Why not Miami (OH)? They are pretty consistent. And Marshal from C-USA wouldn't be terrible. Remember that once these smaller schools join, finaces for them increase, along with their visibility. So they should be able to improve their recruiting, and become even better teams. It will just take a few years to happen.
Miami, OH hasn't been great lately and neither has Marshall. Actually, I think the ideal alignment would be: Big Ten (14) West Illinois Iowa Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Northwestern Wisconsin Big Ten (14) East Cincinnati Indiana Ohio State Penn State Pittsburgh Purdue West Virginia
here's the numbers, i added the recent bowls: SEC vs Big 10 since 1920: 69-62-6 --53% since 1990 30-23--57% what i did notice: OSU or Meechigan has won or shared a piece of the big11 conference every year since 1968 except 7 times. thats 38 years with 31 titles belonging to at least one of them and multiple times both. thats not a cycle, thats a pattern.
Yep, I posted that in a previous thread while debating with Hawker earlier this year. For some reason, he still hasn't reponded though.
psulions2007, OK I want you to go to the first page and show me where ANYBODY said the SEC OWNED. I see posts where people are accurately stating that SEC teams played a tougher schedule but where do you see anybody saying the SEC owned? All I see is fans of the SEC replying to the ridiculous comments made by the media about how great Ohio St. and the Big Ten are. And those comments by the fans of the SEC turned out to be true. psulions2007, you are saying that I obviously lack at reading comprehension, but you are the one who is saying people here said things they obviously didn't say. It looks like you are the one who lacks reading compehension.
Sorry if I missed that, Nutriaitch.... It would be delusional to argue that M and O haven't dominated the Big Ten historically... if you add in Penn state, you have the three teams who have been most consistent in winning % over the past four decades... I'm not sure that's proof positive that no one else in the conference can play the game. My comments are that there have been much more "cracking of the ice" over the past ten years or so that many outside the conference would notice unless they followed the conference closely. On the wins versus SEC thingy, I used the espn five year history and the Big Ten has something like a 9-7 edge against the SEC, regular season and bowls. It has never been offered to say the Big Ten is better... just to soften the comments about the SEC being dominant. Over the past five years, the SEC record against the other major conferences is a wash. I can go find it and repost it again if you wish. And finally, I argue against the inference that Ohio State and Michigan rule the Big Ten AND THEREFORE all the other Big Ten teams really suck (the Big 2, little 8/9)... when in fact we have some very good teams, who can play with anyone, especially lately. You guys should be proud of your conference. It can be done without minimizing everyone else. I think most of the posters on here respect the talent in other leagues... and understand that there are many teams who can play the game.
Didn't mean for it sound like such a callout. I never meant it as saying that no-one else in the conference can play. Just meant to say that the top of the SEC is deeper than the top of the Big Ten. Any given year, as many as 5-6 teams can reasonably win the SEC, and possibly compete for the MNC. In the Big Ten, everyone appears to be playing for 3rd. That's not saying that he SEC is "better", just "deeper"
since kentucky played indiana every year, UK/IU accounts for over 25% of the 137 games played between the conferences with a 16-20 record, respectively. But i left them in. without them the record would represent a more accurate number @ 53-42--56% but it wasnt enough to matter so I left it. both dates include all penn state games. joepa has been there since 1920 anyhow so I figured its the same team. their record is right near .500 all-time vs sec if i recall. All of arkansas' as well as south carolina's games are included even though they both joined the sec in 1991. Penn St joined the big 10 in 1990. chicago was omitted because they arent relevant to the discussion.
You're testing my memory now, but I seem to remember a few years ago... when the "ND to the Big Ten" conversations heated up, then died down... the Big Ten commissioner said the Big Ten's primary interest "if they ever decided to expand" would be to seek a state funded school. ... so I'm thinking Rutgers (State University of New Jersey), West Virginia.... more along those lines. We have one private school in the Big Ten, Northwestern, and one partially state funded in Purdue. Not sure we're anxious to add another. Private schools can cause problem... they're either very active (USC, Miami) or take a whole different approach to the student/athlete concept (Northwestern, Vandy) and are the righteous contribution to conference meetings. They want to stay in their leagues so they can keep the financial drippings from athletics, but do little to add drippings of their own.
