Azubuike24;1654703 wrote:Bottom line, the middle/bottom of the B1G sucks. Those are the majority of teams with the bad losses, and are the majority who have continually lost to non-BCS and MAC schools over the last decade.
Quite simply, if Michigan and Nebraska would pull their weight as "premier" programs, we wouldn't be having this discussion. From where they WERE 10-15 years ago, it's hard to argue that Ohio State, Wisconsin and Michigan State haven't lived up to or exceeding their expectations.
The ONLY difference in the SEC and B1G? Tennessee has faded, South Carolina has stepped up. Florida has faded, Texas A&M has stepped up. Tennessee and Florida were both top 5 programs 15 years ago, as was Nebraska (and Michigan was close), but have been replaced. The SEC just has a lot more substance with the ability to step up.
I never thought I'd say it, but adding A&M and Missouri have been enhancing. Almost every other "expansion" into other conferences has actually hurt the conference strength. Colorado and Utah haven't made the Pac 12 better. Maryland and Rutgers don't make the B1G better. Syracuse and Pittsburgh haven't made the ACC better. West Virginia and TCU haven't made the Big XII better.
I would argue that as it stands today, the top tier of SEC teams would more often than not dominate the top tier of B1G teams week in and week out. Hell, the
bottom tier of SEC teams would dominate the bottom tier of B1G teams. Vanderbilt would kill Purdue for example.
I never thought I'd feel bad about Michigan's decline but I miss the days that the Ohio State - Michigan game actually MEANT something on the national stage.
No matter how you slice it, only delusional B1G fans think these two conferences are on par with each other. Guys like sleeper actually fantasize that the B1G is still better. lol