Yes, other teams have won titles more recently as members of other conferences, but no team representing the B1G has won a title other than Michigan and Ohio State since the 1960s when Michigan State, Minnesota, and Iowa all claimed titles. Other than the past couple of years, very few B1G teams have even been in position to threaten for a national title in decades besides the big 2.
If people are wondering why there's suddenly so much B1G smack talk, this is the first time in anyone who's under 70's life that they can legitimately claim that the B1G is the best conference in football. Conference pride is absolutely cringe as hell, but it's a little understandable why B1G fans have become a little more unbearable (admittedly mostly fans of my first flair, who are always a little unbearable) this post season. For the first time since the 1960's the B1G is truly a power conference, not just a power 2 and friends. I for one think that's something to celebrate. I'll go back to rooting against Indiana and Oregon next season.
Pfft, I’m not rooting for Indiana because they’re in the Big Ten. I’m rooting for them because it’ll be awesome to see one of, if not the historically worst P5 program win a national title.
While true, there is something about them being in our conference that makes me more familiar with their suffering. Like I think of them as a terrible team more than say Wake Forest and so their success feels more exciting. It might also of course be that this resonates with me not as a fan of a B1G team but as a fan of a historically terrible B1G team and so Indiana feels more just like us (and thus inspires hope)
I felt the same about you guys in 1995 on your rose bowl run. That was exciting for sure.
How about this: when was the last time a team that had a stadium with a capacity of <60,000 won a national championship?
(Not hating — have been to games there and had a great time. Of course, that was when it was basically a guaranteed Michigan win.)
I mean, I’m pretty sure Autzen (Oregon) is 56k official capacity. Didn’t make Ohio State or Michigan more likely to win there in their last few visits. But it probably is a good indicator that a fanbase has fewer fans willing to travel.
What I’m really curious about is the former affiliations of the Indiana bandwagon fans. Are they Fighting Irish refugees? Alums? Previously uninterested locals? Or maybe…..basketball fans?!?!?!
I had no idea Autzen was that small. But Oregon hasn't won a championship.
Very true, but i was more drawing the parallel between Indiana and Oregon, since one of them will get a shot at a title this year.
i believe IU has the biggest alumni population of any school. that’s probably including all the regional campuses, but I’m not positive
You had me with the first line. No need for the rest there.
Same, I’d love for the worst team in college football win a title! You can totally ignore my flair too
I would be even more excited for Northwestern to be in the same position. I was for some reason, a huge Darnell Autry fan in the 90s
I feel like the attitude of every team in every conference should be fuck everybody except the loser in the corner (unless they’re your rival) Like if Vandy made it to the playoffs, you bet your ass I’d want to see them do well, for every other team? Let’s just say, my Georgia and Ole Miss fan friends received messages, custom tailored to piss them off as optimally as possible, that I’ve had saved in my drafts for months within moments of the clock hitting zero on their seasons.
Edit: in case anyone is curious, the Georgia fan received “I thought them dawgs was supposed to be hell” My Ole Miss friend got “As long as you’ve got Christ, you never really lose” I went 2/2 on receiving my desired result.
As much as I disdain Penn State, their 1994 team got completely robbed not getting a share of the title.
They moved from #1 to #2 after beating a ranked Ohio State 63-14 and never moved back to #1 lol
Because #3 Nebraska drilled #2 Colorado 24-7. A major missing detail there lol
And subsequently beat #3 Miami; a team lead by Warren Sapp and Ray Lewis. I don't think Penn State beat anyone that finished with less than 4 losses that year.
Fewer than*
(Insert Stannis meme)
If we're going to correct him, we must, too, point out that the preterite form of "lead" is "led"
I also think that semi-colon is dodgy.
Thanks Harvard. Wait
You've been blessed with Nowledge
Nebraska: The Harvard of Nebraska.
The N stands for Knowledge
I think of Harvard, Nebraska as the Harvard of Nebraska.
I'm still upset we never got the chance. Would've loved to see the matchup with Nebraska that year.
Penn State would have been favored, I think.
Wait they beat Ohio State by almost 50 and moved down?
Nebraska always had more 1st place votes than PSU, they were just rated lower in other polls on average compared to PSU due to Colorado. So when Nebraska beat Colorado, they basically gained CU’s first place votes and moved up to #2 in other polls which put them above PSU.
Auburn and PSU are the two teams that come to mind the most (Utah and TCU close) who got robbed from not having a playoff system
Mentioned this last night but those two examples are at least partially a driver for the playoffs coming.
Had talked about this with a friend before. In 2005, Penn State lost on the last play of the game in Michigan when time was added to the clock. Had they won, they would have been undefeated but also likely remained at 3 with Texas and USC playing for the title. That would have given us back to back seasons with an undefeated #3 and I bet the playoffs come earlier.
