The Big Ten men's basketball tournament is one of the most entertaining sporting events to attend annually, but holding it a week before the selection special is a concern. I get making a strong play for New York City, but not the week before everyone is paying attention. This is the Big Ten, not some junior varsity conference whose championship is relegated to a sub prime time slot to fill cable content. We are the one who knocks!
Remember what Ramzy said, "A loss to an SEC team is really a half win." So, a loss against a SEC team (assuming you are also a SEC team) is better than a win against a non-SEC team. Therefore, Alabama's half win against Mississippi is better than any actual win Oregon could have had this season as no SEC teams scheduled the Ducks in 2014.
ManU has a ways to go to rebuild that defense without Vidic and Ferdinand. No matter how much firepower is added, no defense with Phil Jones as an anchor can win a championship. It's hard to continually win 4-3.
Kentucky is not comparable to Penn State. We will find out if Kentucky is even comparable to Indiana when they play at Missouri this weekend. As Missouri is currently 3-1 in the conference, it looks like most of the SEC is not on the same level as Indiana.
And every human in the ESPN board room simultaneously high fives each other.
And that was without Heisman candidate Melvin Gordon in the 2nd half.
How many rivals does that team have?
We are Ohio freaking State. We've had how many players drafted since Thad got here, including a handful of lottery picks? Before this past season, we had been to the most Sweet 16s in a row of any program in the country. If Jared Sullinger, Greg Oden, BJ Mullens (was #1 recruit in his class), and a dozen other McDonald's all Americans pick OSU, how is any recruit out of our league?
It looks like Thompson is playing schoolyard keep away and Shannon Scott is trying to jump to get his lunch box back.
Ha! Exactly. That is something "just Rutgers" celebrates. I guess that is still their best win, more than at Washington State or Navy. Either way, people act as though they have acclimated to the Big Ten so well and they are only 1-1 in the conference, having played both games at home. Let's hold off judgement and see how well they acclimate to games at Ohio State, Nebraska, Michigan State, and Maryland. Wisconsin coming to town will be a tough one for them too, as would Indiana had Nate Sudfield not been lost for the season. They could easily still miss a bowl game this year. But as you said, FatPants, congratulations, I guess?
So long as Stanford promises to play Stanford football.
Took the wife to the Michigan State at Northwestern game last year. The stadium was obviously not the shoe, but it had an energetic, if bipartisan, crowd. Aside of the literally freezing temperature (combined with my lovely bride's lack of a winter coat), it was a cool experience. Not to mention we sat 5 rows off the field in the endzone for a combined $20. If we lived in Chicago, I would go to multiple games a year.
While the timing may not have been right before, Oklahoma is more of a Big Ten institution than people think. Large state flagship public research based university (tier-1 research university by Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching). National power football program with top end overall athletic department. Very broad academic catalog with well diversified and established graduate programs. A national brand in/near a major metropolitan area ( <20 miles from downtown Oklahoma City).
They are not currently a member of the AAU. However, membership in organizations changes. Georgia Tech recently gained membership. Nebraska recently lost it. A decade from now, Oklahoma could be an AAU member. They have the programs in place. How attractive would Oklahoma be if they were an AAU member. Look at this as a 50 year move instead of a 5 year decision. Everything about Oklahoma (and Texas) says Big Ten. Good call, Buckeyeneer.
In what universe is Wisconsin on the same level as Texas and USC? They are historically and currently closer to Cincinnati than they are to the big boys. I understand the argument night games typically involve bigger matchups, but let's not pretend Wisconsin is as big of a deal as Texas, Nebraska, USC, Penn State, or other traditional powers we'll see in coming years.
Want to hear something really funny? Watch Big Ten team Indiana take it to SEC division champ Missouri at Missouri and listen to SEC ESPN Network announcers try to think of words to say. They can't say the SEC division champ is bad. They can't compliment the Big Ten team. The result was a lot of hilariously placed awkward silence right after plays followed by something along the lines of, "Hmmm, that's just, okay."
Boise State is over like MySpace and flash mobs and Mississippi was still only up 7-6 with less than 7:00 to go in a game in SEC territory. They really should not get much credit for this win.
And based on what information did South Carolina get ranked so highly this year? They lost their QB, 3/4 of their D line and half their secondary without having stud replacements ready to go. They realistically shouldn't even be ranked right now. Despite an inflated record against a pretty weak schedule the last 3 years, they are still just South Carolina.
How many schools outside the Power 5 would be willing to accept a disadvantageous deal similar to Iowa State and Baylor in the mid-2000's Big XII? (Essentially, where the % of conference payout is based on national TV appearances) Schools like Cincinnati, UConn, and Houston might agree to basically any terms necessary to be allowed to participate.
Second, there would likely be deep politics at play in any voting measure. The SEC and ACC wound not have to merge to form a voting bloc similar to the UN during the Cold War.
Who dismissed actual rankings and made up their own? You accurately quoted Sagarin's rankings of Big Ten teams below East Carolina. Alabama (#3), Stanford (#5), Michigan State (#6), Oklahoma (#12), Florida (#53), Tennessee (#60), Arkansas (#77), and Kentucky (#104) were correctly cited as well. This is based on the final 2013 Jeff Sagarin college football rankings following the BCS National Championship Game. Which part of these rankings surprises you, the low rankings of bottom SEC teams or the inconsistencies of rankings following head to head matchups? Keep in mind, my point was simply that using Sagarin rankings as a determinant of team strength is not always accurate.
Or are you making a joke along the lines of "stupid logic backed up by facts..."?
