Who wins the Big Ten next Year?

[homerHAWKeye777]

What's wild is that the league already appeared pretty "wide open" even before Tress got the boot. Now, with tOSU likely having to face an extra bit of adversity ... things look even wilder/stranger.

I don't see a single team and think "A-HA" it definitely has to be them. Every team appears to have some marked weaknesses ... or, at the very least, has some big shoes to fill at multiple positions.

Here are some thoughts ...

- Nebraska: Appears to have the best D "on paper" ... however, they will likely also continue to contend with having a lack of "true identity" on O. They'll be changing schemes on O ... however, if opposing Ds contain Martinez, then I see their O being DECLAWED.

- Wisconsin: Loses their biggest leaders at multiple spots ... on BOTH sides of the ball. They return some good talent on D and they should continue to feature a pretty punishing running game. I also like their WR, Toon, and their TE, Pedersen ... however, will their new QB be able to effectively distribute the ball to them?

- tOSU: They have the talent ... as always. However, they will also invariably be contending with serious personnel continuity issues. Lastly, they were pretty susceptible against good Ds even when they had Pryor at the helm ... how will they be if he does, in fact, leave? (or if he's not allowed to play) They're going to have A LOT of adversity to overcome. Of course, they have a pretty darn good OL and they have some quality RBs ... so their running game could help to make things interesting.

- Michigan State: Even with the losses that they have at LB ... they should still have a pretty darn good front 7 on D. Furthermore, they return some REALLY impressive talent at the skill positions on O. The big questions will be if they can improve their pass D and if their OL can fill the voids in order to help power what could be a pretty formidable running-game.

- Iowa: Yep, they have to replace a QB, a top TE, and their all-time record holder at WR. On top of that ... the Hawks have NO proven depth at RB. All the same ... Hawk fans seem convinced that their O will be a strength of the squad. Nuts, right?! Wrong ... that is, provided that Coker can remain healthy and that a capable backup RB can emerge. Iowa's O is built off its OL ... and Iowa should arguably have the league's VERY BEST groups (I respectfully disagree with Mr. Steele). Obviously, the D is the biggest question for the Hawks ... however, when Iowa's D is able to remain adequately healthy ... how often has Norm Parker fielded a mediocre Hawk D? Obviously, Iowa is hurting for depth at a few key spots ... thus, should injury strike at a few key positions ... then many pundits will be proven correct about the Hawks. However, if the Hawks can remain healthy ... then they're capable of beating ANYBODY in the league.

- Penn State: The Nitts have some serious fire-power on O. However, they're going to need to be able to tap into it in order to be successful. The question then is ... are they going to be able to resolve their "QB issues" so that they can tap into the quality of their skill players. Furthermore, their OL suffered A LOT from injuries last year ... and now they have to replace their best O-lineman. Given that PSU doesn't have the best track-record when it comes to developing guys on the OL ... will their OL play be good enough to allow the O to realize its potential. The Nitts have an absolute TON of talent on D ... and, furthermore, a lot of that talent is pretty darn experienced too. However, their D has been uber-dinged through spring-camp ... and they lost some serious talent on the DL due to a combination of graduation, grades, and injury. That said ... PSU should be poised to feature a truly excellent back-7 on D ... and they still have plenty of experienced talent on the DL too.

- Michigan: Michigan State is possibly the only other Big 10 program that features quite as much sheer fire-power on O. Furthermore, the Wolverines don't lack talent on the defensive side of the ball either. I really attribute most of the woes of the Wolverine D on injuries and poor coaching. The benefit of all those injuries is that the Wolverines now have A LOT of experience on D. Furthermore, with the new staff ... they actually have some good defensive coaches too. I know that many Big 10 fans aren't looking for the Wolverines to be "back" quite yet ... however, Michigan will be capable of beating ANY team they face this year. However, just because they can doesn't mean they will. As Iowa fans ... we know that fact as well as just about anybody.

- Northwestern: If Persa is back at full health ... then all of the other Big 10 Ds ought to be put on notice. The Wildcat running game really can't get worse ... and they should frankly even be better in the passing game in 2011. Dunsmore is a complete stud and Ebert is "money in the bank." The big question is how well their D can replace the guys that they lost from last year. Northwestern has a highly underrated defensive coaching staff ... and the fact that they "coach up" their guys will be a big reason why the Wildcats will remain a thorn in the sides of many of the upper-echelon Big 10 teams. Will the Wildcats be good enough to contend for the conference title? I don't know ... I doubt it ... however, they should be capable of being competitive ... and that's all you can ask for.

