NCAA Football 2022

[Pyperkub]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

[Skinypupy]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

FWIW, rumors today are that ND is significantly upping their offer and are trying to get both Ludwig (OC) and Harding (Oline Coach).

It'd be a huge blow to us if they were both to leave.

[Pyperkub]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

FWIW, rumors today are that ND is significantly upping their offer and are trying to get both Ludwig (OC) and Harding (Oline Coach).

It'd be a huge blow to us if they were both to leave.

TBH, if our defense isn't better next year, I want UCLA to take your DC . The Mush rush techniques v Caleb Williams and SC were incredibly effective (not rushing past him and giving him a scrambling lane), and we would have beaten SC this year if we had used them... because our defense was incredibly bad at that (in particular) in that game...

[Skinypupy]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

FWIW, rumors today are that ND is significantly upping their offer and are trying to get both Ludwig (OC) and Harding (Oline Coach).

It'd be a huge blow to us if they were both to leave.

TBH, if our defense isn't better next year, I want UCLA to take your DC . The Mush rush techniques v Caleb Williams and SC were incredibly effective (not rushing past him and giving him a scrambling lane), and we would have beaten SC this year if we had used them... because our defense was incredibly bad at that (in particular) in that game...

Good luck. It’s kinda the unspoken understanding that hat Scalley will be Utah’s next HC after Whittingham retires.

[Pyperkub]

Well, thanks for the good wishes

[Skinypupy]

Well, thanks for the good wishes

If it's any consolation, he could be coaching for a team in the Mountain West conference if the P12 can't get their shit together and figure out a media deal.

[Pyperkub]

Well, thanks for the good wishes

If it's any consolation, he could be coaching for a team in the Mountain West conference if the P12 can't get their shit together and figure out a media deal.

Eh, I'll wait for confirmation from Wilner and/or Canzano.

Also, ESPN dropped out/was relegated from the B1G contracts as well, so it may not matter (and could be a sign that the deal is just about done with some other partner)

On the other hand, the linked article indicates that the P12 is trying to get $40m/school, and that seems a lot higher than Wilner/Canzano's initial estimates, so it could just be a negotiating tactic..

[Scuzz]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

Both one time Fresno State OC’s.

[Pyperkub]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

Both one time Fresno State OC’s.

I'll be honest, I think the Pac-12 would be better off with FSU than SMU (and even better with SDSU/FSU and SMU/other TX school). SDSU/Fresno St for a solid CA grounding (Cal and Stanford nice, but the Valley's passion for football and alumni base dwarfs the sports fans of Cal/Stanford, and even SDSU, IMHO. TX foothold important for recruiting, and it would probably good for the Pac-12 to get some TX timeslots too.

Both moves would be good, long term strategy plays, as opposed to just trying to replace UCLA/SC with SDSU/SMU.

[Skinypupy]

Whoa. Is there some sort of apocalypse going on?

UW's OC (allegedly) decides to stay rather than head to 'Bama...

Despite traveling to Tuscaloosa, interviewing with Crimson Tide coach Nick Saban and being offered Alabama’s offensive coordinator position Monday, Grubb has decided to remain at Washington, a source within the program confirmed to The Times on Tuesday.

And now Utah's OC stays rather than go to Notre Dame. Hmm...

Utah offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig will remain with the Utes after interviewing for the same position with Notre Dame, according to multiple reports. Ludwig, 58, was considered the top candidate for the job. The Fighting Irish will continue to look for a replacement for Tommy Rees, who was recently announced as Alabama's new offensive coordinator. 

Both one time Fresno State OC’s.

I'll be honest, I think the Pac-12 would be better off with FSU than SMU (and even better with SDSU/FSU and SMU/other TX school). SDSU/Fresno St for a solid CA grounding (Cal and Stanford nice, but the Valley's passion for football and alumni base dwarfs the sports fans of Cal/Stanford, and even SDSU, IMHO. TX foothold important for recruiting, and it would probably good for the Pac-12 to get some TX timeslots too.

Both moves would be good, long term strategy plays, as opposed to just trying to replace UCLA/SC with SDSU/SMU.

I would tend to agree. SDSU generated a "meh, I guess" reaction while SMU is literally nothing. I don't think that moves the needle for anyone, tbh.

