Bowl teams we played this year

[fortebleedsblue]

Make sure to read the disclaimers on the Big 10 prospectus - prior results do not guarantee future returns.

I'm not declaring the Big 10 dead on those two games. They are dead because their trend line is clearly down, their demographics are terrible going forward, and they made huge mistakes in realignment.

The Nebraska/Rutgers/Maryland trifecta is a straight up debacle in the long term.

Grasping at straws here but if northern football is dead with regards to recruiting then wouldn't it be fair to say that the AAC has greater upside down the road with UCF and USF for Florida, ECU for N Carolina, SMU and Houston for Texas? Add Tulane and Memphis and there is a solid southern presence. A little conference success and some strategic OOC game scheduling could really propel this conference.... A blessing in disguise or trying to make lemonade out of lemons?..

 

[whaler11]

And I've got no bone to pick with you...or the south. But what you're stating is opinion, not fact (outside of the obvious SEC dominance in the sport). If you were to compare the B1G to the Big12, you would get a wash. And I'm not exaggerating about that.

As for the population, all of the states in the north are growing also, just not at the same percentage. The "exodus" southward is having more made of it than really should be. Even Connecticut, the land of steady habits, is slowly growing (although listening to the news, you would think that we would run out of people in ten years!). Michigan is at a population stand-still, but they have almost 10 million people anyways:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_growth_rate

If you look at "where the recruits are going to come from", 4 of the top 10 highest producing states for recruits are in B1G country:

http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/9/11/4718442/college-football-state-texas-california-florida

And the top programs in the B1G still get many of their recruits from south of the Mason-Dixon anyways. Here's a "for instance" from Wisconsin, which has a healthy dose of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/connecticut/football/recruiting/commitments/2014/wisconsin-36

The B1G is healthy. Are they the SEC? Hell no. But nobody else is either...

I know it's my opinion and I know that bad demographics means they aren't growing as fast. Saying they have 4 of the top 10 states, while technically true - when their four add up to less than the states that dominate it's a bit of stretch to call that a positive. They now have three more mouths to feed and haven't really opened any new territories - they already did well in Jersey and the incremental gain in Maryland is hardly going to sustain 3 additonal programs.

I think you are ignoring that it isn't just the SEC that has passed them on the field. The PAC 12 has.

The ACC is gaining. Look at the NFL draft. The ACC clobbers them these days.

Financially healthy. Certainly for now. Football? Already third at best and sinking.

 

[whaler11]

Grasping at straws here but if northern football is dead with regards to recruiting then wouldn't it be fair to say that the AAC has greater upside down the road with UCF and USF for Florida, ECU for N Carolina, SMU and Houston for Texas? Add Tulane and Memphis and there is a solid southern presence. A little conference success and some strategic OOC game scheduling could really propel this conference.... A blessing in disguise or trying to make lemonade out of lemons?..

If the AAC had bowl access and a television payout that was in the realm of competitive one could make the case that it wouldn't be a death sentence.

Wouldn't hurt to never include schools like Tulane and Tulsa. About as useful as a fourth and fifth nipple.

If UConn/Cinci/UCF/USF/Houston/ECU/SMU/Navy/Temple got together and got a contact in the mid teens that could have been as good or better than the Big East as it died.

 

[Drew]

If the AAC had bowl access and a television payout that was in the realm of competitive one could make the case that it wouldn't be a death sentence.

Wouldn't hurt to never include schools like Tulane and Tulsa. About as useful as a fourth and fifth nipple.

If UConn/Cinci/UCF/USF/Houston/ECU/SMU/Navy/Temple got together and got a contact in the mid teens that could have been as good or better than the Big East as it died.

I still would've liked to have seen UMASS added over Tulsa. Could use another state university (ex: WVU, UConn, UNC, UVA, etc). I always thought that killed the old Big East in terms of perception because the schools in there weren't necessarily University of ____ and it was more schools like Pitt, Cincy, etc

 

[whaler11]

UMass is nice in theory but it's just not going to work out there. They just don't have enough of a fan base/institutional support to be successful in the long term.

 

[UConnDan97]

I know it's my opinion and I know that bad demographics means they aren't growing as fast. Saying they have 4 of the top 10 states, while technically true - when their four add up to less than the states that dominate it's a bit of stretch to call that a positive. They now have three more mouths to feed and haven't really opened any new territories - they already did well in Jersey and the incremental gain in Maryland is hardly going to sustain 3 additonal programs.

I think you are ignoring that it isn't just the SEC that has passed them on the field. The PAC 12 has.

The ACC is gaining. Look at the NFL draft. The ACC clobbers them these days.

Financially healthy. Certainly for now. Football? Already third at best and sinking.

I won't argue against the PAC being better top to bottom. I agree with that assessment. I will argue against the idea that Texas, Florida, and California dominating the recruit production of the country is in some way a new phenomenon, because it's not. That has been true for years. It's also true that the premier teams in the B1G still land high-level players from those states (more Florida and Texas than California, which seems to keep all of its players on the west coast primarily).

And I'm not sure that the B1G is worried about the three extra mouths to feed, if I'm being honest, since they don't care about the teams on the bottom. They will use the additional population bases in New Jersey and Maryland to feed their top 6 programs. And after all, that is all that anyone cares about when it comes to college sports! Nobody cares about the parity (for more, see 'Old Big East'). They just care about having a couple of teams in the top 10 (which the B1G does)...

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Schools like Michigan and Nebraska are no more than one very good hire away from being perennial contenders and will be in such a position for at least a few more decades even if it does take that long to finally find the right coach. They are where Alabama was with Franchione and Shula and where USC was with Ted Tollner/Larry Smith/Paul Hackett.

Where they differ from most schools (as any school can make the statement that the right hire would make them a perennial contender) is that a) the right hire for these schools doesn't need to be nearly as perfect as the right hire for us, Kansas, Rutgers, or any of the masses; b) what the right hire would need four to six years to accomplish at most schools could be accomplished in half that time at Michigan or Nebraska and c) Michigan and Nebraska won't need to worry about losing their head coach once they start winning the way many other schools would.

 

[whaler11]

The last time Nebraska didn't lose at least 4 games in a season was 2003.

Their biggest bowl win this century was a Gator Bowl against Clemson.

Their last top 10 end of season ranking was 2001 and only once since then have they finished in the top 15.

Between 1969 and 1998 they never lost 4 games in a season (granted they were shorter). But between 1969 and 1989 they never finished ranked lower than 12 and were in the top 10 17 times.

They still have a brand... But come on if you can't see the bloom is long off the Nebraska rose you are living in the past.

It's also the other way around. Their hires need to be more perfect because of the expectations. There are plenty more Randy Edsalls and Greg Schianos that can win 7-8 games a year than there are Bos and Osbornes who can win 10+ under enormous pressure.

 

[FDNY99]

Nebraska killed their program the day they left the B-12 for the B1G. They were able to transition their recruiting area to Texas after they weren't one of the only games in town on tv every weekend. But that pipeline seems to have dried up now. Another example of how chasing $$ clouded judgement and in the end downgraded the on-field product.

 

[whaler11]

Nebraska killed their program the day they left the B-12 for the B1G. They were able to transition their recruiting area to Texas after they weren't one of the only games in town on tv every weekend. But that pipeline seems to have dried up now. Another example of how chasing clouded judgement and in the end downgraded the on-field product.

Ding ding ding. Where in the hell is Nebraska going to recruit without Texas?

They are going to beat Michigan and OSU in the upper Midwest and Texas/AtM/Oklahoma in Texas for players?

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

I still would've liked to have seen UMASS added over Tulsa. Could use another state university (ex: WVU, UConn, UNC, UVA, etc). I always thought that killed the old Big East in terms of perception because the schools in there weren't necessarily University of ____ and it was more schools like Pitt, Cincy, etc

Sure, for sake of accuracy both Pitt and Cinci are big state universities with as much or more of a following than UMass. They aren't THE state universities, but then again UMass Lowell competes for funding directly with the Mess in Amherst. Now, tiny, private Tulsa is a real head shaker with only a couple thousand students and resulting tiny alumni base and following ... just not much around ...

 

[whaler11]

Rice makes as much sense as Tulsa. At least they have one sport they are really good at. Plus the story behind the guy the school is named after is enough to keep Butch busy for a few months.

 

[Drew]

Rice makes as much sense as Tulsa. At least they have one sport they are really good at. Plus the story behind the guy the school is named after is enough to keep Butch busy for a few months.

and they're an elite academic institution

 

[UConnDan97]

Schools like Michigan and Nebraska are no more than one very good hire away from being perennial contenders and will be in such a position for at least a few more decades even if it does take that long to finally find the right coach. They are where Alabama was with Franchione and Shula and where USC was with Ted Tollner/Larry Smith/Paul Hackett.

Where they differ from most schools (as any school can make the statement that the right hire would make them a perennial contender) is that a) the right hire for these schools doesn't need to be nearly as perfect as the right hire for us, Kansas, Rutgers, or any of the masses; b) what the right hire would need four to six years to accomplish at most schools could be accomplished in half that time at Michigan or Nebraska and c) Michigan and Nebraska won't need to worry about losing their head coach once they start winning the way many other schools would.

You're 100% right as it pertains to Michigan. I don't think that anyone can argue with that point (not even Whaler...I think...).

As for Nebraska; I think they have made a crucial error by leaving the Big12, not only for the aforementioned recruiting area issues, but also because breaking up the nationally followed games against Oklahoma and Texas (it's hard to believe they haven't played each other since 2010!) has really taken a lot away from them in terms of national importance. I still believe that they will remain a very good team. But I would be shocked if they return to the elite stage any time soon...

 

[ConnHuskBask]

The fact Tulane and Tulsa are in this conference still astonishes me.

10 team round robin hoops and then everyone plays everyone once for football. It's not like we got a bump at all for getting to 12 teams and a CCG.

We have exit money for a few years and then even if we're not in a P5, the contract is short enough (6 years?) that if the league does ok maybe we can get a significantly better deal with Fox maybe looking to add content along with ESPN.

 

[whaler11]

You're 100% right as it pertains to Michigan. I don't think that anyone can argue with that point (not even Whaler...I think...).

As for Nebraska; I think they have made a crucial error by leaving the Big12, not only for the aforementioned recruiting area issues, but also because breaking up the nationally followed games against Oklahoma and Texas (it's hard to believe they haven't played each other since 2010!) has really taken a lot away from them in terms of national importance. I still believe that they will remain a very good team. But I would be shocked if they return to the elite stage any time soon...

I agree that Michigan is one hire away from elite. But it might even be harder to find than Nebraska because their fanbase almost automatically rejects anyone who isn't a 'Michigan Man'. I wouldn't give up on Hoke yet, but that was a seriously pedestrian Michigan team this year.

They beat ND, and Minnesota... 2-6 against Bowl teams if you give PSU the benefit of the doubt. 3-6 if you count CMU winning 6 games.

Michigan has lost at least 5 games 5 out of the last 6 years? Yikes. Haven't won the conference in a decade.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

You're 100% right as it pertains to Michigan. I don't think that anyone can argue with that point (not even Whaler...I think...).

As for Nebraska; I think they have made a crucial error by leaving the Big12, not only for the aforementioned recruiting area issues, but also because breaking up the nationally followed games against Oklahoma and Texas (it's hard to believe they haven't played each other since 2010!) has really taken a lot away from them in terms of national importance. I still believe that they will remain a very good team. But I would be shocked if they return to the elite stage any time soon...

Nebraska recruited far more than just the state of Texas when they were at their best and they were only in the B-12 for a few cups of coffee over their most recent stretch of highest level of success (three titles in four years mid- 1990's). When they were at their best in recruiting the state of Texas (mid 1970's to late 1980's), the closest they got to that state in a conference road game was when they visited Norman Oklahoma.

They've recruited the west coast, east coast, Texas, Florida and the midwest very well for decades, what hurt their program was the retirement of an all time great coach (Osborne), replaced by an adequate coach (Solich deserved better treatment that what he received but he wasn't going to perform at a high enough level to keep them on top), compounded by a horrendous hire (Callahan may have done more damage there than PGDL did here), followed by another adequate coach (the one good thing that can be said about Pellini is that he did make an effort to restore the school's image) who really can be viewed as little more than a bridge from the mediocrity of Callahan to where the right coach can take them.

This school has sold out every home game since before my 2nd birthday (I'm 53 at the moment) and will guarantee a sale of every visitor's seat and any available additional seat to every road game. They will sell more tickets to their spring game than 75% of the FBS will sell to their best attended home game. I personally believe (because of the disparity in national titles between the two schools over the past 50 years) that it would be a bit easier for Nebraska than it would be for Michigan to get the right guy in there. Michigan's guy would need to be closer to perfect than Nebraska's.

What a lot of the talk (no longer playing conference games in Texas, too many years since their last title) about Nebraska reminds me of is the comments we heard (from fans of schools who hadn't accomplished a damned thing) after our men's hoops team lost to Va Tech in the NIT in 2010 and what some (from primarily the same schools) have been saying now that we no longer play in the BE about how our program can never be very good again. All this does is demonstrate the lack of understanding of the sport.

 

[whaler11]

Nebraska has the 35th ranked class on Rivals and isn't in ESPN's top 40. They have 3 four star commits. All three are from Kansas.

They have one player from Florida and none from California.

There comes a point - and Nebraska is there - where what you did three coaches ago ceases to be predictive of your future and you actually need to have actual success before it can just be assumed for you.

The game has changed - the monster programs don't roll out the balls anymore and dominate.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Nebraska has the 35th ranked class on Rivals and isn't in ESPN's top 40. They have 3 four star commits. All three are from Kansas.

They have one player from Florida and none from California.

There comes a point - and Nebraska is there - where what you did three coaches ago ceases to be predictive of your future and you actually need to have actual success before it can just be assumed for you.

The game has changed - the monster programs don't roll out the balls anymore and dominate.

There always was and always will be far more to it than merely rolling out the balls in order to dominate.

As far as what you did three coaches ago, I agree but the exact same thing could have been said about Alabama when Mike Shula was the head coach. The right guy (it may take years for Nebraskla to find him) could accomplish more at that school in three years than he could at 85-90 other FBS schools in eight years.

 

[thatguyed]

The biggest take away from the bowls to date for me is that midwest football is dead and everyone knows it. Every game money has poured in against the MAC and Big 10 and it's been right.

Maryland and Rutgers do not help. The gap is growing between north and south. The Big 10 is screwed on the football field.

So then it just might make sense to B1G to try to beef up on the basketball and olympic sports areas.

Gee, I wonder who would be a great fit for that?

 

[Road Dog]

UMass is nice in theory but it's just not going to work out there. They just don't have enough of a fan base/institutional support to be successful in the long term.

UMASS football is on life support. Their program is funded by MA taxpayers and soon that well may dry up. MA doesn't care about college football and they care even less about UMASS.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

Looking at the bowl lineup...will the B1G win a bowl game?

So far Minn and Mich have lost. Newcomers MD and RU have lost.

Upcoming likely losses....Iowa to LSU and Nebraska to Georgia.

That leaves OSU vs Clemson, MSU vs Stanford and Wisc vs USCe

I think these 3 are a toss up at best and if you put a gun to my head, I would pick against all 3 B1G teams.

Revisiting this....I guess the reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated.

Nice win by Nebraska (although I think if that TE caught that last pass Georgia would have won. Also..if GA has Murray they would have won).
Very impressive win by MSU. Iowa and Wisconsin played tough.

It will be interesting to see the OSU/Clemson game. Will Clemson "clemson"?

 

[IMind]

And that's exactly what I am saying we don't add much of anything. It's not like they need access to NE recruits.

You're right... my only response is we're a warm body. We're basically in the same spot we've been in since the beginning of expansion. There really are only a handful of athletic departments that have the kind of budget we do... and none left are anywhere near as successful. If they're all going to 16 team leagues then we're gonna get in somewhere. If the GOR holds and the B1G wants to expand there are only 3 or 4 viable options. The Big 12 is probably going to have to do something in the next decade. The ACC is already bitching about weird scheduling. Something's going to give. It's Diaco's job to make us more attractive than UCF, Cinnci, or USF. It's really kind of a low bar.

 

[ZooCougar]

You're right... my only response is we're a warm body. We're basically in the same spot we've been in since the beginning of expansion. There really are only a handful of athletic departments that have the kind of budget we do... and none left are anywhere near as successful. If they're all going to 16 team leagues then we're gonna get in somewhere. If the GOR holds and the B1G wants to expand there are only 3 or 4 viable options. The Big 12 is probably going to have to do something in the next decade. The ACC is already bitching about weird scheduling. Something's going to give. It's Diaco's job to make us more attractive than UCF, Cinnci, or USF. It's really kind of a low bar.

I am concerned that the scheduling difficulties will cause conferences to take an appetite suppressant on expansion. More teams could mean less exposure and brand dilution and hits the mid pack teams that need exposure.

 

[IMind]

I am concerned that the scheduling difficulties will cause conferences to take an appetite suppressant on expansion. More teams could mean less exposure and brand dilution and hits the mid pack teams that need exposure.

I'm not that concerned about the exposure issue. Everyone gets on TV.

I think in the ACCs case though... the unbalanced scheduling will cause them to just bite the bullet add UConn and have a north and south division. Basketball is less of an issue. I think that's the most likely scenario without the Big 12 doing something.

 

[ZooCougar]

I'm not that concerned about the exposure issue. Everyone gets on TV.

I think in the ACCs case though... the unbalanced scheduling will cause them to just bite the bullet add UConn and have a north and south division. Basketball is less of an issue. I think that's the most likely scenario without the Big 12 doing something.

Not all exposure is equal. Playing FSU and Michigan gets you more exposure than playing Wake and Illinois. One gets you on a network perhaps, the other gets you a webcast on ESPN 3. There will be a bunch of schools in P5 conferences soon, that will be getting millions and will be relatively invisible (or at least feel that way). I think some schools will feel that the mustard is being spread too thin.

 

[Drew]

Revisiting this....I guess the reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated.

Nice win by Nebraska (although I think if that TE caught that last pass Georgia would have won. Also..if GA has Murray they would have won).
Very impressive win by MSU. Iowa and Wisconsin played tough.

It will be interesting to see the OSU/Clemson game. Will Clemson "clemson"?

Was at the gator bowl. Nebraska is without Taylor Martinez (Sr QB 1st team all big ten voted by coaches last year) Spencer Long (All American OL) Avery Moss (starting DE) and more. Both teams have injuries, it's about who can manage it better.

 

[ZooCougar]

B1G isn't just in a down period. It is pretty much the new normal. I am sure they will be OK but I think Whaler is right. They will be 5 of 5. Not sure if there is much they can do, adding two islands in the south such as Georgia Tech and FSU wouldn't have been enough.

Nebraska started its slide when they joined the Big 12 and competition stepped up. Texas, OU, K State, and others made the playing field stiffer and they never adjusted. Osborne hated dealing with then Texans and he took his ball to the B1G where they feel they are a better cultural fit.

Back in the day, when all they had to deal with was OU and occasionally CU, life was pretty sweet. In the day of the almighty TV dollar, this conference would never survive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Eight_Conference

 

[BoatShow]

I still would've liked to have seen UMASS added over Tulsa. Could use another state university (ex: WVU, UConn, UNC, UVA, etc). I always thought that killed the old Big East in terms of perception because the schools in there weren't necessarily University of ____ and it was more schools like Pitt, Cincy, etc

Being the second most popular program in your state after BC is not a recipe for success.

 

[whaler11]

Michigan State has a very good team. They did catch a huge break early when down 10-0, Stanford deflected an easy interception at midfield to Michigan State for a first down. They really did dominate for stretches after that.

Nebraska may have been better off without Martinez, they were pretty bad when he was around this year.

The scheduling issue is huge. Why would some in the Big 10 want to further water down their schedule and see the big names less?

Webcasts won't be an issue for many going forward. The SEC, Big 10 and Pac 12 have their own networks to stash games. ESPN will need a ton of ACC/AAC for what has moved to conference networks and Fox.