 

[74Hunter]

Arkansas was the 2nd best SEC team, and OSU did beat them. Wisconsin barely lost to a team that could've played in the NC.

Arkansas was a good team, no doubt, but they are a 5rd tier SEC team. They are not Florida, Georgia, LSU, Alabama, or Auburn. Sorry. TCU may or may not have been able to play for the MNC, but they were (still are) a mid-major.

Oklahoma beat an 8-5 UCONN,

Well, you have to play who they put in front of you.

and Nebby got manhandled by Washington.

Do you mean like 56-21? Oh, conveniently you forget the results for the game that mattered. A 12 point loss is not a manhandling.

 

[74Hunter]

Yes, and your offense will keep a lot of your opponents in every game as well!

Possibly, but I hope not.

 

[olddude]

I love the way you throw out mid-major when referring to TCU, to downgrade the Wisconsin lose. Bottom line, both Wisconsin and TCU were more than capable of running a train on Nebraska last year.

Thats funny.
Thing is look at the top rated teams in the B12 right before the bowls. Then look at how they got lined up. OK gets who? Missery who was up there gets who? Nebraska who was in the top 20 (I think) gets who? Wiskey gets a team ranked where, compared to any B12 team? See my point? Highly rated in the B12 yes, but how did they get matched up? That says alot right there.
Besides all of that, I have watched the Nebraska/OK game a few times. Do you know what the first thought is EVERY single time? Man those guys are small. Yes there is some size, but over all they are tall and fast. Which makes sence if you are running or covering the spread. You will see what I mean when you play wiskey. If ya want something to tell BO on how to prepare, tell him Wiskey is going to run it right down your throat. Thats not to be mean, it's just a welcome to the B10. That first game, will say alot obout how Nebraska is at stopping the run, against a team that can run.

 

[Sirhouseman]

What the ef does DoNU mean??

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Point #1 Arkansas was a good team, no doubt, but they are a 5rd tier SEC team. They are not Florida, Georgia, LSU, Alabama, or Auburn. Sorry. TCU may or may not have been able to play for the MNC, but they were (still are) a mid-major.

Point #2Do you mean like 56-21? Oh, conveniently you forget the results for the game that mattered. A 12 point loss is not a manhandling.

RE: Point #1 - There you're WAY off. You're basing your assessment of Arkansas on perception rather than their play on the field LAST YEAR. It's true that the other teams you listed have better overall traditions .... however, on the field last year, Arkansas truly was one of the best teams in the SEC last year.

Of course, given the team you cheer for, it's not surprising that you'd back more on tradition and perception than necessarily RECENT PLAY on the field.

What's more ... you might opt to marginalize TCU ... however it doesn't change the fact that TCU would have arguably handed the Huskers their behinds on a plate in a bowl match-up.

RE: Point #2 - Ummm ... did you watch the Nebraska bowl game? The score didn't reflect the disparity in the game. Nebraska really DID get manhandled in that game. However, the argument that you SHOULD have made in replay was that the Huskers simply didn't want to be in that game. They definitely didn't want to be in that game mentally and emotionally ... and it showed.

However, before you get all defensive ... you could also rightly argue that Iowa's "formidable D" got pretty manhandled by Minnesota's "patsy O." Just like the Huskers ... that was a game that the Hawks simply didn't care about.

 

[03bizHawk]

How does a 5th tier SEC team make it to a BCS game? Just curious.....

 

[74Hunter]

I love the way you throw out mid-major when referring to TCU, to downgrade the Wisconsin lose. Bottom line, both Wisconsin and TCU were more than capable of running a train on Nebraska last year.

Purely conjecture, that is your opinion. Some would say that you are incorrect in your opinion, but there is really no way to prove it one way or the other.

Love the recap of last year. Since you're talking about the two loses coming by a combined total of 6 points, lets remind everyone about how you barely snuck past ISU.

Yes, it was a bad game, but it was a win. Played with our 3rd team qb, and there was some very questionable officiating in that game, as well as the texa$$ and A&M games (same officiating crew).

And seriously no matter how you look at it, you're essentially bragging about .500 football against the top of the conference. Regardless of what conference you play in .500 against the best teams in the conference simply doesn't cut it.

Yes and no. While you never want to lose, and you want to dominate every team you play, going .500 against the top of the conference got us a shot at the conference championshiop.

And quit with the chest pumping about how awesome you were in the Big 12.

Never said awesome, just said that we were in the hunt for the conference championship for 2 years in a row in the second best conference in college football, so we should be able to compete in a lesser conference.

