junior4949

Phillip Fulmer, Lloyd Carr, and Mack Brown all say hi. I don't think winning the NC in 99' would have bought him a lot of time. I'm guessing it buys him 2 years tops. If we'd have won the NC in 01' then he more than likely gets afforded more time.

December 2, 2002 is probably the date that sticks out most to me in terms of causing a lot of change. This was the date Bill Byrne handed in his letter or resignation. On one hand, it's hard to fault Pederson, TO, and Eichorst. They were simply hired as AD to fire the current football coach. On the other hand, it's hard not to fault them for the clowns they hired. It probably isn't fair to include TO, but he was hired as AD to can Callahan. It also isn't really fair to include Bo as one of the clowns as he did inherit a mess and changed the direction of the program even though he really wasn't a long term solution.

How much money does it take to buy trophies? Right now, we're cash rich and asset poor along with the rest of the B1G in comparison to the SEC. We may laugh all the way to the bank while they laugh throughout the rest of the year. Urban's "retirement" was a huge blow to the conference especially if Harboob can't get his $hit together. Other than Frost and Harboob, what can this conference really hang it's hat on? This conference is beginning to resemble the old Big 8 after OU went on probation.

Is the bolded really true? Since TO retired, we haven't exactly been known as a program that holds onto football coaches. Heck, we've had as many ADs since TO's retirement as coaches haven't we? It's likely had Frost not taken the job that it would have been open again within the next 3-7 years.

I would say Devaney's run in the late 60's to early 70's was more of an anomaly than TO's run in the 90s primarily because of the information, video, etc. of recruits available to the coaches at the time.

I think there are a couple of reasons the South is dominating. One would be the coaching. Take Bob Stoops for example. He left Kansas State in a lateral move as defensive coordinator to become Florida's defensive coordinator. Why? He said the daily schedule was much shorter at Florida than at K State. Typically, coaches in the South don't have to work as hard or as many hours as they do in the North because they are surrounded by excellent recruits. Therefore, it's more likely to find the best coaches in the South rather than the North. Why are the best recruits in the South? It's the exact same reason that the best hockey recruits are typically found in the North instead of the South. It's the weather. More specifically, it's the amount of time as in months young athletes play football in the South when compared to the North. When one considers the amount of club football played nearly year round in the South, it's of little wonder why those athletes are better prepared for the sport of football because they've simply spent many more hours honing their skills. Has anyone ever wondered why most of the Bowl games are played in the South? It's because of the weather and being a more enjoyable experience for the fans. Well, it's also a more enjoyable experience for most of the players as well. I know I'd much rather go play catch with my son when it's nice and sunny rather than cold and miserable. For a North team to become the next NC winner, I think it will take a couple of things. First, it will take an experienced staff who has worked together for quite some time. Second, it will take a staff that is geared to player development. I don't necessarily think the best athletes are all found in the South. I just think that they're ahead of most players in the North because of the amount more football they've played prior to college. Helping the cold weather recruits catch up with the warm weather recruits will be key to leveling the playing field.

How many NDSU Bison expect to make it into the NFL? How many have made it into the NFL in the last decade? 15 games in the lower divisions is different than for power 5 D1 athletes because those players are just thrilled to get their education paid for. The 4 and 5 star recruits in D1 have aspirations of playing in the NFL. The more games they play the better the odds of getting a permanent injury. Bosa quit Ohio State when they were definitely in playoff contention. Let's just call it for what it is. The only reason the playoff might expand is for one thing and one thing only: money! The players with the skills to make it to the next level really don't get any benefit from the windfall. I'm not sure I buy into the argument that those playing in the playoff benefit much at all from the exposure. Year in and year out, we see players stock either rise dramatically or fall dramatically based upon how they do at the combine. Dabo has already said he'd be in favor of going back to the way it was before the playoffs just having the #1 and #2 team play in a bowl game at the end of the year for the NC. In 2016, Saban hinted that he was in favor of expanding the playoff. In 2017, he was against it arguing it would diminish the other bowl games. In 2018, he made the same argument about diminishing the other bowl games. One could argue he changed his mind simply because of the different situation his team found itself in at the end of the season. However, I believe there's a bit more to it than that. Why are Dabo and Saban against expansion? Is it because it makes it more difficult to win a NC? Possibly. Or, is it because they see the tide changing and are afraid more and more of their better athletes will simply decide to skip the games in order to prepare for the draft? 2016 was the beginning of the trend of sitting out games in the post season when Fournette and McCaffrey sat out. In 2017, that number went from 2 to 10. In 2018, the number doubled to 20. See a trend?

