SWBadger

The East/West thing makes sense. Wisconsin has no national championships but we have been a major player for most of the past 20 years. If we'd had Martinez, we'd have beaten Stanford... Iowa is also strong. In today's terms, they are the equal of Penn State. Without the scandal. Minnesota has 6 national championships, though the program is in a dormant phase. But who knows... maybe they can become decent. Illinois has Red Grange, one of the greatest football players of all time at any level. They also won a couple of NCs and though not consistently good, now and then they recruit their state well and have the ability to win 10 games. Purdue... there is sporadic history there. they will struggle in the West most years. Northwestern -- they finally won a bowl game and have been competitive over most of the last 10-15 years. they will never beat the huskers when the huskers are good, but they will compete with you most other years. I think you Big 10 people put too much emphasis on the past and somehow try to spin it like it's relevant today. It's not. Only Wisc and NW will probably be our toughest teams to play. The Leaders/Legends division were more competively balanced. You know what my friend, I think we Husker fans are wildly guilty of what you just said --- we put too much emphasis on the past and spin it as though it were relevant today. Today, no one in the B1G is relevant... except perhaps OSU --- and just how relevant remains to be seen. But NU, Wisconsin and Michigan basically matter as football programs only to their fans... to the rest of the nation's general college football fans, as they think in view of the national landscape of college football... NU and Michigan are nowhere in view (though seen as historic programs of past excellence) and Wisconsin is simply nowhere in view at all. That is not to say these programs have not accomplished anything recently --- but only that in terms of the national picture...all of these programs are not part of the picture. Well, somebody on the national scene seems to have heard about Wisconsin: http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/p/41637417/LSU-vs-Wisky-set-for-2014-opener-in-Reliant-Stadium.aspx

I think you make some good points. I think you have to look at it from a Husker perspective. We were in a conference with divisions. At the start, it seemed fairly equal. But as time went on, you could see that Oklahoma and Texas were making the South Division stronger and getting a lot more of the top recruits. Pretty soon all of the other southern schools started looking up as well. In the end, it was made into a divisional rivalry and things got disproportional. Husker fans see similarities in the East-West. You have basically 3 big time schools on the East and will use that as a recruiting advantage on kids on the East Coast. Where the West division is really the Mid-West with no real prime recruiting grounds except maybe Chicago. Which I know is a good area. With having Michigan and Michigan State in the same division as Nebraska along with the protected crossover game with PSU, it allowed us to recruit better on the East because kids knew they would head back that direction to have family see them a few times per year. I think Husker fans see what some B1G fans don't see because they have not been in this situation before. The effect of the division alignment on Eastern recruiting is a topic of discussion in Badgerland, too. I am a numbers person. I look at data. In the end, I don't think I accept the argument that Eastern recruiting will be hurt due to the division setup. Ohio is the most fertile recruiting ground in the Big 10. Wisconsin was in the same division as OSU. Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern, all members of the Leaders, had more Ohio recruits this year than Wisconsin. Wisconsin has played OSU almost continuously for over a decade. We have only minor Ohio presence to show for it. Ditto Pennsylvania, and we have played Penn State most years, too, and were in the same division as them. Ditto for New Jersey. So, I would like to see an argument - made on the basis of data - that demonstrates that such a claim is true. I will argue that what matters to recruiting (assuming great athletic facilities for all) is winning, winning, winning, coaching ties to recruits, and geographical proximity to good recruits. Yes, I don't understand the problems with the Big 12 North. But I drive through Texas, and I see huge cities, $60M high school football stadiums, and the like. I go via Norman, OK, and note that it is pretty close to big D (just like Ann Arbor is in the halo of Ohio high school football). My conclusion is that Texas and Oklahoma will always get top recruits, not by virtue of what division they are in, but by virtue of what I claim is important. I drive through Nebraska 4X/year, minimum. I don't see many people. I don't see a lot of large population centers in nearby surrounding states. I don't see $60M high school football stadiums. The only thing I see in Nebraska is enormous passion for Cornhusker football. By an accident of birth, Nebraska is going to be out at the end of any physical chain of humanity in any conference it is in, Big 10, Big 12 or otherwise. This makes it harder, no matter which division. Seems to me that the answer for schools like ours, Wisconsin or Nebraska, has to be to throw a net over all the local talent, then recruit nationally wherever one can find them. We simply do not have the fortunate situations of OSU/Michigan and Texas/OU. Perhaps the situations with other Big 12 schools that have led to an imbalance are school-specific, as opposed to being due to division alignment? Oklahoma State had a Phil Knight'ish experience, K-State's fortunes went up and down not with division alignment but rather with Bill Snyder, etc. Colorado, ugh. Correct me if I'm wrong. Parity scheduling also plays into this, if you really believe that division alignment is important to your success. Stay good, and you get continued exposure to the top teams in the East. All I know is, we have nothing to fear but fear itself, grin. Nebraska was a great get for the Big 10. I will be shocked if there isn't mutual success for both Nebraska and the conference, and if the Big 10 West doesn't acquit itself well in years to come. `

First post. Badger fan. I joined because of this thread. I just wanted to tell you how delusional Husker fans are if they think they are in any position to look down on Wisconsin in the new order of things. About the time I decided to do this, the thread got more realistic. Yes, by golly, there are plenty of Husker fans out there who understand reality... As to the new alignment, I would argue that it is as balanced as something like this can be. Yes, the East is probably a bit stronger, but not enough to justify all the handwringing. Here is the way I look at it: What counts, to a conference, first and foremost, is... conference championships. Here is the data on championships/co-championships since Penn State joined the league: OSU: 9 Wisconsin: 6 Michigan: 5 Northwestern: 3 Iowa: 2 Michigan State: 1 Purdue: 1 Illinois: 1 Penn State: 1 OSU is clearly the power of the conference. We cannot say that they are ascendant, because they were never that far down. Wherever they go the greatest power resides. After that it is close. Add Nebraska to the mix above, and the West should be represented well in the statistic that matters most, conference championships. People seriously underestimate Northwestern. Pat Fitzgerald appears to be there for the long term, and as long as he is there Northwestern will be an important factor in the conference. Wisconsin is ascendant. Anybody who thinks otherwise is going to be surprised. Anybody who thinks that Nebraska is the class of the West has a very short memory, indeed. Our coaching change will result in a better program, not a decline, and it will be apparent right away. Watch and see. Michigan is ascendent. But it isn't proven that they will be all the way back to where they were. Time will tell. Penn State has not been as successful as their image. Penn State hasn't really mattered all that much ever since it joined the conference. One conference championship in 20 years, all but one of those years under Paterno, hardly qualifies as a conference power. Now they have real problems with image and scholarship limits. I see no evidence that they will contribute to an East-West imbalance. The wild card in all of this is... Nebraska. If you guys will please get it together the West will be just fine. More than any other school, the balance of the conference is up to you. *You* are the question mark. Not Wisconsin. Not even Michigan, really. If you elevate just a bit, the West will be fine. So quit crying about being in an inferior division, do your part, get your act together, be the OSU of the West, get back to excellence. You are pretty close. I wish you great success. I look forward to a long and competitive series.