Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/26/22 at 3:33 pm to RelentlessTide
That is irrelevant to conference expansion. Money is what drives all of this and the B1G has more of it.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 3:38 pm to RogerTempleton
quote:
LA watches USC when they are good
I've seen this parroted time and time again since the news was announced. Hell, I heard Finebaum say it recently.
I'll ask this again: can anyone point to objective, verifiable data indicating this is true? Or is it just a media talking point.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 4:59 pm to BuckI
You miss the point. The Big Ten could pay each school 1 billion dollars each and it will not improve their teams. The reason is that they can not change the one thing that
turns off most of the top recruits, cold. If you want an example, University of Oregon has an endless bank account due to Nike. When was the last time they won a NC in the Big 3 sports?
The Big ten could take the rest of the schools in the nation and they would still not be able to beat the SEC teams for titles.
The Big Ten is like the yacht owner that spent a lot of money but never takes it out of the slip.
The SEC maybe has a smaller yacht but travels the world.
turns off most of the top recruits, cold. If you want an example, University of Oregon has an endless bank account due to Nike. When was the last time they won a NC in the Big 3 sports?
The Big ten could take the rest of the schools in the nation and they would still not be able to beat the SEC teams for titles.
The Big Ten is like the yacht owner that spent a lot of money but never takes it out of the slip.
The SEC maybe has a smaller yacht but travels the world.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 5:04 pm to Tornado Alley
quote:
I'll ask this again: can anyone point to objective, verifiable data indicating this is true? Or is it just a media talking point.
It maybe true, however honestly USCw has not been very good the last 40 years except 2002-2005
Posted on 7/26/22 at 5:04 pm to ClaimToFame
He's just mad more Texas oil money going to pull a few Bama cruits.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 5:12 pm to BuckI
quote:
That is irrelevant to conference expansion.
Ha Ha, when was the last time Harvard or Yale sold 100K seats?
When Yale came to little Centre College in Danville they were the beasts of college football yet left with a loss. The B1G had their time in the sun from the 50's - 70's but they still think they are in those times.
quote:
Money is what drives all of this and the B1G has more of it.
They have numbers on their side now, but that will be gone in the next decade or two, why do you think they keep trying to expand to better climates?
I know you guys are scared but it karma paying you back for being a$$holes after WWII till the Supreme Court case in the 70's.
It is fun to watch you now like deer in the headlights with no clue you are already dead.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 5:28 pm to BuckI
Gonna be a disaster having your nearest oos Competitors thousands of miles away. All the other sports are fricked.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 7:11 pm to BuckI
Paul who?
Posted on 7/26/22 at 7:24 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
While you may be right about not giving the coaches enough time, Nebraska was a running school and folks just don't run as much. Coupled by they now must play boring teams instead of the old Big 8 and B 12 schools. CFB is not the pros and regionalism still holds more sway.
I can’t seem to find much comparative data from Solich’s era, but Nebraska had a pretty good air attack during Pelini’s first two years, which placed Nebraska 9th in the nation in total offense (463 ypg) and 7th in the nation in passing offense (324 passing ypg) in 2007 and 12th in the nation in total offense (451 ypg) and 15th in the nation in passing offense (281 passing ypg). The Huskers took a drop after Zac Lee and Taylor Martinez went under center, but Nebraska had the ability to air it out.
But even if Nebraska were able to churn it out on the ground only, they were still winning 9-10 games per year under Solich and Pelini. My point is simply that winning 10 games per year is what kept Oklahoma relevant during the Stoops era, even though he never won the big one again.
Heck, Riley didn’t win the big one either, and yet Oklahoma continued finishing the season ranked in the top 5-10 because the Sooners were amassing double-digit wins every year.
Both Oklahoma and Nebraska are college football royalty, even though neither has won it all in over two decades. However, the difference in how they’re perceived today is largely the result of sustained winning from year to year—Oklahoma did, whereas Nebraska did not. Well, the Huskers were winning 10 games per year with guys like Solich and Pelini, but that evidently wasn’t good enough.