Most Ohio State fans would not agree with the bolded. They call them the John Cooper years.

Times have changed. Back in TO's day, I would say no. His recruiting classes right before the run weren't really highly ranked classes. However, a lot of things have changed since then. Heck, back then the best two teams didn't even play each other in the bowl most years because of conference tie-ins with bowls. In today's day and age especially with talk about expanding the playoff, I'd say you definitely need at least some top 10 classes or need to be very lucky in avoiding injuries and attrition. Depth becomes a big factor when a playoff is involved. If it expands to eight teams, it will be an even bigger factor if the ultimate goal is a NC.

I think if a fan is being honest with themselves, you have to go with either Devaney or Pettit. They built something. Cook and Osborne are similar, but they are both behind the top 2 because they inherited a power house and didn't let the wheels fall off.

If the bolded happened, I doubt we'd be in the B1G. It's been quite a while since most people would consider us in the top tier. Our last year in the Big 12, Nebraska and Maryland had an almost identical records and both finished just inside the top 25. Maryland's most recent conference championship is more recent than ours.

Speaking of eras, we're entering a new one. We have players who are opting out of bowl games in order to prepare for the NFL draft. We had a player who quit the team after getting an injury to prepare for the NFL draft. In the past few years, college players are getting a bit more vocal about how the money is allocated. If we extend the season by keeping conference championship games and then going to an eight team playoff, it might be the straw that breaks the camel's back. A few years ago, there was a RB that was encouraged to not even play his junior year of college because the shelf life of a RB in the pros is short. I have a feeling this will be revisited in the near future. I never thought I'd see the day where a coach of an amateur sport is paid more than a coach of the same professional support. Times are a changing, and I believe asking these players to do even more for their schools will cause the breaking point.

I think we're being a little premature with the Maryland bashing. Last year, they had a pretty decent recruiting class. The coach they just hired is thought to be a great recruiter. They more than likely get just enough talent into their program to keep most B1G teams honest. I realize the guy they just hired didn't exactly light the World on fire the last time he was a head coach, but he has spent the last few years under Saban. In a sense, he's put Bama's offense on the map.

The bolded happened because two P5 conference champs were undefeated along with Notre Dame. I've always been for an 8 team playoff. However when we get down to the rat killing, I'd rather see a one loss champ miss the playoffs than see a three loss champ who played in an excessively weak conference make the playoffs. When one considers why it took so long to get a playoff (too many games, diminish regular season, etc.), I think we're stuck with the current system and four team playoff for quite a bit longer.

Notre Dame is the crown jewel. The B1G should try to land Notre Dame and OU. Then, they could tell Texass to pound sand.

When we belonged to the Big 12, there were three blue blood programs. With an odd number, it stands to reason why it was lopsided. In the B1G, there are four blue blood programs. I've always wondered why they put three in one division and one in the other? If the B1G is successful in getting OU and Texas, this will all work itself out. If they don't, then it would stand to reason to move Michigan. At the end of the day, I'd say we're in a good spot if they leave things the way they are. Winning this division is easier than the other one. Take Wisconsin last year. They didn't even have to play a couple of the better teams in the B1G. If they would have taken care of business in the title game, they were in the playoff.

