You are Jim Delany - how do you fix the Big 10?

• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  Let's see if we can keep this a smack-less thread ... I remember going to school at OSU in the 90s, and the Big 10 always considered the elite conference, bar none. Then, something happened. Maybe it was the creation of the BCS, or maybe it was the smackdown vs. Florida, I don't know, but I think its safe to say that we collectively agree that the Big 10 is simply not the top dog anymore, or even close for that matter.
  
  So, let's say you are Jim Delany ... how do you fix this? Is it a recruiting issue? Is it a coaching issue?
  
  I read somewhere (can't remember where) that because of email, Facebook, the internet, etc, student athletes find it much easier to stay "virtually" connected with hometown friends and family, so big-time recruits are more inclined to go to warmer colleges like USC or Florida instead of staying local at Iowa, Wisconsin, etc (might be a stretch, but worth discussing).
  
  Thoughts?
• charliehustle14

  The only way he can fix the Big 10 is expand it. It was stupid that we settled for Nebraska and that's it. He could have really stepped up and lobbied for more teams, but he didn't. There was all that talk that delaney wanted to make the Big Ten into a mega conference, but he called the dogs off. I thought he really screwed up by not going after TCU, and this was back when I believed TCU was a product of their schedule. I still thought it'd be a good pick up just to add depth to the conference. How nice would it be to have TCU now that they proved themselves legit vs Wisconsin? Hell of a pick up by the Big East.
  
  Now we can only hope that the Big 12 dies and we're able to bring in a few teams from there. I'm not talking about Baylor either, I mean Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Mizzou.
• slingshot4ever

  There are more athletes these days, so more schools can compete with top tier teams....I don't think there is anything that a commissioner can do.
• charliehustle14

  slingshot4ever;621637 wrote:There are more athletes these days, so more schools can compete with top tier teams....I don't think there is anything that a commissioner can do.

  
  Yep. The only thing you can do is bring in more of those competitive schools to increase the depth of the conference. The SEC is so good because of the depth of the conference, so they're battle tested come bowl season. There's just too many cream puffs in the Big Ten right now
• Cleveland Buck

  

  There's nothing wrong with the Big Ten. If Michigan gets back to where they were with Ohio State, Nebraska, Penn State, Iowa, and Wisconsin, and if Michigan State continues to improve, the SEC is only conference that can come close to a lineup like that. The SEC has advantages with lower academic requirements and teams paying players, but there is nothing you can do about that. Big Ten doesn't take a back seat to any other conference in the country.
• karen lotz

  

  Cleveland Buck;621645 wrote:There's nothing wrong with the Big Ten. If Michigan gets back to where they were with Ohio State, Nebraska, Penn State, Iowa, and Wisconsin, and if Michigan State continues to improve, the SEC is only conference that can come close to a lineup like that. The SEC has advantages with lower academic requirements and teams paying players, but there is nothing you can do about that. Big Ten doesn't take a back seat to any other conference in the country.

  
  link to SEC players getting paid? Or are you just going to keep saying that and look like a jackass?
• Ty Webb

  

  Cleveland Buck;621645 wrote: Big Ten doesn't take a back seat to any other conference in the country.

  
  Well,when one conference has had a team win the last 4 BCS National Championships and has the chance for another one this year,and they aren't the Big 10,then yes,the Big 10 takes a backseat to them
• Cleveland Buck

  

  You're right. Cam Newton didn't get anything.
• Ty Webb

  

  Cleveland Buck;621662 wrote:You're right. Cam Newton didn't get anything.

  
  Do you have any proof?
• vball10set

  After the bowl season last year people were saying the Big Ten is back, blah, blah, blah...it was a crappy day for the conference yesterday--so what? Two days ago the Big Ten was 2-0, and all was right with the world...now, if this trend continues for the next 3 or 4 years, then Mr. Delany will have some decisions to make.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  Ty Webb;621660 wrote:Well,when one conference has had a team win the last 4 BCS National Championships and has the chance for another one this year,and they aren't the Big 10,then yes,the Big 10 takes a backseat to them

  The way I wrote it should tell you that I meant other than the SEC, the Big Ten doesn't take a back seat to any other conference.
  

  Ty Webb;621663 wrote:Do you have any proof?

  
  I don't need any proof. I'm not investigating him. I can just use all of the proof published by everyone else to form my opinion.
• karen lotz

  

  Cleveland Buck;621662 wrote:You're right. Cam Newton didn't get anything.

  
  
  So you can say for sure no Big Ten players get any money?
• darbypitcher22

  

  Cleveland Buck;621645 wrote: The SEC has advantages with lower academic requirements.

  
  This, except for Vanderbilt. There's a bunch of guys playing in the SEC that couldn't qualify @ Ohio State
• karen lotz

  

  darbypitcher22;621707 wrote:This, except for Vanderbilt. There's a bunch of guys playing in the SEC that couldn't qualify @ Ohio State

  
  OSU doesn't lower admission standards for athletes?
• Fly4Fun

  

  A few things give the SEC an advantage:
  
  1. Weather, most people enjoy going somewhere warm.
  2. Extending more scholarship offers than a school actually has. The Big 10 doesn't allow this but the SEC does. If they over sign then they cut "dead weight".
  3. Standards of admission. While generally standards for great football players are lower at EVERY school. The SEC schools typically have less strict standards to begin with.
• OQB

  

  The problem is the big ten is old school football....power I formation with strong defense. Michigan is the only exception with their spread offense attack.
  
  To fix the issue the big ten needs to evolve like the rest of college football and recruit sec country hard.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  OrrvilleQB;621900 wrote:The problem is the big ten is old school football....power I formation with strong defense. Michigan is the only exception with their spread offense attack.