I follow college football pretty closely, and the only thing that comes to mind when someone mentions SMU is the fact they got the "death penalty" at some point.

[Apollo]

Does the Pac-12 really want SMU? I'd be stunned if the Pac-12 brought in a religious university. Seems like there would be a huge culture clash taking in a Methodist University from Texas.

I think this just shows how desperate the Pac-12 is to survive and stay relevant in Football after losing USC and UCLA.

[ImLawBoy]

SMU isn't a bad get. Yes, they've got the notoriety of the death penalty, but they've managed to return to occasional relevance (i.e., ranking), which is no small feat for a school outside of the Power 5. Getting a foothold in Texas is probably important for the league, too.

As for culture, is that even a thing anymore in college athletics? I lost any notion of that once the Big Ten added Rutgers and Maryland.

[Hyena]

Does the Pac-12 really want SMU? I'd be stunned if the Pac-12 brought in a religious university. Seems like there would be a huge culture clash taking in a Methodist University from Texas.

I think this just shows how desperate the Pac-12 is to survive and stay relevant in Football after losing USC and UCLA.

As someone who worked as a police officer at SMU, I can first-hand tell you SMU is no more religious than any other school. Same for my alma mater, TCU. It is religious in name and founding fathers only.

[Apollo]

Does the Pac-12 really want SMU? I'd be stunned if the Pac-12 brought in a religious university. Seems like there would be a huge culture clash taking in a Methodist University from Texas.

I think this just shows how desperate the Pac-12 is to survive and stay relevant in Football after losing USC and UCLA.

As someone who worked as a police officer at SMU, I can first-hand tell you SMU is no more religious than any other school. Same for my alma mater, TCU. It is religious in name and founding fathers only.

Cool. I would like to see the Pac-12 survive, and taking in a Texas school is obviously a good idea for recruiting, I just don't think it's ever going to be the same without USC and UCLA, which is sad. Can't blame USC and UCLA though. The Pac-12 hasn't really seemed to care much about football in recent years.

[JCC]

The Pac 12 would add SMU to get into Texas. San Diego St. would likewise be for the So. Cal mrket. The Pac 12 is left with no great choices. From what I am hearing through the CFB podcasts I listen to regularly, the Pac 12 may end up having a new TV deal with a lot of games on streaming only. That has proven to not be a recipe for a big audience. (The NFL games that aired on Amazon did very poorly this season.) The Big 12 may have been shrewd in opening up their TV negotiations early. Now, there aren't as many TV slots left for the Pac 12. If the Pac 12 can't generate the same revenue/viewers in whatever deal they are able to get, then Oregon/Washington may start considering the Big 12 as an alternative (after of course testing Big 10 waters which I am guessing will be "shallow"). If Oregon and/or Washington leave, the Pac 12 is in even deeper trouble.

[Scuzz]

There are no true replacements for USC and UCLA. Taking SMU for Texas recruiting makes no sense. Texas can be recruited without having a school there, just like Florida.

In the end the PAC-12 returns to 10 schools. Because of the money.

The real argument against SDSU and Fresno State is the PAC won’t give up those recruiting bases.

[ImLawBoy]

Having a school in Texas is important for recruiting because it puts the league on TV more in the local markets, which raises visibility to recruits. It also puts the teams physically in the location more often. It's the same reason Notre Dame keeps USC and Stanford on the schedule - they get to be in California to attract recruits annually. Sure, you can still recruit Texas without having league teams there, but it becomes easier to do so when you have some sort of local presence.

[Pyperkub]

There are no true replacements for USC and UCLA. Taking SMU for Texas recruiting makes no sense. Texas can be recruited without having a school there, just like Florida.

In the end the PAC-12 returns to 10 schools. Because of the money.

The real argument against SDSU and Fresno State is the PAC won’t give up those recruiting bases.

SMU is for "Dallas" market, not nec. recruiting (tho it will help, especially with SC/UCLA eliminating many opportunities to recruit SoCal. And, while SMU has a small enrollment, their alums punch far above their numbers, especially in Texas.

[JCC]

Yes, Texas and So. Cal are wanted for TV eyeballs. Recruiting is just a bonus.

[JCC]

And here is an article detailing the Pac 12's shaky ground for media rights haggling. (TLDR: CBS is out. FOX is out. ESPN wants the late window only. Leaving streaming partner(s) to carry the load, which would greatly lower the eyeballs watching.)

