What can the Big Ten do to become relevant in football again?

[Kodos]

The Big Ten is so bad right now. I'm hoping it's just a cyclical thing, but I have my doubts. What does the Big Ten need to do to be able to compete with the SEC, PAC-10, etc.? Besides take magical speed-enhancing pills.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Start hosting bowl games in places like Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Ohio, etc.

[Honolulu Blue]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Start hosting bowl games in places like Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Ohio, etc.

HB #2 here.

My evil twin is choosing not to remember the Cherry - er, Motor City Bowl. Probably just as well...

[Kodos]

I don't think the bowl locations are a big enough factor to explain away the crappiness of the Big Ten.

[MJ4H]

Stop losing.

[Dr. Sak]

Start playing more bowl games against the Big East or ACC.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Kill themselves.

WVIAC 4 LYFE

[Matthean]

A mammoth influx of speed.

A conference title game although I don't think that really changes much recently. If Iowa got to be part of it this year instead of a PSU/OSU rehash, it might have been interesting considering Iowa really became a strong team later on.

Some better overall coaching. There are a number of schools who aren't even maxing out what little potential they do have. And yes, I think Joe Pa is actually hurting PSU since nobody ever knows when he's leaving.

But really, the lack of speed across the board is really what is killing the conference. There is enough decent coaches in the conference to kick out enough quality teams to where they alone could make the conference as a whole be deemed respectable. Historically speaking, Purdue and Illinois are the two that seem they could make a move up and push the top tier more if they got it together.

[bignej]

I read this somewhere but can't for the life of me remember where it came from. Basically, The worst thing for the Big10 this bowl season was Ohio State getting picked for a BCS Bowl because it caused every other Bowl eligible team to move "up" a Bowl. Basically Ohio State should have played Georgia, Michigan State should have played South Carolina etc.

They have other issues but lets not forget that they usually have as much OOC success as anyone when it comes to bowls(except OSU in last 2 NC). This is just a down year and OSUs recent championship failings is causing people to blow it way out of proportion.

[albionmoonlight]

Is the lack of speed in the Big Ten a function of the geographic recruiting base of the Big Ten?

If so, does the answer involve extending stronger recruiting pipelines into places like Florida and California, possibly at the expense of recruiting in the Big Ten backyard (assumedly leading to more players from that area going to MAC schools and the like)?

Or does the Big Ten need to focus on developing better feeder high schools in the Midwest? Does high school football need to become the life-or-death event in the Midwest that it is in Georgia, Florida, Texas, etc.?

Or, is the problem not one of the recruiting base? Do as many talented players come from the Big Ten footprint as from the Southeast or California? If so, then you have to look at coaching. And possibly how coaching plays into recruiting.

Rightly or wrongly, when 5* 17 year olds see Urban Meyer putting up 60 points a game and compare that to Tressel's sweater vest or Joe Pa's age, they are going to be attracted to the former. In that regard, the (right or wrong) reputation that the Big Ten is stuck in the last decade may end up becoming self-fullfilling. Whenever recruitment becomes part of success, then perception can quickly become reality.

[DeToxRox]

The Big 10 teams have to just get creative, and most teams moving to the spread is the right start.

Old time football fans might hate it, but look at the teams in the National Title games as of late: spread teams with lots of speed who get the balls their playmakers in space.

The 3 yards and a cloud of dust game just doesn't work. Look at happened to Bama vs Florida and vs Utah, and look at Georiga. The pro style offense just isn't the answer.

Ohio State has yet to learn how to defend the spread because they rarely face it, and when they do, it's vs teams with inferior speed (Northwestern, Minnesota, Michigan this year) so it's easier to defend against, but when they play Florida, or when LSU at times last year spread them out, they just got abused.

With Pryor in at QB, you spread the field, let your D see it, and get used to it.

It's the reason I have faith in Rich Rod turning Michigan back into a power it hasn't been since 97; he's putting speed on the field all over the place and he's going to let the playmakers make plays.

