Share This Page

Rutgers football coach says Scarlet Knights, Big Ten 'a tremendous marriage'

| Monday, July 28, 2014, 11:16 p.m.

CHICAGO — Though their moves were announced more than 20 months ago, Rutgers and Maryland took part in their first official conference event at Big Ten media days.

Maryland spent the prior six decades in the ACC; Rutgers was in the Big East for football for more than 20 years. While their additions to the Big Ten — ones commissioner Jim Delany acknowledged were more for financial reasons than on-field merit — have drawn figurative groans from fans, Rutgers coach Kyle Flood defended his school's profile.

“Over the last year, I've gotten this question probably more than any: How do you feel about being in the Big Ten?” Flood said. “And my answer to you would be this: It feels right.

“To me, as I look at our football program and I look at the Big Ten conference, I see a tremendous marriage.”

Players and coaches for the Terrapins and Scarlet Knights acknowledged the challenge they expect to encounter in what appears to be a brutal East Division.

Before even stepping onto the field, Flood's school has lost battles against their new conference rivals on the recruiting trail. Penn State, in particular, has recruited successfully in New Jersey and Maryland in its short time under James Franklin.

“We know that we're in an area where there's going to be a lot of schools come in and recruit where we're at,” Maryland coach Randy Edsall said.

Chris Adamski is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at cadamski@tribweb.com or via Twitter @C_AdamskiTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.