-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter LordJeffBuck
- Start date
Yes they did, yet Sparty only slid 4 spots and were in prime position to sneak back into the playoff the whole time. 5 weeks later and they are #6 with at least two guaranteed losses upcoming for the teams ranked above them.
Now from where I'm sitting, that doesn't prove that the league is good if they get in let alone win. It proves they are good. Whether they or the conference are "now", relevant or any other noun, I am still trying to figure out the ground rules for that.
Upvote
0
I don't know, for awhile every year seems like it's a new low and I think "it can only get better"... and every year seems to prove me wrong.
I don't see tangible signs of improvement. Nebraska and Wisconsin remain solid schools that probably belong in the top20-30 region with occasional top-15 success. Minny is back to Glenn Mason decency but can't see them going further. Iowa is floundering in mediocrity and drops games to the likes of LHN bottom-feeder Iowa State. Moreover, all of these teams are 1-dimensional and flawed; not just with their product but in recruiting and coaching it seems. Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, and Indiana are dumpster fires. NW plays like 1 game a year then takes their union break. Indiana does show some signs of progress, if only they could discover how to play defense like the rest of the B1G. Appleby could be a revelation for Purdue, but jury is out for me. scUM and PSU are similarly dumpster fires. And for all I care, they can stay that way.
Maryland and Rutgers look decent, but imo really just add to the logjam of mediocrity starting with Indiana through Northwestern, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Nebraska.
MSU has supplanted their neighbor, which leaves them and Ohio State holding down the fort.
Maybe there is "hope" that PSU rights the ship now that sanctions are ending, and scUM finds a competent replacement for Hoke. But, I'm not betting on either of those. Their recruiting is suffering right now, and I can't imagine that suddenly improving for either.
I've come to terms with the fact that this is an academic conference. That's not meant in a "holier than thou" way; I see it the same way as being a basketball conference. Different priorities. AAU membership is a serious issue for this conference, even after our own members were instrumental in kicking Nebraska out. Being a good fit for CIC research funding is also critical (~8 Billion dollar cash cow for the conference... without knowing the exact numbers, I have a feeling that dwarfs the combined athletic departments.) This isn't empty rhetoric either. ND met a road block due to not being a good fit, and their decision to ultimately throw in with BE and now ACC in non-football sports:
The Rev. Edward A. Malloy, Notre Dame's president, said the university's institutional identity was the deciding factor in the decision to remain independent.
People were recently discussing Syracuse vs. Rutgers - but 'Cuse wasn't a member of AAU by then. Consider Nebraska's chancellor stating they probably wouldn't have been offered if they hadn't been a member at the time:
「"All the Big Ten schools are AAU members," Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman said. "I doubt that our application would've been accepted had we not been a member of the organization.」
It'll continue being a decent football conference so long as at least 1 other school can hold up their end (currently MSU), but this is reality. At this juncture the Big Ten has a bigger name brand beyond merely sports recognition and that trumps other considerations. It doesn't mean schools don't engage in the "football factory", but it's not priority.
This is also why I see Texas as a silver bullet, pipe dream though it is -- and accepting OU (non-AAU) as a part of that compromise. Texas would slot right into CIC as a huge chip, and be very beneficial for both parties.
"Relevance" is all about perception. So if I wanted to quantify it in a peer-review fashion, that would probably involve scraping hundreds of media outlets' articles and transcripts about B1G members in football, searching for specific kinds of keywords to characterize declarative statements as positive/negative, and finally matching them up against how other conferences fare using the same method.
All that said, I think we all know what the media narrative is.
As a conference... not so relevant imo. As individual teams... still relevant (preseason #5, and as you already mentioned MSU is still in the picture)
Upvote
0
They sure get a lot of attention during their football irrelevance though.
If Notre Dame doesn't protect themselves with 3 horrible PI calls against Mr. Waynes last year, Sparty probably plays for the title and I like their chances against a mentally soft Jameis (especially after the banquet tour). If they win, does that make the rest of the conference sexy? I don't think so. I think it makes Sparty respectable and the hyperbole about the conference doesn't hold as much water (like with most of the CFB dynasties before 2006) but it doesn't change how bad the depth is in the league.
