Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Mike80]

This quote and post says alot. You hit the nail right on the head. The economy has alot to do with everything. Careers and job opportunitys are lost in the midwest. I was forced to leave Ohio in 89 to keep my position with the railroad. Florida Georgia and other states in the south region are plentiful if you really want to work.

Up in Ohio we had so many industries with jobs in the steel mills and railroads but now all that is gone. A good economy has a tremendous effect on where students are going to school. Ohio State may be an exception to the rule. They are still a haven for great students to come and play and get a great education as well. How long this will continue can olny be measured be the growth of the economy(if it ever can reverse it self)in the great state of Ohio.

Michigan's economy has been in the shitter since the 70s but that hasn't had any effect on the football team.

And honestly Alabama isn't exactly an economic oasis but Auburn has been a relatively successful team this entire decade.

 

[Onebuckfan]

I agree to a point..but also Only tOSU and scUM are considered football factories in the Midwest. PSU and Notre Dame are viewed as something better like it or not. Football factories are looked down on in the Midwest and Northeast by the Liberal School administrators, and media. The Southern schools have no Qualms about being football factories in fact they are proud of it. The Alumni and Administrators from FSU to Alabama embrace the Idea of being Football Powers and just give lip service to academics. The riot that occurred at the U, during the game would have led to calls to drop football if it happened in the Midwest or Northeast. I'm sure some U grads were embarrassed but others were probably proud. The economy is one reason but I believe culture and political views are another reason the SEC, OU,UT continue their tradition. On an a side note Ilived in Texas for 6 mos. The UT grads liked to look down at AandM and Oklahoma as football factories but in reality they would change coaches in a moment if they lost to OU and the Aggies in the same year.

 

[Mike80]

It was the golden era of the Midwest as the central hub of the industrial economy as well. And that is the thing that worries me about Big Ten football.

I think there are other factors at work other than just economic.

There were major social changes across the south as well as a populace migration (partly economic, partly social) from the northern states to the south/southwest during the past 50 years as well.

 

[sepia5]

I think there are other factors at work other than just economic.

There were major social changes across the south as well as a populace migration (partly economic, partly social) from the northern states to the south/southwest during the past 50 years as well.

[sarcasm]Don't forget about SEC speed, either.[/sarcasm]

 

[BB73]

Here's a list of Big Ten National Champs between 1933 and 1960:

1933 - Michigan (retroactive)
1934 - Minnesota (AP)
1935 - Minnesota (UP)
1936 - Minnesota (AP)
1940 - Minnesota (AP)
1941 - Minnesota (AP)
1942 - Ohio State (AP)
1944 - Ohio State ("civilian")
1947 - Michigan (retroactive)
1948 - Michigan (AP)
1954 - Ohio State (AP)
1957 - Ohio State (UP, FW)
1960 - Minnesota (AP, UPI)

In a 28-year span, that's 8 consenus national champs (1934, 1935, 1936, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1948, 1960); 2 split champs (1954, 1957); 2 retroactive champs (1933, 1947); and one minor champ (1944). Add in NC's for Notre Dame in 1930, 1943, 1946, 1947, 1949, and 1953, plus Michigan State in 1952, and the 1930's, 40's, and 50's were clearly the Golden Age of midwestern football. Now, not so much....

The shift in declaring NCs after the bowl games, which started in the late 60s, is a significant factor in those stats.

If NCs were still awarded before bowls, tOSU would have lost the 2002 NC, but gained NCs in 1975, 1979, 2006 and 2007. And that would take away 2 NCs from the recent SEC dominance.

One of those 4 NCs that was lost in those bowl games was a neutral game (Florida after the 2006 season). The other three NCs were lost to a team playing a bowl game in their home state.

If you're just going to use NCs to track conference strength, I believe the factor of where the bowl games are played should be recognized.

 

[BB73]

Then when was it ever "up"?

In 1999, 5 of the top-13 in the Final BCS standings were Big 10 schools. That group of 5 teams did not include Purdue team with Drew Brees or tOSU (a rare down year).

For comparison, this year's Big 12 dominance has Oklahoma State, their 4th team, as #14 in the current BCS standings.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

The shift in declaring NCs after the bowl games, which started in the late 60s, is a significant factor in those stats.

If NCs were still awarded before bowls, tOSU would have lost the 2002 NC, but gained NCs in 1975, 1979, 2006 and 2007. And that would take away 2 NCs from the recent SEC dominance.

