Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Bowl or Bust

Haverhill said:
Recruiting rankings from Texas speak for themselves. Can't wait to argue whether Texas or Ohio have better recruits.
Click to expand...

You do realize you have absolutely no factual evidence to support the idea that the B12 has better talent than the B10 right? I mean you guys are the ones saying that is the case. No one here is saying the B10 has better talent. We're simply pointing to the NFL draft numbers as factual evidence that there's no advantage one way or another.

Please show me something that proves what you're saying....
 
If you think comparing talent of teams is just about draft choices then you might be using the smallest statistical reference point possible. The only other way to compare talent only is recruiting rankings.

The best way is to look at head to head match ups. This has favored the big twelve for a long time. Of course, other factors are included such as coaching but head to head is by far the most accurate gauge of talent.

They play on the same field in the same conditions. More players are involved which is a better reflection of team talent as compared to one or two players on a team.

Nothing can be gained from comparing one or two players. The rest of the team might be a bunch of stiffs.

Gonzo said:
You were doing so well until this last line. C'mon man. Seriously. You beat us last year by 3 after getting a second shot on a FG because our coach is a complete stooge in the heat of the moment. The time before that you won 9-6, the time before that 44-41, the time before that 15-13. In ISU's 10 wins since ending the 15-year drought they've won by more than 7 points three times. Every other win has been by a TD or less.

Hey, congrats on your team's ability to now win in this series at a regular clip, and I agree with some of your other points. But be real. "SPANK"? It does nothing for your credibility when you bring that kind of delusion into an otherwise sensible point.
Click to expand...
 
D UP Clones said:
If you think comparing talent of teams is just about draft choices then you might be using the smallest statistical reference point possible. The only other way to compare talent only is recruiting rankings.

The best way is to look at head to head match ups. This has favored the big twelve for a long time. Of course, other factors are included such as coaching but head to head is by far the most accurate gauge of talent.

They play on the same field in the same conditions. More players are involved which is a better reflection of team talent as compared to one or two players on a team.

Nothing can be gained from comparing one or two players. The rest of the team might be a bunch of stiffs.
Click to expand...

Between 2004 and 2012, after Miami and BC left and before other schools left, the Big East had a winning record head-to-head against the Big 12, ACC, and SEC. I doubt anyone would argue that the Big East was a more talent rich conference than those were during that time.

Head-to-head results as a measure of conference talent doesn't work because too often Conference A's bottom feeder is playing Conference B's power program.
 
Not all draft picks are created equal. Last big 10 QB drafted in the first round was Kerry Collins. That will change this year but just looking at straight draft picks IMO isn't a good way to look at it.
 
BryceC said:
Not all draft picks are created equal. Last big 10 QB drafted in the first round was Kerry Collins. That will change this year but just looking at straight draft picks IMO isn't a good way to look at it.
Click to expand...

What, in your opinion, is a good way to look at it then? What does Kerry Collins have to do with it? That seems like a handpicked attempt to make a point, and it's really dumb quite frankly. Talent isn't only measured at certain positions. The conversation hasn't only been about skill players. It's about overall talent between conferences.

I'm not saying that looking at draft picks is the trump card. There isn't really a perfect way to measure talent between conferences. However, by and large NFL teams employ coaches and scouts who know more about football than any of us and of course they are going to target the most talented players. It absolutely makes sense to use it as a metric. It makes more sense to use the NFL draft as a metric than it does to compare recruiting profiles. When you simply look at recruiting you aren't taking into account player development. The NFL draft looks at the big picture, and I think in terms of the metrics available it is the best way to decipher talent differences between conferences.
 
OceanMotion said:
What, in your opinion, is a good way to look at it then? What does Kerry Collins have to do with it? That seems like a handpicked attempt to make a point, and it's really dumb quite frankly. Talent isn't only measured at certain positions. The conversation hasn't only been about skill players. It's about overall talent between conferences.

I'm not saying that looking at draft picks is the trump card. There isn't really a perfect way to measure talent between conferences. However, by and large NFL teams employ coaches and scouts who know more about football than any of us and of course they are going to target the most talented players. It absolutely makes sense to use it as a metric. It makes more sense to use the NFL draft as a metric than it does to compare recruiting profiles. When you simply look at recruiting you aren't taking into account player development. The NFL draft looks at the big picture, and I think in terms of the metrics available it is the best way to decipher talent differences between conferences.
Click to expand...

If you look at the Michigan State/Baylor game (which still frustrates me) the Spartans were very well coached and their mindset in that game was no different than UNI basketball playing Iowa State or Kansas. One team is better in every position on the floor, but they slowed the game down and were well coached. Outside of Ohio State, thats how the Big Ten wins. They were successful this bowl season doing just that, but the talent level isn't close.
 
Haverhill said:
If you look at the Michigan State/Baylor game (which still frustrates me) the Spartans were very well coached and their mindset in that game was no different than UNI basketball playing Iowa State or Kansas. One team is better in every position on the floor, but they slowed the game down and were well coached. Outside of Ohio State, thats how the Big Ten wins. They were successful this bowl season doing just that, but the talent level isn't close.
Click to expand...


Good to see Hok fans don't hold the franchise on delusion.
 