[Pyperkub]

And here is an article detailing the Pac 12's shaky ground for media rights haggling. (TLDR: CBS is out. FOX is out. ESPN wants the late window only. Leaving streaming partner(s) to carry the load, which would greatly lower the eyeballs watching.)

Eh, we shall see, but as a Bruin? The B1G jump is looking better and better all the time.

[JCC]

Eh, we shall see, but as a Bruin? The B1G jump is looking better and better all the time.

It was a total no brainer. Even if UCLA has to share a bit of money with other UC schools, they are far better off financially. And money is obviously the only impetus for these decisions. In fact, I would argue UCLA was lucky to be invited. Don't get me wrong, UCLA is a big brand, but not sure the Big 10 needed both UCLA and USC to capture the LA market. And USC is certainly the more tradition rich program in LA. It might have made more financial sense for the Big 10 to invite USC and then Oregon or Washington as the 2nd choice.

I still think we might eventually get to a 2 conference "premier" league with the Big 10 and SEC each adding another 4-5 (or more) teams from the best of the ACC, Big 12, and Pac 12 teams (and of course forcing Notre Dame to join or be out of playoff consideration). And then, there will truly be 40-50 teams that play "real" CFB and the rest will be left to scrape together a B league. If only they would add promotion/relegation to go along with it and we could trim out the current fodder from the Big 10/SEC! (A guy can dream...)

[Pyperkub]

Eh, we shall see, but as a Bruin? The B1G jump is looking better and better all the time.

It was a total no brainer. Even if UCLA has to share a bit of money with other UC schools, they are far better off financially. And money is obviously the only impetus for these decisions. In fact, I would argue UCLA was lucky to be invited. Don't get me wrong, UCLA is a big brand, but not sure the Big 10 needed both UCLA and USC to capture the LA market. And USC is certainly the more tradition rich program in LA. It might have made more financial sense for the Big 10 to invite USC and then Oregon or Washington as the 2nd choice.

I still think we might eventually get to a 2 conference "premier" league with the Big 10 and SEC each adding another 4-5 (or more) teams from the best of the ACC, Big 12, and Pac 12 teams (and of course forcing Notre Dame to join or be out of playoff consideration). And then, there will truly be 40-50 teams that play "real" CFB and the rest will be left to scrape together a B league. If only they would add promotion/relegation to go along with it and we could trim out the current fodder from the Big 10/SEC! (A guy can dream...)

Agreed, tho, if one looks at recent B1G Expansion, UCLA is a HUGE get (compared with bottom feeders Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska). While USC is the big fish, UCLA isn't far off from the Penn St acquisition, and miles better than the other recent B1G invitees.

[JCC]

Agreed, tho, if one looks at recent B1G Expansion, UCLA is a HUGE get (compared with bottom feeders Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska). While USC is the big fish, UCLA isn't far off from the Penn St acquisition, and miles better than the other recent B1G invitees.

For sure. I didn't mean it as a slight on UCLA, I just meant the net gain for the Big 10 may well have been more if they had plucked from a different market.

The grandfathered in bottom feeders in both the Big 10 and SEC are going to have a lot of "left out of the party desipte being way better" CFB programs hating on them like crazy. It would be interesting to see if the SEC/Big10 ever actually tried booting them out. Someone needs to pay all the poor starving lawyers!

[Scuzz]

Eh, we shall see, but as a Bruin? The B1G jump is looking better and better all the time.

It was a total no brainer. Even if UCLA has to share a bit of money with other UC schools, they are far better off financially. And money is obviously the only impetus for these decisions. In fact, I would argue UCLA was lucky to be invited. Don't get me wrong, UCLA is a big brand, but not sure the Big 10 needed both UCLA and USC to capture the LA market. And USC is certainly the more tradition rich program in LA. It might have made more financial sense for the Big 10 to invite USC and then Oregon or Washington as the 2nd choice.

I still think we might eventually get to a 2 conference "premier" league with the Big 10 and SEC each adding another 4-5 (or more) teams from the best of the ACC, Big 12, and Pac 12 teams (and of course forcing Notre Dame to join or be out of playoff consideration). And then, there will truly be 40-50 teams that play "real" CFB and the rest will be left to scrape together a B league. If only they would add promotion/relegation to go along with it and we could trim out the current fodder from the Big 10/SEC! (A guy can dream...)

I agree this is where we are headed. Sadly college football in many communities will die as a result.

[JCC]

I agree this is where we are headed. Sadly college football in many communities will die as a result.

Yeah, let's look at my alma mater (NC State). I would say it is very VERY unlikely they will end up in the "premier" league once the ACC dissolves. They would *really* need the ACC/Big12/Pac12 merger to remain viable. I am sure they will keep playing football, and they would still likely play UNC (who will definitely be in the Big 10 or SEC) every year, but what would the change do in terms of their attendance and revenue? I mean will they be a program like say... Memphis after this all shakes out? Pretty depressing to think about.

[DOS=HIGH]

UCLA football might be careful about what they wish for in jumping to the B1G. When was the last time they won the Pac-12?(1998) How many times have they finished in the top 10 in the past 20 years? (once, 10th in 2014)How many times have they actually even finished ranked in the past 20?(four) Are they really a big get as an actual football program for the B1G? Seems like people are putting a lot of faith that Chip Kelly is going to keep improving while the competition is going to ramp up another level. Look at Nebraska pre and post B1G. I think they have a better shot at being competitive than Nebraska and they won't be fed to the sharks of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, & Mich State EVERY YEAR like Rutgers and Maryland have been. But again, be careful what you wish for. It's the right move for UCLA and the B1G but not sure it's going to make the football program relevant again.

[Scuzz]

UCLA football might be careful about what they wish for in jumping to the B1G. When was the last time they won the Pac-12?(1998) How many times have they finished in the top 10 in the past 20 years? (once, 10th in 2014)How many times have they actually even finished ranked in the past 20?(four) Are they really a big get as an actual football program for the B1G? Seems like people are putting a lot of faith that Chip Kelly is going to keep improving while the competition is going to ramp up another level. Look at Nebraska pre and post B1G. I think they have a better shot at being competitive than Nebraska and they won't be fed to the sharks of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, & Mich State EVERY YEAR like Rutgers and Maryland have been. But again, be careful what you wish for. It's the right move for UCLA and the B1G but not sure it's going to make the football program relevant again.

The move was about the money and survival.

[Skinypupy]

UCLA football might be careful about what they wish for in jumping to the B1G. When was the last time they won the Pac-12?(1998) How many times have they finished in the top 10 in the past 20 years? (once, 10th in 2014)How many times have they actually even finished ranked in the past 20?(four) Are they really a big get as an actual football program for the B1G? Seems like people are putting a lot of faith that Chip Kelly is going to keep improving while the competition is going to ramp up another level. Look at Nebraska pre and post B1G. I think they have a better shot at being competitive than Nebraska and they won't be fed to the sharks of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, & Mich State EVERY YEAR like Rutgers and Maryland have been. But again, be careful what you wish for. It's the right move for UCLA and the B1G but not sure it's going to make the football program relevant again.

The move was about the money and survival.

Yup. On-field results and potential competitiveness are an entirely secondary consideration in all these moves.

[JCC]

Yes, this is about money and being in one of the (only) 2 conferences whose financial future is 100% secure. For now we still have a power 5, but that is going to be consoildated in the future. As I noted above, there are either going to be 2 big conferences or 3 big conferences in the future. Anyone and everyone who is invited to the Big 10 or SEC should jump at the chance. (You too Notre Dame.)

[Pyperkub]

UCLA football might be careful about what they wish for in jumping to the B1G. When was the last time they won the Pac-12?(1998) How many times have they finished in the top 10 in the past 20 years? (once, 10th in 2014)How many times have they actually even finished ranked in the past 20?(four) Are they really a big get as an actual football program for the B1G? Seems like people are putting a lot of faith that Chip Kelly is going to keep improving while the competition is going to ramp up another level. Look at Nebraska pre and post B1G. I think they have a better shot at being competitive than Nebraska and they won't be fed to the sharks of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, & Mich State EVERY YEAR like Rutgers and Maryland have been. But again, be careful what you wish for. It's the right move for UCLA and the B1G but not sure it's going to make the football program relevant again.

