In partnership with CBSSports.com
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
You're not very much fun.
YOUR have been banned from reading and posting on the Michigan Wolverine board.
It would be boring if we pointed out the normal fans. It's better to find the crazies so I can stereotype the whole fan base.
I didn't see many comments that reflect this at all.
Furthermore, the freep article is what's being discussed, which very clearly quotes Ford as saying that Michigan is the most talented team in the country.
Can we not all agree that UM is definitely not the most talented team in the country?
laconophilia is everywhere...
The divisions are fundamentally screwed up because team strength varies and it's incredibly egotistical to think you can actually create consistently balanced divisions. Look at the SEC. For the first half of its history, the East was stronger. The past few years, it's swung to the West.
The B10 thought they were smarter than everyone else and bastardized the divisions in the name of "perfect balance" instead of setting them up the way everyone else does ... geographically. Geographically makes far more sense to people and keeps all the traditional rivalries together without the need for stupid guaranteed crossover games. And now we are in year two and the divisions already are out of balance (and look like they will remain that way for the foreseeable future) and we have an 8-5 team headed to the Rose Bowl. The irony is the guaranteed crossover games make the schedules unbalanced again anyway. Just set the damn divisions up like everyone else ... geographically.
B10 East: OSU, UM, PSU, MSU, RU, MD, UVA, GT
B10 West: UNL, WIS, IOWA, ILL, NW, PUR, MN, IU
This post was edited by MrWoodson 19 months ago
Darrell Hazell backed out of the Purdue job?
Skip Holtz is gonna be pissed.
Pretty bad when a MAC coach turns you down.
The divisions are quite balanced.
The only reason it seemed like they aren't is b/c PSU and OSU aren't bowl eligible. If they were, the divisions would be quite even.
This violates SteveSchneider's rule. Unless he's actually arguing the MAC is a better conference than the B10. But if that's the case, why don't we see all the B10 head coaches leaving for MAC jobs? My head is starting to hurt.
While I think tRCMB is way offbase critiquing Hoke for his offering MSU commits, please tell me you see the difference between these two things.
But that's the point. You can't predict the future. PSU will be ineligible for another three years. And how long after that will they be down? And what is going to happen to Wisky? Will they go on like they have the past 20 years or revert to the pre-90s dumpster fire that they were pre-Alvarez? How about MSU and NW? Are you going to continue to be 9-11 wins per year programs or revert to what you were before your current coaches made you perennially bowl bound? They sacrificed geographic sanity for balance and ended up with neither. And it was predictable. You cannot create always balanced divisons. It's impossible.
Isn't PSU reduced to 65 scholarships also? If that's the case then it will be extremely difficult for them to make an impact in the B1G imo.
There is no difference. Circumstances change constantly. This change happens to be a big one, but I can think of a hundred circumstances that could change and impact a prospect's decision whether or not to sign with Wisconsin. There is nothing wrong with Dantonio contacting a Wisky recruit and asking him whether he has an interest in MSU and inviting him for a visit. It doesn't suddenly becone acceptable because of a coaching change.
TBH I don't renember the number, but it might be 65. It's a brutal punishment and will almost certainly render PSU toothless for years.
Over the course of 20+ years, these divisions will definitely be more balanced than unbalanced.
Whereas with the B12 or SEC you have a significantly better division every year. I would much rather have divisions that are mostly balanced 60% of the time than ones based on geography that are balanced 10% of the time.
This post was edited by Jandy 19 months ago
Okay, before you start arguing a point I'm not making, I agree that what both coaches are doing is perfectly acceptable.
I can also see how one might view the situations as very different. One would be revisiting a situation that has very viable reasons for already changing. One could cross into contacting a kid too much who has already made his decision and doesn't have a commonly known reason for changing.
Again, I don't differentiate, but I can definitely see how someone would view them as different situations.
That's not necessarily true. You don't know they will be more "balanced" than geographic decisions. It's absolutely impossible to predict.*
And it gets worse when you factor in guaranteed crossover games. UM plays OSU every year while MSU plays IU. It absolutely unbalances the schedules. If you set the divisions up geographically and did away with guaranteed crossover games, the schedules are likely to be as balanced or moreso than they are likely to be under the current alignment.
*The divisions were set up using data from 1995-2009. If they had used data from the 70s and 80s, the alignment would be different. Likewise, if we ran the numbers just for the last 10 years, again, the divisions would be different. The "balance" is a myth based on a snapshot of data that is unlikely to be very predictive of the future.
So you don't think it's safe to assume that OSU and UM will be good most seasons?
You don't feel it's safe to assume that Wisconsin+Purdue+Illinois will generally produce at least one good team while MSU+Iowa+Northwestern will likely do the same?
I don't know. I see where you're coming from, and I wouldn't be against geographic divisions. I think the most important thing would be to have equally marketable teams split evenly.
OSU = UM
PSU = Nebraska
WIS = MSU/Iowa
PUR/ILL/IND = MIN/NW
Honestly, I think the most important aspect is that PSU/OSU/UM/Nebraska be split evenly. Those teams will pretty much always draw followers and be marketable.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Jandy 19 months ago
I'm not saying coaches should harrass kids who aren't interested. If they aren't interested, you back off. But that has nothing to do with this discussion (or the comments in the threads from rcmb I mentioned). It applies equally whether the kid says he's already committed to another school or not. Coach Hoke is not harrassing Reschke or Finley. He reached out to them to guage their interest and extend them an offer.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by MrWoodson 19 months ago
True of all of us.
Lot of dislike for Vogrich in the game thread on MGoBlog . Seems like a ship without a port. He might want to get ahold of Smotrycz and see what's happening out east.
I agree with you. Just pointing out I can see how some might see/assume a difference.
For the record, Reschke has been getting a crap ton of attention. I wouldn't call it harassment, but has certainly received a heavy dose of UM lately.
The young man sticks out like a sore thumb. Levert will slowly take his minutes away.
Lol. Fans will always have 'that player' that can do nothing right.
Jeff Backus (although that is split)
Dan France is approaching this status (though this is probably mostly because he's not a very good LT)
The list could go on and on.
In partnership with