  Other than Wisconsin, most B10 schools run a spread style shotgun offense, or at least a pro style offense that utilizes the spread sometimes.
  Also, not everyone in the SEC runs the spread. Bama runs a pro style offense, so does LSU, Arkansas, and Georgia. Florida and Auburn are the spread teams.
  
  

  To fix the issue the big ten needs to evolve like the rest of college football and recruit sec country hard.

  They do. How many OSU players are from Florida?
  But, the thing is, most recruits are still good from Ohio and Penn.
  
  The B10 is fine. This bowl season just had all the wrong matchups and teams not wanting to be there.
  I figured the B10 would go 4-4, I wasn't that far off.
  
  The conference expansion is good, and overall remember the B10 had 3 teams in the top 10. The conference is fine.
• OQB

  

  But the big ten is significantly slower than the sec and there is plenty of proof to that. Almost all of the big ten athletes do come from Florida or sec country we don't have a full team of them though. The difference is in the lines....a big ten line can look great during the season, but put them up against a fast and very athletic defensive line...they look average.
  
  I do agree the big ten will be fine and is good competition.
• KR1245

  

  ptown_trojans_1;621952 wrote:
  The B10 is fine. This bowl season just had all the wrong matchups and teams not wanting to be there.
  I figured the B10 would go 4-4, I wasn't that far off.
  
  The conference expansion is good, and overall remember the B10 had 3 teams in the top 10. The conference is fine.

  
  Agreed
• believer

  

  ptown_trojans_1;621952 wrote:The conference expansion is good, and overall remember the B10 had 3 teams in the top 10. The conference is fine.

  One got their asses handed to them by the number 13 team in the country and another got beat in the Rose Bowl by team in a conference allegedly non-BCS worthy. We'll see how the Buckeyes do Tuesday night.
  
  The Big 10 is also under .500 in bowl games in the past 10 seasons.
  
  The Big 10 is alive but fine?
  
  When the Big 10 climbs above .500 in the post-season, when the Buckeyes beat an SEC team in a bowl game, when Big 10 teams stop losing BIG TIME in BIG TIME games, when Michigan gets its act together, and a whole host of other "when's" then I'll agree that the Big 10 is fine.
• Con_Alma

  ptown_trojans_1;621952 wrote:...
  The B10 is fine. This bowl season just had all the wrong matchups and teams not wanting to be there.
  I figured the B10 would go 4-4, I wasn't that far off.
  
  The conference expansion is good, and overall remember the B10 had 3 teams in the top 10. The conference is fine.

  
  
  I too think the Conference as a whole is fine. At the end of the day it's made up of individual programs. It's the individual programs that must work to make their scenario as best as they can be within the confines of their school's overall focus. The collective can't be impacted greatly if the individual components are going to continue along their same MOP.
  
  I don't see the Commissioner doing anything in an attempt to "fix" something that's not truly broken.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  believer;622047 wrote:The Big 10 is alive but fine?
  
  When the Big 10 climbs above .500 in the post-season, when the Buckeyes beat an SEC team in a bowl game, when Big 10 teams stop losing BIG TIME in BIG TIME games, when Michigan gets its act together, and a whole host of other "when's" then I'll agree that the Big 10 is fine.

  
  When the Big Ten plays a similar bowl lineup to what other conferences play, then they should be expected to be over .500 every year. The fact is the conference has so many draws means that they have great bowl tie-ins, which leads to a lot of high profile games even for the teams that place lower in the conference.
• karen lotz

  

  Cleveland Buck;622106 wrote:When the Big Ten plays a similar bowl lineup to what other conferences play, then they should be expected to be over .500 every year. The fact is the conference has so many draws means that they have great bowl tie-ins, which leads to a lot of high profile games even for the teams that place lower in the conference.

  
  
  GTFO with your excuses. Look at the bowl ties in:
  
  Capital One Big Ten #2 vs SEC #2
  Outback Big Ten #3 vs SEC #3/4/5
  Gator Bowl Big Ten #4 vs SEC #3/4/5
  TicketCity Big Ten #7 vs Big X12 #8 (CUSA #2 next year)
  Little Caesars Big Ten #8 vs MAC
  Texas Bowl Big Ten #6 vs Big XII #6
  Insight Bowl Big Ten #5 vs Big XII #4
  
  Please tell me which one of those games leads you to believe that the Big Ten plays a bowl lineup that is in someway unfair when compared to other conferences.
• believer

  

  karen lotz;622120 wrote:GTFO with your excuses. Look at the bowl ties in:
  
  Capital One Big Ten #2 vs SEC #2
  Outback Big Ten #3 vs SEC #3/4/5
  Gator Bowl Big Ten #4 vs SEC #3/4/5
  TicketCity Big Ten #7 vs Big X12 #8 (CUSA #2 next year)
  Little Caesars Big Ten #8 vs MAC
  Texas Bowl Big Ten #6 vs Big XII #6
  Insight Bowl Big Ten #5 vs Big XII #4
  
  Please tell me which one of those games leads you to believe that the Big Ten plays a bowl lineup that is in someway unfair when compared to other conferences.

  I'll answer...it's NONE.
  
  The Big 10 as a BCS conference doesn't play any tougher bowl line-up than any other BCS conference.
  
  I root like hell for Ohio State myself, but Buckeye fans in general are adept at (a) denigrating any team that's not Ohio State, (b) denigrating conferences that aren't the Big 10, and then (c) making excuses for both OSU and Big 10 failures when they occur...and they occur more frequently than some Buckeye fans care to admit.
• karen lotz

  

  Good answer believer.