As of now, we have an elite offense, and just need to get a decent defense. We'll do better than any of the programs which have joined the B1G recently. IMHO these are the football tiers in the the B1G:

1) Ohio St (perennial favorite)
1a) Michigan (favorite who has somewhat slipped a bit lately
2) Penn St/Wisconsin (the usual challengers, but not on the top tier)
3) Michigan St/Iowa (solid programs which periodically rise up and challenge - tough road games)
4) Purdue/Northwestern/Illinois (every once in awhile break through for division title)
5) Minn/Indiana//Nebraska/Maryland (can make a bowl every once in awhile)
6) Rutgers

I see UCLA slotting into tier 3, and SC into tier 2 currently (for football). SC can get to tier 1/1a, but isn't there. UCLA could get to tier 2 IMHO. Note that that's the perspective of a Bruin who was at UCLA when Troy Aikman was there, but also has seen a really solid rebuild of the program under Chip Kelly. a lot of UCLA's troubles since the 90's have to do with not understanding the way CFB changed in the 90's, and essentially not paying our Coaches and investing in facilities competitively (FYI, Coach Wooden's highest salary at UCLA was 40k/year - we got really spoiled and arrogant that our name was enough, and we didn't pay Donahue much more either). That cheapskate mentality is gone, tho not to the degree of the SEC/tOSU with regards to NIL currently.

[ImLawBoy]

1) Ohio St (perennial favorite)
1a) Michigan (favorite who has somewhat slipped a bit lately
2) Penn St/Wisconsin (the usual challengers, but not on the top tier)
3) Michigan St/Iowa (solid programs which periodically rise up and challenge - tough road games)
4) Purdue/Northwestern/Illinois (every once in awhile break through for division title)
5) Minn/Indiana//Nebraska/Maryland (can make a bowl every once in awhile)
6) Rutgers

Big Ten (and Michigan) fan perspective on your rankings:

1) OSU and Michigan (if anything Michigan has regained its old footing - we were lost in the woods for most of the 2010s, but we've made the last 2 playoffs and return most of the roster)
2) PSU, MSU (MSU is on shaky footing here if Tucker can't stabilize things, but at least they've made a Playoff)
3) Iowa, Wisconsin (solid for West teams; Wisconsin has the potential to move up to 2 if Fickell can get things rolling)
4) Purdue, Minnesota, Nebraska (Nebraska has the fan support and facilities; if they can ever get their heads out of their asses in the post Scott Frost world they're a sleeping giant)
5) Maryland, Illinois, Indiana (Illinois has the potential to move to 4 if Bielema can keep it rolling; Indiana is more likely to drop than rise)
6) Northwestern (one of the worst P5 teams at the moment with no recruiting momentum at all)
20) Rutgers

I don't follow Pac 12 as closely, but I'd probably peg both USC and UCLA as tier 3 right now. USC never seems to be able to put it together despite great recruiting. UCLA can shoot up or down - I don't have a lot of long term faith in Chip Kelly.

[Pyperkub]

1) Ohio St (perennial favorite)
1a) Michigan (favorite who has somewhat slipped a bit lately
2) Penn St/Wisconsin (the usual challengers, but not on the top tier)
3) Michigan St/Iowa (solid programs which periodically rise up and challenge - tough road games)
4) Purdue/Northwestern/Illinois (every once in awhile break through for division title)
5) Minn/Indiana//Nebraska/Maryland (can make a bowl every once in awhile)
6) Rutgers

Big Ten (and Michigan) fan perspective on your rankings:

1) OSU and Michigan (if anything Michigan has regained its old footing - we were lost in the woods for most of the 2010s, but we've made the last 2 playoffs and return most of the roster)
2) PSU, MSU (MSU is on shaky footing here if Tucker can't stabilize things, but at least they've made a Playoff)
3) Iowa, Wisconsin (solid for West teams; Wisconsin has the potential to move up to 2 if Fickell can get things rolling)
4) Purdue, Minnesota, Nebraska (Nebraska has the fan support and facilities; if they can ever get their heads out of their asses in the post Scott Frost world they're a sleeping giant)
5) Maryland, Illinois, Indiana (Illinois has the potential to move to 4 if Bielema can keep it rolling; Indiana is more likely to drop than rise)
6) Northwestern (one of the worst P5 teams at the moment with no recruiting momentum at all)
20) Rutgers

I don't follow Pac 12 as closely, but I'd probably peg both USC and UCLA as tier 3 right now. USC never seems to be able to put it together despite great recruiting. UCLA can shoot up or down - I don't have a lot of long term faith in Chip Kelly.

