Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. Collapse Details
    the rise & fall of the Big 10
    #1
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,577
    conference's football coaches not good enough?

    http://michiganradio.org/post/big-te...ack-leadership
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    11,685
    In 1895, the presidents of seven Midwestern universities met at the Palmer House Hotel in Chicago to form what we now call the Big Ten. They created the world’s first school-based sports organization, predating even the NCAA. Soon the rest of the country’s colleges and high schools followed suit, forming their own leagues based on the Big Ten model. The uniquely American marriage of academics and athletics – something no other country would even consider -- had been officially consummated.
    That's a historical happenstance that I never gave much thought to, but now DEFINES athletics in America - the union of school and sport. I can't think of another nation on earth that has developed this relationship as we have and certainly accounts for America's preeminence in world sport. It's the perfect farm system for raising great athletes.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #3
    I gotta go with recruitment. The Florida/Texas studs aren't heading off to cold Michigan, when they can play at LSU, USC, FSU, Alamama if they have that choice.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,358
    By and large, it is harder to go to school and even get in to school at the Big Ten institutions than it is in the other conferences, and in particular, in the SEC, whose reputation is being tarnished further by the behavior of its stars and the lack of institutional attention or even direct institutional assistance of the schools and the cities that they inhabit.

    Not sure how it total breaks out, but I would guess that the total compensation for the head coach and rest of the core staff is higher in the SEC than elsewhere
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Right there.
    Posts
    2,785
    Bacon said since 1970 that the Big Ten has won only two NC titles which is true but also what is true is they have won two since 1997. The conference is certainly weaker than what it was ten+ years ago but the admissions standards of it's member schools for the most part are not what flies in other conferences that I'm aware of. The only other conference that I know of as a whole of top schools (outside of the Ivy league of course)and high admissions standards (with the exception of a few schools) would probably be the ACC. This of course affects recruitment.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #6
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,577
    In instructive piece on the decline of the Big 10 from the NY Times:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/sp...lees.html?_r=0
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    from an IP that never sent jazz that PM, never !
    Posts
    6,879
    Quote Originally Posted by gh View Post
    In instructive piece on the decline of the Big 10 from the NY Times:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/sp...lees.html?_r=0
    This is an absolutely great article. It captures the multifaceted nature of the Big10 decline. No one factor is to blame. The article uses a good LB recruit to show how Ohio is losing its own backyard to the SEC. It is an interesting story, articles like this must be written around anecdotes that make for good reading but this 6'1 210 lb LB, a prospect that is not extraordinary in the Midwest, typifies the trend:

    "Yet in the class of 2014, Illinois’s top recruit went to L.S.U., and Iowa’s went to Alabama. In the class of 2013, SEC and Atlantic Coast Conference programs poached premier prospects from Indiana and Pennsylvania, and Maryland’s top recruits went to Virginia Tech and Southern California. By contrast, Texas’ best went to Texas A&M, Louisiana’s to L.S.U., California’s to Southern California and Virginia’s to Virginia.

    Fact from NYT article:
    "An instructive comparison is Michigan and Georgia. In 1960, Michigan had twice Georgia’s population; in 1990, it was nearly one and a half times as big; today, their populations are roughly equivalent. "

    Demographics is destiny is many ways. It is certainly not that the Midwest athletes can not compete with the SEC, it is that the Midwest HS footballers are actually going where football is taken more seriously.

    Nevertheless I will predict a comeback for the Big10 over the next decade. Of course it is easy to do that because in life, what goes down must come up.
    Last edited by user4; 10-05-2014 at 12:49 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #8
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235 View Post
    By and large, it is harder to go to school and even get in to school at the Big Ten institutions than it is in the other conferences, and in particular, in the SEC...
    Barring maybe Northwestern, that's just not true. If any Big 10 school had strong interest from a 6-3, 225-pound blue chip running back with 4.3 speed and he met the minimum NCAA academic requirements, he would be in there like Jack Flash.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,358
    Quote Originally Posted by gm View Post
    Barring maybe Northwestern, that's just not true. If any Big 10 school had strong interest from a 6-3, 225-pound blue chip running back with 4.3 speed and he met the minimum NCAA academic requirements, he would be in there like Jack Flash.
    I was thinking of the SEC primarily, as the Pac-12 has many very high quality schools (even USC is steadily moving up in the ranks of strong schools). However, there was an International Ranking that had these of the majors: top 4 Pac 12, then 5 Big10, Pac12, ACC, Big10, Pac12, then Vandy gets the first SEC, followed by three more Big10, then FL then three more Pac12, then TX A&M.


    So, both the Pac12 and Big10 get in half a dozen before the first SEC, then BIG10 gets four more (to 10) before FL gets the second SEC, followed by three more Pac12. So, those top conferences get in 14 schools before the #2 SEC school. The more touted ACC is not really much better, although they lost MD). The Big12 does not fare well either (the UC system has seven or eight in the top 100; after that they are in groups of 50 and then 100)

    http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2014.html

    2 Stanford
    4 Cal
    12 UCLA
    15 Wash
    22 Mich
    24 UW
    28 Northwestern
    28 IL
    30 MN
    31 Duke
    34 Colo
    36 UNC
    39 Texas
    43 MD
    51 USC
    52 Rutgers
    54 Vandy
    58 PSU
    60 Purdue
    64 Ohio State
    78 FL
    86 AZ
    87 Utah
    88 ASU
    96 TX A&M
    99 GA Tech

    And the comment about the 'flash' recruiting of a stud; I have heard that there are a number of athletes that the UW does not even bother to go after because they will not pass the academic standards.
    Last edited by 26mi235; 10-05-2014 at 04:07 AM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #10
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,577
    The amount of school/conference bias that goes hand-in-hand with any such discussions renders meaningful dialogue almot impossible. EVERYBODY way overrates their school/conference in academic terms.

    (OK, mayby not the Ivies, but they're so irrelevant athletically they're not part of the conversation)
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •