NCAA Conference Realignment

[Tracer Bullet]

Saying PSU and OSU (together) have been the class of the Big Ten looks a little ridiculous. PSU was supposed to dominate when they joined. They've been right with the rest of the 2nd tier behind the single dominant team.

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

jesus truffle. cutting out the first half of your post where you discuss their record over the last 10 years and then bolding and underlining 4 words doesn't make me look stupid, it makes you look ridiculous. I'm fully capable of reading what you wrote. You used a 10-year period, divided it to make your school look better, and then made a statement that looks crazy since OSU has won outright or shared the big ten title each of the last 5 years.

 

OSU has been the class of the conference for the last 5 years (and more). PSU hasn't distinguished itself apart from the 2nd tier as among the class of the conference during any period of time.

[Garwilly]

Saying PSU and OSU (together) have been the class of the Big Ten looks a little ridiculous. PSU was supposed to dominate when they joined. They've been right with the rest of the 2nd tier behind the single dominant team.

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

jesus truffle. cutting out the first half of your post where you discuss their record over the last 10 years and then bolding and underlining 4 words doesn't make me look stupid, it makes you look ridiculous. I'm fully capable of reading what you wrote. You used a 10-year period, divided it to make your school look better, and then made a statement that looks crazy since OSU has won outright or shared the big ten title each of the last 5 years.

 

OSU has been the class of the conference for the last 5 years (and more). PSU hasn't distinguished itself apart from the 2nd tier as among the class of the conference during any period of time.

 

But again, his point wasn't that PSU wasn't the class of anything. The point was that periods of crappiness can be followed by periods of success. That declaring Michigan as a goner was short sighted.

[Tracer Bullet]

Saying PSU and OSU (together) have been the class of the Big Ten looks a little ridiculous. PSU was supposed to dominate when they joined. They've been right with the rest of the 2nd tier behind the single dominant team.

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

jesus truffle. cutting out the first half of your post where you discuss their record over the last 10 years and then bolding and underlining 4 words doesn't make me look stupid, it makes you look ridiculous. I'm fully capable of reading what you wrote. You used a 10-year period, divided it to make your school look better, and then made a statement that looks crazy since OSU has won outright or shared the big ten title each of the last 5 years.

 

OSU has been the class of the conference for the last 5 years (and more). PSU hasn't distinguished itself apart from the 2nd tier as among the class of the conference during any period of time.

 

But again, his point wasn't that PSU wasn't the class of anything. The point was that periods of crappiness can be followed by periods of success. That declaring Michigan as a goner was short sighted.

 

Really? He said PSU was, with OSU, the class of the big ten for the last 5 years. So much was this his point that he went back to quote part of his post about it and highlight 4 words. I think that very much was his point.

 

As an aside, no one is saying UM football is a goner, nor has anyone said or implied that it's dead. But it's not the program it was 15-25 years ago. Will it be again? Maybe. But it could just as easily settle in behind OSU with the rest of the good, sometimes great, teams in the conference. It's not a foregone conclusion that the UM/OSU game will continue to be the de facto conference title game as many think it has been (i.e., the winner will go on to beat whomever shows up from the west in the title game). it's certainly not necessarily true that the 3 best teams/programs in the conference (going forward) are OSU, UM, and PSU, which is really the larger point.

[Garwilly]

Saying PSU and OSU (together) have been the class of the Big Ten looks a little ridiculous. PSU was supposed to dominate when they joined. They've been right with the rest of the 2nd tier behind the single dominant team.

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

jesus truffle. cutting out the first half of your post where you discuss their record over the last 10 years and then bolding and underlining 4 words doesn't make me look stupid, it makes you look ridiculous. I'm fully capable of reading what you wrote. You used a 10-year period, divided it to make your school look better, and then made a statement that looks crazy since OSU has won outright or shared the big ten title each of the last 5 years.

 

OSU has been the class of the conference for the last 5 years (and more). PSU hasn't distinguished itself apart from the 2nd tier as among the class of the conference during any period of time.

 

But again, his point wasn't that PSU wasn't the class of anything. The point was that periods of crappiness can be followed by periods of success. That declaring Michigan as a goner was short sighted.

 

Really? He said PSU was, with OSU, the class of the big ten for the last 5 years. So much was this his point that he went back to quote part of his post about it and highlight 4 words. I think that very much was his point.

 

As an aside, no one is saying UM football is a goner, nor has anyone said or implied that it's dead. But it's not the program it was 15-25 years ago. Will it be again? Maybe. But it could just as easily settle in behind OSU with the rest of the good, sometimes great, teams in the conference. It's not a foregone conclusion that the UM/OSU game will continue to be the de facto conference title game as many think it has been (i.e., the winner will go on to beat whomever shows up from the west in the title game). it's certainly not necessarily true that the 3 best teams/programs in the conference (going forward) are OSU, UM, and PSU, which is really the larger point.

