Caven

As long as they are smart with the scheduling a 16 team conference can be made to work - but I am not sure if they will be smart with the scheduling. Thanks Knappic for the run down on the strengths and weaknesses as you see them. That was pretty much in line with what I had in mind as an outsider for what they are.

That's about the reponse I expected. That wasn't my response. I'm still willing to give it to you, I just want to know what you expect. Do you expect your question to be taken as seriously as you took mine, or do you expect a real answer? That's a legitimate question. After all, if you're not going to take this conversation seriously, why should I bother with you? I would like to see what your honest opinion is of what potential drawbacks might have been that Delaney had to convince the presidents to overlook in this whole process. I know what I think and based on this thread I have far fewer that I think of than others it appears

psst - come to our school and we will give your ROOMMATE a sweet sports car. *wink wink, nudge nudge* Nothing in the rules against you borrowing "his" car for the weekend right?

None of those games will cost me $39.95, thats gonna be nice. So true! Spending over $100 a season to watch games on PPV and ordering ESPN Gameplan for the day when the ABC regional game didn't air in my area sucked badly! So glad those days are gone for good. GBR!!! Won't the regional ABC coverage still give us problems? No - the Big Ten requires a reverse mirror on either ESPN or ESPN2 for the regional ABC games.

Does anyone know - will a postseason ban for OSU include the conference title game? That would suck to have OSU win it and then be banned from the Rose Bowl.

Before you get too excited... Miles (from Google Maps): Lincoln to Dallas: 640 Miles Lincoln to Indy: 641 Miles Austin to Dallas: 199 Miles Columbus to Indy: 176 Miles Just saying.... Probably should put the mileage from Wisky or PSU - not OSU.

Underrated? I've heard and seen his name in heisman darkhorse talk. Thats not underrated. The Dude is killing your argument.

This has a lot to do with the gut reaction of many older B10 fans. Just think of the year that Nebraska played for the MNC after not even winning the North. Instead of doing that - you would have been sitting at home for the holidays. How many years before the BCS did the Rose Bowl team have a chance for at least a share of the NC? Until very recently playing in the Rose Bowl was the ultimate goal because it gave you a marquee game to try and get that last final push for the votes necessary to win the title. Yes, you will get fans that in the heat of the moment will say beat Michigan or make it to the Rose Bowl as their number 1 goal - but let's get real. Every single fan wants their team to win the title. If OSU goes 4-8 but they beat Michigan, their fans aren't truly going to be happy about that season. Go 11-1 regular season, make the B10 title game and end up playing in the MNC game and winning? Fans aren't truly going to care that the single loss on the season is to Michigan. Yes they would rather it have been to ANYONE else - but they are still going to consider the season a massive success. Hell - when we enter the Thanksgiving game against you guys undefeated and you squeak out a victory against us because we are looking ahead to the B10 title game and the MNC game after that, I won't consider the season a bust even

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6593311 I can't believe the number of SEC coaches coming right out and saying that they need to basically cheat in order to win.

I would support the player fully and have zero problems with them. If I missed this point then I apologize: The biggest arguement generally made against this is the locker room comraderie. They all change/shower/etc together and (justified or not) concern is always stated about person X staring at and objectifying while in the locker room.

Players already get stipends on top of their scholarships if I'm not mistaken. I don't know too many student athletes that are having problems making ends meet while in school. Their families may be a different story though. Some families rely on their children to pitch in during and after high school to make ends meet. I think the majority of supporters feel that schools make a lot of money of the backs of young student athletes and that they need to be compensated more than they currently are. Although it is a good theory and would likely be well received by larger universities, and obviously the athletes themselves, smaller universities will find it difficult to financially compete even if it's properly regulated. If it does come to fruition, they are going to need to create significant amount of guidelines and regulations. I would much prefer to give back to the student athletes by sinking the money into better facilities and equipment (much like Nebraska has/is doing). Players do NOT get stipends. They did 20 years ago, they don't now. A "Full-Ride" college scholarship covers Tuition, Books, University Fees and the cost of a dorm room. THAT'S IT. That scholarship doesn't cover parking, gas, laundry, insurance, car payments, groceries and daily essentials, entertainment etc. It also doesn't cover extra rent you would have to pay if you live outside a dorm (many older players are married and can't live in dorms for example and others join a greek house, many of which have rent/member fees associated with them) and it doesn't even cover a lot of extra course and lab fees that many classes require. Even on a "Full-Ride" scholarship it costs somewhere between $2,000 and $3,000 a year out of your own pocket to be a student-athlete at a major university.. and that's living fairly meagerly. And unlike their academic scholarship brethren who get the same monetary benefits but don't bring in anywhere close to the notoriety or money to the university that the athletic scholarship students do, the student-athletes have to do all of that without having a job because according to coaches, their sport is supposed to be their job. Full ride scholorships should not cover things that are personal choices. No car???? no car payment, no insurance, no gas, no parking fees. If a player chooses to live off campus they get the cost of a dorm room already, why pay them more money for that choice. Dont want to sound like a dick, but how many spouses have worked to pay for the others college. I bet that scholarship athletes eat better at the training table than any other student does. What other benefit does a scholarship athlete get??? They get the opportunity to leave college with a degree and be debt free (no student loans). if they choose to have all of the "nice to have" not "need to have" what is stopping them from taking out student loans? is there a NCAA Rule that says a full scholarship athlete cannot take out a student loan? Just for the sake of argument lets compare this to a student on a full academic scholorship. The academic gets full tuition, room and board - just like the athlete. The academic generally must maintain above a 3.5 which takes a lot more studying so you could argue that their job at school is to study just like it is argued that the athletes job is to play their sport. Here is where you run into a problem though. If the academic wants extra money to spend on movies, comics, paying the difference to live off campus - they can get a part time job. The athlete is forbidden from doing this. Why should they be forced to take out a student loan? Other students can work while they are in college so they don't go in debt - but we make that off limits to the athletes. To be fair - you HAVE to make it off limits to the athletes or you would have them doing minimum wage jobs for $1000 an hour at some boosters place of buisiness. Since the standard method of making some extra cash is forbidden to them it makes perfect sense that the university/conference steps in and does something about it in a logical and controlled manner.

They had to pick something of Minnesota's (each team is guarnateed at least 1 prime time game now) and they probably just filled in all the games they WANTED and then gave Minnesota the slot that was left.

He has TM ranked at 5th just ahead of Iowa's QB and gives him some good running props. 5. Taylor Martinez, Nebraska: This was a tough one, and Martinez earned the spot mostly through his experience under center; he has more than those listed earlier. He was 116-196 for 1631 yards, 10 passing touchdowns and 7 INTs last year. Hes not a great passer, not hardly. If its third and long, its about ready to be 4th and punt. However, his legs…those legs is what makes him dangerous and I am excited to see if he can run the way he did last year in a league that prides itself on defense. He ran for 965 yards and at times proved to be as dynamic as Michigans Denard Robinson…but Robinson is a much better thrower. If we run these rankings at the end of the year, Martinez probably drops a few spots because I think there are better QUARTERBACKS in the traditional sense of the word who will bloom, but dont yet have as much experience to earn this slot. http://www.hawkeyenation.com/football/best-in-the-b1g-quarterbacks eta: The Minnesota writers take on the QBs http://www.thedailygopher.com/2011/5/11/2112925/minnesota-gopher-football-ranking-the-big-ten-qbs-for-2011

Roark --- you are so correct. People who see us with 10 (or more!) regular season wins are to be commended for their enthusiam and are certainly updeat (which is good) but are bound to be really dissapointed. I see the regular season as a 7-5 record. There is an outside chance, probably the next most likely regular season record, at maybe 8-4.... though Roark, I'd agree that a 6-6 is also fairly reasonable a possibility. In no way can or should we expect this team to win more than 8 games in the regular season ... and that is with 4 teams on the schedule that are gimmes. This team is way too inconsistant, is too prone to being flat, poorly prepared and play with out intensity, they have a "new" offense (maybe!) and are too prone to penalties, fumbles, taking needless sacks and... well we are still a mid-uppermis conference-level team... maybe inching up in the right direction... but a long way from a 10-11 win regular season against this upcoming schedule. Roark and I may be wrong, and I'll go out on a limb and speak for the both of us in saying we hope we are wrong... but wow... I cannot see where these predictions are coming from... did you guys see the last 5 games of last season? OK - there are SO many on here that are underestimating the Big 10 but I think you are giving us a little too much credit here. 8-4 should be the absolute worst unless the wheels just come off. The only way you go 7-5 is if you lose to every team that you should even have a chance of losing to. I still think 9-3 sounds about right in the first year with a good chance at 10-2. I think 10-2 gets you a tie for the Legends title with the tiebreakers deciding who goes.