You were in the Big 12 North!!! Solid conference overall? Yes, but please the north wasn't exactly the strongest division in college football.

I love the "Big 12 North" argument, while completely ignoring that you have cross-divisional games. Last year, 2 of our 3 cross divisional opponents finished in the top 20, as well as the team we played in the CCG. 4 top 20 teams in total on our conference plate, which was more than the B1G would have offered.

BTW, the Big 12 North had 2 teams finish in the top 20 last year, which was only 1 fewer than the entire Big 10.

I think Nebraska definitely does a lot of good for teh conference, but let's not forget that this isn't the Nebraska of the 90s.

Love this too. The only people that I have ever heard refer to "the Nebraska of the 90's" are the haters. I've never mentioned Tom Osborne, Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, Grant Wistrom, Aaron Taylor, Ahman Green, or Jason Peter. Those guys are gone. Nebraska fans (painfully) know it's not the same team or program that it was 15 years ago, but it doesn't mean that we can't or won't compete at the highest level.

 

[74Hunter]

How does a 5th tier SEC team make it to a BCS game? Just curious.....

Typo. I meant 3rd tier.

 

[KnightHawk9]

DoNU went 2-2 against the top teams in the Big 12, the 2 losses coming by a total of 6 points with our starting qb playing at about 30%. With a healthy T-Mart (last year), I would have liked our chances against the 2 we lost. I would have expected better results in the B1G last year.

Teams with tiny little running quarterbacks always find it so surprising that they're always injured. I find this funny.

My prediction: 50% chance Iowa faces Nebby's backup QB.

 

[74Hunter]

Thats funny.
Thing is look at the top rated teams in the B12 right before the bowls. Then look at how they got lined up. OK gets who? Missery who was up there gets who? Nebraska who was in the top 20 (I think) gets who? Wiskey gets a team ranked where, compared to any B12 team? See my point? Highly rated in the B12 yes, but how did they get matched up? That says alot right there.

Its about matchups, you have to play who is put in front of you. Both the Big 12 and Big 10 had horrible bowl seasons last year, that is for sure.

Besides all of that, I have watched the Nebraska/OK game a few times. Do you know what the first thought is EVERY single time? Man those guys are small. Yes there is some size, but over all they are tall and fast. Which makes sence if you are running or covering the spread. You will see what I mean when you play wiskey. If ya want something to tell BO on how to prepare, tell him Wiskey is going to run it right down your throat. Thats not to be mean, it's just a welcome to the B10. That first game, will say alot obout how Nebraska is at stopping the run, against a team that can run.

I’m sure that Wisconsin will run right at us, and yes, the style of defense we ran will probably not hold up well against that sort of beating. Our DT’s are around 290, DE’s around 250-260, the one LB that played the most (David) weighed in around 210, with Compton being around 240. We played 5 or 6 DB’s most of the time. I agree with you, against Wisconsin, that will have to change. Only time will tell how it plays out.

 

[hawkfan1319]

Good Write up Homer . I see a very wide open race next year even though from what I have gathered the Husker faithful they think a 10-2 season is a failure.

 

[74Hunter]

RE: Point #1 - There you're WAY off. You're basing your assessment of Arkansas on perception rather than their play on the field LAST YEAR. It's true that the other teams you listed have better overall traditions .... however, on the field last year, Arkansas truly was one of the best teams in the SEC last year.

Of course, given the team you cheer for, it's not surprising that you'd back more on tradition and perception than necessarily RECENT PLAY on the field.

What's more ... you might opt to marginalize TCU ... however it doesn't change the fact that TCU would have arguably handed the Huskers their behinds on a plate in a bowl match-up.

Both TCU and Arkansas were very, very good teams last year, I agree with you. I’m sure both teams would have given Nebraska all we could have handled.

RE: Point #2 - Ummm ... did you watch the Nebraska bowl game? The score didn't reflect the disparity in the game. Nebraska really DID get manhandled in that game. However, the argument that you SHOULD have made in replay was that the Huskers simply didn't want to be in that game. They definitely didn't want to be in that game mentally and emotionally ... and it showed.

However, before you get all defensive ... you could also rightly argue that Iowa's "formidable D" got pretty manhandled by Minnesota's "patsy O." Just like the Huskers ... that was a game that the Hawks simply didn't care about.

I agree with you, I could have used that reason that the team was not mentally or emotionally in that game, but some would not buy it. It was kind of a catch 22 I was in. Either way, we gave up too many yards rushing, and the offense was a disaster in that game.

 

[Ikeasaurus]

Unfortunately it's going to be Nebraska, making the B10 look like fools yet again.