You won't win grinding out 7 minute drives to score a TD, and then watch your opponent do it in 2 minutes, it just doesn't work that way anymore and the Big 10, for whatever reason, still seems to have the Woody and Bo mentality.

As a Big 10 slappy it's time for this clinging on to the past to stop.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Is the lack of speed in the Big Ten a function of the geographic recruiting base of the Big Ten?

If so, does the answer involve extending stronger recruiting pipelines into places like Florida and California, possibly at the expense of recruiting in the Big Ten backyard (assumedly leading to more players from that area going to MAC schools and the like)?

Or does the Big Ten need to focus on developing better feeder high schools in the Midwest? Does high school football need to become the life-or-death event in the Midwest that it is in Georgia, Florida, Texas, etc.?

Or, is the problem not one of the recruiting base? Do as many talented players come from the Big Ten footprint as from the Southeast or California? If so, then you have to look at coaching. And possibly how coaching plays into recruiting.

Rightly or wrongly, when 5* 17 year olds see Urban Meyer putting up 60 points a game and compare that to Tressel's sweater vest or Joe Pa's age, they are going to be attracted to the former. In that regard, the (right or wrong) reputation that the Big Ten is stuck in the last decade may end up becoming self-fullfilling. Whenever recruitment becomes part of success, then perception can quickly become reality.

Michigan and Ohio State can generally get kids from anywhere in the country, but yes, the other teams are generally pooling from the Midwest, and it hurts. PSU has the East locked up well enough, and are able to get kids from all over at times, and MSU does a good job within Michigan and Ohio, but OSU locks up all the elite Ohio talent, and Michigan usually provides 10 legit college players a year, and only 4-5 go to Michigan, and then rest is a free for all for MSU and others. That's why I like what Minnesota does, as well as Illinois. They go for the speedy kids, even if not that highly regarded, because it's what you need and it's the one thing you can't teach .. Though Zook can'te teach period apparently because he squanders his talent like nobodies buisness.

As far as kids down south, you have it right. Why leave the warm and sunny South where you can go play in a wide open offense, to come up North and play in an antiquated system?

[Izulde]

Wisconsin's problem is a horrible head coach who should've been left at DC. They grossly underachieved relative to their talent level this season, especially at RB, where they're stacked.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Wisconsin's problem is a horrible head coach who should've been left at DC. They grossly underachieved relative to their talent level this season, especially at RB, where they're stacked.

Bielma is the biggest asshole in college football. He makes Saban seem not smug.

[DeToxRox]

One other thing I hate about the Big 10 is the fact that they rarely have night games.

There is nothing else like seeing two SEC teams battle it out on a Saturday Night.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Bielma is the biggest asshole in college football. He makes Saban seem not smug.

Yeah he's pretty much destroying everything Alvarez built up.. and I'm sure Alvarez is kicking himself for appointing the asshat as his successor.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Bielma is the biggest asshole in college football. He makes Saban seem not smug.

Yeah he pulled some shady crap a few years ago where his KO team would blatantly go offsides and had to re kick just to get more time off the clock at the end of a half.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

Yeah he pulled some shady crap a few years ago where his KO team would blatantly go offsides and had to re kick just to get more time off the clock at the end of a half.

I just hate his whole demeanor. Like this year vs Michigan he was up 17 and did a punt on 4th and 1, and a UM kid jumped for the offsides and he celebrated like he won the Superbowl. He was jumping up and down on the sidelines and just laughing his ass off.

[digamma]

Stop panicking? These things are cyclical.

[DeToxRox]

But looking at the Big 10 down the road .. I do think the potential is there to get back to prominence ..

OSU is OSU, they'll always have talent and win 10 games, but they can win titles if Tressel stops being the most conservative coach in football.

PSU is recruiting amazing athletes and using them the right way. Getting Newsome was a great get and he'll be a stud.

Michigan is still Michigan. I think this year is a 6 or 7 win year, but by 2010 RichRod will have the talent he needs to make a run. I mean as of now he had 6 freshman on the OL redshirt, and he has 2 more studs coming in, with the potential of 2 more. I do think the future is very bright still.

