I miss the Big XII.

[Stumpy1]

The one thing thats make this a gigantic clusterf*ck is the non defacto shift twords super conferences, grabbing any school that is available. To make things worse this isn't done for the sake of competition, but for greed which the larger conferences such as the SEC, PAC XII, and B1G are totally guilty. You have the rampant douchebaggery that is the SEC, and those that are struggling to achieve that douchebaggery, namely the B1G, Pac XII, Notre Dame & Texas.

 

Within a couple years you won't recognize most conferences from what they were 20 or even 15 years ago...

The sooner people learn that college football revolves around money, the better. The game has turned into a money factory and that will never go away, so why not be grateful to be a part of a conference that makes more then anyone else and enjoy what it will bring to the university. I don't really care about who we play as long as we play, B12 or B1G.

[Whistlebritches]

The one thing thats make this a gigantic clusterf*ck is the non defacto shift twords super conferences, grabbing any school that is available. To make things worse this isn't done for the sake of competition, but for greed which the larger conferences such as the SEC, PAC XII, and B1G are totally guilty. You have the rampant douchebaggery that is the SEC, and those that are struggling to achieve that douchebaggery, namely the B1G, Pac XII, Notre Dame & Texas.

 

Within a couple years you won't recognize most conferences from what they were 20 or even 15 years ago...

 

Decisions were made by market share which absolutely sucks when a school like Louisville was available. Hey, we landed Maryland and Rutgers. Whoopee

[Stumpy1]

The one thing thats make this a gigantic clusterf*ck is the non defacto shift twords super conferences, grabbing any school that is available. To make things worse this isn't done for the sake of competition, but for greed which the larger conferences such as the SEC, PAC XII, and B1G are totally guilty. You have the rampant douchebaggery that is the SEC, and those that are struggling to achieve that douchebaggery, namely the B1G, Pac XII, Notre Dame & Texas.

 

Within a couple years you won't recognize most conferences from what they were 20 or even 15 years ago...

 

Decisions were made by market share which absolutely sucks when a school like Louisville was available. Hey, we landed Maryland and Rutgers. Whoopee

 

Whoopee from a competition wise, but not from a revenue wise. Again, it's not about the athletics but the money that each school can bring in via their location.

[walksalone]

The one thing thats make this a gigantic clusterf*ck is the non defacto shift twords super conferences, grabbing any school that is available. To make things worse this isn't done for the sake of competition, but for greed which the larger conferences such as the SEC, PAC XII, and B1G are totally guilty. You have the rampant douchebaggery that is the SEC, and those that are struggling to achieve that douchebaggery, namely the B1G, Pac XII, Notre Dame & Texas.

 

Within a couple years you won't recognize most conferences from what they were 20 or even 15 years ago...

The sooner people learn that college football revolves around money, the better. The game has turned into a money factory and that will never go away, so why not be grateful to be a part of a conference that makes more then anyone else and enjoy what it will bring to the university. I don't really care about who we play as long as we play, B12 or B1G.

 

And it's going to ruin it like it has the NFL...

[The Dude]

The one thing thats make this a gigantic clusterf*ck is the non defacto shift twords super conferences, grabbing any school that is available. To make things worse this isn't done for the sake of competition, but for greed which the larger conferences such as the SEC, PAC XII, and B1G are totally guilty. You have the rampant douchebaggery that is the SEC, and those that are struggling to achieve that douchebaggery, namely the B1G, Pac XII, Notre Dame & Texas.

 

Within a couple years you won't recognize most conferences from what they were 20 or even 15 years ago...

The sooner people learn that college football revolves around money, the better. The game has turned into a money factory and that will never go away, so why not be grateful to be a part of a conference that makes more then anyone else and enjoy what it will bring to the university. I don't really care about who we play as long as we play, B12 or B1G.

 

And it's going to ruin it like it has the NFL...

Hopefully some day the NFL can be as successful as the NHL.

[The Dude]

I hate Jim Delaney, hate the Michigan/Ohio State pompousness almost as much as that of Texas, hate the travel distance, hate the conference's terrible perception, hate our upcoming games against Illinois and Purdue and Rutgers and Maryland, hate the obsession with the Rose Bowl, hate Penn State, hate the Big Ten's total aversion to the playoff, hate how they are afraid to play games at night because apparently everyone in Big Ten country is a massive vagina, hate how we don't play any traditional rivals anymore, and hate having "cultural fit" and "stability" rammed down our throats. Like I've said a ton of times, I know why the move went down from an administrative standpoint. But that doesn't mean I have to like it.

You're gonna like it whether you like it our not.

[huskered17]

The B1G was probably the best move out there for us. I miss the Big-8 days, and started to get settled in the Big-12, until Texas started to pull their crap. The addition of Rut& Maryland doesn't do much for me. The OU & Texas game was and always will be more important to OU than it was against us. Their recruiting base was always Texas, and they sold that to their recruits, in Texas. As great a rivalry as we had with them, they never would have dropped their year in and year out with Texas.

