Here we are on the first weekend of college football and as a life long Buckeye fan I am already a little depressed.

Much like last year, we already know they are going to win all their games until a bowl game this year because the conference blows and there is no one to compete with the Buckeyes. Our out of conference schedule is filled with scrubs, and then the conference is even worse.

Winning is fun, but far less so because it is more a product of shitty competition than just shear dominance.

I hate the SEC, but at the same time if I were a fan of one of those schools I would be fired up because there are always big games it seems because of how many teams seem to legitimately contend for a National Title every year. Even out of conference I am seeing Georgia playing Clemson tonight, Bama played VT.

Am I the only Buckeye fan finding themself bored with the current situation? I am old enough to remember when the Big 10 didn't feel like a souped up version of the MAC that the Buckeyes lorded over every season. I miss those days, as they were far more exciting as a fan.

:rolleyes:

IggyPride00;1494086 wrote:Here we are on the first weekend of college football and as a life long Buckeye fan I am already a little depressed.

Lighten up Francis. Buffalo would beat a few B10 teams. Buckeyes are fine.

vball10set;1494091 wrote::rolleyes:

Are you old enough to remember when it didn't used to be like this?

If you are, are you telling me you really prefer this to how it used to be?

Christ. It was competitive just a few years ago. You dont exactly have to be old to remember that.

Wisconsin and Michigan State are what they are. Elite footballs they aren't. Elite football programs they will never bed. Recently proud programs Iowa and Purdue have turned to garbage. Penn State has been pretty consistent, but it's still an uphill battle for them right now. The B1G's perception during the Urban era is going to really go as far as Michigan and Nebraska go. There's no reason those 2 aren't top 10 teams every year given a pretty weak conference schedule.

There's no reason those 2 aren't top 10 teams every year given a pretty weak conference schedule.

Neither has been a consistent legit top 10 program for over a decade now. Michigan had that year in 2006, but that was 7 years ago. Nebraska has not been the same since Osbourne left in the 90's.

Michigan becoming a 2nd rate program has hurt the conference tremendously.

Are the buckeyes gonna be favored to win most if not all of their games? sure. Did they look like a juggernaut today? absolutely not.

You'd better hope that the actual team isn't 1/2 as arrogant as you or they may drop a few games before a bowl game

That's my point. They SHOULD be, given their history. At least every other year, they should be a serious threat at a top 5-10 finish.

I don't root for a conference.

Fly4Fun;1494120 wrote:I don't root for a conference.

Without a good conference it's hard to go anywhere, just ask Boise State. Don't necessarily have to root for them but the conference does need to be better. Going through a weak conference doesn't exactly prepare a team for games against a team like Alabama.

xKoToVxSyNdRoMe;1494129 wrote:Without a good conference it's hard to go anywhere, just ask Boise State. Don't necessarily have to root for them but the conference does need to be better. Going through a weak conference doesn't exactly prepare a team for games against a team like Alabama.

B1G is down, but not that down.

Also, Utah seemed plenty prepared.

The thing that's bad is besides Michigan and Penn State I think the other BIG schools are happy being who they are. Recruiting is lazy. Penn State is fighting an uphill battle. Michigan is recovering and will produce some good teams very soon. The problem is Iowa Wisconsin Nebraska, and Michigan State seem happy to recruit from the leftovers the top notch schools didn't want. Their happy to have that 1 standout season every 4 or 5 years.

I really hate this lemming like following of the conference dominance horseshit...ESPiN doles out the pablum and some seem to live off of it, fuck that.

My team is 1-0...that is where my general concern ends. The argument that your conference needs to be good in order for your team to suceed late in the season/bowl game is pretty weak. It didn't matter when tOSU played a far superior team in Miami, when Boise beat Oklahoma or Georgia? There are plenty of examples...point is it's a myth, preparation and execution trump getting beat up all season long. It will matter even less as we move to a play-off system starting next season.

Will the B1G get better? Don't know and don't care.

vball10set;1494091 wrote::rolleyes:

tw

f

IggyPride00;1494097 wrote:Are you old enough to remember when it didn't used to be like this?

If you are, are you telling me you really prefer this to how it used to be?

ytownfootball;1494166 wrote:I really hate this lemming like following of the conference dominance horse****...ESPiN doles out the pablum and some seem to live off of it, **** that.

My team is 1-0...that is where my general concern ends. The argument that your conference needs to be good in order for your team to suceed late in the season/bowl game is pretty weak. It didn't matter when tOSU played a far superior team in Miami, when Boise beat Oklahoma or Georgia? There are plenty of examples...point is it's a myth, preparation and execution trump getting beat up all season long. It will matter even less as we move to a play-off system starting next season.

Will the B1G get better? Don't know and don't care.

