^ Pretty much exactly what I was going to say.

Every one of those pro-big east points was just awful.

I know that neither conference is very impressive, but who has any of the Big 10 teams beat?

I say Oregon State is better, because they are basically playing for the Pac 10 championship against Oregon.

thedynasty1998 wrote:I say Oregon State is better, because they are basically playing for the Pac 10 championship against Oregon.

That is with the help of other teams losing. The fact that they LOST to Arizona and USC PROVES they are not better than them. You know, a LOSS in HEAD TO HEAD competition...This weren't fluke upsets, this was one team being better than the other.

you're fighting a losing battle with this guy,krazie45--trust me

With all that talent, Iowa should be playing the national championship.

It's not a losing battle. I just don't think the Big 10 is heads and shoulders above the Big East like many on here do. I try to be unbiased, and although I don't think the Big East is very good, I don't think the Big 10 is either.

112,

you would think that would be the case with 7 first teamers. What a crock.

thedynasty1998 wrote: No, I'm an OSU team, but respect Cincinnati and think they are a good team.

The BCS is all about money. The Big 10 schools have larger fan bases, which is why often times the Big 10 gets two teams in. They just travel better.

The Big 10 is not good. It's that simple.

Big 10
OSU lost to a mediocre Pac 10 team, and struggled with Navy.
Iowa did beat Arizona, but struggled with Northern Iowa and Arkansas State
Penn State didn't play anyone worthe mentioning in OOC
Northwestern lost to Syracuse
Wisconsin needed OT to beat Fresno State

Those are the top 5 teams in the Big 10. None have an impressive OOC victory.

Big East
Cincinnati beat Oregon State (better than USC and Arizona) and Fresno State
Pitt beat Notre Dame and Navy, lost to NC State
WVU lost to Auburn, beat East Carolina
South Florida beat Florida State
Rutgers all loses in conference

Just looking at wins and loses, it's hard to say that the Big 10 has a more impressive resume (actually it's impossible).

Plus, you mention number of eligible bowl teams, well Big 10 has 11 schools and the Big East has 8; so of course the Big 10 would have more bowl eligible teams.

I never said anything about having more bowl eligible teams, I said how the Big Ten usually has 2 teams in the BCS. I'll give you that they travel better, but generally the Big East doesn't have many teams that are good enough to make the BCS outside of their conference champ.

Also, I never said the Big Ten is good, I said they are better than the Big East.

You also never addressed how none of the current Big East teams have ever made the BCS title game. OSU has made it 3 times, winning one, and that is why I say the Big Ten is better than the Big East and without OSU they are on the same level.

You mention how the Big East has better quality wins this season (debateable). This is one year, overall the Big East can't hang with the Big Ten over the course of 5 years or 10 years.

thedynasty1998 wrote: It's not a losing battle. I just don't think the Big 10 is heads and shoulders above the Big East like many on here do. I try to be unbiased, and although I don't think the Big East is very good, I don't think the Big 10 is either.

I don't think they are head and shoulders above the Big East this season, but over the course of time the Big 10 is much better.

If you think you are disparaging the Big Ten by saying Ohio State has more talent than the rest of the conference, Ohio State has more talent than every mid major, every Big East team, every ACC team, all but one Pac-10 team, all but two SEC teams, and all but two Big XII teams, and of those 5 exceptions, only USC and Florida have more talent, Oklahoma, Texas, and LSU have about equal talent.

Cleveland Buck wrote: If you think you are disparaging the Big Ten by saying Ohio State has more talent than the rest of the conference, Ohio State has more talent than every mid major, every Big East team, every ACC team, all but one Pac-10 team, all but two SEC teams, and all but two Big XII teams, and of those 5 exceptions, only USC and Florida have more talent, Oklahoma, Texas, and LSU have about equal talent.

I about spit my drink all over my monitor when I read that post!

rock_knutne wrote:

Cleveland Buck wrote: If you think you are disparaging the Big Ten by saying Ohio State has more talent than the rest of the conference, Ohio State has more talent than every mid major, every Big East team, every ACC team, all but one Pac-10 team, all but two SEC teams, and all but two Big XII teams, and of those 5 exceptions, only USC and Florida have more talent, Oklahoma, Texas, and LSU have about equal talent.

I about spit my drink all over my monitor when I read that post!

You disagree that they have the same amount of talent? He didn't say OSU was better, he said the talent levels are the same. There is a diffrence. OSU is one of the most talented teams in the country.

dwccrew wrote:

rock_knutne wrote:

Cleveland Buck wrote: If you think you are disparaging the Big Ten by saying Ohio State has more talent than the rest of the conference, Ohio State has more talent than every mid major, every Big East team, every ACC team, all but one Pac-10 team, all but two SEC teams, and all but two Big XII teams, and of those 5 exceptions, only USC and Florida have more talent, Oklahoma, Texas, and LSU have about equal talent.

I about spit my drink all over my monitor when I read that post!

You disagree that they have the same amount of talent? He didn't say OSU was better, he said the talent levels are the same. There is a diffrence. OSU is one of the most talented teams in the country.

