For the last few years, Alabama has dominated recruiting. Ohio State just signed Browning - a linebacker out of Texas that for what I understand chose between the 2 schools. Two or 3 years ago, I think no doubt that goes the other way. This class Ohio State has coming in looks better then anything it's ever had before. The Big 10 might actually have overtaken the SEC this past year - or definitely will by next year- and I think we're probably going to see the Big 10 being the elite conference for a few years now. Alabama may have their best team ever this year though. Should be a very interesting next couple of years between the Big 10 and Alabama. Probably starting this year in the National Championship.
Alabama/Ohio State
- Thread starter RUblackshirt2006
- Start date
Ohio State has been up and down this year and not nearly as consistent and dominant as Alabama--but I can't think of another team that has a better chance, or much of a chance, to beat Alabama. Clemson looks to be about as good as last year, but Clemson wasn't good enough to beat Alabama last year, so it's doubtful they would beat Alabama this year. Washington can't possibly have the talent and depth to hold out for 4 quarters against Alabama. Who does that leave?
Remember that OSUs current team is VERY young. They will unseat Alabama at the top of college football over the next few years. I think Alabama is just THAT good this year that they will be tough to beat by anyone but you never know.
I think the tides have turned though and the B1G is more dominant across teams now. Overall, Bama is the top dog in the nation but the other schools in the SEC are up and down.
I think the tides have turned though and the B1G is more dominant across teams now. Overall, Bama is the top dog in the nation but the other schools in the SEC are up and down.
College football is just insanely top-heavy now and it looks like it not going to change anytime soon. IMO the pay scale of the most elite coaches and their assistants is so one-sided that parity can never be achieved. It's like the NYC Marathon with 5 Kenyan's at the top and 50,000 losers behind them.
Unfortunately except at the bottom of the leagues. Right now we would get steam rolled by any team in the SEC.
It comes down to effort and a commitment to compete. In individual sports it comes down to a persons natural abilities and his or her commitment to hone those fundamentals to a point they are second nature. Then you need mental toughness combined with the desire to win.
In team sports it's about putting a group of kids together who possess the same qualities as the elite athletes of individual sports. Now you need a group of elite coaches to put together a game plan. The most experienced coaches naturally have success on the field attracting the best talent. These coaches demand lucrative contracts and it's up to a University to pay those salaries. Even the most ardent Rutgers fans know that is not the mission here in Piscataway and it is not the mission for anther 70% of other universities. I believe that in time (25-50 years) you will see D1A schools pared down to 30 Universites and the remaining schools will play in some lesser conference.
Last edited:
Outside of Alabama being the best team in the country, this is obviously true. The Big Ten is clearly superior to the SEC this year when you look at the number of top quality teams.
For those few people who are still on the fence about which is the best conference this year.
Current rankings:
1 Alabama 12-0 1
2 Ohio State 11-1 2
3 Clemson 11-1 4
4 Washington 11-1 5
5 Michigan 10-2 3
6 Wisconsin 10-2 6
7 Penn State 10-2 7
Current rankings:
1 Alabama 12-0 1
2 Ohio State 11-1 2
3 Clemson 11-1 4
4 Washington 11-1 5
5 Michigan 10-2 3
6 Wisconsin 10-2 6
7 Penn State 10-2 7
Is there anyway we could do that analysis over the past 20 years? That would probably give a better read on who is the best conference.
I like our chnaces against Bama. The struggled scoring on LSU and I believe our defense is better than LSU, and I know our offense is.
Though I believe 99% of what you said, I would add, college conference expansion is dividing the have and have nots even further. Mich and OSU have more exposure in NJ now and are pillaging our high school talent. They are using our added TV money against us.
(I am beginning to think they (OSU/MICH/PSU) are making us wait so long for a full payout, having us work with 3 times less money, so they can bury us 6 feet under, ruin our rep, so no HS studs would ever consider us.)
When college football conference were regional 30yrs ago, you didn't see this kind of national recruiting and hording of the top players. Even with 100 scholarships, the top programs took the best talent in their region, buried them on the roster, and let the other programs play with the scraps.
The Power 5 will break away completely from the mid majors, but they won't dump the RUs, Vandy's or Miss State's of the world. They will just pillage and throw us some money to keep us quiet while kicking our heads in on Saturday's.