Anyway, my point isn’t that Solich and Pelini are the answer for Nebraska. Rather, it’s just to argue that Nebraska’s problem wasn’t its move to the Big Ten; it was canning coaches that consistently won, albeit not the big one.
Oklahoma hasn’t won it all since 2000, but no one would dare say that they’re in the same boat as Nebraska, at the moment. And, in my view, it’s all about how the programs handled their coaching situations.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 7:49 pm to BuckI
Op that is a huge surprise lol
Posted on 7/26/22 at 8:19 pm to lewis and herschel
quote:
Gonna be a disaster having your nearest oos Competitors thousands of miles away. All the other sports are fricked.
Not really. The B1G will make it easier on them by scheduling multiple games on extended road trips and this thing called the internet will make sure they do not miss any classroom time.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 8:27 pm to TideFaninFl
quote:
You miss the point. The Big Ten could pay each school 1 billion dollars each and it will not improve their teams. The reason is that they can not change the one thing that
turns off most of the top recruits, cold.
Let me educate not just you, but everyone who thinks this. All the players in the SEC want to go where? The NFL. Where are most NFL teams? The north. Players will follow the money, wherever it may lead them. When the B1G opens its checkbook, all that talent will follow that railroad to the north just like their ancestors.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:22 pm to BuckI
quote:
Let me educate not just you, but everyone who thinks this. All the players in the SEC want to go where? The NFL. Where are most NFL teams? The north. Players will follow the money, wherever it may lead them. When the B1G opens its checkbook, all that talent will follow that railroad to the north just like their ancestors.
Let me educate not only you but everybody that thinks like you. The best talent, the best coaches, the best workout area, the best weather are all in the south. If a player wants to go to the NFL (and before that, play for and possibly win a NC), they want to be recruited and trained by the best and that is in the south.
You seem to be focused on the money that the Big Ten will make (and you seem to forget that the SEC is right there as well.) If the athlete wants to go to the NFL, staying in the south is the way to go (why do I say "staying in the south" because most of the top talent is in the south)
Even Bill Belichick knows this to be true, why do you think he makes a trip to Alabama every year? Why do you see mostly southern athletes names being called in the first couple of round in the draft? 12 SEC players out of the first 32 went in the first round this year, only 6 from the Big Ten
The Big Ten is making a joke of itself by adding more and more teams (each team gets a smaller and smaller piece of the pie.) The funny thing is even adding more teams does NOT increase the Big Ten's chances of winning NC, it actually lessens it. Even adding the new additions, how many NC has the Big Ten teams won in the last 40 years?
And in case you are wondering, winning titles in college is what playing sports is all about.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 9:47 pm to TheSocialGadfly
quote:
I can’t seem to find much comparative data
I was talking when I was younger and Nebraska's bread and butter was the run. I forget sometimes most on here are too young to remember the option and power left and power right. Uncomplicated playbook back then but nobody could stop it. I was a lineman and I much preferred the run to the pass.
quote:
But even if Nebraska were able to churn it out on the ground only, they were still winning 9-10 games per year under Solich and Pelini.
Yeah, Marc Richt at UGA had similar numbers but still fired him, and with Kirby it seems the right move, as he has taken them to the promised land. Bible set the bar back in the early days and Devaney and Osborne cemented the Nebraska style (which they took from the Sooners). Problem is they are now in a conference that still plays 3 yards and a cloud of dust but that type of play is not getting you into the CFP's.
Sorta sad as the Nebraska I grew up with is probably gone and not coming back, especially not in the B1G where they are viewed only for brand $$$ and not as a real part of the B1G future.
SEC is too strong to get peeled away and the ACC has gotten stronger with realignment, not weaker as many predicted. B1G had to poach somewhere and just sad they preyed on the Big 8 / Big 12 and Nebraska and Colorado let them whisper in their ear.