Minnesota is recruiting great as well. Not sure on Brewster as a coach but he'll have the talent to be great.

Illinois has great talent, but a bad coach. I think whoever inherits the team will do great things.

[Young Drachma]

Rutgers?

[Arles]

I posted this in another thread, but it's more relevant hereL:

The Big 10 will continue to struggle for doing their silly 8 conference, 4 patsy, miss-2-team-a-year-with-no-champ-game setup. Every mid-level Big 10 team starts out 4-0 after beating up on their Midwestern directional schools and then they only need to go 2-6 in conference to be bowl eligible. Look at Minnesota and Wisconsin. MN starts out 4-0 against Northern Illinois, Bowling Green, Montana St and FL Atl. They don't even play Penn State or Michigan State, go 3-5 in conference (wins over Indiana, Illinois and Purdue) and that gets them a bowl game with Kansas (which they lose by 20).

Wisconsin beats Akron, Marshall and an OT thriller with Cal Poly - meaning they also just need a 3-5 conference record (which they get by beating Illinois, Indiana and (drumroll) Minnesota). That gets them an unearned bowl game against Florida State and they get trounced by 30.

As long as it only takes a 2-6 or 3-5 record in a marginal big 10 conference to make a decent bowl game, the Big 10 will continue to stink in these games. They either need to start playing nonconference teams with a pulse (like the Big 12, Pac 10 or big east) or join the Pac-10 in playing 9 conference games (take out a game against Akron and sub in Ohio State or Penn State).

The Pac-10 is 5-0 because marginal teams like Stanford and Arizona State (at or better than MN or Wisconsin) didn't make a bowl game because they played strong nonconference teams (TCU, Georgia, ...) and had 9 conference games.

If Oregon State wouldn't have played Penn State or Utah and made the BCS with USC, then the Pac-10 would have struggled as each team would have moved up and played a better opponent. Whenever you setup a soft nonconference schedule (and have few conference games and no champ), you will get more bigtime bowl games - but you will also have more lobsided defeats.

[DeToxRox]

Before he died, Bo was pushing for 10 conference games and 2 non conference games.

That is ideal but it won't happen. 9 and 3 is fine with me, but I do agree 8 and 4 is dumb, especially because of years when teams miss both UM and OSU. That's absurd.

[SackAttack]

Speed and global warming.

You're not going to compete against the USC and Florida squads without speed, and you're not going to get the very best athletes to play in climates where the high temperature on game day might be 15 degrees, unless they grew up idolizing the Badger or the Wolverine.

[DeToxRox]

And as a Michigan fan, I wish we'd play 2 MAC's, ND and a team like Texas A&M, or South Carolina every year but it won't happen.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Before he died, Bo was pushing for 10 conference games and 2 non conference games.

That is ideal but it won't happen. 9 and 3 is fine with me, but I do agree 8 and 4 is dumb, especially because of years when teams miss both UM and OSU. That's absurd.

Right because you have teams like Michigan who always play Ohio State and Michigan State...Ohio State always plays Michigan and Penn State...while Penn State always plays Ohio State and Michigan State. I'd like to see 9 conference games and they rotate a team out each year.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

Right because you have teams like Michigan who always play Ohio State and Michigan State...Ohio State always plays Michigan and Penn State...while Penn State always plays Ohio State and Michigan State. I'd like to see 9 conference games and they rotate a team out each year.

Agreed totally.

I mean the only other option is go bring Pitt, Rutgers or Syracuse in and have a conference title game, but I'd much rather just see 9 conference games.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

As far as kids down south, you have it right. Why leave the warm and sunny South where you can go play in a wide open offense, to come up North and play in an antiquated system?

Sports Guy said basically this, but for all college-bound kids. Why bother with the North at all? Go somewhere in the South or West. Warmer, sunnier, and hotter chicks (and because of the first two, they are wearing less). No-brainer.

[rowech]

How easy is it for USC to recruit? Warm, California Girls, and play football for a top 5 team where I as the coach, will let you do just about anything as long as you don't get into trouble.

