P
Preacher
Posts: 218
Dec 12, 2009 1:45pm
Forgot about the touching thing.lol
Kentucky is a quality academic school.
Very good at basketball and baseball.
middle of the road in Football.
Great fit.
Kentucky is a quality academic school.
Very good at basketball and baseball.
middle of the road in Football.
Great fit.
N
NOL fan
Posts: 376
Dec 12, 2009 1:48pm
gotta have UM and OSU in the same division, to ensure that they only play once per year
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Dec 12, 2009 2:04pm
West
Notre Dame
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Northwestern
Illinois
East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Indiana
Purdue
Notre Dame
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Northwestern
Illinois
East
Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Indiana
Purdue
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Dec 12, 2009 2:08pm
And if Notre Dame and Michigan ever get back to what they were, then that is as good a conference as there is in college football.
N
NOL fan
Posts: 376
Dec 12, 2009 2:23pm
Division A
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Illinois
Minnesota
Division B
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Indiana
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Iowa
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Illinois
Minnesota
Division B
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Indiana
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Iowa
O
osu99
Posts: 333
Dec 12, 2009 4:23pm
My friend from Alabama always wants to ship UK to the Big Ten and then add Clemson to the SEC. He's concerned about the Big 10 getting 12 teams.
Hesston
Posts: 516
Dec 12, 2009 9:44pm
I would think ND would be there 1st choice, I like Mizzo & Pitt too, proly Mizzo before Pitt cause the National fan base but I doubt ND will be interested because of there arrogance. Heck they brought up Newt Rockne the other day
D
dtdtim
Posts: 358
Dec 13, 2009 3:36am
I think there's a snowball's chance the Big 10 would even entertain the notion of adding UK. And there's a snowball's chance that UK would leave the SEC anyway.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Dec 13, 2009 4:09am
I don't want UK, there academic standards are not worthy of the Big 10.
I'll take Pitt.
I'll take Pitt.
believer
Posts: 8,153
Dec 13, 2009 6:53am
So Sleeper...these "academic standards" you love to cling to as reason for NOT wanting certain schools in the Big Televen, where do you get this information from? Is it just a SWAG on your part or did you conduct your own academic standards study to make these determinations for yourself?sleeper wrote: I don't want UK, there academic standards are not worthy of the Big 10.
I'll take Pitt.
Why is Pitt better than UK or WV academically? Are you just assuming that students in urban Pittsburgh must be smarter than them there hill-jacks of UK or WV?
No wait....I know. The Big Televen commissioned a study of academic standards not long ago and determined that the schools of the Big Televen are coincidentally superior in academics than schools in other conferences.
That's it isn't it?
S
Sonofanump
Dec 13, 2009 9:00am
It is acedemic standards. Did you notice that players that do not qualify for Big Ten schools end up at certain Big East or SEC schools?believer wrote:Why is Pitt better than UK or WV academically? Are you just assuming that students in urban Pittsburgh must be smarter than them there hill-jacks of UK or WV?
E
enigmaax
Posts: 4,511
Dec 13, 2009 12:45pm
Such as? And what "standards" is it that drives them to other schools?Sonofanump wrote:It is acedemic standards. Did you notice that players that do not qualify for Big Ten schools end up at certain Big East or SEC schools?believer wrote:Why is Pitt better than UK or WV academically? Are you just assuming that students in urban Pittsburgh must be smarter than them there hill-jacks of UK or WV?
N
NOL fan
Posts: 376
Dec 13, 2009 1:12pm
are you aware of the fact that some schools are harder to get into than others when it comes to academic requirements? this is what he is referring toenigmaax wrote: Such as? And what "standards" is it that drives them to other schools?
believer
Posts: 8,153
Dec 13, 2009 1:51pm
So if I understand what you're saying, thugs like Maurice Clarett - for example - are smarter than similar thugs in the Big East, SEC or even - say - the MAC?Sonofanump wrote:It is acedemic (academic) standards. Did you notice that players that do not qualify for Big Ten schools end up at certain Big East or SEC schools?
LMAO
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Dec 13, 2009 3:21pm
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-universities-rankings/believer wrote:So Sleeper...these "academic standards" you love to cling to as reason for NOT wanting certain schools in the Big Televen, where do you get this information from? Is it just a SWAG on your part or did you conduct your own academic standards study to make these determinations for yourself?sleeper wrote: I don't want UK, there academic standards are not worthy of the Big 10.
I'll take Pitt.
Why is Pitt better than UK or WV academically? Are you just assuming that students in urban Pittsburgh must be smarter than them there hill-jacks of UK or WV?