Posted on 7/26/22 at 10:33 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Sorta sad as the Nebraska I grew up with is probably gone and not coming back, especially not in the B1G where they are viewed only for brand $$$ and not as a real part of the B1G future
Nebraska was winning for a lot of reasons back then that don't exist for them anymore. They use to recruit partial qualifiers, and haven't been able to do that since the Big 12 started back in the day. It became a rule that none of the teams could recruit those types of athletes, I doubt the BIG allows it either. They used to have a pipeline to Texas recruiting and pretty much lost that when they moved to the BIG. They were the first football program, I believe, to have an actual strength and conditioning program/ an actual assigned coach. Everyone has a strength and conditioning coach now. They used to play every Thanksgiving against OU, and it was kind of a big deal. They lost that too.
Their heyday is dead and gone, and doubtful it ever comes back.
This post was edited on 7/26/22 at 10:41 pm
Posted on 7/27/22 at 1:25 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Yeah, Marc Richt at UGA had similar numbers but still fired him, and with Kirby it seems the right move, as he has taken them to the promised land.
I’m not saying that a program should never fire a coach if it thinks that it can do better. I’m simply stating my belief about why Nebraska is no longer considered to be relevant like OU is. Neither program has won a national championship in over two decades, but Oklahoma is still considered to be a worthwhile contender on the national stage.
Granted, the Sooners won a few Heisman Trophies, won the Big 12, and made the playoffs a few times, but they consistently came up short when it mattered. The difference, in my view, is that Oklahoma stuck by Stoops and enjoyed sustained 10+ win seasons, and that kept OU relevant in the minds of pundits and recruits, whereas Nebraska dumped winning coaches and are now struggling to regain their winning ways.
Posted on 7/27/22 at 5:01 am to BuckI
Forgive him, the question prolly confused him as it didn’t give him a chance to talk about Nick Saban
Finebaum sucks
Finebaum sucks
Posted on 7/27/22 at 9:28 am to BuckI
I read different smack boards, big ten included, and big ten fans obsess over the SEC. If the SEC makes a move of any kind the big tenners go hyper.
This recent realignment has big tenners bragging about coast-to-coast and becoming a national conference, located in all the big media centers of the country, etc.
When all is said and done what does that accomplish? Does it equate to more money per team?
None of this will make the HS recruits in the midwest states any better or more plentiful.
If it increases more big ten recruiting in California, that dilutes the talent from the two teams you recently took in.
This recent realignment has big tenners bragging about coast-to-coast and becoming a national conference, located in all the big media centers of the country, etc.
When all is said and done what does that accomplish? Does it equate to more money per team?
None of this will make the HS recruits in the midwest states any better or more plentiful.
If it increases more big ten recruiting in California, that dilutes the talent from the two teams you recently took in.
Posted on 7/27/22 at 9:46 am to bunkerhill
Honestly the B1G made the better move from a money standpoint. There is a LOT more money to be gained from adding CA - the entire state's loyalty. They will also add WA and Standford in time, making for a Western Division so to speak. Adding Texas locks down the rest of the state for the SEC (didn't need to since longhorn fans watch every A&M game anyway judging by stats), and adding OU adds a historically good team but not much else to the plate, especially from a monetary standpoint.
The B1G schools are going to make more in the next round of TV negotiations. They have the entire NE locked up, including NY, the state of CA, and are the center of all sports media affiliates like ESPN. I still expect them to make a play for Miami or FSU to add Florida to their "resume"
I'm not talking about competition, just money.
The B1G schools are going to make more in the next round of TV negotiations. They have the entire NE locked up, including NY, the state of CA, and are the center of all sports media affiliates like ESPN. I still expect them to make a play for Miami or FSU to add Florida to their "resume"
I'm not talking about competition, just money.
Page 13 of 14
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News