As for the Big 10...

First off, football is, at least in Ohio, just about life and death for most people. Things it can do...

1. Add a 12 school and have a championship game. Better national TV exposure for sure along with adding to the conference. Ideally, it should be Notre Dame but it probably never will be. It would be good for ND to join the conference because they would become a little more revelant as well.

2. Someone has to have the guts to start to sacrifice conference championships in the hopes of getting national championships. The offensive lines of Big 10 teams are built to play slow-plodding football and it's fine when you're in the Big10 playing those same types of teams. Tiller shocked the Big 10 for a couple years when he did this but he didn't have the recruiting base. Michigan has the best chance to do it right now but that's not saying they will.

3. Start having their teams play Thursday night games. I can't really think of any Big10 games on a Thursday night...mostly because I think they all go on the Big10 network which I think has been counterproductive to kids who want national exposure and not regional exposure.

4. Open up the offense a bit more. Kids want to play in spread offenses, offenses that are going to put up points, offenses that will be fun to play in.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by rowech

How easy is it for USC to recruit? Warm, California Girls, and play football for a top 5 team where I as the coach, will let you do just about anything as long as you don't get into trouble.

As for the Big 10...

First off, football is, at least in Ohio, just about life and death for most people. Things it can do...

1. Add a 12 school and have a championship game. Better national TV exposure for sure along with adding to the conference. Ideally, it should be Notre Dame but it probably never will be. It would be good for ND to join the conference because they would become a little more revelant as well.

2. Someone has to have the guts to start to sacrifice conference championships in the hopes of getting national championships. The offensive lines of Big 10 teams are built to play slow-plodding football and it's fine when you're in the Big10 playing those same types of teams. Tiller shocked the Big 10 for a couple years when he did this but he didn't have the recruiting base. Michigan has the best chance to do it right now but that's not saying they will.

3. Start having their teams play Thursday night games. I can't really think of any Big10 games on a Thursday night...mostly because I think they all go on the Big10 network which I think has been counterproductive to kids who want national exposure and not regional exposure.

4. Open up the offense a bit more. Kids want to play in spread offenses, offenses that are going to put up points, offenses that will be fun to play in.

100% agreed.

[Noop]

They need to brand their teams better in southern states. I know in Florida kids typically don't name Big-10 teams in their top 5. (Maybe some broward schools) I think in states like California, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina there is enough talent at the skill positions to give teams like Ohio State, Michigan, Illinois and maybe one other a chance against fast teams.

The only problem is those kids would need to be developed and that would require good coaching.

[bignej]

If it was all about nice weather and pretty girls, why do many California teams suck? Most kids still want to play close to home. Miami has gone from a situation like USC is in but now is having to rebuild. Also the nice weather didn't just appear, they have always had that advantage.

The coaches of the Big10 need to and will take pages from the playbooks around the country to update their style. They don't want to lose and will improvise. Slow Big10 Michigan(and loser to App St) put up over 500 yards against southern speed Florida last year with a pro-style offense. They have plenty of speed. People aren't faster simply because they are born in the south.

The main advantage I would say the SEC and USC have right now is attitude. They eat and breathe football. They recruit big mean kids and they always jumping around on the sideline. They are as cocky as their fans and it is a huge advantage on the field. Ohio State this year was overrated. They beat Texas 2 years ago so its not like they cant compete. They just didnt have the same attitude and intensity of USC,UF and LSU.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by bignej

If it was all about nice weather and pretty girls, why do many California teams suck? Most kids still want to play close to home. Miami has gone from a situation like USC is in but now is having to rebuild. Also the nice weather didn't just appear, they have always had that advantage.

The coaches of the Big10 need to and will take pages from the playbooks around the country to update their style. They don't want to lose and will improvise. Slow Big10 Michigan(and loser to App St) put up over 500 yards against southern speed Florida last year with a pro-style offense. They have plenty of speed. People aren't faster simply because they are born in the south.

