Hey Im just glad no one in here ever used the argument #15 ranked Michigan is clearly better than #16 ranked Iowa State this year because they are ranked higher. Caught me with my pants down there.
Big 12 vs Big Ten Debate
- Thread starter ForeverIowan
- Start date
Yeah lost leavitt to ASU, lost best DL to Oregon who went in the first round, best WR is now a star at Bama and lost all the depth.
New AD and new coach has people back on board. Still a huge rebuilding year but I really like what smith has done with his time here. Had to fully rebuild the culture that fell apart with Tucker.
If ISU caught Michigan in the first half of the season I’d give the slight edge to ISU at a neutral site.
Michigan State is one of those teams who might have the same record as last year on paper but are dramatically better talentwise.
That schedule is a beast.
Last years schedule was worse, OSU, Oregon, Indiana, Illinois, Michaign, even having to go on the road early to BC (not a good team but hard for a brand new squad)
This year cautiously optimistic for 7-8 wins. Unless Sparty loses next week and then you’re right on the record part
Every year? No. This whole thing exists entirely on vibes. It's merely guaranteed until someone decides to go about change, yet again.
I'm pretty sure if everyone agreed to a 4-4-2-2 autobid model and signed important papers documenting and mandating said model for XX number of years, it would happen for XX number of years.
You really think monied powers that be wouldn't find their way out of anything they desire? It's not designed to be equitable.
Why would they want to? They'd be guaranteed twice as many spots at minimum, with a realistic chance at one more from year to year. If they wanted something other than the 4-4-2-2 model they'd just opt for the 5+11 model, which IMO would be bad news for the Big 12 and ACC.
It's not the powers behind the ACC and Big 12 who would be advocating to get out of any scenario. It would be the P2 wanting to get a continually larger share. They won't agree to any setup that doesn't have backdoor outs for them to bail or re-negotiate at minimum.
I was talking about the P2 powers that be. If they really want a consistently larger share, they'll just go with the 5+11 model.
Mich St fans I know are putting a lot of emphasis on the BC game at East Lansing this week. Both second year coaches, both teams picked near bottom of their conferences.
But Smith has a lot more resources to work with than O’Brien.
But Smith has a lot more resources to work with than O’Brien.
The issue with the P2 is they want to guarantee their own seats while not guaranteeing anything else.
This is just one example, but one I highly doubt we never hear the end of again. Those "two auto bids" for the new FCS leagues won't be guaranteed to start with, then it just takes a little gamesmanship from the people at the table to get a bigger share awarded to P2 anyway.
The perception is the B12 is a weaker league, does it really matter that we just admit what many think and take the guaranteed two spots? Here we are debating about how strong the SEC and B10 are if you take out the top 4 teams in the conference, when that is exactly the problem the B12 has, we do not have any of those teams. You take Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Oregon out of the B10, and they still have USC, Wisconsin, and other schools to rise up and make the playoff as that 4th team, much like Indiana did last seasons. The SEC is much the same way, sure in both conferences the bottom half is not any stronger than most B12 teams, but that is why they are at the bottom of that conference.
The first year of the playoff, Baylor was ranked #3, TCU was #5 I believe, both behind Ohio State, but in the playoff ranking, Ohio State jumped both of them with the magical 13th data point. Never heard from before or since, but we still have people thinking that if we take the 5 + 11 the B12 will somehow get in 3 teams every now and then. If we could not even get one team in that first year of the playoff we are never getting 3 teams in unless they are all ranked in the top 5. It's not happening, the powers that be do not care about the B12, because they are making money off the B10 and SEC and will make more by getting those teams into the playoff. Take the two guaranteed spots every year and be done with it.
And it's not like with the 2 autobid model it means the Big 12/ACC can't get 3 in either. It just means 2 are automatically in. I think you'd have just as good a chance at 3 bids in either model. Like you said, probably not great odds because they're going to want to load up on SEC/B1G teams.
which is crazy because they got put in one of the worst divisions in the history of major CFB and could've at least made the Big Ten Championship game yearly and they only made it once....and got crushed by a Wisconsin team, who was only in Indy by default because Ohio State and Penn State had postseason bans
You are rewriting history there, in the B12 North, which every EIU fan states was horrible they finished 3,2, 1st and 5th fired their coach and then he tied for 1st twice and won it outright once. But in the B10 West they finished. 3,1,2,2. It was only after Riley came in did they start to drop. Their greed and arrogance did them in. Not moving to the B10.
But now with QB Dampier and OC Jason Beck coming over from New Mexico their offense looks pretty impressive.
I’d say Utah is the favorite.
Eight is enough. Regardless of the size of the field, there will always be a narrow gap between Last One In and First One Out. You want in? Win your conference or do something nearly as impressive in the regular season.
They played in the Big 12 championship game their final 2 years in the conference (3 of their final 5 years), losing 23-20 to Oklahoma their final season. That doesn't seem like a program that had tanked. They then played in the B1G championship game their second season in, losing 70-31 to Wisconsin.