Well stated. ESPN, Herbstreit, etc drive this stuff. It's not the SEC that's been winning championships. It's Alabama, LSU, Auburn that have produced great teams. The rest of the SEC is no different than the rest of the country - outside looking in. College football is cyclical and that will continue.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1494172 wrote:Well stated. ESPN, Herbstreit, etc drive this stuff. It's not the SEC that's been winning championships. It's Alabama, LSU, Auburn that have produced great teams. The rest of the SEC is no different than the rest of the country - outside looking in. College football is cyclical and that will continue.

Listing Auburn with Bama and LSU and not even mentioning Florida. Man, you really know your stuff!

College football is cyclical and that will continue

Bingo!!!!

[INDENT]I don't root for a conference. [/INDENT]

I always root for conference. Born and raised under Woody Hayes. Yeah we hate TSUN....but when push comes to shove the Big 10 is family. No doubt, that is where Herbie comes from....and I like it. We compare stats from all sorts of things in all sorts of sports, so it is quite fair to look at football conference to conference. In the old days, it was the greatest honor to represent our league...in the ROSE BOWL....and the PAC was our biggest rivals. Nowadays, it the National Championship...and it's the winners of the SEC that have been dominant......And that's a fact.

Why they are dominant is another story and there are plenty of reasons, some are football related, others are off field. (read NCAA). It doesn't matter...Go Buckeyes!

One football reason that I see for SEC dominance is they hone their teams for the NC games by having a playoff system in place within their league that toughens their champion, and makes them ready for the BCS game.
Off the field, the NCAA has hammered PAC and B1G teams lately while letting the SEC skate.

Rotinaj;1494177 wrote:Listing Auburn with Bama and LSU and not even mentioning Florida. Man, you really know your stuff!

Florida won a championship a few years ago. But they and Auburn are not elite. Only LSU and Alabama can make that claim. . the point you missed is that there are elite programs in the Southeast right now. it's not some sort of magical conference. South Carolina, Georgia, Arkansas, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, MSU, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt. - these programs are no different than the Big Ten.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1494186 wrote:Florida won a championship a few years ago. But they and Auburn are not elite. Only LSU and Alabama can make that claim. . the point you missed is that there are elite programs in the Southeast right now. it's not some sort of magical conference. South Carolina, Georgia, Arkansas, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, MSU, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt. - these programs are no different than the Big Ten.

Like hell they aren't. I would take most all those schools over our mid-lower tier B1G schools.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1494172 wrote:Well stated. ESPN, Herbstreit, etc drive this stuff. It's not the SEC that's been winning championships. It's Alabama, LSU, Auburn that have produced great teams. The rest of the SEC is no different than the rest of the country - outside looking in. College football is cyclical and that will continue.

Yes it will, sometime the SEC will drop off some and a conference like the Big Ten will be top for a while. But in order to do that, they will have to improve, hence the point of OPs thread. Sitting around waiting for that to happen isn't good enough. The top SEC coaches are aggressive as hell in recruiting (see: Urban Meyer), so if Big Ten teams and coaches have that attitude towards things it will be a long time before there is any change.

The conference will be better when bets are hedged. Sure, Alabama and LSU have been dominant in the BCS era. With that said, if either of those 2 aren't there, one of Florida, Georgia, Auburn, South Carolina and even a few others like Texas A&M and Arkansas have been in position to make noise.

That was the OP's point, and a valid one. Who else will rise to the occasion?

The new scheduling format to start in '14 will take care of some of this...at least for the Buckeyes, scUMs, Wiskys, Spartys etc. some of the others will get better but probably not by a whole lot. But I ask you...why the hell should I care? We will play tough enough opponents to get us in position to be in the play-off and that's all I really care about. I could give a rats ass if Indy, Minny or Hawkys ever win another game. Get my point?

The Buckeyes do not have control over how good the other Big Ten school are, but they do have control over their non-conference schedule. The non-conference schedule has been extremely watered down in recent years. Here is what the non-conference schedule used to look like.

1980: Syracuse, Arizona St, UCLA
1981: Duke, Stanford, Florida St
1982: Baylor, Stanford, Florida St
1983: Oregon, Oklahoma
1984: Oregon St, Washington St
1985: Pitt, Colorado, Washington St
1986: Alabama, Washington, Colorado, Utah
1987: West Virginia, Oregon, LSU
1988: Syracuse, Pitt, LSU
1989: Oklahoma St, USC, Boston College
1990: Texas Tech, Boston College, USC

Any of those schedules would make for a more exciting September than we have now.

OSU, UM, Nebraska, Penn State and Wisconsin are a great top nucleus. Throw in mid level teams like MSU, NW and Iowa you have a pretty terrific league. It's just right now the SEC has an abundance of really good coaches, so you wind up with essentially 14 decent teams.

I do think there are two major factors that have hurt Midwest football however. One is down south they can practice all year and in better weather as well as high schoolers while Ohio boys are relegated to a August-November schedule. Then you have to factor in the major migration of population towards the sun belt as well, diminishing our previous huge numbers and vast elite talent that existed when the B1G and Notre Dame basically ruled the sport