Last edited:
100% spot on. When Rutgers was invited to the B10 it was sold as a win win for the conference and Rutgers. Not really, if look at the entire deal and long term impact on our performance as a team the ACC would have been a much better deal. Of course the
B10 offers more money but what good is it if are destined to be bottom dwellers for the next three decades.
Why use the SEC as an example when the B1G is doing the exact same thing
There are roughly a dozen traditional powers. They sometimes drop for a short period of time (USC, Mich) but will always bounce back. Everyone else is an interloper. But there will be times when they will rise up for some years -- usually due to a great coach -- but I can't think of one that has stayed up there, joining the elite on what seems like a permanent basis.
We wil never reach the heights on a permanent basis of Alabama, Mich, PSU, USC, Oklahoma, LSU, Florida, FSU, ND. But we can become a Washington, Wisconsin, Colorado, Miami.
We're better off in the B1G than anywhere else. We've got a better chance of that temporary move up to the elite class, and the other non-athletic advantages of the Big 10. While I'd love to be #1, I'll be satisfied- no, happy -- to join the likes of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Mich State, Iowa and have our 80,000 seat stadium filled on Saturday with a real chance to beat the elites from time to time. To fly my Rutgers flag and not have to answer to the basketball and FB performances of late.
And, who knows, we strike lightning in a bottle with a coach we'll have the money/rep/conference to maybe keep him (Think Alvarez/Wisconsin) -- think what fun that'll be.
We wil never reach the heights on a permanent basis of Alabama, Mich, PSU, USC, Oklahoma, LSU, Florida, FSU, ND. But we can become a Washington, Wisconsin, Colorado, Miami.
We're better off in the B1G than anywhere else. We've got a better chance of that temporary move up to the elite class, and the other non-athletic advantages of the Big 10. While I'd love to be #1, I'll be satisfied- no, happy -- to join the likes of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Mich State, Iowa and have our 80,000 seat stadium filled on Saturday with a real chance to beat the elites from time to time. To fly my Rutgers flag and not have to answer to the basketball and FB performances of late.
And, who knows, we strike lightning in a bottle with a coach we'll have the money/rep/conference to maybe keep him (Think Alvarez/Wisconsin) -- think what fun that'll be.
I didn't even think this was a question anymore, for this season, anyway.
As much as I'd like to see where the mutual masturbation between the board's two biggest downers leads, I have to interject: The B1G deal was 1000 percent a win-win. We haven't even been a bottom dweller for our entire time in the league, and we won't be forever. Hell, even this terrible, terrible season gave us some good games against other state schools.
So we'll have more money than we ever dreamed of, in a P5 conference with the best bowl lineup out there, playing against some of the best names in college football every Saturday, with much better TV distribution. Pretty much every aspect of the game has improved for the fans, but keep crying into your cheerios about how the B1G took our media money in return for pillaging our recruiting base (like OSU couldn't be hand-picking recruits, either way). Or would you really prefer to be wasting away with Uconn, playing SMU and Tulane, with no money and no hope?
and WTF is up with the B1G in instituting this 5 year wait before we receive full shares, who the fuct does that help ! It makes us the whippin boy and practice game for the elitist of the league.....shame on them.
The problem is that no one runs the ball on Alabama. To beat them, you need to be able to stretch the field vertically. Barrett is good, but not that kind of QB. Saban has gone to school on the 2014 playoff loss, and Michigan provided a blueprint for stopping Ohio State's offense.
I haven't watched much of Alabama, in fact maybe not any. But I'd like to think Washington's offense could give them a run for their money if it's not having an off day. It can definitely stretch the field.
Alabama, maybe. But surprising upsets do happen in the playoffs. IMO, Washington's combo of D and O can play with anyone on a good day. But maybe some of those injuries have hurt its chances to have that good of a day. And maybe I just don't know Alabama well enough.
But Colorado? It's a good, solid team, but has been winning by the skin of its teeth (or losing) against top competition all season. Don't see it woodshedding anyone this time of year, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.
But Colorado? It's a good, solid team, but has been winning by the skin of its teeth (or losing) against top competition all season. Don't see it woodshedding anyone this time of year, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.
I have been asking that same question for 3 years now. If you are supposed to be part of the B1G family, why are you not getting your fair share when you joined the family? Or, are Rutgers and Maryland the red headed stepchildren of the B1G?
