wow. thank you for the award and for the gestures of appreciation. much appreciated. and thank you, buckeyeskickbuttocks, for fixing the readability of the post. nice way to handle that.
i realize that i should show the other schools being discussed in that post and will amend it. it was intended to be a conference comparison from the texas viewpoint with the big 12 and sec thrown in for perspective, but adding the other teams extends it to be comprehensive of the larger question.
davey has posited that if three teams are added and we assume reality with respect to notre dame, the three should be missouri, nebraska, and pitt. here are the conference summaries as is and with that change:
Big Ten
avg 50.2
std dev 19.5
Northwestern . 12
Michigan .. . . . 27
Wisconsin .. . . 39
Illinois . . . . . . 39
Penn State .. . 47
Ohio State . . . 53
Minnesota .. . . 61
Purdue .. . . . . 61
Michigan St .. . 71
Iowa . . . . . . . 71
Indiana .. . . . . 71
Big Ten
avg 57.6
std dev 24.6
Northwestern 12
Michigan 27
Wisconsin 39
Illinois 39
Penn State 47
Ohio State 53
Pittsburgh 56
Minnesota 61
Purdue 61
Michigan St 71
Iowa 71
Indiana 71
Nebraska 96
Missouri 102
pitt certainly seems like a good fit. if you add three, i'd like it to be pitt and texas, but i'm having trouble coming up with a third. even with their athletic distress, i think notre dame would be ideal if all else was good. the success right now of pitt and texas would offset the struggles of the domers, and the prospect of their righting their ship would be enough in the eyes of the public to see the addition of the three schools in a very positive light. certainly those three additions would be a mega shot in the arm for market positioning.
syracuse would pass muster academically and their basketball program would be a fine addition. we all realize that football is the key, though, and i'd like a stronger program there. i also question how much coverage they would add. as fans, we don't think all that much about marketability and concentrate on issues like academics, reputation, and athletic competence, but i am told that the guys who handle the rudders of the programs pay very much attention to market share. money is a huge issue today and promises to be of much greater significance in the future.
right now rutgers looks like a good possibility. i don't think we can assume any huge market-share effect and the athletic program doesn't improve the perceived strength of the conference. moreover, there is no long history of athletic excellence that might see a resurgence. a good possibility, but not ideal.
any or all three of pitt, syracuse, and rutgers would improve jo-pa's dyspepsia, i suppose.
what about the domers? i mentioned them just now. what if they swallowed a little of their pride and came in? in my reading here, i've not seen much mention of cultural fit. how would notre dame fit in as a conference partner? all of us who know the feeling of great success from time to time have high opinions of ourselves and our programs, but i don't think any of us are prepared for the grandiose self-assessment the average domer possesses. and it is so out-of-bed with the reality of that program the past few years that i highly suspect they aren't a good fit anywhere but on a pedestal in the basement.
that brings up the subject of texas and cultural fit in the big ten. there is a lot of difference in the cultures of the southwest with respect to the upper midwest and east of there. my great suspicion is that many of the schools in the southwest would not work in the big ten. i've read here repeatedly, though, that buckeyes who have shared time with horns have come away with positive impressions, and i think that is indicative of a liitle bit broader outlook in the longhorn community than some of the others in the region, and i think that's what is driving many here to see us as a good all 'round fit.
now. the elephant in my thinking is texas a&m. a&m is a good school, but it is not lost on me that that name has not graced these pages. i've lived a good many years alongside them and a good way to pick my blood pressure up is to mention them. we all know the spirit of a tough rivalry, but this is different. on the surface they appear to be almost as good a fit here as texas, at least if you don't pay attention to their recent athletic woes. really, though, their history is that of a doormat. it took a very slimy jackie sherrill and the good services of the fedex guys to put them on the map for a while. worse . . . much worse, they are in horrible fiscal shape. years of mismanagement and paying multiple football head coaches at the same time have put them at the doorstep of bankrupcy. they tried to match texas in facilities and added a huge end zone project to their tackle-box stadium, but they only sell the thing out when somebody like texas comes to town. but much, much worse even than that -- and i'm sure you guys know it, but i just feel the need to get it in print -- is the cultural clash of college station, texas and the big ten. i'm sure you all have heard stories, but it is probably much worse than you can imagine. in my travels around the country the various places i've lived, i've learned to not tell all with respect to the gomers. at some point i lose my audience, so to speak. at some point my listener will decide i am making things up. no way this stuff could be true. some years ago i took my still-young daughter to an aggie game in austin. it so happened that two ags were sitting immediately behind us and they were extremely ugly and obnoxious. openly begging for injury to texas players and the like. trying to goad someone into an ugly encounter. just to our right were two fresh-grad ut young ladies, i gathered, and finally one of them turned on the ags after a particularly nasty comment and blasted them. i nudged the lady and asked her to leave the ags alone. i explained that i had been trying to paint a representative picture of a&m to my daughter but that it was difficult to get it across and not seem histrionic. these two guys, i told her, were doing a great job. the two gals hooted in laughter, and you never saw two nicer representatives in your life as those two clowns the rest of the game. i applaud your not mentioning them.
well, anyway, here i'm showing the big ten with texas and pitt. nothing but good from this vantage:
Big Ten
avg 50.4
std dev 17.9
Northwestern . 12
Michigan ....... 27
Wisconsin 39
Illinois 39
Penn State 47
Texas 47
Ohio State 53
Pittsburgh 56
Minnesota 61
Purdue 61
Michigan St 71
Iowa 71
Indiana 71
