For those thinking the Big Ten is destined for permanent gloom and doom ...

Cover3

Cover3

Well-Known Member
Someone on here recently made a good point that the conference has been similarly poor in the past, but has bounced back. Indeed, after looking up the 1981 standings to refute the idea that Hayden would have taken only one team to Pasadena under the conference tiebreaker rules circa 2002-2010, I stumbled across 1982:

1982 Big Ten Conference Year Summary | College Football at Sports-Reference.com

The conference as a whole in '82--THE ENTIRE CONFERENCE--logged a grand total of one week in the AP top ten that entire season. It was by Michigan. In mid-September. That's bad. Like, 2012 bad. Things will recover.*

*-That's not to say the B1G will become a total powerhouse, either. Historically, the conference has had trouble against the Pac-10/12 in the Rose Bowl, going back probably to 1980 at least.
 
While that's true, I think times are a little different now. The population shift to the south wasn't there in '82. It is now, and it puts teams in the north (Big Ten) behind the 8-ball. And it's not going away anytime soon.

That doesn't mean the Big Ten can't be good again. But this is apples to oranges, IMO.
 
OSU and Michigan are both recruiting very well (around top 5 nationally). I personally believe that will translate into success for both of them (like the old days).

Everyone else in the BoneG is pretty far behind the two of them in terms of recruiting.
 
racerhawk said:
OSU and Michigan are both recruiting very well (around top 5 nationally). I personally believe that will translate into success for both of them (like the old days).

Everyone else in the BoneG is pretty far behind the two of them in terms of recruiting.
Click to expand...

Why do you call it the "boneG"?
 
Also, the Big 10's problem isn't too hard to figure out. There's a quarterback shortage in this conference right now.
 
Right. Hence my asterisk marking their problems in the Rose Bowl since the 1980s. I'm not saying we'll usurp the SEC...ever...but just pointing out that having two teams in the top 25 and floating near the bottom of it is not necessarily the conference's destiny for the next 100 years, as many imply.
 
I don't buy the population shift thing. Look at those freek SEC D-linemen, the tailbacks the DB's - they're from little towns in the deep south or from other places in the deep south. Their families have been there for ever.

Ingram was from Flint, MI but that is an anaomoly - Saban$ recruiting
 
NCHawker said:
I don't buy the population shift thing. Look at those freek SEC D-linemen, the tailbacks the DB's - they're from little towns in the deep south or from other places in the deep south. Their families have been there for ever.

Ingram was from Flint, MI but that is an anaomoly - Saban$ recruiting
Click to expand...

Wow. Just wow.

You might notice there's been less and less top flight talent coming from the north. The percentage of top-flight recruits living in the south is increasing, at the same time as the percentage of the population in the south is also increasing. Seems a tad ridiculous to see that as nothing more than coincidence.
 
I know I would have been an all american if I'd been born in the south. I'm from Iowa, never had a chance..
 
you guys are confusing correlation with cause and effect.

Yes there has been a big migration to the south. But those migrating to the south are not producing top football talent. People llike me migrated to the south. Not parents of those athletes.
 
NCHawker said:
you guys are confusing correlation with cause and effect.

Yes there has been a big migration to the south. But those migrating to the south are not producing top football talent. People llike me migrated to the south. Not parents of those athletes.
Click to expand...

It is true. Stupid, lazy people live in the south.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top