I disagree they would be a door mat to 2-4 other schools in the b10. They wouldn’t be bottom tier but floor mat just the same. In the b12 they could be anything that they want to be. They could be the big dog (duck) in the conference as far as the media is concerned that is for sure.
What's Next for the Big 12? As Colorado (Reportedly) Leaves Pac-12, Four Paths the League Could Take
Just to pile on your uninformed Bowl Performance statement. If you say one of these is “mediocre to bad”…so is the other. I did a quick google search on the last 10 Bowl seasons. Of those 10, they each were better in 5 seasons. So that was a split. The Big 12 went 34-27 (.557) while the Big 10 went 46-42 (.522). The Big 12 has OU & TCU that have made the playoff. OU is leaving. The Big 10 has Ohio St, Mich, & Mich St that have made the playoff. The Big 10 is adding USC while the Big 12 is losing OU. So this time next year…TCU will be the lone Big 12 rep in the playoff
I guess Cincy’s playoff appearance was a myth. Sounds like the Big 12 has a better bowl win rate to me as well as a higher percentage of teams making a bowl each year. The Big 10 West is a complete joke lf a division. Like I said the top of the Big 10 better but once you get past that it’s open season with average to downright mediocre teams. Rutgers - ass, Maryland - ass, Northwestern - ass, Illinois - ass, Indiana - ass, Nebraska - ass, Purdue - average, Iowa - average.
Youre now claiming Cincinnati’s appearance!! You say the Big 10 is top heavy…yet they have 3 programs that have made the playoff while the Big 12 has 4 of their 5 made by 1 program. Youre too easy
Not as easy as the OU guy on an OSU message board. The Big 10 West is a complete joke. Guess if the Big 12 somehow gets Oregon and Washington their playoff appearance become a myth too.
Does the Big 12 lose the OU appearances once they leave?
Why does it come down to losing appearances? The AAC doesn’t lose their appearance but they do lose the ability to say they have a team capable of appearing. Even if we don’t count OUs anymore we still have 2 appearances with 12 teams vs 3 with 14. Big whoop. Like I said it’s top heavy.
@DickeySucksBalls So in the last 10 years, there have been 29 head-to-head matchups between the Big 12/Big 10. The Big 10 is 16-13. What do you have to say about that? Since all you initially cared about was Bowl Season and W-L records…still say the Conf is worse than the Big 12?
Top to bottom yes I do. Their top end is better but the bottom of that conference is bad. They have 5 Kansas’s at least.
So just to summarize. You initially stated Bowl Record. It was proven to you that they are basically identical of each other. The Big 10 has a better record Head-to-Head. Has more playoff appearances. More Nat Titles. More teams that qualified for the Playoff. Facilities are better. Monetary shares are better. Salaries are better. Sustained winning as a Conf over history is better. None of that matters. But what does matter is somehow that in your opinion, the bad teams are worse in the Big 10…therefore it makes it a worse Conf? That is pure ignorance. A Conf that has Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, and USC…is WORSE than a Conf that has …TCU as its bellcow!!! O)r KState!!! Baylor!!! That is absolutely laughable. I just dropped half a hunnerd on you. There are some solid posters on here. Some solid, intelligent fans who can carry on a solid debate. You just arent one of them and therefore are not worthy of any more of my time. Carry on
When did money make a conference better at the sport? You seem super pressed that I think top to bottom the Big 12 is a better conference than the Big 10. I already told you their top end is better. I don’t know why you keep telling me they have Ohio State and Michigan like I forgot or something. Congrats on the brand recognition trophy and the money trophy though I guess. Seems to have done Rutgers, Maryland, Illinois, Indiana, Nebraska, and Northwestern a lot of good.
Ok, I had to respond to this because of it being the dumbest thing youve said. IN A WORLD WHERE STREAMING IS TAKING OVER THE LANDSCAPE…YOU ASKED HOW BRAND RECOGNITION AND MONEY MATTER!!! You have no clue!!!
What does that have to do with their on field performance?
@DickeySucksBalls Ok, lets try this. With the new additions to the Big 12/Big 10, there are now 34 total teams. I want you to rank the TOP 20 of those 34 teams. The criteria is opinion. Facilities.
Tradition. History of winning. Fan support. Recruiting base. Brand recognition. What you think the program will be going fwd. Overall job for a HC. Just factor all of that in as you wish and see what you get. You think the Big 12 is better. I think the Big 10 is better. We arent changing each others minds, which is fine. Rank the top 20. Here is mine
1: Ohio St
2: Michigan
3: USC
4: Oregon
5: Penn St.
6: Wisconsin
7: Utah
8: Washington
9: TCU
10: Iowa
11: Baylor
12: Nebraska
13: Mich. St.
14: Oklahoma St.
15: UCF
16: BYU
17: UCLA
18: ASU
19: KState
20: Houston
This is irrelevant to the point I made.
Dude…it was just a question. Im not changing your mind. You arent changing mine. And you made no point. You stated an opinion. There is a difference
Then why ask me the question? I never argued brand recognition and facilities. I argued on field performance.
It was just asking your opinion. This is forum. Discussion is what drives these. My apologies big fella.
The top 20 will be full of big 10 teams just because of the ridiculous money they’re getting. I cannot wait until 70% of those freeloaders get dumped on their asses in a decade or two.
"The top 20 will be full of big 10 teams just because of the ridiculous money they’re getting. I cannot wait until 70% of those freeloaders get dumped on their asses in a decade or two.
Why do you feel like they are they getting “ridiculous” money? What do you mean by thinking/saying 70% will get dumped on their a**es?