A 2006 4 team playoff would have been pretty slick with Michigan, UF, Ohio State, and USC. I mean Florida’s defense would have dominated the whole thing but it would have been a great playoff.
Also 2008. Florida and Bama both make it. Oklahoma and Texas included makes that the goat QB field in any play off (3/4 schools had Heisman candidates including 2 winners).
2004 Auburn fascinates me. How do you go 13-0 and SEC champs and not get a chance at the title?
I would have loved to see them take on Utah that year, and the winner face USC.
Only a guess here, but in 2004 the SEC wasn't the SEC as we know it today. It was a good conference, but people didn't perceive it as head and shoulders better than the rest of em.
USC was the dominant team. They were getting a spot no matter what. Then Texas was a bigger brand than Auburn. Figure in Auburn started the season not ranked very highly, if at all (I forget which) and they weren't going to pass USC and Texas.
You're talking about Oklahoma right? Texas wasn't until next year.
Assuming so, you'd be right on the money; those two were the dominant teams. 2004 really was a different time.
Doink!! I stand corrected. Good catch.
USC and OU started the season ranked 1 and 2. They both went undefeated.
I also disdain Penn State and also think the 1994 team was badly robbed.
Distain
an archaic word meaning to stain, discolor, or sully something, often in a way that taints honor or reputation.
Especially because there were three years with split champions in the nineties…but for some reason except in 94.
It’s because after consecutive split champions in the early 90s, they created the Bowl Coalition in an attempt to make sure number 1 played number 2 in a bowl game every year. All the major conference signed on except the B1G and PAC due to contractual obligations with the Rose Bowl.
So in 1994, there was a “national championship” but it was 1 vs 3 because Penn State was contractually obligated to play in the rose bowl as B1G champ
everything I've ever read about the history of CFB is "they couldnt do it the right way because the Rose Bowl stopped improvements to the sport" and its why it's the most overrated tradition in all of sports
Except eventually the Rose Bowl did relent, but we have a sport that's eating itself alive AND no Rose Bowl tradition either, so I can't really blame them.
And 1997 had #3 Tennessee and Peyton Manning taking on #2 Nebraska in the “National Championship Game”
Rose Bowl ruining yet another thing in CFB.
Have you seen that sunset though?
And yet that didn’t stop Michigan from getting a split title with Nebraska just three years later even though they didn’t play Nebraska in their bowl game either…
The only real difference is that Michigan was ranked number 1 going into the rose bowl, while Penn State wasn’t. It sucks to think that you didn’t get a split title due to poll inertia (lol) but the actual reason for both scenarios is because the B1G/Rose Bowl refused to join the Bowl Alliance/Coalition.
It’s weird to me that B1G fans are complaining about this, when the B1G is the one who chose to remain excluded from the National Championship system that everyone else agreed to. If they had simply joined the agreement like every other conference (besides the PAC), none of this would have happened
The rose bowl/B1G marriage was a codependent mess for long stretches. For the longest time you couldn’t play in consecutive years representing the league when it was the only bowl game you could play as a member.
“You’re the best team again? Too bad, you went last year. It’s somebody else’s turn”
We complain now but CFB has NEVER been logical or fair.
Idk why that’s weird, it’s not like all these big ten fans were the ones that decided not to play for a natty. At the end of the day if you are missing 2 of the major conferences you aren’t really hosting a “national championship” even if you want to call it that
There was no system. The NC was awarded by voters regardless of the games/structure as 1997 showed
As a fan of a B1G team, albeit one that hasn't won a natty since 1960 or a conference title since 1967, both before I was born, it ALWAYS pissed me off that the conference was tethered to the Rose Bowl growing up, meaning they got screwed by the pollsters in that era.
But there are literally old farts that firmly believed, and still do, that winning the Rose Bowl was more important than winning a national championship.
A perfect explanation as to why voting for the champion was fucking stupid. Tradition stood in the way of an actual playoff for way too long.
Ironically, 94 PSU was robbed because the Big Televen didn’t want a national championship game. If PSU had remained independent or joined the Big East, they would have played against Nebraska in the Bowl Coalition’s #1 vs #2 game.
They could have just gone undefeated and uncrowned like they had in 68, 69, and 73.
Those years and many others were exactly why the rest of the conferences created the Bowl Coalition in 1992. It’s why #2 Alabama played and defeated #1 Miami that season rather than just crowning Miami champions after both teams beat some rando bowl opponents. 1994 would have pitted Nebraska vs Penn State if the B1G hadn’t refused to participate. (Or am I misreading you and you’re saying you’d rather have them just finish unbeaten and uncrowned than join something that would eventually lead to a full blown playoff system?)