Haverhill said:
If you look at the Michigan State/Baylor game (which still frustrates me) the Spartans were very well coached and their mindset in that game was no different than UNI basketball playing Iowa State or Kansas. One team is better in every position on the floor, but they slowed the game down and were well coached. Outside of Ohio State, thats how the Big Ten wins. They were successful this bowl season doing just that, but the talent level isn't close.
Click to expand...


I don't think there is a huge difference at the top. It's the rest of the Big 10 that makes it a joke. The West division, in particular. Hawkeye fans are really good at flying the Big 10 flag even though it's their part of the league that is an embarrassment. Big 12 North anybody?
 
The B12 North comparrison to the B1G West is spot on. I know it's not ground breaking news or anything like that but I just wanted to pad my post count :cool:
 
jahfg said:
I don't think there is a huge difference at the top. It's the rest of the Big 10 that makes it a joke. The West division, in particular. Hawkeye fans are really good at flying the Big 10 flag even though it's their part of the league that is an embarrassment. Big 12 North anybody?
Click to expand...

That's the point. To think there's some kind of huge talent gap between Texas and Ohio St., Baylor and Michigan St., TCU and Wisconsin, is ridiculous. Every conference has its elites, and the talent level among that tier of programs between conferences is comparable. Clearly the SEC has more of those elite programs and more teams with elite talent. The Big 12 has fewer sh*tty teams with less talent than the B1G has, because they have four less teams. But blanket statements like the Big 12 has far superior talent than the B1G or vice versa is just an exercise in stupidity.
 
Gonzo said:
That's the point. To think there's some kind of huge talent gap between Texas and Ohio St., Baylor and Michigan St., TCU and Wisconsin, is ridiculous. Every conference has its elites, and the talent level among that tier of programs between conferences is comparable. Clearly the SEC has more of those elite programs and more teams with elite talent. The Big 12 has fewer sh*tty teams with less talent than the B1G has, because it has a footprint extending south, which has warmer weather and players train year round. But blanket statements like the Big 12 has far superior talent than the B1G or vice versa is just an exercise in stupidity.
Click to expand...

Fixed it.
 
Haverhill said:
If you look at the Michigan State/Baylor game (which still frustrates me) the Spartans were very well coached and their mindset in that game was no different than UNI basketball playing Iowa State or Kansas. One team is better in every position on the floor, but they slowed the game down and were well coached. Outside of Ohio State, thats how the Big Ten wins. They were successful this bowl season doing just that, but the talent level isn't close.
Click to expand...

Lol so for the B10 it's coaching and mindset? You are desperate. Come on man. I don't think anyone would argue that Baylor had more talent than MSU on the offensive side of the ball. That's obvious. However talent isn't only on offense. MSU's defense deserves credit, and MSU's defense was far more talented than Baylor's defense.

Again, it seems to me like a lot of you are only looking at skill positions to determine talent. I think it's fair to say the B12 has better skill position talent. It's definitely more flashy. However, when it comes to the trenches and defense the B10 evens out the comparison. That's why the NFL draft numbers are the way they are. It's not flashy but it's the truth.
 
OceanMotion said:
Lol so for the B10 it's coaching and mindset? You are desperate. Come on man. I don't think anyone would argue that Baylor had more talent than MSU on the offensive side of the ball. That's obvious. However talent isn't only on offense. MSU's defense deserves credit, and MSU's defense was far more talented than Baylor's defense.

Again, it seems to me like a lot of you are only looking at skill positions to determine talent. I think it's fair to say the B12 has better skill position talent. It's definitely more flashy. However, when it comes to the trenches and defense the B10 evens out the comparison. That's why the NFL draft numbers are the way they are. It's not flashy but it's the truth.
Click to expand...

Uh ok. Who are you? Barak Obama? You ride that fence hard. I have no idea what you are saying. But yeah, I guess whatever it is you are saying is absolutely true.
 
el tornado said:
Uh ok. Who are you? Barak Obama? You ride that fence hard. I have no idea what you are saying. But yeah, I guess whatever it is you are saying is absolutely true.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am Barack Obama (You spelled my name wrong by the way).

All I am saying is that overall there is not a discrepancy in the talent level between the B10 and B12. There are different styles of play. I would argue that for the most part the B12 has better skill position talent and the B10 has better talent in the trenches and on defense. There may be an occasional discrepancy to that theory on a year to year basis, but overall it's a pretty solid statement to make.

My point is that there is no factual evidence to suggest the B12 is more talented than the B10. No one has provided any, but I've heard the claim many times by people on here that the B12 is far more talented. That's simply not true. They are just letting their bias get in the way of rationality.

That's what makes a match-up like Baylor and MSU so fun to watch (for me anyways). I think that game served as a pretty solid example of the differences between the two conferences (with some outliers obviously). The game becomes a battle of different styles. Can MSU's offense keep up with Baylor's? Can Baylor light up the scoreboard like they usually do against a MSU defense that has been pretty dominant? Can Baylor's defense prove they are being slighted in the hype or vice versa for a MSU offense?

The difference lies in the style of play not in the amount of talent on the field. Baylor targets and often times lands more talented guys at skill positions on offense because their style of play gives those guys an opportunity to light it up. The same can be said for the guys MSU targets and lands on the defensive side of the ball. The elite talent is often there for both sides it's just located at different positions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom