New Divisions: ESPN We are in the West of course.

[robsker]

This is going to be a disaster and it's stupid to keep realigning divisions. Sure we now have less competition in the west but will that prepare us for the east champion? history says no.

 

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.

[StPaulHusker]

This is going to be a disaster and it's stupid to keep realigning divisions. Sure we now have less competition in the west but will that prepare us for the east champion? history says no.

 

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 said

[skersfan]

The past, history, tradition, National Titles mean absolutely nothing in today's youths minds. What have you done for me lately, what can you do for me now, and what guarantee do you have to go with it. You win, you get pretty good kids, see Boise State. You win convincingly and on a regular basis see, Bama, LSU, Oregon and a few others.

 

In honesty this split up may end up being the best thing for us. If Bo is the coach that most think he is, we should be in the hunt nearly every year for the CCG. We win our regular season games, non and conference, we get the big guys. Much easier schedule to the CCG it appears. I hate taking the easy way out, but we can over come any shortfall in our conference schedule with a killer out of conference. Some do not like that as it is possible losses, but if you want to be a big boy, you have to act like a big boy, beat the competition and forget about how this or that screwed us over.

 

Win the games, everything else takes care of itself.

[Notre Dame Joe]

The past, history, tradition, National Titles mean absolutely nothing in today's youths minds. What have you done for me lately, what can you do for me now, and what guarantee do you have to go with it. You win, you get pretty good kids, see Boise State. You win convincingly and on a regular basis see, Bama, LSU, Oregon and a few others.

 

In honesty this split up may end up being the best thing for us. If Bo is the coach that most think he is, we should be in the hunt nearly every year for the CCG. We win our regular season games, non and conference, we get the big guys. Much easier schedule to the CCG it appears. I hate taking the easy way out, but we can over come any shortfall in our conference schedule with a killer out of conference. Some do not like that as it is possible losses, but if you want to be a big boy, you have to act like a big boy, beat the competition and forget about how this or that screwed us over.

 

Win the games, everything else takes care of itself.

 

Sorry but this is completely wrong. Boise and Wisconsin should be outrecruiting Michigan and Notre Dame by a long shot. Someone pointed out on NSD that the top 10 recruiting ranked teams were basically like the top 10 in AP from 50 years ago.

[SWBadger]

This is going to be a disaster and it's stupid to keep realigning divisions. Sure we now have less competition in the west but will that prepare us for the east champion? history says no.

 

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

[exswoo]

This is going to be a disaster and it's stupid to keep realigning divisions. Sure we now have less competition in the west but will that prepare us for the east champion? history says no.

 

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.

 

I understand the sentiment but I feel like that's a bit extreme.

 

If that is seriously your view on CFB, you're essentially saying that only the teams in the SEC title hunt is part of the national picture. The past 7 years has made every conference that's not the SEC look bad in the post season, but I don't think the gap is that big at all.

 

We'll see what happens in the next few years but I'm confident that the reign will not be a permanent one.

[BuckeyeMike]

hey again Huskers...man those were some serious chores..lots of good stuff in thread I would like to comment on

 

Walksalone:

I think they moved too quick with the addition of Rutgers and Maryland. If they'd have waited it out for another year or so, they could have lured a couple better schools into the conference.

 

BM:

No doubt. I mean no offense to those two programs, but they just don’t fit in a Midwest Conference. But in my opinion the Sooners, KState, Kansas, and the Cowboys would fit no problem. Horns I would like to thing so, but who knows…

 

Walksalone:

We are our own worst crictics, like I'm sure you are in regards to your own team. I think the conference will start regaining it's respect when Ohio St, Mich, Neb, and either Mich St/PSU/whoever steps up and becomes a team that people are legitimately afraid to play. Until we start scaring the crap out of teams in the SEC, Big XII, PAC XII, then there's work to do...

 

BM:

I whole heartedly agree with all of this…good points…

[BuckeyeMike]

Prezbucky:

so -- UW alumnus and Badger fan here. Hello people.

 

We've had some pretty memorable moments together already and starting in 2014 we'll be butting heads every year. I'm glad the B1G did it in the East/West fashion because it preserves every main rivalry except Indiana/Purdue... and i'm pretty sure they'll play each other annually.

 

I wish you guys would go back to your old bread and butter -- power football. Even if that meant you'd beat the Badgers. Because a strong Nebraska means a stronger Big Ten.

 

The realignment means that we (UW) get to play all of our traditional rivals every year -- Minniehaha, Iowa, Northwestern, Illinois. I look forward to the annual Wisc/Neb/Iowa battle for the West crown.

 

BM:

Excellent points here. Yea I definitely see an intensity level building into some great games between Huskers/Wisky and hopefully IA joins the fray soon…

 

I still see the Huskers as mostly a smash mouth team, which is the way I still think of them…I was reluctant to go spread at OSU but I have to admit coach UM at least does use a power spread where he uses that 230 lb tailback between the tackles…

[BuckeyeMike]

Accountability:

I think so too. I mean, are we really that bad that a team that should've been playing for the National title had to play 4 quarters to beat us? Sure we have bad games, and we have great games too. But we're not exactly Iowa St or Kansas as some claim us to be.