I’m just saying that they finished without a title in the old system as independents, but then from a bad timing perspective bettered their position by being in the Big Ten but worsened it by being held to the Big Ten rules of the time. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
That was the single greatest offense I had ever seen until 2019 LSU
Statistically, 1994 Penn State was essentially the same team as 2019 LSU. 1994 Penn State led the nation in scoring at 47.8 PPG while 2019 LSU was #1 in scoring at 48.4 PPG. 1994 Penn State was 32nd in scoring defense allowing 21.1 PPG while 2019 LSU was 31st in scoring defense allowing 21.9 PPG. But nobody dared to say horseshit about how bad that LSU defense was like they did with the Penn State defense. Because their offense was a historic, dominant, all-time great unit which overrode any deficiencies they had defensively.
I think the other thing was Penn States offense was doing that in an era where you didn’t see anything close to that level of dominance, and beating the breaks off a great Ohio state team in the process by 50. Just going by the eye test you didn’t always see offensive levels of dominance like that for a few more years until 01 Canes and 04-05 USC squads rolled in
The 1994 Penn state offense had 5 first round picks and 6 other nfl draft picks. The only lineman not drafted still played in the nfl for several years.
Penn State getting screwed in '94 is still one of the biggest what-ifs in CFB history, they went undefeated and beat Oregon in the Rose Bowl but the polls just said nah
They dropped to #2 after beating Ohio State by 50. Could you imagine what would be said if that happened today?
Because #3 Nebraska drilled #2 Colorado 24-7. A major missing detail there lol
Would never happen today. Guaranteed. PSU beat a ranked opponent by 50.
Then they’d just say it didn’t count as a ranked win because Ohio State dropped out after the loss
Not really, it was just math. Nebraska had more 1st place votes than PSU, they were just rated lower in other polls on average due to Colorado. When Nebraska beat CU, they gained more first place votes and moved from #3 to #2 in polls where PSU was #1 which put them ahead.
1994 Tom Osborne Lifetime Achievement Award
And #1 Penn State beat #21 Ohio State 63-14, and before that beat #5 Michigan in Ann Arbor. It’s not like Penn State beat up on the Citadel or the Little Sisters of the Poor. This was a ranked Ohio State team.
For what it’s worth, I found another post from a few years ago that showed the AP voters from Ohio and a few other papers in the Big Ten region all conveniently voted Nebraska over Penn State.
It really wasn’t though. It’s just voters being voters. And if you’re talking about a shot at beating Nebraska, Penn State joined the Big Ten knowing that would be a problem.
Honestly, it doesn't really change anything. There was a lot of hand waiving regarding "champions" before the BCS era, as the top 2 teams rarely actually played each other.
“Tom Osborne has never won a national championship, we have to give it to him”
Yep, its historical fact that mid 90s Nebraska was a scrub. It’s not like they were at the beginning of a 60-3 run or anything.
This is the answer. I wish Pat Kraft would just claim the damn thing and tell everyone to fuck off.
He seems hot headed enough that we could actually bully him into doing so.
Seriously, just claim the undefeated seasons and be done with it. People might wring hands t first but nobody will care past that and it will make us look a lot better in comparisons.
100% on board with this.
Blame the Big 10 for not participating in the bowl alliance and insisting on sending them to the rose bowl
I always feel like Penn State, Wisconsin and then Northwestern in the mid 90s kind of woke up Ohio State and Michigan that there is more to CFB than a B10 title.
I'm so glad I grew up with the BCS. As lame as it was that only two teams got a shot--definitely a few years where it was a 3-team race--hearing about all the shared titles and snubs of the pollster-only era sounds hair-tearingly annoying.
Let’s not forget the reason they couldn’t share if was because you couldn’t possibly make Osborne share the title when he was retiring.
Also kinda crazy the big ten only has 5 national titles as a conference since 1970
It definitely seems like a weird stat, but I think it’s primarily the format. (Like how both of Ohio State’s championships in the CFP era never even would have happened under the previous systems, even though Michigan’s still would have).
Because there were actually plenty of solid years for other Big Ten teams since 1970, but somebody ended up 11-1 or 10-2 with a Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, or Sugar Bowl win, ranked somewhere #3-8 behind an 11-1 or undefeated team they never played… instead of playing for a title. At least a few of those looked like championship caliber teams that simply dropped a couple of really close games along the stretch, kinda like this year’s Miami.
In the previous system Michigan also probably is playing for a national title in 2021 and 2022
I agree if we had a playoffs it probably would have happened more often
I would have loved to see the 2013 and 2014 michigan state teams in this playoff format.
I would have loved to see the 96 and 98 Buckeyes in a playoff...
Then there's "the game won't even be close" 06-07 Ohio State.
