Nebraska-UM comparison

[Don Unverferth]

Even though UM is down right now, covetously, they are still equal to tOSU as far as potential to always be a national power house and 1A in the Big Ten, and Nebraska will take the 1B category along with Penn State.

However, MANY argue (Scout Insiders, Nebraska input mostly) that with Nebraska's arrival on the scene - looking at both current state and historical records over the last several decades, that this means UM should no longer be categorized as the "1A potential to always be a national power house" and top shelf within the Big Ten and should replaced by Nebraska.

Just looking for Hail Victors perspective.

Don't hurt me.

[Mich97c]

All four are 1A in my opinion - capable of being a national power at any given time. Just depends what year.

[blueisbetterthanred]

Penn State is not 1A yet. I would have to say Nebraska needs at least 2 years of play to evaluate in the Big10 before it can be put into either class.

[Don Unverferth]

Penn State is not 1A yet. I would have to say Nebraska needs at least 2 years of play to evaluate in the Big10 before it can be put into either class.


True, however the point can be made that UM was not as good as Nebraska over the last few decades. I would have to agree. The prevailing arguement is that the only comparable year of greatness was shared. Therefore, should Nebraska have higher status?

[Mich97c]

Penn State is not 1A yet. I would have to say Nebraska needs at least 2 years of play to evaluate in the Big10 before it can be put into either class.

You guys are crazy - all four schools are big time programs, ton of tradition and lots of success over the years. Since you two disagree with me, I will now vote negative points on you.

[amazinblue]

Don,

I think all four programs are solid - and Iowa and Wisconsin have certainly demonstrated they can play some pretty decent football too.

One thing that I always felt about Nebraska was that the conference, for the most part, did not measure up with other conferences in the country. There was one tough game - Oklahoma - and, that was it. K State and Colorado had a couple of decent years, but - for the most part, the Big8 was a two horse race. And, when Oklahoma hit the skids - there wasn't a team in the conference that gave Nebraska a test.

Now, I do believe Nebraska's a decent squad, and I also believe that Michigan's taken a half step back over the last decade or so. Tressel's done a very good job at OSU - even an ardent Michigan fan, as I am, has to respect what's been accomplished in Columbus.

I remember when Penn State joined the conference, my initial thought was - ohhh noooo - they're going to Pasadena every other year. And, what has the result been? Occassional trips to Pasadena, yes - regular trips - no.

If you were to rank the teams in the conference today - unfortunately, you have to rank OSU at the top. I believe that Michigan will return to that upper echelon and I expect 2011 to be that year. Nebraska will do well, and I'd expect finish in first or second place in their division with some regularity - but, it won't be the cakewalk that the Big 8 or Big 12 North was. Penn State will probably be grouped with Iowa and Wisconsin. So, depending on how they create divisions - I think you'll see a two or three horse race every season for the division crown.

P.S. For what it's worth - I gave you a thumbs up for creating this thread.

[Blue In Ohio]

I'd say let Nebraska enter the conference and start playing the schedule before deciding their status above Michigan who does have a winning record against every team in the conference. I wouldn't let a few bad seasons trump over the last 100 years of sucess. From the sounds of Rich Rod we should expect a much better football team this season and be a top 25 by seasons end. This is the happiest I have seen him since he has been here. I think he likes this team. I'm not giving a positive or negative to this because I think it is game for discussion. Let's not forget Nebraska too is still rebuilding just a little further ahead than Michigan right now.

[tpilews]

True, however the point can be made that UM was not as good as Nebraska over the last few decades. I would have to agree. The prevailing arguement is that the only comparable year of greatness was shared. Therefore, should Nebraska have higher status?

You are quick right. Historically, over the last 20 years, UM has had the third best record in the Big 10 (while including Nebraska). Now obviously, Nebraska wasn't playing the same teams as UM or OSU, but it's still a good indicator of the strength of their program.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c373/tpilews/fa8c52e4.jpg


You gotta give some props to Wisconsin too. Over the last ten years, they've been #2 in the Big10. You can classify teams wherever you want, but what I think is the biggest thing to note is that the Big10 is going to be strong for years to come and will hopefully take back the crown as the top conference in college football. PSU will likely have a little bit of a let down this year, but if they can bounce back and Iowa can become consistent, the Big10 likely has 6 or 7 teams that could be rated in the top 25 any given year.

[Blue In Ohio]

Right now the media is giving the big ten alot of credit. If Michigan improves 2 or three wins this year look for that to continue. I loved it when Bill King on rivals said the sec has some legit competition with the big ten. The southern folks love to believe that they will always be number one but the big ten has more dollars and should in the next few seasons surpass them in number of quality teams. That factor alone should help all big ten teams as a whole in recruiting and stop the flow of talent down south. Funny thing is the sec powers come up and steal a good player out of Michigan and then Michigan just picks up an equal right in their back yard. Honestly I'd rather get a top Florida or Texas player over a top Michigan high school player. If they are legit in Florida or Texas they are usually legit. The level of competiton in HS football in Michigan is questionable to the point where some of the in state recruits are rated better than they actually are. Seeing a Florida power like Tampa Plant on film who would probably demolish the top team in Michigan by 4 touchdowns is very reassuring. I'm not saying I wouldn't take the top ten players in Michigan every year which historically Michigan had it's choice but I can't say I'm unhappy about getting good players out of Florida, Ohio and Texas as we have lately. Many of these players are lining up against division one talent week in and week out where the Michigan players just don't see that level of competition. The area in Michigan where I grew up yielded Ryan Miller, OSU and Jake Frysinger, Michigan who were the biggest stars I can ever remember coming out of that area. Division one prospects were so rare often the best area player we would see when I was in high school would be getting a scholarship to Eastern Michigan or playing for Hillsdale or Wayne State so really the trade of between letting the sec fill roster spots with the little talent we have in Michigan isn't to big a deal right now. I tend to look at the fact that they have fewer scholarships which may make it easier for us to go get somebody from their backyard.