Big Ten

I doubt you will hear anything from the few Big 10 fans remaining, they prove to be sore losers. Big 10 football has been a joke for the better part of a decade. Personally, I hate the Big 10 so with that said I have not had a better college football Saturday in a very long time.

On a separate note - BCS bowls including the National Championship should only be open to the SEC, Big 12, and Pac 10 teams. Basically the ACC, Big 10, and Big East should not have automatic bids to play.

The B10 is easy to pick on here because I heard them talk shit all year about how tough their schedules were.

And how can you say Pac 10 should get an automatic bid? They just need to get rid of this system and let there be a playoff.

I have no association with the big 10...but calling them underperformers academically? Sure some may be, but Northwestern and Michigan are hardly underperforming schools. I'd argue that academically, outside of the Ivy's, the big 10 probably has some of the best schools.

they aren't bad school, but they are mediocre and where i work, thats not acceptable.

We probably get laid more though.

i'm glad i dont represent wall street oasis training packages in my signature on here. talk about a douche

Jrt336 your thesis is resting on 2 games? Come on bro, UT lost to UNC this bowl season yet no one is saying the SEC sucks - for a reason. The Big 10 sucks from top to bottom year after year, plain and simple. 2009 was the Big 10's first winning BCS bowl season ever (4-3). Odds are they will not have a winning BCS record this bowl season either.

However, last season Texas was one fluke injury away from competing for its second national championship. Pac-10 and SEC both have multiple national championships in recent years. The Big 10 umm not so much. Their national championship from 2002 was result of a terrible call that gave them the game. I only vote for the Big 12 because of Texas and to much lesser extents Oklahoma and Oklahoma St. No conference is great top to bottom but at least the Big 12, SEC, and Pac- 10 usually have at least one good team.

Big 10 football is like minivan racing. Sure someone "wins" but does it really matter?

SEC is far better than big 12 and PAC 10. SEC West alone is better than those other conferences.

I did not come to a Big Ten school for the football (I came for the beasketball and was sorely dissapointed). But seriously, the Big Ten is a pretty strong conference overall. You will find Big Ten alum at almost every firm, and we do pretty well in basketball and football (but the last couple years have been rough for football). Great looking girls (especially at Madison), and people who like to party. What more do you want?

i want more than mediocrity.

I'll admit the B10 isn't great, but they did win 2 BCS games last year. The b12 is no better, and the B10 will certainly be better when Nebraska joins next year. The Pac10 may be better at the top, but not in the middle.

dont get so defensive. your identity is too wrapped up in your WSO credentials. douche

I'd say academically, the PAC 10 is the best. USC, UCLA, Berkeley, and Stanford's pretty good I hear.

Then Big 10-OSU, Michigan, Indiana, Illionois, Mich St. and Northwestern.

2nd Tier-VII, ACC, Big East

Last by far- SEC

This debate is pretty pointless. Are we talking NYC IBD placement? Are we talking sports? School ranking? Basketball or football?

The downfall of Big 10 Football is pretty remarkable. Just look at some of the names that 10 years ago were among the heaviest hitters in college sports. Michigan, Ohio State (had a pretty good year this year too), Penn State (ok, maybe more than 10 years), etc. It just shows how temporary your place at the top can be. Who would have thought that Oregon and TCU would be among the best teams in the nation just a few years ago?

It's all cyclical.

these fags who get so uptight about this site are seriously lame. i'll give you a markup here in a few hours so you can get back to work. oh yeah, and can you get my shoes shined for me, analyst?

2397 posts on this site? really? have a life much?

PSU, OSU, Purdue, Nebraska are pretty well know and solid schools. No way they rank up with the Ivy league, but if you tell someone you went to OSU I am pretty sure they will recognize the school.

Can't wait to hear what Cowherd says about the Big10 after this weekend on ESPN this week.

I am not sure why I even get the damn Big10 Channel. They were dissecting for like 40 mins yesterday how Wisconsin lost that game with dominating rushing yardage and time of possession.

http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools…

UIUC, UW-Madison, Purdue - all on that list

http://wpcarey.asu.edu/fin-rankings/rankings/results.cfm

OSU, UIUC - both on that list

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-doct-e…

UIUC, Purdue

Listen, all I am saying is shitting on random schools is stupid. If you went to Penn, Harvard, Columbia, etc no one is debating that you went to an amazing school. No one is in New York and goes to Nebraska. It is a well known, flagship state school. Some people are 1st generation college students. So kids don't have the money or they cannot imagine themselves going to another school.

I don't know, I went to pretty decent private schools. I never feel the urge to shit on someone who went to a lesser school. Way too many elements that go into a college decision to make blanket statements. This thread would have had merit had it just been about bashing sports teams, but to demean people for whatever reason is silly.

If you went to a top school and work in banking you are living the dream. How does shitting on someone else increase your happiness at this point?

For what it is worth, I would be hesitant about shitting on any school. I've met plenty of Wharton guys who had big 10 or lower schools as their UG's. I am sure they wouldn't appreciate that.