RE: Wisconsin, the multiple Rose Bowls recently is why I have them above Michigan St

I don't see Nebraska as a sleeping giant, the luster of the 90's has worn off and they don't have anything going for them other than being in the B1G. Northwestern I have higher because they have won the West a few times recently, tho this year was awful. UCLA is more of a sleeping giant than Nebraska, IMHO.

Re: Michigan - maybe, but I still have them a notch below Ohio St, because of both the slump AND losing in the playoff the past 2 years (and being non-competitive in the first). Ohio St has had some issues lately, but in terms of consistency and winning Playoff games, they are still above Michigan, IMHO. Penn St has the talent to move to tier 1x, BUT their Coaching/scheme is not good enough to do it. SC will have the talent to be in tier 1x but they aren't there coaching wise, but they are in much better shape than MSU.

[ImLawBoy]

Careful not to overvalue winning the Big Ten West. That division is a tire fire. Keep in mind that since the East/West divisions started in 2014, the West team has never won the championship. Wisconsin gets to the Rose Bowl because the Big Ten champ from the East goes to the playoff (and their fan base travels really, really well).

[Pyperkub]

Careful not to overvalue winning the Big Ten West. That division is a tire fire. Keep in mind that since the East/West divisions started in 2014, the West team has never won the championship. Wisconsin gets to the Rose Bowl because the Big Ten champ from the East goes to the playoff (and their fan base travels really, really well).

I don't think I am, but maybe. The teams who usually win the B1G are essentially above all the west teams in my tiers, and the west teams who do make the championship usually have beaten one of the top east teams in those years. Usually.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[ImLawBoy]

Let's put it this way. In most years, any of the top 3 or 4 teams from the East would win the West going away.

[JCC]

There will no longer be a Big 10 West (most likely) after next season. In fact, pretty much all of the conferences are or will be scrapping their divisions. Divisions can muck up playoff berths and/or dilute the conference title game. The bottom line is the conference title game is often (not always) their highest rated, showcase "regular season" game. They aren't going to keep mediocre division champs making them anticlimactic.

[Pyperkub]

There will no longer be a Big 10 West (most likely) after next season. In fact, pretty much all of the conferences are or will be scrapping their divisions. Divisions can muck up playoff berths and/or dilute the conference title game. The bottom line is the conference title game is often (not always) their highest rated, showcase "regular season" game. They aren't going to keep mediocre division champs making them anticlimactic.

Probably. No decision has been made yet.

What will the new format look like for the Big Ten?

It’s not entirely clear if the Big Ten will keep divisions at all in 2024 and just swap some teams around, or if the conference will just throw everyone in the same bucket.

An educated guess makes me believe it’s going to be the latter. The B1G and all other conferences want their best teams in the title game. That’s much easier to do without divisions at all.

by my google-fu doesn't see any decision yet one way or another.

[ImLawBoy]

There will no longer be a Big 10 West (most likely) after next season. In fact, pretty much all of the conferences are or will be scrapping their divisions. Divisions can muck up playoff berths and/or dilute the conference title game. The bottom line is the conference title game is often (not always) their highest rated, showcase "regular season" game. They aren't going to keep mediocre division champs making them anticlimactic.

Whatever happens, it's not really relevant to the prior discussion, which was around the tiering of the teams. I thought Pyperkub was generally (but not always) overvaluing teams from the West.

That said, it'll be interesting to see where the Big Ten goes. As it stands, OSU and Michigan are clearly the best two teams in the conference, as they were the last two years. The two are not going to want to move The Game off of its final weekend standing, and what the Big 2 want, the Big 2 generally get. For the last couple of years, that would have meant back-to-back Games, which devalues the first Game. Since the Game is usually the true marquee game for the conference (with the best ratings), will the Big Ten want to risk that? I don't know. Maybe?

[JCC]

by my google-fu doesn't see any decision yet one way or another.

The article you quoted says the exact same thing I did! In fact, it is more emphatic than I was. I said "most likely".

So, enjoy the East and West divisions while you can because once 2024 gets here, it’s almost certainly going to be the end of the road.