Started By
Message
To our Big 10 posters
Posted on 11/3/25 at 8:42 am
Posted on 11/3/25 at 8:42 am
The last two weeks I've actually spent time watching some Big 10 games and trying to make as an objective assessment as I possibly can, if Indiana and Ohio St are THAT dominant or is there a significant drop off of talent in the middle of the conference. Again, I did my best to take my SEC homer glasses off and just "watch football" and identify what I know is high quality football and what I know is not.
But I'd like for y'all to do your best at taking off your Big 10 homer glasses, leave the snark outside the room for this conversation and give as honest and objective answer as you can. Are Ohio St and Indiana just that dominant or is there a significant dropoff in the second and third tiers of the conference? I'll give my opinion later in the discussion, just want to get yours. Thanks for playing along!
But I'd like for y'all to do your best at taking off your Big 10 homer glasses, leave the snark outside the room for this conversation and give as honest and objective answer as you can. Are Ohio St and Indiana just that dominant or is there a significant dropoff in the second and third tiers of the conference? I'll give my opinion later in the discussion, just want to get yours. Thanks for playing along!
This post was edited on 11/3/25 at 8:47 am
17
Posted on 11/3/25 at 8:59 am to NWLA_Bama
Oregon rounds out the big 3 in the league. I believe they beat Indiana in a rematch.
The B1G isn't much different than the SEC, less defense. They have Alabama and the next tier, A&M and Georgia. Ole Miss would beat Michigan imo.
No one cares about the middle of leagues because they are still losers.
The B1G isn't much different than the SEC, less defense. They have Alabama and the next tier, A&M and Georgia. Ole Miss would beat Michigan imo.
No one cares about the middle of leagues because they are still losers.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:03 am to NWLA_Bama
quote:
Are Ohio St and Indiana just that dominant or is there a significant dropoff in the second and third tiers of the conference?
I think yeah there is obviously a drop off once you get past Ohio State, Indiana and Oregon but you'll see the same thing in any conference with legitimate national championship contenders though. Its likely no big ten team outside of each other will beat Ohio State, Indiana or Oregon, but in the sec you see a similar thing- no sec teams besides each other have beat A&M, Bama, Georgia or Ole Miss. The sec has more high end teams so I'm cutting their top off at four teams for now.
I dont have the exact numbers off the top of my head but while Saban was dominating the sec at Bama, it was probably extremely rare that any sec teams outside the top 3 in the conference ever beat them. I would guess it happened less than 5 times total but I cant be bothered to look it up. So you could easily argue the sec was just as top heavy as the big ten is now.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:08 am to NWLA_Bama
quote:
give as honest and objective answer as you can
I objectively believe OSU is 10 points better than anyone else in the country and anyone who says there is no dominant team this year hasn't been watching. Best defense, best WRs and the best QB. The Texas game Day admitted he ran a conservative gameplan to win and now they are opening up the offense and Sayin has been incredible leading it.
I think Indiana is OU of the 2000s and 2010s where they get up on a team and have no problem avalanching them and will do so to win style points. I think they are a legit top 10 team, but they have shown against Iowa that they can be stopped a bit and IU doesn't play conservative at all so that wasn't the reason.
I think the SEC has 3-4 teams who can win any game they get into, but they would need 2-3 big bounces to go their way to beat OSU. I think UGA/Bama/A&M would beat Indiana in 70% of scenarios
So I think there is one team on top but obviously any team is beatable, but OSU should be the firm betting favorite
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:12 am to Buckeye06
Pride co.eth before the fall. Buckeye players aren't benefiting from the crucible of iron sharpens iron like the SEC teams are.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:12 am to NWLA_Bama
Here is how I see the Big 10
Tier 1 (Easily have been the two most dominant teams in the country)
- OSU
- Indiana
Tier 2 (Any of these teams could make the playoff and win a game)
- Oregon
- Iowa
- USC
Tier 3 (respectable)
- Minnesota
- Washington
- Illinois
- Nebraska
- UCLA
- Northwestern
Tier 4 (pure shite)
- Rutgers
- Maryland
- Penn State
- Wisconsin
- Michigan State
- Purdue
Tier 5
- Michigan
Tier 1 (Easily have been the two most dominant teams in the country)
- OSU
- Indiana
Tier 2 (Any of these teams could make the playoff and win a game)
- Oregon
- Iowa
- USC
Tier 3 (respectable)
- Minnesota
- Washington
- Illinois
- Nebraska
- UCLA
- Northwestern
Tier 4 (pure shite)
- Rutgers
- Maryland
- Penn State
- Wisconsin
- Michigan State
- Purdue
Tier 5
- Michigan
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:15 am to NWLA_Bama
I think Ohio St and Indiana are 100% legit. I think the rest of the league is meh to poor.
Oregon is pretty mediocre.
Michigan, Iowa, USC and Illinois are kind of average to below average. The rest of the league is horse shite.
Since everyone is firing coaches, when is Wisconsin firing Fickell?
Oregon is pretty mediocre.
Michigan, Iowa, USC and Illinois are kind of average to below average. The rest of the league is horse shite.
Since everyone is firing coaches, when is Wisconsin firing Fickell?
This post was edited on 11/3/25 at 9:21 am
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:17 am to BuckI
quote:
Oregon rounds out the big 3 in the league. I believe they beat Indiana in a rematch.