ESPN has done a masterful job of crafting and twisting perception that the SEC way is the only way when that simply isn't true or required. The ACC was weak last year. The Pac12 was not that great during Carroll's run and FSU/Miami did not have stellar leagues throughout their dominance. The B12 was okay when Stoops first rose to power. OSU didn't fail in the 2 NC games because the league was weak (frankly the conference greatness hyperbole was in full effect before the UF game), they failed because their defenses were charmin soft and the second NC berth was a least ugly couple contest.
OSU does not need the league to become dominant and winning titles across the board to be well positioned for the playoffs (frankly they're in striking distance without any of that right now). They need one other running mate and one or two other credible decent programs. If Michigan hires a competent coach he will have a lot of talent and potential to turn that around in a heartbeat (and be the other credible program from day 1 and challenge for the top-2 spot shortly afterwards). One of PSU, MSU & UM will be a quality running mate with Urban and the other two will be solid opponents.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
There is no excuse for Penn state or Michigan to not be good to great.
Frankly there are excuses for Wisconsin and Michigan State to be mediocre but they have had some excellent coaching to overcome their limitations (less so this year for bucky) . This far removed from the glory days you can add Nebraska to this group as well.
Illinois and Maryland have the local talent to be in the above group occasionally.
There are tons of excuses for Minnesota, Iowa, Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern, and Rutgers to be bad. Their tradition and or local talent pools are dreadful.
Upvote
0
matcar
Mostly banned
It is probably true that we don't need a stable of good teams to make the National Champoinship party. ...unless we do just that for a couple years and completely shit the bed in the semi finals.
But yes it is likely true that having tOSU and one other decent team is sufficient to make the final four.
I don't supppse that will matter when it comes to perception inside or outside the conference. People outside will have legitimate reason to doubt our qualifications and will reasonably discredit the conference and folks here will be furious about this and claim bias and the pissing contest will continue.
Upvote
0
I think relevancy during the season is not getting beaten in the majority of your premiere non-conference games and that has been the conference's fatal flaw...we continually lose those games. Then the other half of the equation is of course success in bowl games...last year, the B1G more than held their ground there and that is what makes this season so frustrating. On one hand, most of those successful teams graduated a ton of talent, especially us...half of our graduating class is playing pro ball right now and making names for themselves. But the cupboards were far from bare on teams that lost to LSU, Oregon, VT...the list goes on. Now with that said, there haven't been many dumpster fires since Week 2 (save for TTUN) and a strong finish from OSU, MSU, and Nebraska could get us right back in the conversation, particularly if we slip a team into the playoffs.
Then you also look at the rest of the country and I tend to agree with @jwinslow ...I am not really impressed with any one team all that much. The Mississippi schools certainly look good but you know that won't last for long down there. The Pac 12 is far from impressive, the Big 12 is TBD in my books, the ACC is very weak and even FSU has yet to impress, and the SEC looks down to me overall and they will cannibalize each other anyways. Wildcard is if ND is legit but that is one team anyways. Really I think it is more a matter of everyone else failing to impress that even can keep the B1G in the conversation for this year...in past years, we would be lightyears behind the SEC, Pac 12, Big 12, and maybe the ACC in this state of existence. I think depth-wise, we are certainly trailing many conferences in terms of total quality teams. But what remains to be seen is if the upper-echelon of B1G teams (OSU, MSU, and Nebraska) have progressed enough since the beginning of the season to compete with other Top 10 teams...outside those 3, the outlook is pretty bleak to me. scUM is way down, Iowa looks terrible, Northwestern stumbled early, Wiscon's near-win over LSU was a facade, Minnesota may be solid but getting killed by TCU hurt, PSU just lost to scUM, Maryland is nothing to hang your hat on (same with Rutgers), and beyond that you have very bad football with Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue.
From here on out, ideally Nebraska wins out and faces a one-loss MSU/OSU team in the championship game. Then if Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Rutgers can win the games they should win, then there might be a respectable group come December to put into the bowls.
Then you also look at the rest of the country and I tend to agree with @jwinslow ...I am not really impressed with any one team all that much. The Mississippi schools certainly look good but you know that won't last for long down there. The Pac 12 is far from impressive, the Big 12 is TBD in my books, the ACC is very weak and even FSU has yet to impress, and the SEC looks down to me overall and they will cannibalize each other anyways. Wildcard is if ND is legit but that is one team anyways. Really I think it is more a matter of everyone else failing to impress that even can keep the B1G in the conversation for this year...in past years, we would be lightyears behind the SEC, Pac 12, Big 12, and maybe the ACC in this state of existence. I think depth-wise, we are certainly trailing many conferences in terms of total quality teams. But what remains to be seen is if the upper-echelon of B1G teams (OSU, MSU, and Nebraska) have progressed enough since the beginning of the season to compete with other Top 10 teams...outside those 3, the outlook is pretty bleak to me. scUM is way down, Iowa looks terrible, Northwestern stumbled early, Wiscon's near-win over LSU was a facade, Minnesota may be solid but getting killed by TCU hurt, PSU just lost to scUM, Maryland is nothing to hang your hat on (same with Rutgers), and beyond that you have very bad football with Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue.
From here on out, ideally Nebraska wins out and faces a one-loss MSU/OSU team in the championship game. Then if Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Rutgers can win the games they should win, then there might be a respectable group come December to put into the bowls.
Upvote
0
My biggest complaint would be that these schools don't finish games, and they rarely win the 50/50 games. See it every year in bowl season.
Wiscy has got to be the poster child for doing this, but it's everywhere.
Iowa dropping that game to Iowa State. Indiana losing to a MAC school and then beating Missouri the next week. Northwestern just goes completely AWOL for long stretches and only seems interested in conference games. Even MSU is doing it this year, throwing in the towel against Oregon, letting Neb and Purdue back into games that were under control.
The only conference team I've watched in recent years and feel has a "never say die" attitude, is Nebraska. (Not including Ohio State)
Even so I expect somebody to provide an example. But they fought in their bowl game last year and their OOC games this year, even with that McNeese St. blunder... Abdullah never quit.
The entire conference has a case of the Clemsons.
Wiscy has got to be the poster child for doing this, but it's everywhere.
Iowa dropping that game to Iowa State. Indiana losing to a MAC school and then beating Missouri the next week. Northwestern just goes completely AWOL for long stretches and only seems interested in conference games. Even MSU is doing it this year, throwing in the towel against Oregon, letting Neb and Purdue back into games that were under control.
The only conference team I've watched in recent years and feel has a "never say die" attitude, is Nebraska. (Not including Ohio State)
Even so I expect somebody to provide an example. But they fought in their bowl game last year and their OOC games this year, even with that McNeese St. blunder... Abdullah never quit.
The entire conference has a case of the Clemsons.
Upvote
0
buckeyeintn
Legend
Even with the B1G network money I don't think they can come close to the S-E-C salary cap (since they have no cap).
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
What would it take for the national media to change its tune. Note that I'm not saying that the media SHOULD change its tune at the moment, but what if the Big Ten gets left out of the playoffs, and wins all of its bowl games? Will that be enough to convince the nation?
What would it take to convince you that the Big Ten is relevant, is a power, and possibly even better than the SEC? What would it take to convince the national media of the same thing? 1 national championship, plus a strong showing in the bowls in 2014-15? Or would it take longer than that? Back-to-back championships? Three-peat? I really don't know. They have their heads up the SEC's ass so far that it might take 7 championships in 8 years.
What would it take to convince you that the Big Ten is relevant, is a power, and possibly even better than the SEC? What would it take to convince the national media of the same thing? 1 national championship, plus a strong showing in the bowls in 2014-15? Or would it take longer than that? Back-to-back championships? Three-peat? I really don't know. They have their heads up the SEC's ass so far that it might take 7 championships in 8 years.
Upvote
0