 

Really. Reread the post....

 

 

I absolutely love seeing a Penn State fan sticking up for Michigan. Michigan is on it's way back up for sure.

 

penn state football, 2000-04: 26-33, 16-24 conference record, 1 bowl appearance.

2005-09: 51-13, 29-11 conference record, 5 bowl appearances

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

Over the last 5 years, the have been on top (he isn't stating anything other than they have turned around what a bad situation previous to that). But that is not the point he is making, the point of the comment is that teams can rebound.

[Tracer Bullet]

Really. Reread the post....

 

 

I absolutely love seeing a Penn State fan sticking up for Michigan. Michigan is on it's way back up for sure.

 

penn state football, 2000-04: 26-33, 16-24 conference record, 1 bowl appearance.

2005-09: 51-13, 29-11 conference record, 5 bowl appearances

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

Over the last 5 years, the have been on top (he isn't stating anything other than they have turned around what a bad situation previous to that). But that is not the point he is making, the point of the comment is that teams can rebound.

 

I've read the post, I know what it says. That's why a page or two ago I told truffle that I thought adding that PSU was among the class of the big 10 took away from his larger point. did you see that post I made?

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

This has been one epic pissing match.

[Garwilly]

Really. Reread the post....

 

 

I absolutely love seeing a Penn State fan sticking up for Michigan. Michigan is on it's way back up for sure.

 

penn state football, 2000-04: 26-33, 16-24 conference record, 1 bowl appearance.

2005-09: 51-13, 29-11 conference record, 5 bowl appearances

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

Over the last 5 years, the have been on top (he isn't stating anything other than they have turned around what a bad situation previous to that). But that is not the point he is making, the point of the comment is that teams can rebound.

 

I've read the post, I know what it says. That's why a page or two ago I told truffle that I thought adding that PSU was among the class of the big 10 took away from his larger point. did you see that post I made?

 

So we have the following:

 

1) You agree with the conclusion that he reached regarding "rebounding" programs.

2) You don't like that he threw in a comment that essentially was as "aside" to his argument. This is because he is a fan of said team, making him look like a homer.

 

OK then. I as an Illini fan will say the following:

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

The five year windows he created were not an arbitrary cutoff to declare his school superior to any other school. They were created to show a valid point he had. He then simply stated tacked on a conclusion (a correct one) from the same window that was previously created.

[Tracer Bullet]

Really. Reread the post....

 

 

I absolutely love seeing a Penn State fan sticking up for Michigan. Michigan is on it's way back up for sure.

 

penn state football, 2000-04: 26-33, 16-24 conference record, 1 bowl appearance.

2005-09: 51-13, 29-11 conference record, 5 bowl appearances

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

Over the last 5 years, the have been on top (he isn't stating anything other than they have turned around what a bad situation previous to that). But that is not the point he is making, the point of the comment is that teams can rebound.

 

I've read the post, I know what it says. That's why a page or two ago I told truffle that I thought adding that PSU was among the class of the big 10 took away from his larger point. did you see that post I made?

 

So we have the following:

 

1) You agree with the conclusion that he reached regarding "rebounding" programs.

2) You don't like that he threw in a comment that essentially was as "aside" to his argument. This is because he is a fan of said team, making him look like a homer.

 

OK then. I as an Illini fan will say the following:

 

people were basically throwing dirt on the psu program and saying they'd never recover until paterno retired and they brought in mostly new staff. the last five years they and ohio st have been the class of the conference. it's hard to keep great college football programs down for long.

 

The five year windows he created were not an arbitrary cutoff to declare his school superior to any other school. They were created to show a valid point he had. He then simply stated tacked on a conclusion (a correct one) from the same window that was previously created.

 

holy crap.

 

if his primary point (which it is) is that Michigan will be back to a top program in the country in the near future b/c you can't keep a good program down, I don't agree. While UM might eventually return to contending for Big Ten titles regularly, and might even do so soon, there is little evidence now from which to conclude that.

 

Using PSU as a comparison for UM is bad; UM is in a much much worse place now that PSU was 7-8 years ago. But making that comparison and saying PSU is among the class of the big ten makes you look crazy. OSU and OSU alone is the class of the big ten for the last 5 years and more. that point is not valid and it doesn't support a valid comparison, b/c the comparison is bad.

 

please tell me you've been following this thread the entire time and aren't just jumping in at the end. no one needs you to re-state truffle's points nor for me to re-state mine.