He's just mad because his team wasn't listed. But why would you list a team that is 1-9 in their last 10 bowl games? All that "talent" can't do shit with it.

sleeper wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

rock_knutne wrote:

Cleveland Buck wrote: If you think you are disparaging the Big Ten by saying Ohio State has more talent than the rest of the conference, Ohio State has more talent than every mid major, every Big East team, every ACC team, all but one Pac-10 team, all but two SEC teams, and all but two Big XII teams, and of those 5 exceptions, only USC and Florida have more talent, Oklahoma, Texas, and LSU have about equal talent.

I about spit my drink all over my monitor when I read that post!

You disagree that they have the same amount of talent? He didn't say OSU was better, he said the talent levels are the same. There is a diffrence. OSU is one of the most talented teams in the country.

He's just mad because his team wasn't listed. But why would you list a team that is 1-9 in their last 10 bowl games? All that "talent" can't do shit with it.

good post

devil1197 wrote: Just a joke thread so don't get all upset.

Iowa 7 B10 1st teamers.
OSU 1 B10 1st teamer.

Who has the top talent?

Not sure why this is a "joke" thread?

The guys who are 1st team are great players. I have no problem with the selections.

Iowa having all those first team selections and NOT winning the title makes you wonder why Ferentz is the coach of the year.

Come on voters, you can't have it both ways. If a guy with only one all conference member coaches his team to the championship, he should be your coach of the year.

There is a ridiculous bias against Ohio State in these awards. The team is expected to have talent at every position and is picked to win (or contend for) the championship most year -- so Tressel is never selected as the top coach.

So when his teams achieve and win the conference as expected, they give the coaching award to someone else -- but then they turn around and vote in other players as tops at their positions. Or he actually does a great coaching job (after the loss to Purdue, especially) and takes a less talented (according to the voters) team to the title, but his accomplishment is ignored.

The fact that Tressel has won more games and titles (including a national championship) than any other coaches in the Big Ten and has yet to be the Coach of the Year makes all of these awards a sham.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Iowa having all those first team selections and NOT winning the title makes you wonder why Ferentz is the coach of the year.

Come on voters, you can't have it both ways. If a guy with only one all conference member coaches his team to the championship, he should be your coach of the year.

There is a ridiculous bias against Ohio State in these awards. The team is expected to have talent at every position and is picked to win (or contend for) the championship most year -- so Tressel is never selected as the top coach.

So when his teams achieve and win the conference as expected, they give the coaching award to someone else -- but then they turn around and vote in other players as tops at their positions. Or he actually does a great coaching job (after the loss to Purdue, especially) and takes a less talented (according to the voters) team to the title, but his accomplishment is ignored.

The fact that Tressel has won more games and titles (including a national championship) than any other coaches in the Big Ten and has yet to be the Coach of the Year makes all of these awards a sham.

Well said- the voters can't have it both ways. Either Tressel is coach of the year, or OSU should have more 1st teamers. Ivan Maisel's recent Three point stance article says as much.

Writerbuckeye wrote:
The fact that Tressel has won more games and titles (including a national championship) than any other coaches in the Big Ten and has yet to be the Coach of the Year makes all of these awards a sham.

Paterno has won more games and national title technically, but I know what you are saying.

Writerbuckeye wrote: Iowa having all those first team selections and NOT winning the title makes you wonder why Ferentz is the coach of the year.

Come on voters, you can't have it both ways. If a guy with only one all conference member coaches his team to the championship, he should be your coach of the year.

There is a ridiculous bias against Ohio State in these awards. The team is expected to have talent at every position and is picked to win (or contend for) the championship most year -- so Tressel is never selected as the top coach.

So when his teams achieve and win the conference as expected, they give the coaching award to someone else -- but then they turn around and vote in other players as tops at their positions. Or he actually does a great coaching job (after the loss to Purdue, especially) and takes a less talented (according to the voters) team to the title, but his accomplishment is ignored.

The fact that Tressel has won more games and titles (including a national championship) than any other coaches in the Big Ten and has yet to be the Coach of the Year makes all of these awards a sham.

I agree with this. Ohio St talent is not overwhelming this year but Tressel won with only one first teamer. He should be coach of the year.

NOW, not only do Ohio State fans hate Ohio State, but so do all of the other Big Ten coaches. As do the the "experts". One night on the Big Ten Network, the guy with the big nose, said it would be VERY BAD for the Big Ten if Ohio State beat Iowa and won a 5th straight Big Ten Title. WHY???? HATERS!

BTW, Tressel has NEVER been voted Big Ten Coach of the Year. Not even when OSU went 14-0 and won the BCS Title. How in the hell can a coach win FIVE straight Big Ten Titles and not deserve a Coach of the Year at least once??

Ohio State HATERS. No one ever likes the bully.

Look at all the defense lost from last year. Look at all of the illnesses and injuries the O-line had this year. A whole new set of Wide Receivers this year. Herron and Saine both being nicked. Pryor has a sprained ankle, tweaked knee and a Turf Toe on each foot. The ONLY constant? JIM TRESSEL.