Reply With Quote
The Big Ten is out manned in every bowl game. Wheras their #3 plays SEC #2, Northwesten, our 5th played Mizzou the Big 12 4th
something you might want to look into
I wouldn't start beating your chest, the Big 12 doesn't look so great either
I mean, if the Big Twelve sucks a fourth as much as TShlong says it does, then the Big 10 must be the biggest joke since Dennis Franchione.
The Big Ten is out manned in every bowl game. Wheras their #3 plays SEC #2, Northwesten, our 5th played Mizzou the Big 12 4th
something you might want to look into
I wouldn't start beating your chest, the Big 12 doesn't look so great either
Maybe if they didn't take a week off while everyone else is playing conf. championship ball, they'd be better prepared.
or maybe if they were evenly matched.
It's funny how Ohio State wins 4 BCS Bowls in a row, but they only talk about the Big Tens last 6 so it makes their stat look good.
i htink you meant to say osu has LOST three bcs games in a row. That's pretty good!
And if the big 12 is so ty as you say, should'nt the big 12 3rd team play teh big 11 4th team?
As someone who has been watching the Big Ten for the past decade, I can say that it is the biggest joke since Dennis Franchione.
they won the 99 Sugar, 02 Fiesta, 03 Fiesta and 05 Fiestai htink you meant to say osu has LOST three bcs games in a row. That's pretty good!
And if the big 12 is so ty as you say, should'nt the big 12 3rd team play teh big 11 4th team?
yeah i knew that. that's not in a row. in a row is year to year to year to year. or i guess it co uld be wihtout losing one in between.
did they lose any BCS Games between the ones I mentioned? were they 4-0 at one point?
The Big 10 is down because the level of coaching in the conference is down. Tressell is probably the best coach in the Big 10 (but his assistants, esp. on offense and on the o-line, are terrible.) Dantonio has done fairly well so far. Ferentz is decent but he's stuck at a second-rate Iowa program. Zook is completely clueless on every level other than recruiting. Beilema isn't sustaining what Alvarez built. Tiller was over the hill. Paterno is 200 years old. RichRod is a mid-major coach at a major school.
The conference needs a lot of new, fresh blood at the coaching level.
BTW, Thunder Dan, cannot concur on the matchups excuse. When the Big 10 was up in the late '90s and early '00s, the conference was getting the better of those games, regardless of how mismatched they were on paper. The year Ohio State won the MNC (2002), the Big 10 went 5-2 in bowl games, with OSU, Wisconsin (Alamo), and Purdue (Sun) all winning over higher-rated opponents. If the league is good enough and deep enough, the matchups shouldn't matter.
I know they are capable of doing it, but if it were the SEC going 1-6 you would hear that all day long about how they are forced to play better teams
Let's hold off with the Rich Rodriguez blasts. Yes, the Wolverines sucked last year. Give him at least another couple years with his own recruits. And, you can say what you want about his coaching, but that coaching did pretty well in West Virginia in a BCS conference. Rodriguez might end up being a bad coach for the Big Ten. Who knows? But, give him sometime to build his own program. He came into a tough situation in that his system is entirely different from the previous coaching staff, not all the players already in the program fit his system, several players transferred, and he lost basically the whole offense to graduation.
The Big Ten sucks for several reasons. First, it's the most stubborn league in college football. It doesn't like change. It's still living in the 50s when it comes to approach and style. In its very core, it still tries to be a traditional field position, smash mouth football conference. Joe Tiller was a change but Purdue hasn't always gotten the best talent. Jim Tressel and OSU have at least tried to use some more modern schemes and it has been good for them, especially considering the talent they get.Why does the big 10 suck so bad?
The limited scholarships has also hurt the Big Ten. Teams like Michigan and Wisconsin and Penn State (and Notre Dame) used to hog midwest talent every year. Now they can't do it. Ohio State is really the only school that's been able to do it in large part due to their consistent success over the last 7-8 years or so. It has also had a trickle down effect to mid major schools for more parity in college football. Would-be "diamonds in the rough" that could get some of those Big Ten scholarships before aren't getting them and going to MAC schools or other mid major conferences and blossoming there instead of becoming welcomed surprises in a Big Ten school. Again, you've seen it with Notre Dame as well.
And, well, quite frankly because of the above two reasons, the talent isn't coming to the Big Ten like it used to. With the changing culture of college football, and with other exciting programs across the country, high school football players don't always stay in their region anymore. A greater number of Michigan all state caliber high school football players are going to the Floridas and USCs and Oklahomas now. More and more midwest kids are going to the SEC because it's considered the best conference now.
These things haven't affected the SEC as much because the talent is going there. It hasn't affected USC much because Pete Carroll has been outstanding with recruiting, but you can tell that the rest of the PAC 10 has felt the effects, otherwise USC might have gone to the NC game.