Comparing major football conference's school academic rankings is pointless. The ivy league is on top, followed by public ivys (Michigan, UVA, UNC) and top liberal arts. Outside of that, the difference between the academic quality is pretty marginal. No one gives a shit about whether or not University of Georgia, University of Arizona, and Oklahoma is the best academically out that group. What matters most is athletics and quality of women at each school.

The SEC is hands down, without question, the best conference in college football right now. As a Big 12 guy, it hurts to say that the 2000s were dominated by the SEC. This doesn't mean this decade will be dominated by the SEC. In fact, the next decade may be dominated by the Big 10. With Nebraska joining the conference, and Harbaugh maybe joining Michigan, they may stronger in the next 10 years. Throw in Penn State and OSU, and there could easily be 3 or 4 top ten Big Ten teams year in and year out.

The SEC, as a conference, has perhaps had the best 10 year run in the history of college football. But there time may be over. Will Muschamp was a pretty mediocre hire for Florida. He was the D Coordinator for a team with a losing record during a year when the Big 12 was pretty shitty. And he had plenty of horses on that defense....Charlie Weis failed at ND, what makes UF think he will succeed as the O Coordinator at Florida?

regardless of how "prestigious" his undergrad school may have been, blue baller got a 2.9 gpa at it, couldn't break into banking out of undergrad, and is now one of the arrogant yet useless post-mba associates everyone hates

Well OSU saves the Big Ten from being a total disaster. That being said, Big Ten is really the most solid conference out there in terms of balancing football, basketball, and academics. SEC might have fielded better teams in the last 5 or so years, but that comes at a cost of questionable recruiting and - lack of - graduating its "student"-atheletes. It's really nothing more than minor league for the NFL. Not that the Big Ten is totally clean (OSU comes into mind), but the SEC really takes it to a new level.

TCU won the rosebowl, which was awesome to be at with all those fat crying cheeseheads.

That being said, anyone who thinks they are superior to someone because of where they went to UG is a complete ass clown. Sorry not all of us started preparing for college applications in 7th grade but actually had lives. True, going to H/Y/P gives you a significant advantage in the game of upper finance but i am pretty sure your performance and drive on the job will easily trump a history degree from Harvard. It's pretty obvious where i went to school and couldn't be happier with where i am right now in life so suck on my balls.

Just for the record, the reason the SEC has been so good for so long is JUCO. Except for FSU, ACC schools don't take JUCO players except in rare cases. You will see a universal theme among the vast majority of football factory schools is the taking of JUCO players, which is why the ACC will remain "second tier" in football. But it's laughable to put the Pac-10 or Big Ten ahead of the ACC academically. That's absurd.

Totally my bad on that call guys. I guess everyone always totally disregards the ACC when talking about football, so I disregarded them when I put that. My apologies, they are definitely up there with the top tier, heck maybe even best.

Who cares about student athlete performance. College sports is the last place slavery is still condoned. These guys bring in tons of cash for the school and if they get hurt they have none of the fall backs that an NFL player has. Sell one of your jerseys and you are suspended. A university sells your jersey and makes millions. Complete garbage.

Brief article about JUCO players and how top performing football schools use them. That's basically the difference between mediocre BCS conferences (Pac-10, ACC generally speaking) and the SEC.

http://accsec.blogspot.com/2010/12/juco-recruiting-pays-dividends-cause…

The is a random blog entry from some guy without any substantiation for his arguments? He basis the SEC having more JUCO athletes on the fact that a few of the top JUCO players for one particular year went to SEC teams... It just may have been also because they happened to be among the best teams in the country and close to home. A pretty easy decision then.

Jerome, why do you think the SEC has dominated college football for the last decade? JUCO isn't the ONLY reason, but it's a significant reason. Look at Florida State. Until Virginia Tech joined the ACC, FSU dominated the conference totally and absolutely. FSU was the ONLY team consistently taking JUCO players. If you look at their rivals rankings right now, it appears about 1/3 of FSU's class is JUCO. It makes a huge difference when you can plug holes with dominant 20-year-old players when the rest of your competition is having to fill their holes by developing younger, weaker high school players. I believe Ohio State does this, too. Right now, a solid quarter of their recruiting class is JUCO.

The thing is, I wish VT did this because it's a legal option available. But the simple fact is, the football factory schools take JUCO players and they win national championships and it's a substantial reason why, particularly this year as the Heisman trophy winner on the likely national championship team is a JUCO player. And by they way, Cam Newton is not from Alabama; he's from Atlanta.

In summation, football success is absolutely a measure of national prestige for a university. But fans shouldn't act so arrogantly about "this conference being 2nd tier in football, this one being premiere" when much of the success has to do with coaching philosophy of weighting sports in a greater manner than athletics rather than having them balance. If VT could have plugged some significant holes on its offensive line and in its decimated linebacker core (injury) this year, we'd have easily been 13-0 and in contention for the title.