Perhaps, hypothetically, the Big Ten brought in Nebraska because they sensed the demise that was to bring down Ohio St.

 

[74Hunter]

Good Write up Homer . I see a very wide open race next year even though from what I have gathered the Husker faithful they think a 10-2 season is a failure.

Interesting. I can’t speak for all Husker fans, but we "lovingly" look back at better times when we were competing for National Championships and want that back.

Realistically, I want my team to compete for conference championships and BCS bowls, while being in the conversation for the MNC.

10-2 is a good year no matter how you look at it. Last year for example, 10-4 was a good year, but it was close to being so much better. It was disappointing to see the team (offense) play so poorly at the end of the year.

 

[74Hunter]

Teams with tiny little running quarterbacks always find it so surprising that they're always injured. I find this funny.

I don't find it funny, nor am I surprised when any qb gets injured. Even big pocket passers take big hits and get hurt.

My prediction: 50% chance Iowa faces Nebby's backup QB.

Very, very possible.

 

[homerHAWKeye777]

Besides all of that, I have watched the Nebraska/OK game a few times. Do you know what the first thought is EVERY single time? Man those guys are small. Yes there is some size, but over all they are tall and fast. Which makes sence if you are running or covering the spread. You will see what I mean when you play wiskey. If ya want something to tell BO on how to prepare, tell him Wiskey is going to run it right down your throat. Thats not to be mean, it's just a welcome to the B10. That first game, will say alot obout how Nebraska is at stopping the run, against a team that can run.

Traditionally Iowa has been a bit undersized on the DL and has not exactly been terribly stellar in the secondary. However, the Hawks have made up for personnel disparities by tackling VERY well, playing very disciplined ball, and using quickness and toughness to our advantage.

There have been years when it appeared as though Wisky should have completely flattened our DL and LBs given the size disparity ... and yet Iowa's D did more than hold their own.

As much as I hate defending the Nebraska D, a definite part of their strategy has been to render opposing teams rather 1-dimensional. And, in the Big 12 where the Os tend to be so "multiple" ... if you force a squad to be 1-dimensional ... and that 1-dimension is a finesse running game ... that usually won't hurt you too bad. As a result, Nebraska was willing to give up yardage against the run. That still beats the heck out of giving up a ton a big plays and points.

I agree that slowing Wisconsin's running game will not be trivial, particularly because it's most certainly NOT a finesse running game. However, I don't think that that is even the biggest concern for the Nebraska D against the Wisconsin O. While Nebraska fans like to tout how well Lamonte David is in coverage ... what they're not accounting for is that his reads in coverage weren't necessarily as challenging. However, when you're playing against Wisky ... LBs not only have to worry a ton about the running game ... but their TEs and RBs are also really important in their passing game as well. It's really easy for a LB to get caught in against the run against a team like Wisconsin (or Iowa) ... only to then get beat by the RB/TE.

 

[MoseSchrute]

Teams with tiny little running quarterbacks always find it so surprising that they're always injured. I find this funny.

Yep, it happens over and over. That's why it just doesn't go over in the NFL.

 

[olddude]

Traditionally Iowa has been a bit undersized on the DL and has not exactly been terribly stellar in the secondary. However, the Hawks have made up for personnel disparities by tackling VERY well, playing very disciplined ball, and using quickness and toughness to our advantage.

There have been years when it appeared as though Wisky should have completely flattened our DL and LBs given the size disparity ... and yet Iowa's D did more than hold their own.

As much as I hate defending the Nebraska D, a definite part of their strategy has been to render opposing teams rather 1-dimensional. And, in the Big 12 where the Os tend to be so "multiple" ... if you force a squad to be 1-dimensional ... and that 1-dimension is a finesse running game ... that usually won't hurt you too bad. As a result, Nebraska was willing to give up yardage against the run. That still beats the heck out of giving up a ton a big plays and points.

I agree that slowing Wisconsin's running game will not be trivial, particularly because it's most certainly NOT a finesse running game. However, I don't think that that is even the biggest concern for the Nebraska D against the Wisconsin O. While Nebraska fans like to tout how well Lamonte David is in coverage ... what they're not accounting for is that his reads in coverage weren't necessarily as challenging. However, when you're playing against Wisky ... LBs not only have to worry a ton about the running game ... but their TEs and RBs are also really important in their passing game as well. It's really easy for a LB to get caught in against the run against a team like Wisconsin (or Iowa) ... only to then get beat by the RB/TE.

I liked your post so well, I had to copy the whole thing again. You should be looking at a job at SECPN or something, cept I dont tink day louw logic and comon cents over dare.