One of those 4 NCs that was lost in those bowl games was a neutral game (Florida after the 2006 season). The other three NCs were lost to a team playing a bowl game in their home state.

If you're just going to use NCs to track conference strength, I believe the factor of where the bowl games are played should be recognized.

Good point, but that only supports the proposition that Ohio State has vastly out-performed the rest of the Big Ten during the last five decades - and has been the only national power from the conference during that time. It certainly does not support the proposition that the Big Ten as a whole is still a respected conference capable of competing with the SEC or the Big 12 on the national stage.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Expansion + title game = the only way to restore credibility to the Big Ten.

The ACC has a championship game and zero credibility. The way to establish credibility is to win. To go into the Coliseum and beat SC. To beat SC in the Rose Bowl. To beat SEC schools in BCS bowls.

When the above happens, the Big Ten will have restored its credibility regardless of whether it has a championship game or not.

Something to think about: If Penn State and Ohio State were rematched in a championship game this weekend, the only result would be one most likely getting bumped out of the BCS.

 

[MaxBuck]

Good point, but that only supports the proposition that Ohio State has vastly out-performed the rest of the Big Ten during the last five decades - and has been the only national power from the conference during that time. It certainly does not support the proposition that the Big Ten as a whole is still a respected conference capable of competing with the SEC or the Big 12 on the national stage.

OK, here's another view: the SEC is really in a class of its own. Nobody can convince me that any other conference can compete year-in and year-out with Florida, LSU and (now, with Nick Saban) Bama.

But to say the B11 and Big Twelve are not similar is bemusing. Both have two generally dominant powers (Oklahoma and Texas are really the only players in the B12), several pretty good programs (TTech and aTm are pretty similar IMO to Michigan State and Wisconsin), several mediocre ones (Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas - throw 'em in a bag IMO) and some real crap (Indiana; Baylor). I really don't think Okie and UT are in a different layer of the atmosphere from Michigan and Ohio State.

Pac10, ACC are one step down from the B11 and B12; Big Least is obviously one more step down, and are at best on par with the Mountain West IMO.

SEC has never had any academic component, while the B11 comprises only universities that are major research institutions. That component is why Pitt or Cincinnati would be better choices IMO than Rutgers, whose research credentials pale in comparison to Pitt or Cincy. For that reason alone I don't really care if SEC continues to be superior in overall football performance to the B11. We have other things going for us - we're much more than just a sports conference.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

SEC has never had any academic component, while the B11 comprises only universities that are major research institutions. That component is why Pitt or Cincinnati would be better choices IMO than Rutgers, whose research credentials pale in comparison to Pitt or Cincy. :hatepc::2004:

While I agree with you that Pitt is a perfect fit for the Big Ten. If you're talking CIC membership, Cincy is nowhere near acceptable compared to Rutgers.

Rutgers is its state's flagship campus: UC is not.

Rutgers is an AAU (the 60 top research universities public and private in the country) member; Cincy is not and nowhere near receiving an invititation

Rutgers' USN&WR rank is just a couple spots down from Ohio State's and better than Minnesota, Purdue, Iowa, Indiana, and Michigan State; UC is 3rd tier.

Non-flagship, non-AAU member and 3rd tier USN&WR ranking. Cincy is nowhere close to meeting the requirements for the CIC.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Something to think about: If Penn State and Ohio State were rematched in a championship game this weekend, the only result would be one most likely getting bumped out of the BCS.

True, but don't you think that Penn State would like another shot at a top-10 team right now? With a win, their SOS goes up quite a bit - as does their perception with the voters - and if things broke properly, they might be able to sneak into the BCS title game. As it stands now, they have no chance to do any better than the Rose Bowl.

What's the difference between Penn State and Florida this year?

Florida
Tebow: 160/246 (.650), 2,299 yards, 25 TD, 2 INT; 507 yards rushing, 12 TD
Harvin: 1,133 yards from scrimage, 16 TD
Rainey: 680 yards from scrimmage, 4 TD
Demps: 670 yards from scrimmage, 7 TD
Total points: 556 scored, 146 allowed
Yards per game: 449.4 gained, 275.7 allowed
Non-conference: Miami (ACC); Florida State (ACC); Hawaii (WAC); The Citadel (FCS)
Wins: Eleven, one versus a team currently in the top 20 (Georgia)
Losses: One, by one point to an 8-4 Mississippi team (5-3 in coference) at home