If you go back to my first post in this thread, you will read I specifically said two best records. I didn't say anything about two best teams. You said I forgot about this year. I didn't because I specifically said two best records which Northwestern had this year. Until each and every B1G teams plays one another head-to-head, it's going to be difficult to say who the best two teams are. Last year, are we sure the two best teams played in the B1G title game? I mean Wisconsin didn't play either Penn State or Michigan State. Arguing whether the two teams in the conference championship need to be the best two teams or have the best conference records really doesn't matter that much to me. If they change the rules and the format, it just solidifies my thought how they're basically catering to one or two programs in the B1G. Isn't this one of the major reasons we left the Big 12?

Washington really didn't have a very good season. They lost three games all at the hands of teams that finished unranked. The only team they beat that finished ranked was Utah. Yet, we're willing to give them a playoff spot because they happened to be the champion of a very weak conference this year? This is why I have a bit of a problem with this format. Michigan loses to teams ranked in the top 10. They stay home. Washington loses to just about every team they play with a pulse, but they get into the playoff. If this doesn't diminish the regular season, I don't know what does. Bama vs. Washington in the first round would pretty much just be giving Bama a bye.

Two best teams, two best records; there is a difference. Northwestern only had one conference loss heading into the title game which was to Michigan. They beat the same Purdue team that blasted Ohio State. Michigan is the same team that got drilled by Ohio State one week before the conference title game. I didn't forget about 2018. Northwestern had the same conference record as Michigan. Northwestern hadn't played Ohio State. I'm not sure why anyone would want to watch a rematch of Ohio State and Michigan when they just played the week before. This is why I think it would be dumb to change things from how they currently are.

This is what happens when the conference misses out on it's second playoff in a row. Are we trying to reinvent the wheel here? Division realignment sounds like a good idea until it doesn't. College football is cyclical. Take the Big 12 for example. When it was first formed, the strength of the conference was in the North. A little less than a decade later, it was clearly in the South. Since we've belonged to the B1G, there has only been two years where teams with the best records didn't play in the conference title game. One was 2012, but that was because of sanctions. The other was 2016. In 2016, both Penn State and Ohio State were one loss conference teams while Wisconsin was a two loss team. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me to change things.

Yes to the bolded. However, it's also going to warm Harbaugh's seat up pretty good if Michigan doesn't take over the East next year. The next two to three years could be very interesting in the B1G especially if Franklin bolts for USC.

Yep, I can see this happening as well. Once Dabo leaves the ACC, it will be prime for the taking by Urb.

Urb's been pretty consistent. He goes to a conference that for the most part has been underachieving with not so marque coaches. If he's coaching in the next five years, this is how I see it playing out. Saban retires at Bama, Bama hires Dabo. Urb goes to Clemson. The USC job almost fits the bill, but I'm not sure Urb wants to butt heads with Chip year in and year out.

At the end of the day, they're going to do what they're going to do. However, there is a bit of a problem with auto-qualifiers. It has long been told that the reason it took so long to even get a playoff was because D1 didn't want to diminish the regular season. If we had auto-qualifiers this year, 10-3 Washington would be in the playoff. They lost to 7-5 Auburn in the regular season. Auburn finished 5th in the SEC West. By putting Washington in the playoff, I would think it would greatly diminish the regular season. Another reason it took so long to get a playoff was because of the extra games. By playing a conference title game and then having an eight team playoff, there would be more games for a couple of teams. I have no doubt that going to an eight team playoff will be fought tooth and toenail by the Power 5 Commissioners unless there are auto-qualifiers. Yet, they're still going to have to have a committee that picks the three at-large teams. The exact same committee that has in the past chose teams in the current four team playoff that didn't even win their conference. I've long thought an eight team playoff was the best and doing away with conference championship games. However, I just don't we're going to see it because of butthurt Power 5 Commissioners. It appears that an eight team playoff is still quite a ways off.

On the bolded, under the current format? Not so fast. Last year, Wisconsin smacked down the West teams and played in Indy. Guess what? Neither them nor the team that beat them made it into the playoff. Considering the most recent teams the B1G has brought into the conference, I'm not sure one could argue it was to make the conference better. We were brought in for the same reason at Rutgers and Maryland.