Wisconsin-Iowa Penn State-Michigan State Ohio State-Nebraska Illinois-Michigan Indiana-Northwestern Purdue-Minnesota? I did the same thing to Purdue that happened in the first set of crossover games. Put everyone else's logical games first and they got stuck with someone that doesn't make sense. Maybe that does happen again given that they are the only team with all of their major historical rivals already in their division. The ones I see as guaranteed are Illinois-Michigan and Wisconsin-Iowa. Penn State and Michigan State were a contrived rivalry since Penn State needed 2 teams that didn't rotate off and they couldn't have both Michigan and Ohio State but I don't see Penn State making any more sense with Minnesota than Purdue does so they would probably go ahead and renew that trophy game. The only teams that make sense for Nebraska are Wisconin and Ohio State but since they will certainly re-instate the Wisky/Iowa game that pretty much leaves Nebraska with Ohio State by default. I suppose you could flip Northwestern and Minnesota since they are both playing a team from Indiana. Not sure where there might be more of a historical significance amonng those 4 teams.

You know - it is funny. I don't mind so much when all of you put down Iowa. Yes it gets annoying but I kind of expect it since I am on your boards. But what REALLY bothers me? Stop putting Wisconsin with OSU, PSU and Michigan! Or start putting Iowa there also. Iowa and Wisconsin are essentially the same team! Going back in my hole now while I get trolled for this post. As far as the team that you will end up disliking their fans I would say probably Wisconsin (although we have some real asshats at the Iowa games also).

Knappic - do you know which Big 10 member voted against Nebraska? ETA: It also makes no sense that schools like Iowa State and Kansas are still in given UNLs higher rankings that both of those schools.

That game brings out the worst of the worst - on both sides.

Like Michigan/Ohio State and Auburn/Bama? (I suppose at least Michigan and Ohio State fans don't go poisoining each others trees)

I was looking for one standing there with arms crossed tapping a foot and glaring or something similar - but I guess I will go with:

I'm not saying everyone here thinks that, but have you seen the posts on this board regarding joining the Big10? There are 500 posts here talking about concerns for the coming year, everything from our starting QB to our line to our opponents to the overall SOS we're facing for every one post of "we're going to beat the hell outta everyone." Who you choose to focus on says more about you than us, to be honest. Unfortunately it is human nature to remember the bad things said about you more than the good things. That is what makes social bullying so bad in schools. 10 friends can have a hard time overcoming the negative thoughts introduced by a couple of asshats. Yes if you go through and count the number of people on each side of the arguemnt it is overwhelmingly in favor of the middle of the road - yes we should do good but we probably won't dominate - and there are actually relatively few people saying Nebraska is going to dominate, but how many people actually take the time to count? And the reality is that the people trashing the Big 10 tend to be the loud and obnoxious ones that stick out

There is one job that he will leave for - if Ferentz leaves before Stoops is ready to retire that is.

The SECPN will go to one of those games before they would highlight another Big 10 game. They will almost certainly be at the Wisky game since that is Nebraska's first game in their new conference so the odds are probably against them being at the OSU game unfortunately - especially given the 2 big matchups in their pet conference.

The Big 10 has a no night games in November rule. Through the first two months however, there is almost always 1 Big 10 game in the 6 or 7 pm timeslot (usually 7). Iowa State, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Michigan State were all 2:30 games this year for Iowa. We actually only had the other 2 non-conference games that were 11 am games at home. I would guess that Nebraska will probably only end up with at most 2 home games that are at 11 this year - and possibly not even that many since the ones that typically would (the early non-con home games) will be more likley to be highligted due to interest in the new team. You might actually get by with no 11 am games this first year.