No wait....I know. The Big Televen commissioned a study of academic standards not long ago and determined that the schools of the Big Televen are coincidentally superior in academics than schools in other conferences.
That's it isn't it?
Pitt is ranked 55, which is inline with other Big Ten schools.
Kentucky is ranked 126, consistent with community colleges and tech schools.
E
enigmaax
Posts: 4,511
Dec 13, 2009 3:58pm
Yeah, and I'm waiting on some specific examples of top recruits who didn't qualify at a Big Ten school, so they "ended up" at an SEC school.NOL fan wrote:are you aware of the fact that some schools are harder to get into than others when it comes to academic requirements? this is what he is referring toenigmaax wrote: Such as? And what "standards" is it that drives them to other schools?
I am also aware of the general statement of these standards, but I have really never seen anyone provide real examples of players that the Big Ten couldn't reduce itself to sign.
I'm not saying there isn't something to it, but I'd really like specifics and examples. For example, until the last year or so, the SEC would not accept non-qualifiers at all. My understanding is that other conferences can/did accept non-qualifiers but they had to sit a year. The SEC recently changed its stance on that and their policy now matches that of the other major conferences. Did I understand that correctly and what is the Big Ten's policy on non-qualifiers?
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Dec 13, 2009 4:11pm
1. ND
2. Pitt
3. Mizzou
4. Iowa St
5. Rutgers
2. Pitt
3. Mizzou
4. Iowa St
5. Rutgers
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Dec 13, 2009 4:15pm
I agree the "academic standards" that the Big 10 likes to say it has, is lame. There is roughly the same amount of knuckleheads on Big 10 teams as there are elsewhere.
Brandon Graham's pre-game callout of Boren in which he confused when to say "is" and "are" comes to mind
As does Clarett, Katzenmoyer, etc
Brandon Graham's pre-game callout of Boren in which he confused when to say "is" and "are" comes to mind
As does Clarett, Katzenmoyer, etc
believer
Posts: 8,153
Dec 13, 2009 5:04pm
^^^I have a hunch it's not "academic standards" as much as it is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Academic "standards" for 4-star D-1 football players who can barely read their own names don't matter much. If you have speed and can catch a ball, you qualify.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Dec 13, 2009 5:51pm
Can't leave out Pryor.jordo212000 wrote: I agree the "academic standards" that the Big 10 likes to say it has, is lame. There is roughly the same amount of knuckleheads on Big 10 teams as there are elsewhere.
Brandon Graham's pre-game callout of Boren in which he confused when to say "is" and "are" comes to mind
As does Clarett, Katzenmoyer, etc
O
osu99
Posts: 333
Dec 13, 2009 6:00pm
You think there might be a chance they are referring to the academic standards of their entire student body population and not just the athletic teams?
believer
Posts: 8,153
Dec 13, 2009 6:11pm
I'm sure it is....but like I said earlier when it comes right down to it you're looking at $$$$$$$$$ in sports not academic standards.osu99 wrote: You think there might be a chance they are referring to the academic standards of their entire student body population and not just the athletic teams?
A
Al Bundy
Posts: 4,180
Dec 13, 2009 6:14pm
Why would they be concerned with the entire student body when considering who to admit to an athletics conference? It is about $$$$$$$. I'm not sure if I see any of the teams mentioned leaving their current set up. ND has the TV contract. Pitt and WV have a much easier path to a BCS bowl where they are now, and the Big East is usually a better conference in basketball. If Missouri or Iowa State are truly unhappy in the Big 12, they might be the best bets to leave their current conference.osu99 wrote: You think there might be a chance they are referring to the academic standards of their entire student body population and not just the athletic teams?
Little Danny
Posts: 4,288
Dec 13, 2009 6:38pm
I crack up when I hear about my academic standards. All of the so called inferior schools of the Big East and the the SEC offer similar programs and opportunities as all of the Big10 schools (except for Northwestern and Michigan). True you can break out some US News and Report article showing these schools a little further down on the list, but from my experience, there is not a whole heck of a lot of difference between these schools.
OSU, Indiana, Minnesota, Michigan State, Iowa are not that much better than say Pitt, Syracuse, UCONN, UC, UK, GA, etc.
OSU, Indiana, Minnesota, Michigan State, Iowa are not that much better than say Pitt, Syracuse, UCONN, UC, UK, GA, etc.
jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Dec 13, 2009 6:39pm
I know many of you keep talking about UC and WVU... but neither would qualify under the current rules because of academic standards, or lack thereof. I know I was making fun of this earlier, but facts are facts. Any argument involving these two is moot.