I have to disagree with some of you on which one of the bowl games means more. I remember for years hearing fans say they wish that we could play in the Rose Bowl, and it wasn't fair that the Big-10 and the Pac were the only teams to get to play there.. It may not be as big a deal now, but it still is the second best, after what ever bowl is holding the N/C game. The Sugar, Orange, Cotton [in the day], and the Fiesta have been and always will be the little sisters to the Rose.

 

GBR!!!

[WoodyHayes1951]

Sounds like some of you wouldn't be as nostalgic if you had some Big 8 friends with ya.

 

OU is not likely since they have a Diet Oklahoma/T Boone problem. Okie lite will never get an invite.

 

KU and Mizzou are still very much on the table.

 

Iowa is essentially a stronger Iowa State(even with the shortcomings) and who cares about KSU or CU?

[knapplc]

Sounds like some of you wouldn't be as nostalgic if you had some Big 8 friends with ya.

 

OU is not likely since they have a Diet Oklahoma/T Boone problem. Okie lite will never get an invite.

 

KU and Mizzou are still very much on the table.

 

Iowa is essentially a stronger Iowa State(even with the shortcomings) and who cares about KSU or CU?

 

I don't get this. I see Missouri bandied about on several message boards as a potential target for Big Ten expansion, and I have to ask, what makes you (or anyone) think they'd leave the SEC? They're in the premier athletic conference, making scads of money, and they have a free pass to the best players in the country now. What could possibly entice them to move to the Big Ten which, much as I love being in this conference, is clearly a step down from the SEC?

[WoodyHayes1951]

Sounds like some of you wouldn't be as nostalgic if you had some Big 8 friends with ya.

 

OU is not likely since they have a Diet Oklahoma/T Boone problem. Okie lite will never get an invite.

 

KU and Mizzou are still very much on the table.

 

Iowa is essentially a stronger Iowa State(even with the shortcomings) and who cares about KSU or CU?

 

I don't get this. I see Missouri bandied about on several message boards as a potential target for Big Ten expansion, and I have to ask, what makes you (or anyone) think they'd leave the SEC? They're in the premier athletic conference, making scads of money, and they have a free pass to the best players in the country now. What could possibly entice them to move to the Big Ten which, much as I love being in this conference, is clearly a step down from the SEC?

 

 

 

Because there is always more money to be made. Harvard isn't in the business of being a great school for charitable reasons. Being a great school makes you a boatload of cash.

 

The Big Ten for better or worse is the money making machine. While SEC schools have FANS, the Big Ten has ALUMNI AND FANS.

 

don't get me wrong, obviously people graduate from Alabama and LSU but those groups don't compare to Big Ten alumni bases.

 

This is the best and worst part of the Big Ten. Because no matter what happens, no matter how hard Minnesota sucks, they will still get a huge amount of cash. No incentive to do better. Iowa can afford to NOT recruit Florida. who cares? they get money whether they suck or not.

 

Mizzou isn't a Southern School either. The important people in the state/University feel that they are Big Ten school.

 

How does this make Big Ten football better than the SEC? it doesn't but it does matter more than football to the people that matter. As football fans we have to overcome the Turdues of the world being a parasite(for the most part).

[knapplc]

Meh. The money they'd make would have to be quite a bit more than they're getting from the SEC for them to make the jump so soon after leaving the Big XII, and nothing I've seen shows that it's that big a difference. The CIC is a huge benefit, and will help Nebraska (and, I presume, Rutgers and Maryland) almost immediately, but I'm not seeing the impetus from Missouri to leave. At all.

 

Rittenberg/Bennet agree, by the way:

 

PhilosopherJoe from SpartanNation, USA writes: With the new media rights agreement being implemented in the ACC and no such agreement existing for the SEC, doesn't it remain at least a SLIGHT possibility that the B1G picks off one of the SEC's teams? If this were to happen, who would be the most likely to make a move? That is, who would be the most likely to WANT to move even risking membership to the most successful on-field conference and who would be appealing to the B1G as far as academics (AAU membership), geography, and new media markets? Maybe Vandy?

 

Brian Bennett: How strange is it that of the five major conferences, the SEC is the only one that seems vulnerable to getting poached because it lacks a grant of rights agreement? Of course, "seems" is the key word here. In reality, the SEC doesn't need to reach such a deal, because none of its teams are interested in leaving. For argument's sake, the only AAU members in the SEC are Vanderbilt and Missouri. If any school were inclined to leave, it might be Missouri, which I believe still fits better culturally in the Big Ten than the SEC. The Tigers found out last season that they might just be in over their heads when it comes to SEC football. Maybe they have buyer's remorse, and maybe the Big Ten tries to capitalize on that. But the Big Ten showed no interest in Missouri a couple years ago when Mizzou desperately wanted in, and adding that school would mean the Big Ten would need another member to get to the round number 16. And candidates are hard to find right now. Plus, there's just no real monetary incentive for anyone to leave the SEC -- unless Nick Saban and Alabama decide to try the NFL.

