BIG XII > B1G

[drednot57]

Yes the "Big"Ten (14) Conference is playing "little" ball barely keeping up with the MAC, MWC, C-USA, etc., much less any of the other "Power Five" conferences. I think it's obvious the "B1G" is the the weakest of the P5, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Probably this conference will be the one left out of the BCS playoff.

 

[jdoggivjc]

I don't understand, with that much money and fan support, how all the teams could be so terrible.

Because all the money and fan support doesn't change the Big 10's primary recruiting pool - the north and east. The talent in this pool doesn't compare to the talent in the deep south and Pacific, and the SEC, Big 12, and Pac 12 own these pools.

It's also why I think Mike Valenti (a guy who does sports talk in Detroit) is absolutely full of ****. He is 100% convinced both Texas and Oklahoma will be playing in the Big 10 within the next 10 years (likely the next 5), because they pay in the Big 10 is much better than the pay in the Big 12. Bull. ****. Maybe the pay is better in the Big 10, but Texas and Oklahoma can play in whichever conference they choose. Both of these schools refuse to play in Ames in November if they can help it because they don't want to play in cold weather. If either school became dissatisfied with the Big 12, why would either team choose to play up north when they would get a similar deal from the ACC, SEC, or Pac 12? But then, the guy is a Michigan St and Big 10 shill, and he also works in an industry where everyone has a voice that comes straight from their ***, so he can say what he will.

 

[CycloneErik]

The Big 10 is so, so bad. It's amazing how bad they are. Ohio State got killed by VT last week. VT was getting killed by some Carolina school today (not sure if they lost or not). Purdue lost to some terrible team last week and now is holding their own with ND who killed Michigan. Northwestern lost twice. Iowa should have two losses.

We'd win a lot of games with a Big 10 schedule.

The Big 10 is awful, but we wouldn't win more games, because we'd be stuck recruiting Big 10 talent. Being in that conference drags down everyone, even Ohio State (as far as they can be dragged down).

 

[HFCS]

1) SEC
2) Pac-12

3) Big 12


4) ACC




5) Big Ten
6) American

I mostly agree but Pac 12 and Big 12 more of a draw with a space behind the SEC. Sagarin has 1 Pac division above Big 12 and one below using first three weeks of this year and last 3 games of last year.

There's also not much diff, if any between American and MWC. Unless the Big Ten cleans up on these last non-conf games computers are going to have the MWC and American teams ranked very comparably with Big Ten teams in terms of ranking and SOS, both conferences have a higher win % against the power five.

 

[CyCrazy]

Because all the money and fan support doesn't change the Big 10's primary recruiting pool - the north and east. The talent in this pool doesn't compare to the talent in the deep south and Pacific, and the SEC, Big 12, and Pac 12 own these pools.

It's also why I think Mike Valenti (a guy who does sports talk in Detroit) is absolutely full of ****. He is 100% convinced both Texas and Oklahoma will be playing in the Big 10 within the next 10 years (likely the next 5), because they pay in the Big 10 is much better than the pay in the Big 12. Bull. ****. Maybe the pay is better in the Big 10, but Texas and Oklahoma can play in whichever conference they choose. Both of these schools refuse to play in Ames in November if they can help it because they don't want to play in cold weather. If either school became dissatisfied with the Big 12, why would either team choose to play up north when they would get a similar deal from the ACC, SEC, or Pac 12? But then, the guy is a Michigan St and Big 10 shill, and he also works in an industry where everyone has a voice that comes straight from their ***, so he can say what he will.

Ya thats funny. UT/OU are not going to the BIG suck in my lifetime or my kids lifetime.

 

[jbhtexas]

Because all the money and fan support doesn't change the Big 10's primary recruiting pool - the north and east. The talent in this pool doesn't compare to the talent in the deep south and Pacific, and the SEC, Big 12, and Pac 12 own these pools.

It's also why I think Mike Valenti (a guy who does sports talk in Detroit) is absolutely full of ****. He is 100% convinced both Texas and Oklahoma will be playing in the Big 10 within the next 10 years (likely the next 5), because they pay in the Big 10 is much better than the pay in the Big 12. Bull. ****. Maybe the pay is better in the Big 10, but Texas and Oklahoma can play in whichever conference they choose. Both of these schools refuse to play in Ames in November if they can help it because they don't want to play in cold weather. If either school became dissatisfied with the Big 12, why would either team choose to play up north when they would get a similar deal from the ACC, SEC, or Pac 12? But then, the guy is a Michigan St and Big 10 shill, and he also works in an industry where everyone has a voice that comes straight from their ***, so he can say what he will.