Penn State
Clark: 171/285 (.600), 2,319 yards, 17 TD, 4 INT; 265 yards rushing, 9 TD
Williams: 1,332 all-purpose yards, 9 TD
Royster: 1,357 yards from scrimmage, 12 TD
Green: 722 yards from scrimmage, 5 TD
Total points: 482 scored, 149 allowed
Yards per game: 452.2 gained, 263.9 allowed
Non-conference: Oregon State (Pac 10); Syracuse (ACC); Temple (MAC); Coastal Carolina (FCS)
Wins: Eleven, one versus a team currently in the top 20 (Ohio State)
Losses: One, by one point to an 8-4 Iowa team (5-3 in conference) on the road

The reality: The two teams are evenly matched; both have great defenses and running games, although Penn State runs a more traditional tailback-oriented attack and Florida employs more of a true spread; each team has a top dual-threat QB and multi-purpose player; OOC schedules are nearly identical in terms of level of competition, but Penn State beat Oregon State who beat Southern Cal.... Each team had a one-point loss to a solid conference foe, but Penn State's was on the road.... On a neutral field, Florida would be a slight favorite, but Penn State's superior line play would keep them in the game.

The perception: Florida rolled through the toughest conference in CFB with their ultra-high-powered spread offense led by Heisman winner Tim Tebow and the unreal speed of Harvin, Rainey, Demps, etc. Because the level of competition is so high in the SEC, it's understandable that Florida had an off day against Mississippi. If the Gators beat Alabama in the Game of the Century, then they are the clear number one team in the country, and they will go on to win the BCS title.

Penn State plodded through the weak Big Ten and four non-conference cupcakes, relying on their antiquated running attack. Penn State was exposed by Iowa, a Big Ten also-ran, late in the season, and almost lost to Ohio State (who was crushed in the last two BCS title games by SEC opponents). The Lions back into a conference championship without having to play a title game. They will be annihilated in the Rose Bowl by USC, who played a much tougher schedule but lost a fluke game early in the season.

There you go, folks....

Another win by Penn State, at the end of the season, against a top-ten team, with something meaningful at stake, has to change the perception in Penn State's favor. Maybe they still wouldn't get SEC-like love, but any boost to their credibility would certainly be helpful.

 

[MaxBuck]

Non-flagship, non-AAU member and 3rd tier USN&WR ranking. Cincy is nowhere close to meeting the requirements for the CIC.

You're right; my bad.

I guess I retain a more positive opinion of UC because I'm familiar with the engineering and medicine programs, both of which are better than most Ohioans seem to think. But you've persuaded me about Rutgers - AAU membership carries a lot of weight with me.

 

[BB73]

The perception: Florida rolled through the toughest conference in CFB with their ultra-high-powered spread offense led by Heisman winner Tim Tebow and the unreal speed of Harvin, Rainey, Demps, etc. Becuase the level of competition is so high in the SEC, it's understandable that Florida had an off day against Mississippi. If the Gators beat Alabama in the Game of the Century, then they are the clear number one team in the country, and they will go on to win the BCS title.

The reality: Florida has 1 win over teams currently in the top-25 of the AP, Harris, or Coaches poll. That was at a neutral site; their only other opponent that's now ranked resulted in a home loss.

I know I've posted this in about 3 threads now, but nobody else in the country seems to want to mention it.

And the chance for Penn State to get a significant postseason win will have to occur in USC's backyard.

 

[MaxBuck]

The reality (A): Florida has 1 win over teams currently in the top-25 of the AP, Harris, or Coaches poll.

The reality (B): Tonight, they'll have 2.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

You're right; my bad.

I guess I retain a more positive opinion of UC because I'm familiar with the engineering and medicine programs, both of which are better than most Ohioans seem to think. But you've persuaded me about Rutgers - AAU membership carries a lot of weight with me.

No worries. Whatever the love it or hate it response that my feelings on Ohio higher education engender around here, I do have a respect for UC and its role in the state system above that of a Toledo or Akron. They have solid, nationally known engineering and medical colleges (though still a marked step below ours) and their architecture and design college is superior to ours. Beyond that, however, there is still a large across the board quality difference between Ohio State departments and those at UC.

Here's the last National Research Council's ranking of academic departments--done in '95 and about to be updated in the next year.

http://www.stat.tamu.edu/~jnewton/nrc_rankings/nrc41.html

On balance, I really feel that UC should have an elevated role in the state system as the secondary research university--the VaTech to our UVA. That being said, that would still put the CIC out of reach.

Throw in the non-academic reasons such as having to split the state with a second B10 university, their not adding any television sets or recruiting footprint, and they really are--and always will be--a non contender for B10 membership.