The only way it changes is by reducing scholarships again. I'd love to see them reduced to 1AA levels (63), which would free up a ton of talent that is currently locked up on benches at the top 10-20 schools. Plus, it would free up money for universities to theoretically use on other sports.
Teams don't need ~4X as many scholarships as starters. Just look at hoops, which has 13 scholarships for 5 starters (2.6X), and is generally more competitive, which we see every year in the tourney. They (coaches of the top teams of course) screamed that reducing scholarship from 105 to 95 and then 95 to 85, years ago, was going to destroy the game, and that obviously didn't happen.
http://thehuskyhaul.com/2011/11/17/would-a-reduction-in-scholarships-make-college-football-better/
The reason Rutgers is receiving less money for the first 5 years is that Rutgers is buying in to their share of the Big 10 network.
Nebraska had to do the same thing.
Forget football for a minute and think of it this way:
A group of 13 attorneys/accountants/engineers are looking to add a partner who has a specialty (expertise in the New York market) which is not held by one of the existing partners.
They interview and offer to hire attorney/accountant/engineer Rutgers, a New York expert, who agrees to a salary of $300,000 per year based on projected incomes from a variety of sources.
However, during negotiations, it is disclosed that the group owns their building and there will be a requirement for the new guy, Rutgers, to buy into his share of ownership of the building as part of the employment requirements. The building is worth $4,500,000 and there are 15 shares as one share is centralized by a management agency (Big 10). To get the job, our friend Rutgers needs to 'buys in'. The buy in is $4,500,000 / 15, or $300,000. Problem becomes that Rutgers does not have an extra $300,000 laying around, but because the original group of 13 want him in; and he wants in, the partners say "OK, we'll finance it. Instead of getting $300,000, we will give you $240,000 per year and the other $60,000 per year will pay off your share of the equity in the building. Then, after five years, you will own a 1/15 interest in the building which is gaining value and equity every day.
Are you OK with that?
Rutgers has a choice. He can stay in his current job at $95,000 per year or he can agree to the terms of the group of 13 and jump to $240,000 per year and an equity share in a growing investment.
Rutgers thinks about this for a short nano second, says YES and away we go.
The BIG is not instituting a five year wait. It is self financing your purchase of a 1/15 share of the Big 10's ownership interest in the Big 10 network.
Also, I note that I am aware that the BIG owns only a part of the Big 10 network.
Washington's offensive line is no match for Alabama's defensive line, which negates their advantage at QB and WR.
Alabama's secondary may be better than their defensive line. Certainly with Eddie Jackson.
Yeah he's one of the best in the country... but they have 3 5 star mid classman still there even without him. It's just insane.
And not just 5 star - number 22 in the country type... top 5 5 star kind of guys.
Ok. I got it now, thanks!
Rutgers is not part of the family. Rather, we are buying in to the business! We have to buy into our share of the enterprise if we want any of the profits! Thanks for the clarification.
52: I'm not big on exaggerations but I have watched Alabama on at least 4 occasions this year. Now listen to me carefully, if Alabama plays Washington the game will be over at the end of the 1st half. They are as close as you're going to get to a pro team. The Bama defense is stifling and punishing and their offense line will treat the Washington D-Line like 5 year olds. There biggest weakness in my opinion is their QB.
Well if Rutgers was smart about their finances they would have borrowed against future earnings at such low interest rates to be competitive NOW. Then they can get ahead
Agree, but OSU isn't exactly the Sisters of the Poor. I do agree, however, that this year Alabama has more depth and some off that is due to last year's massive exodus to the NFL (5 of the first 20 players taken were Buckeyes). But with the returning talent and "past sick" 2017 class coming in, next year is the year OSUcatches (and possibly passes) Alabama in depth. Still, this was suppose to be Harbaugh/Michigan's year in the BIG with 43 seniors (and motor-mouth Peppers) on the roster (many will be drafted high in the NFL draft) and any rational fan/follower has to be impressed with the job Urban and his staff did to bring a team with 44 first-year players (never played a down of CF) this far.
Agree, especially the right side - a little scary right now. Of course, I thought the same thing in 2014. OSU was a 5 1/2 point underdog against Wisky in the BIG CG, 10 point dog to Alabama and 7 1/2 point underdog to Oregon in 2014. Point: give Urban a few weeks to prepare and things can change.