The main advantage I would say the SEC and USC have right now is attitude. They eat and breathe football. They recruit big mean kids and they always jumping around on the sideline. They are as cocky as their fans and it is a huge advantage on the field. Ohio State this year was overrated. They beat Texas 2 years ago so its not like they cant compete. They just didnt have the same attitude and intensity of USC,UF and LSU.

Michigan put up 500 yards on Florida running a spread though. They brought out 4 and 5 wides like one of the Big 12 offenses. Plus Michigan had Henne, Hart, Long, Manningham and Arrington.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Noop

They need to brand their teams better in southern states. I know in Florida kids typically don't name Big-10 teams in their top 5. (Maybe some broward schools) I think in states like California, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina there is enough talent at the skill positions to give teams like Ohio State, Michigan, Illinois and maybe one other a chance against fast teams.

The only problem is those kids would need to be developed and that would require good coaching.

Currently Michigan is recruiting the Muck like gangbusters and it seems to be paying off. Plus they have one verbal in 2010 from WR Ricardo Miller who will be a high 4 star kid, and a silent from 5* S Marvin Robinson Jr, also from Florida.

[bignej]

OK but the point is they had/have plenty of speed. Thats not the problem.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by bignej

OK but the point is they had/have plenty of speed. Thats not the problem.

I agree to an extent. The problem is, their skill players are not that fast. I mean look at Hart, Arrington and Manninghams combines. All 4.6 and above.

And on D Michigan gets killed with slow LB's and Safeties. That;s the biggest problem imo.

[Noop]

Oh and the big 10 need to spend money a la Alabama, Florida, Tenn and Co.

I am talking about a black gym bag with money showing up on signing day kind of stuff.

[kcchief19]

I'll start by saying that I don't completely accept the premise of the question. The Big 11 (sorry, I'm smart ass) is relevant -- they got 2 teams in the BCS, they have recent titles and title game appearances and are light years ahead of the Big East and ACC. If anyone should be concerned about relevancy, it's those two conferences.

That said, I would compare the Big 10 to Nebraska in the early '90s when Florida State and Miami were alternating in literrally running away from the Huskers in bowl games. Once Osborne started favoring speed over size on defense and the skill positions, the light switch went on pretty quickly.

So how do you "fix" the Big 10? I agree with several points made here.

Originally Posted by rowech

1. Add a 12 school and have a championship game. Better national TV exposure for sure along with adding to the conference. Ideally, it should be Notre Dame but it probably never will be. It would be good for ND to join the conference because they would become a little more revelant as well.

Championship game is desperately needed. Right now, the Big 10 is beginning almost every season with only two teams really thinking about winning the conference and the BCS bid -- OSU and someone else. The conferences with title games have half the field thinking they can win. If the Big 12 didn't have a title game, every season would begin with OU and Texas as the only teams with a shot. But the north schools all get to tell recruits that you come here and you can play for a title. Playing for a title is huge. Good recruits don't want to go somewhere just to 7-5 -- they want to win a title of some kind, even if it's a divisional title. Split into two divisions and you double the "champions" and open up the races.

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

Right because you have teams like Michigan who always play Ohio State and Michigan State...Ohio State always plays Michigan and Penn State...while Penn State always plays Ohio State and Michigan State. I'd like to see 9 conference games and they rotate a team out each year.

The conference schedule makes little sense. If you go to 12 teams a 9-game conference schedule isn't really any better. But if you go to divisions at least then you have five consistent games on your schedule and you can rotate the other six teams. Yes, there will still be flukes when a team might miss the two best teams in the other division. But with a divisional schedule you have five games with meaning every year instead of just the rivalry games. Michican and Minnesota would have more rivalry as a divisional game than just one conference game they play 3 out of 4 years.

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Old time football fans might hate it, but look at the teams in the National Title games as of late: spread teams with lots of speed who get the balls their playmakers in space.

The biggest problem with the Big 10 style of play is that more and more top high schools are running a spread offense and that is what the kids want to play. Why go to OSU and run a conventional offense if you can go to Florida and put up big stats? Plus, when you don't see the spread much it's hard to defend. How many times have we seen spread offenses by inferior teams light up the Big 10? Call it the Appalachian State effect.