With all of that, the Big Ten has been down for the last several years. And, it was certainly down this year. Michigan getting their program together could help. Last year, Michigan did beat Florida in the Capital One (in Florida). And, Ohio State did hang with Texas last night and probably should have won the game. Even though they're not that good top to bottom, the top of the Big Ten can still play with most other "elite" teams. But, there's no doubt that the Big Ten doesn't appear like it can be a powerhouse conference top to bottom for quite a while if ever again.
Maybe I'm prematurely blasting RichRod. But first of all, Michigan should NEVER go 3-9, ever. Secondly, RichRod's offensive style is built for schools that can't get the elite o-line, QB and receiver talent and need an equalizing scheme. Michigan isn't Tulane or West Virginia. They can get the elite recruits up front, behind center, and on the edges. They don't need a gimmick offense to succeed. And I don't think they needed the radical facelift.
Had UM hired a different coach- say, Brian Kelly- and kept Ryan Mallett in the fold, they would have been a decent team this year. I don't think RichRod was the right guy, and I've seen nothing so far to make me change my mind. Maybe he'll get it right. Hopefully he does, because the Big 10 needs a strong Michigan to be a strong league.
Let's not forget that the Big Ten is the only league that plays a pro-style game. I don't know about you, and I don't want to sound like I'm bitter about the loss- because I'm really not, but I couldn't get really excited about the way Texas beat Ohio State last night, and the way Big 12 schools win. I'm not excited about seeing my QB chuck the ball up 60 times a game- I'm just not. I'm also not high on what Florida does, even though it's really entertaining.
This is why I respect USC so much. They don't run a gimmick offense like most of the Big 12 schools, and most of the SEC schools. The reason they stand to get beat each week is because they play a fair game. They don't run a no huddle all game just so the opponent can't subs ute, they don't throw it 60 times a game, and they don't put WR's at QB and Running back like some of the SEC schools do. They line up, and take it right to their opposition and say," our team is better than yours" They play defense, and don't depend on putting up 60 points a game to win style points.
Unfortunately, the gimmicks are what work unless you have premier talent. The Big Ten is out gimmicked in Bowl games by college teams playing their styles. College football is shifting far away from the NFL, and the Big Ten is dragging it's feet because it's against our nature. Illinois, Minnesota, Michigan, and to a lesser extent Ohio State are chasing a trend.
That no huddle bull is legal, but it's for cowards that can't win within the nature of how the game was formed. I'm consistent as this is the reason I think Peyton Manning is a bag.
great post. i think about this sometimes. though, i doubt it will be well received on this board.
Don't be so quick to say the college game is shifting away from the NFL. Ever heard of the "Wildcat"?
I hate the way TTU plays offense but it's within the rules.
yeah because the Big 12 style of beating a team 70-50 is entertaining. But this is the reason why USC and Ohio State are 1 and 2 in NFL prospects every single year. It's the reason why Big Ten QB's make it in the NFL
This is all true when it comes to the Big 10's elite teams like OSU, Michigan and Penn State. But Purdue and Northwestern have been running gimmick offenses for years.
It doesn't last though. The Greatest show on Turf only lasted 2 years, and the Wildcat didn't even make it a season as the Dolphins were rocked by the Ravens. Gimmicks don't last in the NFL like they do in college football
Purdue changed in 2006, after Orton and Brees were gone
Maybe ur right.
All I'm saying is don't blame the inadequacies of the Big 10 (I don't they are that bad) on systems that are around the country in college football. Put some blame on the Coaches and recruiters not bringing in the talent.
Ohio State has more talent on their team than anyone in college football except for maybe Florida and USC. It's not talent, it's the style of play. If it were talent, you would never see a Buckeye drafted, but you will see 3 taken in the top 15 this year and 10 overall.
Right, then that's were the coach gets some of the blame.
Can't disagree. Tressell-Ball worked when Ohio State had 2002's defense and 2002's kicking game. When they don't, there just isn't enough margin for error to play that style, especially against elite opponents. And the OC (Jim Bollman) is completely clueless. He's an o-line coach by trade, and our o-lines have been pretty mediocre ever since JT came on board.
Best of both worlds would be Jim Tressell combined with John Cooper's assistants (Walt Harris, Fred Pagac.) Coop's greatest strength was finding capable assistants and delegating properly to them; JT's greatest weakness is relying on his old Youngstown State cronies and relatives.
why because Tressel plays the way the creators of football intended it to be played? A style that is still played in the NFL for the most part. He plays a style that translates to the pros and it shows because each year he has more players drafted than any other school except USC- who also plays a traditional style game, but has better talent because of their ability to recruit from a larger pool (Ca) and the city and area they are in.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