[WoodyHayes1951]

The governor of Missouri and the Chancellor of the University still have a pants tent for the Big Ten.

 

Not saying they would leave the SEC but the love from the key figures can't be ignored.

[walksalone]

The one thing thats make this a gigantic clusterf*ck is the non defacto shift twords super conferences, grabbing any school that is available. To make things worse this isn't done for the sake of competition, but for greed which the larger conferences such as the SEC, PAC XII, and B1G are totally guilty. You have the rampant douchebaggery that is the SEC, and those that are struggling to achieve that douchebaggery, namely the B1G, Pac XII, Notre Dame & Texas.

 

Within a couple years you won't recognize most conferences from what they were 20 or even 15 years ago...

The sooner people learn that college football revolves around money, the better. The game has turned into a money factory and that will never go away, so why not be grateful to be a part of a conference that makes more then anyone else and enjoy what it will bring to the university. I don't really care about who we play as long as we play, B12 or B1G.

 

And it's going to ruin it like it has the NFL...

Hopefully some day the NFL can be as successful as the NHL.

 

doesn't need to be, the NHL sucks less than the NFL...

[BOJ]

I somewhat agree with the OP. I miss what the Big 12 SHOULD have been, if we didn't have to deal with texa$$' politics and power pulls. I miss the rivalries of the Big 12. I miss the better quality baseball and football. The Big 12 could at least compete with the $EC. I think that OSU will be able to now with Urb, but I don't think that we will ever compete for another MNC in this conference, unless we get a guy like TO, Urb or Saban to coach here, and that is very unlikely to happen. It will also be more difficult to get to the CWS again. The men's basketball was a little easier in the Big 12, so Miles would have a better shot at getting into the upper half of the conference. I don't like the stupid B1G rivalry games or the overrated Rose Bowl, and many of the fans of our new conference foes are worse than CU, KSU, and Mizzou fans. The road trips are farther away, and our fans seem to get treated pretty badly at those locations. To top it all off, OSU gets put on probation, Rutgers is a mess, and PSU had the worst scandal in the history of sports. Pretty embarrassing, really.

 

I guess the B1G has better wrestling and volleyball, so there is that. In time we will get more TV $$$ and the CIC will be great for the U, but athletically, this has been a fairly poor move. I don't get how many of our fans feel that "its a fit" and it "feels like home." We spent decades (and rightfully so) making fun of how weak B1G football was, now many of those same fans get all twitterpated over playing MSU and Michigan.

This piqued my interest, so I have to ask, what decades were these and in comparison to what? Made fun of how weak the Big Ten was in comparison to the Big 12 and Big 8?

From the 70's until the day we joined the B1G. If I recall, the B1G has only won one legit MNC since the 60's, while teams from the Big 8 and Big 12 were almost always in the MNC picture, often played for it (much more so than B1G teams), and won more in that time period. Heck, we have won more legit MNCs since the 60's than the B1G as a whole.

 

I know, I know, the Big 8/18 had OSU, and Texas Tech, and Baylor, and Mizzou, and Kansas, and KSU, and Colorado. Well, the majority (if not all) of those teams have either been rated #1 at some point, have played in BCS/major bowl games, or have had a Heisman Trophy winner.

I guess I don't totally understand this, most of the schools in the B1G during that time had also been ranked number 1, played in major bowls or whatever, but I think what is most compelling is that the up to 2008 (just b/c thats where I saw the records up to), every school in the B1G had a winning record against the Big 12/8 except for Illinois (even Indiana did), while only Texas, Nebraska, and Oklahoma had winning records against teams from the B1G, the overall record between the conferences isn't even close. I get that Nebraska had a terrific 90s decade and Nebraska was better than the B1G during that decade (hell, Nebraska was the Big12/8 for a while after Oklahoma dropped off the map), but statistically speaking in head to head match-ups, the B1G has been the stronger conference (perhaps not perception wise, but when the teams have played, the numbers are there). But, oh well.

 

**Edit: I should point out that I didn't check what the head to head records were from the 70s on, just overall (didn't have the time)

[knapplc]

**Edit: I should point out that I didn't check what the head to head records were from the 70s on, just overall (didn't have the time)

 

Since 1970, Nebraska is 43-11 against the Big Ten, outscoring them 1,931-915.

 

We're upside-down against Wisconsin, but otherwise we're either even or in the plus column against the rest of the Big Ten - with the exception of Purdue, whom we haven't played since the 50s.

 

Not sure what the rest of the Big XII records would be. That would take quite a bit of digging.