I think the Big 10 also needs to realize that tradition doesn't matter much anymore to college kids. Michigan is struggling right now because no 18-year-old remembers Michigan being any good. It's the same problem places like Notre Dame and Nebraska are having.

I don't buy the weather argument. If places like Virgina Tech, West Virginia and Missouri can win, so can Michigan and Illinois. But you have to have the right coaches and playing style.

Some of it is cyclical too. It would be quite easy for the Big 12 to go from having four 10-win teams to two next year.

And if OSU beats Texas tonight, this thread dies in a hurry.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

I don't buy the weather argument. If places like Virgina Tech, West Virginia and Missouri can win, so can Michigan and Illinois. But you have to have the right coaches and playing style.

Yeah, but chief, I've lived in both Missouri and Wisconsin. They may both have "winters," at least compared with Southern California and Florida, but winter in Columbia is very different from winter in what I've experienced so far of Big Ten country.

Give you an example - the high in Columbia on Friday is expected to be 49 degrees. That doesn't compare with the 68 degrees that Los Angeles is going to get, but then take a look at Madison: they're going to see a high of about 28 degrees.

If you get a kid visiting Missouri, Wisconsin and Southern Cal this time of year, one of those three is not going to be like the others. The weather is a factor. It's going to be less a factor for some schools than for others, and it won't be a factor all by its lonesome self, but it's a factor.

[mrsimperless]

Kick out IU?

[I. J. Reilly]

Jim Delany has already explained all this. If you can run fast you don't belong at a Big Televen university.

Big Ten Conference Official Athletic Site

[ISiddiqui]

The biggest problem with the Big 10 style of play is that more and more top high schools are running a spread offense and that is what the kids want to play. Why go to OSU and run a conventional offense if you can go to Florida and put up big stats?

Of course, on the other hand, Big 10 coaches can turn around and say, listen, NFL teams play this style of offense. Look at the lack of success of Florida QBs when they make the jump. Just point at Rex Grossman and then Tom Brady and leave it at that .

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by I. J. Reilly

Jim Delany has already explained all this. If you can run fast you don't belong at a Big Televen university.

Big Ten Conference Official Athletic Site

What, you can't have 4.4 speed and be academically eligible at the same time?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Yeah, but chief, I've lived in both Missouri and Wisconsin. They may both have "winters," at least compared with Southern California and Florida, but winter in Columbia is very different from winter in what I've experienced so far of Big Ten country.

Give you an example - the high in Columbia on Friday is expected to be 49 degrees. That doesn't compare with the 68 degrees that Los Angeles is going to get, but then take a look at Madison: they're going to see a high of about 28 degrees.

If you get a kid visiting Missouri, Wisconsin and Southern Cal this time of year, one of those three is not going to be like the others. The weather is a factor. It's going to be less a factor for some schools than for others, and it won't be a factor all by its lonesome self, but it's a factor.

I remember at some point maybe 20 years ago (late 80s, early 90s), Sports Illustrated ran this huge piece on the subject of "Are East Coast teams doomed?" That may not have been the title, but it was basically the subject matter for the piece.

Their premise was that all of the best players would want to go to the West Coast (and primarily California), to be near Hollywood, to be in better weather, to have a better life basically.

This was roughly some point after perhaps the Lakers had won alot of championships in the 80s, Giants and A's had played a world series vs each other, etc.

Now 20 years later, we see that really hasn't been the case, and I still think it is not the case for the Big 10. I think it is a perceived lack of success and perceived "inferior football" that is played there that is hurting them. Right now the power football conferences probably are viewed to be the SEC, Big 12 and USC (Pac-10). Whether that is right or not, I have to assume it hurts recruiting. The best medicine for this is for the Big-10 schools to win important high profile games against the SEC/Big12 or other national powerhouses.

This isn't something limited to just the Big-10, Notre Dame also has had the same problem as well as other formerly high profile schools (such as Miami for instance).