Your first paragraph is dead on. And your first paragraph is also the reason that Delaney will be doing everything in his power, above board or below board, to somehow expand the Big Ten footprint into those talent pools. The only plays he really has left are to sow discord in existing conferences (the Big 12 would be a likely target), or somehow start pushing the 16-team superconferences and hope for some kind of north-south oriented geographic realignment. The problem with the Big Ten now, as you alluded to, is that it is an east-west oriented conference in the northern part of the country. I won't be a bit surprised to hear more of the talk described in your second paragraph coming from various outlets within Big Ten footprint.

For all those posters here who would love to see ISU in the Big Ten...take that Iowa team you saw yesterday, imagine a team significantly worse than that, and that would be ISU FB 5-10 years after joining the Big Ten with its existing geographic footprint. If a large number of long-time established Big Ten members can't recruit their footprint any better than they are now, ISU doesn't stand a chance establishing any kind of recruiting base in that footprint. Nebraska found out what happens to the TX pipeline when you don't play against TX teams. They went from regularly having 20-30 TX kids on their roster to 12 this year.

 

[CyCloned]

The Big 10 is exactly where they want to be. They have added Rutgers and Maryland to water down the football product even further. Now all they have to do is play a 10 game conference schedule so they don't have to play any Big 5 games at all, and then no one will realize how bad they are because a marginally good team or two will rise from the ashes and win 10-11 games.

 

[CarolinaCy]

The Big 10 is awful, but we wouldn't win more games, because we'd be stuck recruiting Big 10 talent. Being in that conference drags down everyone, even Ohio State (as far as they can be dragged down).

Exactly. Nebraska went from losing 4 games per year in the Big 12 to losing 4 games per year in the Big 10.

 

[norcalcy]

Your first paragraph is dead on. And your first paragraph is also the reason that Delaney will be doing everything in his power, above board or below board, to somehow expand the Big Ten footprint into those talent pools. The only plays he really has left are to sow discord in existing conferences (the Big 12 would be a likely target), or somehow start pushing the 16-team superconferences and hope for some kind of north-south oriented geographic realignment. The problem with the Big Ten now, as you alluded to, is that it is an east-west oriented conference in the northern part of the country. I won't be a bit surprised to hear more of the talk described in your second paragraph coming from various outlets within Big Ten footprint.

For all those posters here who would love to see ISU in the Big Ten...take that Iowa team you saw yesterday, imagine a team significantly worse than that, and that would be ISU FB 5-10 years after joining the Big Ten with its existing geographic footprint. If a large number of long-time established Big Ten members can't recruit their footprint any better than they are now, ISU doesn't stand a chance establishing any kind of recruiting base in that footprint. Nebraska found out what happens to the TX pipeline when you don't play against TX teams. They went from regularly having 20-30 TX kids on their roster to 12 this year.

I don't think a lot of people realize just how well ISU came out of the whole re-alignment mess. Here we are in a 10 team league with real recruiting credibility in Texas and an even cut of TV money to boot. Having Nebraska and Iowa landlocked in that dead league is just amazing considering how they were looking down their noses at us a few years ago. Meanwhile, we're still part of a conference that's still perceived to be among the top 3 (we'll see it that's the case by year end) of the Power 5. That's why there has to be urgency to take advantage of this once in a lifetime opportunity to become relevant in football and rise up the FBS food chain. All we have to do is be better than 4-5 other Big XII teams and stop losing to ******* FCS teams at home.... so close, but yet so far away.

 

[ShopTalk]

Every Knebraska fan I talk to hates the big 10 and wants back in.

Umm, no. Not worthy. Couldn't take losing to ISU, so traded in for losing to Northwestern, Iowa and Minnesota. Wussies.

 

[ShopTalk]

The worn out batteries in Zach McCabe's girlfriend's vibrator are actually greater than the BiG1G

Who is Zach McCabe and why do you care about his girlfriends' vibrator? And how do you know so much about it?:wideeyed:

 

[cyrocksmypants]

In other breaking news, the American colonies have announced their independence from Britain.

 

[jdoggivjc]

For all those posters here who would love to see ISU in the Big Ten...take that Iowa team you saw yesterday, imagine a team significantly worse than that, and that would be ISU FB 5-10 years after joining the Big Ten with its existing geographic footprint. If a large number of long-time established Big Ten members can't recruit their footprint any better than they are now, ISU doesn't stand a chance establishing any kind of recruiting base in that footprint. Nebraska found out what happens to the TX pipeline when you don't play against TX teams. They went from regularly having 20-30 TX kids on their roster to 12 this year.

If ISU's only choices were joining the Big 10 or getting left out entirely from the 64-team Power 4 conferences (a likely scenario), sign me up for the football program dying a slow death in the Big 10 Conference. At least ISU basketball would do very well in the Big 10 because Hoiberg's model of recruiting and play transitions well to there.

 

[jdoggivjc]

I don't think a lot of people realize just how well ISU came out of the whole re-alignment mess. Here we are in a 10 team league with real recruiting credibility in Texas and an even cut of TV money to boot. Having Nebraska and Iowa landlocked in that dead league is just amazing considering how they were looking down their noses at us a few years ago. Meanwhile, we're still part of a conference that's still perceived to be among the top 3 (we'll see it that's the case by year end) of the Power 5. That's why there has to be urgency to take advantage of this once in a lifetime opportunity to become relevant in football and rise up the FBS food chain. All we have to do is be better than 4-5 other Big XII teams and stop losing to ******* FCS teams at home.... so close, but yet so far away.

Nebraska and Iowa aren't landlocked; they're western outposts of the Big 10 in the same vein as Iowa State is a northern outpost of the Big 12 - separated from the major population centers of the Big 10 Conference. And as the conference further expands along the Atlantic, the more separated and irrelevant they become.

 

[KnappShack]

The Big 10 is a mid major with a good TV Network

 

[jdoggivjc]

Iowa fans need to realize just how lucky they are that the Big 10 is (appears to be) a stable conference not in danger of imploding. If the conferences were to decide to blow up and reset to create 16-team Power 4, Iowa might be on the outside looking in right along with ISU.

 

[norcalcy]

Nebraska and Iowa aren't landlocked; they're western outposts of the Big 10 in the same vein as Iowa State is a northern outpost of the Big 12 - separated from the major population centers of the Big 10 Conference. And as the conference further expands along the Atlantic, the more separated and irrelevant they become.

ISU is not landlocked in the same way those two are because we have a verified connection to that wonderful, fertile recruiting area called Texas. If you're Texas talent and UT, aTm, Tech, Baylor and TCU don't want you, come play for us and show them why they were wrong. That's very relevant to Texas kids who get two trips back there every year, plus a trip to OK, in spite of going to that northern outpost called Ames. Beats the hell out of playing in College Park or Piscataway. Folks might see you on ESPN, but that's about it.

 

[Wesley]

Because all the money and fan support doesn't change the Big 10's primary recruiting pool - the north and east. The talent in this pool doesn't compare to the talent in the deep south and Pacific, and the SEC, Big 12, and Pac 12 own these pools.

It's also why I think Mike Valenti (a guy who does sports talk in Detroit) is absolutely full of ****. He is 100% convinced both Texas and Oklahoma will be playing in the Big 10 within the next 10 years (likely the next 5), because they pay in the Big 10 is much better than the pay in the Big 12. Bull. ****. Maybe the pay is better in the Big 10, but Texas and Oklahoma can play in whichever conference they choose. Both of these schools refuse to play in Ames in November if they can help it because they don't want to play in cold weather. If either school became dissatisfied with the Big 12, why would either team choose to play up north when they would get a similar deal from the ACC, SEC, or Pac 12? But then, the guy is a Michigan St and Big 10 shill, and he also works in an industry where everyone has a voice that comes straight from their ***, so he can say what he will.

BIG wants 16 teams?

 

[demoncore1031]

Only TWO of the fourteen Big Ten teams are undefeated after week 3. I hope they keep losing to MAC teams.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

ISU is not landlocked in the same way those two are because we have a verified connection to that wonderful, fertile recruiting area called Texas. If you're Texas talent and UT, aTm, Tech, Baylor and TCU don't want you, come play for us and show them why they were wrong. That's very relevant to Texas kids who get two trips back there every year, plus a trip to OK, in spite of going to that northern outpost called Ames. Beats the hell out of playing in College Park or Piscataway. Folks might see you on ESPN, but that's about it.

That is how it could be, but in reality our recruiting is not there yet. Imo the decrease in competition would make up for any loss in recruiting pull we may have on 3rd and 4th tier Texas kids. Not being in a southern based conference hurts the top programs that are accustom to getting superior talent, and thus helps those recruiting at our level. BTW, Iowa has gotten equal players (in terms of talent) from Texas as ISU- being a fraud pays.

How do we get so many Florida kids?