[Garwilly]

please tell me you've been following this thread the entire time and aren't just jumping in at the end. no one needs you to re-state truffle's points nor for me to re-state mine.

 

You're right it doesn't need to be restated, Truffle made you look foolish on page 72. Yet you continue to fight an argument that is not the one he brought up.

[Exile on Waveland]

I hate Michigan. Therefore, Michigan will never be good again.

[bukie]

As an Illini fan, these to me would be the most fair and balanced divisions:

 

Division A: Teams we don't beat regularly

Ohio State

Penn State

Nebraska

Iowa

Wisconsin

Michigan

 

Division B: We could win this division

Illinois

Northwestern

Purdue

Indiana

Michigan State

Minnesota

[RedFlash]

http://tamu.scout.com/2/978071.html

 

Aggies fans are a wee bit upset of TAM President and AD about their decision to stay in the Texas 10 Conference. Maybe a "wee bit upset" isn't strong enough discription.

[Garwilly]

As an Illini fan, these to me would be the most fair and balanced divisions:

 

Division A: Teams we don't beat regularly

Ohio State

Penn State

Nebraska

Iowa

Wisconsin

Michigan

 

Division B: We could win this division

Illinois

Northwestern

Purdue

Indiana

Michigan State

Minnesota

 

I'd also favor moving a couple more teams to "division A", maybe a 8/4, or 9/3 split.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

As an Illini fan, these to me would be the most fair and balanced divisions:

 

Division A: Teams we don't beat regularly

Ohio State

Penn State

Nebraska

Iowa

Wisconsin

Michigan

 

Division B: We could win this division

Illinois

Northwestern

Purdue

Indiana

Michigan State

Minnesota

Looks a lot like the balance the Big 12 had.

[Old Style]

http://tamu.scout.com/2/978071.html

 

Aggies fans are a wee bit upset of TAM President and AD about their decision to stay in the Texas 10 Conference. Maybe a "wee bit upset" isn't strong enough discription.

I made sure to send President Bowtie an e-mail expressing my opinions on the matter, but I did manage to keep it professional unlike some of my fellow Aggies.

[snoodmonger]

Not that it will affect anything, but Nebraska was booted from the AAU today.

[SouthSideRyan]

Not that it will affect anything, but Nebraska was booted from the AAU today.

 

Well that's embarrasing

[Butterscup1679666578]

lol

[snoodmonger]

Not that it will affect anything, but Nebraska was booted from the AAU today.

 

Well that's embarrasing

 

 

do you think that would have prevented an invitation if this happened a year ago? I know ND isn't AAU, but they seem to get a free pass on that because of superior academic rep (and the fact they are obviously a dream addition to any conference.)

[Guest]

Should have gone with Texas instead. :)

[SouthSideRyan]

Not that it will affect anything, but Nebraska was booted from the AAU today.

 

Well that's embarrasing

 

 

do you think that would have prevented an invitation if this happened a year ago? I know ND isn't AAU, but they seem to get a free pass on that because of superior academic rep (and the fact they are obviously a dream addition to any conference.)

 

It would probably take some extra cajoling of the university presidents, but I imagine money would have won out in the end.

[TruffleShuffle]

pitt and syracuse are applying to join the acc... they seem like good fits since their men's basketball programs are very strong and their football programs are not as good. plus they add new television markets to the conference.

 

i didn't think syracuse would go because boeheim is an icon there, and he really values the big east rivalries and tradition. the fact that syracuse is going suggests to me that they didn't really have any confidence in the big east surviving the conference realignment.

[davell]

Syracuse and Pitt were approved. If the ACC goes to 16 teams, the article I read made it sound like Rutgers and UCONN could be the other 2 teams as it seems like they want to stick with east coast teams. Texas pitched them last week and they had been in talks with WVU as well. Since I'm more of a basketball guy, I love adding Syracuse and Pitt and hope UCONN gets added as well. I'd love Texas, but think the LHN is going to wind up screwing them and kind of doubt any of these super conferences wind up taking them.

[CubInOK]

If Miami gets the death penalty in football, does anyone think the ACC will go after another school?

[Vanilla Ice]

Syracuse and Pitt were approved. If the ACC goes to 16 teams, the article I read made it sound like Rutgers and UCONN could be the other 2 teams as it seems like they want to stick with east coast teams. Texas pitched them last week and they had been in talks with WVU as well. Since I'm more of a basketball guy, I love adding Syracuse and Pitt and hope UCONN gets added as well. I'd love Texas, but think the LHN is going to wind up screwing them and kind of doubt any of these super conferences wind up taking them.

I'd so much rather have WVU than Rutgers