• 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!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

The Big Ten Is Irrelevant - Again

OU & Josh Heupel did win a title 15 years ago. Since then OU has been primarily a laughing stock in big games.
Ah, yes. My bad. Forgot about that. But yeah, even when OU was on a run of incredible big game failures, they weren't lampooned in the media on nearly the same level as B1G programs. Take away that win over bammer, and OU was arguably the biggest underachiever in the country...behind maybe only Texas.
 
Upvote 0
I would dispute your conclusion, @LordJeffBuck where you say since 1961 as it concerns the SEC. While Alabama was indeed in the SEC, them winning all the titles for the conference until UGA in 82 doesn't really show a power shift to the SEC, it shows a dominant program in what may otherwise have been a crap conference (to say, the same crap conference the B1G is at the moment).

You also have 3 programs, Alabama, Miami (Shitty BigLeast Conf) and FSU (Shitty ACC Conf) responsible for the bulk of the "deep south" Fact is, SEC dominance has been a recent invention using that data. I'd agree that the shift began in 1996 or.. maybe even 92 (I think that was Bama's title year). But, 1961 seems a stretch to me.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
In short, I think it's the SEC and everybody else jockying for 2nd place.
There should be no jockeying for second place.

The Big Ten has four of the most storied programs in the history of college football - Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Penn State - plus two very solid programs in Wisconsin and Michigan State. If those six programs played up to their standards, then most pundits would overlook the fact that half the conference is complete garbage.
 
Upvote 0
Interesting data posted by LJB, but note that it also correlates with population shifts, loss of industry -

But I think it also has a good deal to do with culture. As early as the 1930s school administrators in the east and midwest began to put limits on the excesses of sports programs. It is still reflected in the fact that the Big Ten and the Pac 12 are headed by the presidents of the member schools, not the ADs. This is distinctly different from the SEC. though it's not stated, you can believe that some of the practices enjoyed by SEC schools, over-signing, coaches' pay, lower entrance requirements, are a result of this difference in control and philosophy. And since LJB chose to use 1961 - can you just imagine a faculty in the SEC voting to refuse a bowl bid - and then sticking to that decision? No, the culture on those campuses simply would not let such a decision stand.

Frpm Wiki:
Academics & Committee on Institutional Cooperation[edit]
Main article: Committee on Institutional Cooperation
The Big Ten Conference is known for its commitment to academic excellence as well as its proud athletic tradition. Eleven of the thirteen public schools in the Big Ten (Purdue and Nebraska excepted) are considered "Public Ivies".[86] Each Big Ten institution (Nebraska excepted) is a member of the American Association of Universities and is ranked in the US News & World Report top-100 and the Times Higher Education top-200.[87] Nebraska joined the AAU in 1909 but was removed in April 2011 when the AAU disallowed University of Nebraska Medical Center data points to be included in the AAU formula and began to decrease the weight given to agricultural research. Commissioner Jim Delany stated that Nebraska's removal from the AAU would have no bearing upon their Big Ten membership. Nebraska does, however, lead the NCAA with a record of 314 Academic All-Americans (followed by Notre Dame with 221).[88][89] Currently, no Division I conference is comprised exclusively of AAU members. However, the University Athletic Association, a Division III conference is composed of entirely AAU members.

All Big Ten members are, along with charter member the University of Chicago which withdrew from the conference in 1946, part of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC), an academic consortium which allows students at Big Ten institutions to take distance courses at other participating institutions.[90] Students at participating schools are also allowed "in-house" viewing privileges at other participating schools' libraries.[91] The CIC also employs collective purchasing, which has saved member institutions $19 million to date.[92]

In short, the Big Ten was created as much for academic benefit as for athletics and that is reflected in how it is managed at the top. Compare that with the SEC. Note first that the SEC was formed FOR athletics and that a focus on Academics does not come about until 2002. Note also the sponsorship of ESPN - a payoff for better control of the product they need for air time?

Per Wiki: Under the leadership of Michael F. Adams the then President of the University of Georgia and chair of SEC Presidents and Chancellors, the member institutions of the Southeastern Conference joined forces in 2005 to form the SEC Academic Consortium (SECAC), a collaborative endeavor designed to promote research, scholarship, and achievement amongst the universities.[15]

In 2011, the SEC Academic Consortium was relocated to the SEC headquarters in Birmingham, Alabama, from its original home on the campus of the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, Arkansas and was renamed SECU. The SECU rebranded its mission to better serve as a means through which the collaborative academic endeavors and achievements of Southeastern Conference universities would be promoted and advanced. The SECU's goals included highlighting the endeavors and achievements of SEC faculty, students and its universities; advancing the academic reputation of SEC universities; identifying and preparing future leaders for high-level service in academia; increasing the amount and type of study abroad opportunities available for students; and providing opportunities for collaboration among SEC university personnel.[16][17] The Big Ten Conference has a similar program called the Committee on Institutional Cooperation.
The SEC Symposium component of SECU was crafted by Vanderbilt University Chancellor Nicholas S. Zeppos, who at the time was the Vice President of the SEC Executive Committee and liaison to SECU.[18] In an interview with Dr. Zeppos about the formation of the SECU he noted, “that the member institutions of the Southeastern Conference are committed to a shared mission of fostering research, scholarship, and achievement. The SEC Symposium represents a platform to connect, collaborate and promote a productive dialogue that will span disciplinary and institutional boundaries and allow us to work together for the betterment of society.”[19]
The SEC Academic Network was created in 2009 in partnership with ESPN. The SEC Academic Network was an online library of institutionally produced videos featuring academic initiatives and stories from all Southeastern Conference institutions. The SEC Academic Network was officially merged into the SECU operation.[20]
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I would dispute your conclusion, @LordJeffBuck where you say since 1961 as it concerns the SEC. While Alabama was indeed in the SEC, them winning all the titles for the conference until UGA in 82 doesn't really show a power shift to the SEC, it shows a dominant program in what may otherwise have been a crap conference (to say, the same crap conference the B1G is at the moment).

You also have 3 programs, Alabama, Miami ([Mark May]ty BigLeast Conf) and FSU ([Mark May]ty ACC Conf) responsible for the bulk of the "deep south" Fact is, SEC dominance has been a recent invention using that data. I'd agree that the shift began in 1996 or.. maybe even 92 (I think that was Bama's title year). But, 1961 seems a stretch to me.
This is a very solid point. I don't really remember Florida being good until Spurrier took over as coach. Most of the other SEC programs were kind of middling in my opinion. Which is why, when Florida got their chance to play for the NC, Nebraska smoked them.
 
Upvote 0
This is a very solid point. I don't really remember Florida being good until Spurrier took over as coach. Most of the other SEC programs were kind of middling in my opinion. Which is why, when Florida got their chance to play for the NC, Nebraska smoked them.
I went to Stassen to be sure, but you're generally correct regarding Florida. They were winless as recently as 1979 (OK, not that "recent" now), would throw together the occasional 1 or 2 loss season, but was generally 7-5/8-4ish.
 
Upvote 0
There should be no jockeying for second place.

The Big Ten has four of the most storied programs in the history of college football - Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Penn State - plus two very solid programs in Wisconsin and Michigan State. If those six programs played up to their standards, then most pundits would overlook the fact that half the conference is complete garbage.
Yup. Just look at the pass Mississippi State, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, etc. get because of the success at the top of the conference.
 
Upvote 0
There should be no jockeying for second place.

The Big Ten has four of the most storied programs in the history of college football - Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Penn State - plus two very solid programs in Wisconsin and Michigan State. If those six programs played up to their standards, then most pundits would overlook the fact that half the conference is complete garbage.
No argument from me. There's no reason tOSU, scUM, and Penn State shouldn't be consistently competitive on the national stage. However, I think Nebraska is a different story. They made their bones running a particular system that is now extinct on the national level. They have a huge recruiting disadvantage given their location. Not to mention, today's recruits weren't even alive or were in diapers when Dr. Tom was winning titles and fielding maybe the most dominant team in CFB history. I think 9-4 Bo Pelini is their ceiling. Today, it's all about recruiting...or at least 75%. Southern schools simply have a HUGE advantage there, and that's not going to change. tOSU recruits on that level. Franklin might get there. scUM has recruited just fine, but they have a dullard leading their program.
 
Upvote 0
I conceded long ago that the bottom half (or 80%) will be permanently down (or close to it). I see OSU & UM spending huge bucks on coaching, recruiting and facilities and they're still trying to find their way.

I agree with the principle of B1G schools sitting on their gold but I'm not sure if the alternative will pay the dividends that we hope it will.
Well that's a bleak picture then. Maybe true, but bleak.
 
Upvote 0
I would dispute your conclusion, @LordJeffBuck where you say since 1961 as it concerns the SEC. While Alabama was indeed in the SEC, them winning all the titles for the conference until UGA in 82 doesn't really show a power shift to the SEC, it shows a dominant program in what may otherwise have been a crap conference (to say, the same crap conference the B1G is at the moment).

You also have 3 programs, Alabama, Miami ([Mark May]ty BigLeast Conf) and FSU ([Mark May]ty ACC Conf) responsible for the bulk of the "deep south" Fact is, SEC dominance has been a recent invention using that data. I'd agree that the shift began in 1996 or.. maybe even 92 (I think that was Bama's title year). But, 1961 seems a stretch to me.
I don't think the SEC dominance, and associated media fellating began until after the game that shall not be mentioned. Up until 2006, the SEC was seen as a strong conference, but not the dominant entity in CFB. Hell, prior to the game that shall not be mentioned, pundits questioned whether UF belonged in that game and expected them to get steamrolled by "unstoppable" Ohio State.
 
Upvote 0
I don't think the SEC dominance, and associated media fellating began until after the game that shall not be mentioned. Up until 2006, the SEC was seen as a strong conference, but not the dominant entity in CFB. Hell, prior to the game that shall not be mentioned, pundits questioned whether UF belonged in that game and expected them to get steamrolled by "unstoppable" Ohio State.
I agree, actually. I was just saying the earliest I date I'd be inclined to accept for the beginning of the power shift would be 1996, or perhaps 92 (though, that's - again in my opinion - really being generous)
 
Upvote 0
I don't think the SEC dominance, and associated media fellating began until after the game that shall not be mentioned. Up until 2006, the SEC was seen as a strong conference, but not the dominant entity in CFB. Hell, prior to the game that shall not be mentioned, pundits questioned whether UF belonged in that game and expected them to get steamrolled by "unstoppable" Ohio State.
Which was also the final game before the BTN launched. Now you can question why they would hype up OSU/UM that much with an impending network squabble. Then again they made kazillions on the eyeballs watching that debate (especially the angry ones from the SEC, nothing gets ratings like anger), even more on the first matchup and would have exploded the nielsen boxes across america if the rematch took place for all the marbles.

Conversely, maybe they still thought Disney's dare to Delaney would work out well for them.

OSU & the B1G deserve plenty of ridicule. So have others during that span, but there are billions standing in the way of that, and the consequences of that bias are significant.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I went to Stassen to be sure, but you're generally correct regarding Florida. They were winless as recently as 1979 (OK, not that "recent" now), would throw together the occasional 1 or 2 loss season, but was generally 7-5/8-4ish.
True. That said, Clemson has as many national titles since 1970 as TTUN. And Auburn has as many as we do since that same timespan. The shift in power is real- not a media creation.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top