The B1G isn't much different than the SEC, less defense. They have Alabama and the next tier, A&M and Georgia. Ole Miss would beat Michigan imo.
This was one of my take aways from watching. It seems the SEC has better defenses throughout the conference than the Big 10. Hence the reason you don't see as many blowouts by the top teams in the conference when playing the rest of the league as you do in the Big 10.
I think the average talent level between the top tier schools in both conferences are very close. I don't see any team (in either conference) that you watch and just go "They just have exponentially more talent than everyone else".
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:21 am to halfadolla50
Putting Oregon and Iowa in the same tier is ridiculous.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:22 am to lewis and herschel
quote:
Pride co.eth before the fall. Buckeye players aren't benefiting from the crucible of iron sharpens iron like the SEC teams are.
I was asked for my objective take and I gave it.
quote:
iron sharpens iron like the SEC teams are
OSU beat one of the top SEC teams to start the season and I don't believe there is as much iron in the SEC as you obviously do. If Texas hadn't played OSU this season, they would be 8-1 and in the top 5.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:22 am to rojak
Well they play on Saturday. We will find out won’t we
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:22 am to rojak
Oregon plays at Iowa this weekend, so it will be settled on the field.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:25 am to BuckeyeGoon
quote:
So you could easily argue the sec was just as top heavy as the big ten is now.
I think the reason many SEC fans pause at saying the conference is top heavy is because of how many teams have actually won a NC in the last 25-30 years. I'm going by memory but I think Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama and LSU have all won at least one national title in the last 25-30 years. That's six teams out of what used to be a 14 team conference, which is 42% of the teams in the conference won a title. Now that Texas and OU have joined, It's 8 of 16 teams in the conference have won a NC in the last 25-30 years. That increases the % of teams in the conference who've won a NC to 50%. That's not exactly top heavy. That's pretty decent depth. Name another conference with that many NC winners in the same time frame. I don't think you can find one.
This post was edited on 11/3/25 at 9:34 am
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:27 am to BuckI
quote:
Oregon rounds out the big 3
I hate Oregon, but I think they’re the best team in the conference.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:34 am to BuckI
The biggest difference I can say as an newbie sec is that the bottom of the conference is light years ahead of the bottom of the BIG. So while you can take weeks off in the BIG you
Can’t in the sec. That’s a massive advantage the BIG has and it’s simply due to resources, nil, and recruiting grounds.
There is simply more talent in the south period so Purdue is never going to rise up to the level of any sec team
Can’t in the sec. That’s a massive advantage the BIG has and it’s simply due to resources, nil, and recruiting grounds.
There is simply more talent in the south period so Purdue is never going to rise up to the level of any sec team
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:35 am to BuckeyeGoon
The sec added 2 blue bloods that will spend resources to compete to the already best conference. The BIG added programs that may compete, that’s the difference. Had the BIg added Texas and OU it would have balanced it out way more
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:36 am to BuckI
quote:
No one cares about the middle of leagues
Except those teams are the ones that make up the schedules of those top teams. See how that's different?
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:38 am to NWLA_Bama
quote:
I think the reason many SEC fans pause at saying the conference is top heavy is because of how many teams have actually won a NC in the last 25-30 years. I'm going by memory but I think Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama and LSU have all won at least one national title in the last 25-30 years. That's six teams out of what used to be a 14 team conference, which is 42% of the teams in the conference won a title. Now that Texas and OU have joined, It's 8 of 16 teams in the conference have won a NC in the last 25-30 years. That increases the % of teams in the conference who've won a NC to 50%. That's not exactly top heavy. That's pretty decent depth. Name another conference with that many NC winners in the same time frame. I don't think you can find one.
I don't think that matters for 2025 really much at all. Just because a team wins a national title doesn't make the conference good. Tennessee winning a title in 1998 has nothing to do with them not being very good in 2025. LSU winning in 2019 has nothing to do with them getting run out of their own stadium less than 10 days ago. Auburn winning a title with Cam doesn't mean they are competitive this season.
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:39 am to NWLA_Bama
There is still ALOT of football to play yet boys
Is Ohio State as good as last year? Hard to tell with their piss poor schedule
Indiana looks better this year IMO. Much better on defense
Oregon? They have games against Iowa, USC, and Washington left...I think Oregon is overrated and will flame out
The teams to watch are Michigan and USC. Both could make a late season push, especially with Ohio State and Oregon to play respectively
If Michigan wins out and beats Ohio State, tell me they don't make the playoff...The game is in Ann Arbor
Is Ohio State as good as last year? Hard to tell with their piss poor schedule
Indiana looks better this year IMO. Much better on defense
Oregon? They have games against Iowa, USC, and Washington left...I think Oregon is overrated and will flame out
The teams to watch are Michigan and USC. Both could make a late season push, especially with Ohio State and Oregon to play respectively
If Michigan wins out and beats Ohio State, tell me they don't make the playoff...The game is in Ann Arbor
Posted on 11/3/25 at 9:39 am to TexasWranglers
quote:
The sec added 2 blue bloods that will spend resources to compete to the already best conference. The BIG added programs that may compete, that’s the difference.
Oregon won the conference year 1 so I would say they're competing.
Page 1 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News