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Currently Michigan is recruiting the Muck like gangbusters and it seems to be paying off. Plus they have one verbal in 2010 from WR Ricardo Miller who will be a high 4 star kid, and a silent from 5* S Marvin Robinson Jr, also from Florida.

I'll be interested to see what they can do with all that talent.

I'll be interested to see what they can do with all that talent.

Northwestern seems to be the lone team to be able to run the spread, but Northwestern is limited in who they recruit. Penn State and JoPa are starting to evolve the offense (not quite an all-out spread). So it'll be interesting to see what happens.

I think that weather is a little overrated when it comes to football. I think it’s being close to home. One thing I hate is the Big Ten television strategy. They need to allow for the premier Big Ten games to be played on Saturday night with national coverage.

[Arles]

I still think it's primarily the "2 teams in the BCS because we play only 8 conf games, no title game and a soft non-conference". If you made Ohio State play Iowa on the road or had them play a conf title game, maybe they don't make the BCS.

At that point, you have Ohio State playing Georgia, Michigan State playing South Carolina, Iowa playing Missouri and Northwestern playing Kansas (maybe Minny and Wisconsin don't make bowls in that system). So, even with Penn State's loss, you are looking at a much more manageable bowl system. The last two years the Big 10 has gotten 2 teams in the BCS (IL, Mich in 07-08, PSU and OSU in 08-09) when the talent really should have only had 1. That put the rest of the bowls 1 spot ahead of their skis and outmatched.

The reason the Big East, SEC and Pac 10 have done fairly well on bowls is their conference/non conf is setup to weed out the marginal teams before the bowl games. So, you don't have overmatched teams in most of the upper games because they missed 2 key opponents with no champ game and/or had 4 games against directional schools.

[JW]

Ban Ohio St. from national championship games for ten years.

[lungs]

Allow me to echo the Brett Bielema is a jackass sentiments as a Badger fan. He came in, and did well with the talent Alvarez developed and kind of got this 'my shit don't stink' attitude.

Badger football has gone from must watch on Saturdays to who cares? Beat up non-conference opponents, beat shitty teams in the Big 10 and get your bowl bid to get your ass pounded by an SEC or ACC school.

I'd bet the best teams in the MAC could've beat Wisconsin this year.

[Rich1033]

Originally Posted by bignej

I read this somewhere but can't for the life of me remember where it came from. Basically, The worst thing for the Big10 this bowl season was Ohio State getting picked for a BCS Bowl because it caused every other Bowl eligible team to move "up" a Bowl.

Pretty much, but I think it was Oregon State losing that last game that hurt the Big Ten's image. If they win then Oregon State goes to the rose against PSU, USC gets the at large bid over Ohio State resulting in OSU going to the Capital One agaist Georgia, and so on... If that happens they probably win most of their bowl games.

However, that really does nothing to answer the original question . Michigan just has to return to a power, and I believe they are headed that way(but Im biased). Then someone else has to step up and challenge OSU, PSU and UM for the title once in a while. Also, adding another team helps not just for being able to have a championship game, but for shortening the layoff between the bowl games.

[Swaggs]

I think that, while it is fun to hammer the B10, they really aren't that down. Realistically, I think they are just one BCS win away from re-asserting themselves. If Ohio State can manage to beat Texas, for example, I think people will shut up. And, if that happens AND Florida beats Oklahoma, folks will probably start beating up on the B12 instead, because the media loves to tear things down so that there is a story when they are rebuilt.

I will also second the notion that having two BCS teams makes lower-tier B10 teams, who already have really strong bowl tie-ins (because B10 teams are such attractive bowl visitors), play teams that are not really even matches. That, in my opinion, is why Notre Dame has suffered in bowl games over the past 15-years: because they are playing teams that are a notch or two ahead of them.

The combination of Ohio State/Penn State/Michigan are still as good of a trio of anchor schools as any other BCS conference. You can make cases for the B12 or SEC having as good of a set at the top, but that trio at least belongs in the conversation.