 

BM:

I was very impressed with the way the Huskers played the Dawgs. You guys left it on the field and could easily have won that game if you don’t turn it over in the 4^th. You were moving when that happened if I recall…Got to give it to the Dawgs that they took advantage of the turnover like a good team does, but still you guys played a really good team to the wire…

[BuckeyeMike]

skersfan:

The past, history, tradition, National Titles mean absolutely nothing in today's youths minds. What have you done for me lately, what can you do for me now, and what guarantee do you have to go with it. You win, you get pretty good kids, see Boise State. You win convincingly and on a regular basis see, Bama, LSU, Oregon and a few others.

 

BM:

Yea gonna have to agree with this. Perception drives everything now and the SEC has ESPN hyping them 24/7. Combine that with the out of conference games and bowl games and its like you said. I remember in the 90’s when OSU was putting boatloads of players in the NFL and we still couldn’t win the big ones. I remember thinking this crap is going to cost us down the road as we keep losing in front of the whole college football world. My Buckeyes gave ESPN plenty of ammo to shoot us with…But the rest of the top of our Conference has a pretty good record against the SEC. Unfortunately this one is on my Buckeyes. Hopefully UM will help us get our respect back, and we can start doing our part to beat the SEC, and win our big non conference games.

 

I noticed where Wisky has scheduled Bama and LSU? Good for them. My boys have decided to up our non con games also. We have coming up VaTech, Oklahoma, TCU, and Texas…

[skersfan]

To be in the playoff picture that is what is going to be required I think. Playing the tougher teams, and even losing will help with recruiting, as long as it is respectable. Kids want competition, they want to show how good they are, they want to go to the NFL. Beating McNeese state by 45 or losing to Bama by 7, which would mean more to you as a player? Some it is all about wins and losses, for me it is how we play, how we represent our program. I hate losses as much as anyone, but I would rather see us lose to a great team, than spank one that we really have no reason to play other than filling the seats and getting a W.

 

 

[tschu]

The past, history, tradition, National Titles mean absolutely nothing in today's youths minds. What have you done for me lately, what can you do for me now, and what guarantee do you have to go with it. You win, you get pretty good kids, see Boise State. You win convincingly and on a regular basis see, Bama, LSU, Oregon and a few others.

 

In honesty this split up may end up being the best thing for us. If Bo is the coach that most think he is, we should be in the hunt nearly every year for the CCG. We win our regular season games, non and conference, we get the big guys. Much easier schedule to the CCG it appears. I hate taking the easy way out, but we can over come any shortfall in our conference schedule with a killer out of conference. Some do not like that as it is possible losses, but if you want to be a big boy, you have to act like a big boy, beat the competition and forget about how this or that screwed us over.

 

Win the games, everything else takes care of itself.

Absolutely, this split is great for us.

 

Our schedule doesn't even really lose many big games. Think about it - our cross-divisional games are going to be against mostly good opponents, while the East's cross-divisional games are more likely to be against a mediocre to bad opponent. Kind of obvious, but this levels the playing field quite a bit. We're also essentially going to be playing either Ohio State or Michigan every single year (or like 12 years out of 14 or something like that.) We'll be playing either MSU or Penn State 12 out of 14 years as well. So we still have marquee matchups during the season. WE ALSO have a greater chance of reaching the B1G title game than we currently do. We have to get past Wisconsin and Iowa and Northwestern. Completely doable on a year-in-year-out basis. B1G Title games = exposure and prestige and hey, we might even win a few of them! ...and winning a B1G title game should probably at least get you in the discussion for the 4-team playoff.

 

Overall, we don't lose as many marquee matchups as people are making it out to be. Hardly at all, really. Yet our championship equity rises quite a bit.

 

Very good for us.

[husker_99]

This is going to be a disaster and it's stupid to keep realigning divisions. Sure we now have less competition in the west but will that prepare us for the east champion? history says no.

 

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.

 

I know what we are. a top 15 team that gets blown out yearly. I wouldn't even consider us a power anymore.

[SeeingRedMK]

This is going to be a disaster and it's stupid to keep realigning divisions. Sure we now have less competition in the west but will that prepare us for the east champion? history says no.

 

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'm with you on the geographical realignment. It may not offer the most ideally competitive divisions, but it makes sense in terms of schools traveling. I think that is the major force. Schools want to spend as little $ as possible traveling to play road conference games. Why have Nebraska and Maryland in the same division? That's flying nearly half way across the country for a DIVISIONAL game. How much sense does that make? Very little.

[HuskerTrucker]

I am thinking that if the alignment goes the way that ESPN says, Nebraska will be better off in the West, EXCEPT - if they were in that Eastern division, they would get higher rankings in the polls if they won. I don't think they will get the same respect in the West Division.