Also, yes I would take Illinois and/or Indiana over East Carolina on a neutral field. Might take Cincinnati too, and look what Illinois did to them. Both played far tougher non conference schedules (Cincinnati and Washington; Missouri, BG, Navy, respectively) than East Carolina. Not to mention the conference slate with OSU, Wisconsin, Michigan State, et al.
The same Sagarin ratings have 11-3 Stanford ranked 5th and 13-1 Michigan State ranked 6th. And Sparty even beat Stanford while Stanford played Stanford football! A higher ranking in the Sagarin elo chess system does not unequivocally guarantee a superior football team. 11-2 Oklahoma beat 11-2 Alabama by 2 touchdowns. Yet, Sagarin had Alabama #3 and Oklahoma all the way down at #12 somehow.
I would take 2013 Illinois, Northwestern (especially when healthy), Minnesota, or Indiana to beat 2013 East Carolina. For what it's worth, 2013 South Carolina opponents Tennessee (#60), Arkansas (#77), and Kentucky (#104) were ranked below East Carolina while Florida (#53) was somehow just above the Pirates. Which brings us back to Ramzy's classic "homogeneous death machine" comment.
That ring is pretty and all, but let's not pretend everything said by someone who won one of those is beyond reproach. Gene Chizik won a ring once, too. And Larry Coker. The man said ECU is a lot tougher game than a bottom Big Ten team. With the exception of Purdue (who was maybe the worst Big Ten team in a decade last year), he is wrong. Furthermore, the entire bottom half of his division may be worse than even a Tim Beckman coached Illinois team (second worst in the Big Ten). It's trendy to say the SEC is one "homogeneous death machine," as Ramzy so eloquently pointed out.
( http://www.elevenwarriors.com/college-football/2014/02/33748/how-win-games-and-influence )
Equally trendy is the "Hurrr Big Ten sucks worse than Conference USA, Pawl" narrative. Mr Spurrier's comment is simply being challenged here, despite that shiny ring.
Spurrier, never forget you are the coach of jSC. Not the real USC, the one in LA that matters. You coach just South Carolina. You have never been to a BCS bowl (something both Illinois and Purdue accomplished in the BCS era). Your biggest win of 2013 (at home against Clemson) required 4 Clemson turnovers in the fourth quarter of a tied game.
You have been able to fake national prominence on the strength of being an above average team in one of the worst divisions in college football (the SEC East) and the ESecPN hype machine. Last year, you beat Kentucky (at home by 1 TD), Arkansas, and Mississippi State. You beat Florida by less points at home than Georgia Southern beat the Gators by in Gainesville. Vanderbilt was one of your marquee wins last year. Read that last sentence again. You lost to a Tennessee team who lost to that historically bad Florida team by 14 points. How does that equal a top-10 AP rank?
Everyone knows Illinois’ hire of Beckman was a debacle. I would still have taken Illinois to beat Bert’s Razorbacks, last year’s Gators, or basically any Kentucky team. Now that you mention it, ECU would probably beat half of your division as well.
Never forget what you are and what you aren’t. You are the coach of an historically irrelevant, wannabe program, playing in what has been the little brother division since you got there. Nothing more.
I would probably flip the Iowa and Penn State win/loss, but could totally see it playing out this way. Anywhere in the range between 8-4 and 4-8 (depending on injuries) could happen, but 7-5 sounds about right.
TTUN seems tough to beat at home for non-buckeye teams and Michigan State has the athletes/system on defense to give Maryland's skill players trouble. Obviously, the Buckeye game is a Terp loss. Penn State is vulnerable but I expect them to get a boost at home in James Franklin's first season. Wisconsin will likely continue its downward slide since the JJ Watt (2010) and then Russell Wilson (2011) seasons, although they will still be tough at home. Maryland should be a slight home favorite over Iowa if they are healthy and Brown's passing accuracy progresses.
You, sir, deserve more than one up vote for this dissertation.
The problem with the NCAA is not exploitation of student-athletes receiving a free education. It is not the amateur model. The problem with the NCAA is buffoon president Mark Emmert botching everything he has touched and then claiming victory in the media while the whole world face palms, chuckles, and shakes it's collective head at his incompetence.
One of the biggest frustrations the past two years has been the lack or rotation among all positions except QB. Playing starters basically the whole game is short-sighted in college. These younger non-starting players are the future of the program. They need game reps, preferably some of which occur early rather than garbage time.
Jim Tressel used to play his entire second string offensive line the third series of every game. In an interview prior to the 2006 Texas game, he talked about trying to get as many players as possible in the game early. This was both to keep players fresh and to develop talent that would be needed in case of injury or the following season.
The types of players Ohio State recruits could contribute enough to play 20-30 snaps/game as freshmen an non-starting sophomores without hurting the team. Then, the following season, we are not starting at square one to replace graduating seniors. As it stands, many rising juniors are basically third-year freshmen with no meaningful game experience.
Winning games now and building for the future do not have to be mutually exclusive.
Please do not take this as arguing with you, because what you said is correct.
But, who gives a crap what is more "likely," or "realistic?" Quit trying to get a get an easily attainable coach at a discount. Go for the guy who has taken a power conference doormat and pulled them up to middle/upper pack or the guy tearing up a mid-major. Don't settle for the guy who had one winning record in the MAC or the unproven coordinator looking for a shot unless you are sure you have a diamond in the rough. The easily attainable girlfriend is rarely the complete package. Ask said big time coach what he needs to compete for championships and then actually give it to him. Recruit the whole family (wife, schools, etc) and have a plan to get the resources in place.
In short, try harder, administrators at Illinois, Purdue, Rutgers, and Wisconsin. Stop shortchanging your schools, your fan bases, and yourselves. You are better than that. Raise your expectations. Try harder!