutgers.Temple will replace Buffalo as Rutgers MAC opponent.Rutgers is trying to assure itself of OOC schedule that will make it bowl eligble on a regular basis.(1AA,Army,Navy,MAC) The other OOC team will be ND starting in 2010.This will cushion any difficulties that Greg S(hc of Rutgers) will have in( 7 year 7 million dollar new contract )in getting Rutgers to bowl games on a continual basis.

Yes, ND has scheduled Rutgers as one of its two BE opponents starting in 2010. Pitt is the other. Unless, of course, ND joins the Big 10 before then, in which case it will probably keep Pitt and buy its way out of the Rutgers series.

Yes ND will immediately jump to b10.It really wants to give way its ability to schedule its games along with it tv contract with NBC.Furthermore it give up its bowl contracts with the BE for the sun/gator and the houston bowl.That is about as likely as Sac St being the 10th team in the mwc.(or was that portland st).Yes ND wants to give up its games with Rutgers( it plays these games at South Bend or the Meadowlands.)Yes ND wants to minimize its profits from football. Maybe ND should join the mwc so that can get an undeserved bcs membership.

So TS2 is on the record saying that a Notre Dame-led Mountain West wouldn't deserve a BCS bid.

I'll be forwarding this to the big brass under the Golden Dome shortly. I'm sure they'll get a kick out of it.

Pounder maybe you can get reading lessons.The mwc new bowl will be called the bear bowl will be held in Montana in front of and exclusively for all bears in Montana.

It's called poor WRITING. Don't make me diagram that post. I suspect only the bears in Montana would be able to make sense of it.

A much better classification would be( poor reasoning based on poor reading comprehension).AAU schools in the states where MWC has members that have 1A football.
SMU,Rice,U Texas,Texas A&M,Univ of Colorado,USC,UCLA,Stanford,UC Berkley
7out of 9 are BCS;only 2 are non BCS

Too bad SMU isn't AAU.

Montana does draw pretty well for an I-AA school. Would do even better I bet if they were I-A with Utah, BYU, Boise State coming in for visits.

Re: Rutger's future Schedules and the MAC
« Reply #1 on Dec 27, 2005, 4:59pm »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, ND has scheduled Rutgers as one of its two BE opponents starting in 2010. Pitt is the other. Unless, of course, ND joins the Big 10 before then, in which case it will probably keep Pitt and buy its way out of the Rutgers series.

Westwolf:

I don't think that ND would buy its way out of the Rutgers series. They may make some adjustments to the plan if they have to though under this B-10 scenario.
ND wants to play at the Meadowlands at least every other year for recruiting and alumni satisfaction purposes. A scenario under this topic could include an east coast game at Baltimore with Navy one year with the NY alumni and recruits traveling a little further while playing Pitt at SB or in western PA to recruit that area. If Navy is at SB a game could be scheduled at the Meadowlands for the alumni and the recruits that year and ND could be recruiting eastern PA and the NY/ NJ eastern corridor. Various mixes in the schedule could occur over the years rotating Pitt and Rutgers in and out as Navy is a steady staple on the Irish schedule. Another words there is wiggle room for both Pitt an Rutgers for recruiting the Eastern PA and the east coast corridor and recruiting western PA and the Ohio, W. Vir., Maryland, and Virginia corridor.

_________________
SOUTH CAROLINA GAMECOCKS - SEC
RUTGERS SCARLET KNIGHTS - BIG EAST / AMERICAN ATHLETIC CONFERENCE / BIG TEN