Which, to be fair, was technically true.
Wisconsin with Russel Wilson comes to mind, along with the Oregon team they played in the Rose Bowl.
Ohio State's success at the highest level over the last 25 years is bizarre.
Top 5 team and in the hunt almost every year.
But somehow two of our titles are among the biggest underdog title wins in the last 25 years. And the time we won as the favorite was the first year of the 12 team playoff when we wouldn't have qualified for a four team playoff--never mind the BCS.
You're welcome, good job, you're welcome, you're welcome, good job, you're welcome.
2006 through 2014ish, it used to be Ohio state couldn’t beat an sec team. This is the big 10’s best run since Moses was a baby. It’s the number of teams having elite years that matters.
Honestly I’m sure there are seasons a lot of teams could claim if they wanted. I know Penn State has like 6 undefeated seasons they don’t claim.
I’m sure there have been similar undefeated seasons teams could claim (an have been claimed by many other teams)
A decent part of this is because of the fact that the B10 champ would always play in the Rose Bowl which would basically be a home game for USC (or whoever the P8/10 champ was) and USC was a juggernaut back then and has (had? I forget if they still do) the most bowl wins for a reason.
Penn State deserves a share for 1994 and it's bullshit the title wasn't split.
The polls that year were pretty whacked out. Nebraska and Penn State swapped number 1 and 2 mid season for pretty much no reason and it never switched back.
Not saying Nebraska was better, but there was a reason for the swap. Nebraska handily beat then #2 Colorado that week and Penn St’s best win, Michigan, lost to an unranked Wisconsin
PSU beat a nine win OSU team who finished 14th, by 50 points that week too
I was at that Wisconsin loss as my first game
I think it’s just a common misconception.
“National champion” is supposed to mean “the best team”. Effectively it has been closer to “the team with the most impressive season”.
With the expanded CFP, I think we are finally getting a bit closer to a “best team” championship instead of a “best season” championship. We just can’t seem to decide on a good format.
But that same week, Penn State beat #21 Ohio State 63-14.
Right, but #21 and #2 aren't really the same.
The only reason they swapped was a Tom Osborne "he finally could win one and might retire so we better give it to him" love fest. Meanwhile, the fucker got 2 more. The "BIG" resentment towards PSU certainly didn't help.
Yeah, I was a freshman at Illinois that year (I'm old)
They flipped because #3 Nebraska drilled #2 Colorado 24-7. Thats not “no reason”
That’s fair. Although Penn State beat a top 25 team by 50 points that same week. There’s a reason Penn State fans say the Michael Westbrook Hail Mary cost them the national championships. If he doesn’t catch that, Colorado doesn’t give Nebraska that “Top 5 win”
You guys should just claim a NC anyways. It's fully justified.
They could. They were picked by 7 different selectors as champion or co-champion. But they’ll never do it.
It's been mentioned below, but the B1G and Pac-10/12 being tethered to the Rose Bowl had a lot to do with their lack of voted national titles in the 70's-90's.
Literally was a reason 1994 Penn State didn’t get a chance to play for one despite the BCS having just been created so that we wouldn’t get controversies like thay
Penn State was absolutely jobbed in 1994. Delaney and the Big Ten not going to bat for us led to decades (honestly may still be the sentiment among some fans) feeling like we were the red headed stepchild of the conference.
I still remember Delaney in 2016 going on Gameday to argue for Ohio State over Penn State in the playoffs and then being confused when he was booed during the trophy ceremony.
I was a junior that year. It was unreal to watch in person. So many offensive weapons. All Kerry would have had to do was get the ball in the air. Someone on our offense was going to catch it. But then he added deadly accuracy and we were unstoppable. He could hit a mosquito from 40 yards away.
ETA: Starting O-line only gave up 3 sacks that year, too.
The O-line was the reason for the dominance. 2 first round picks and 3 other nfl players, one of whom might be a half of Famer (Marco Rivera)
Delaney not advocating for his conference champ in 2016 was also egregious. He also had the easy out where he could have said that his conference was so good that the deserved two slots in the playoff. Instead, the coward’s route was chosen.
This seems like a reason to be mad, but 1994 what could he do? Rose Bowl is what it is
What are you proposing should have happened in 1994 that didn't happen?
Penn State would’ve been favored on a neutral field over Nebraska and they both went undefeated so it was a pretty textbook split national championship year. The reason Nebraska got so much love as the year went on was because Osborne’s Nebraska teams were ‘always bridesmaid never the bride’ at that point and them finally getting a national championship was a story that captivated people. That ‘94 Nebraska team was genuinely a fantastic story so it’s not like it was a conspiracy, but that’s just the way things were then and people accepted it even though the truth is it not being a split national championship kinda makes a mockery of the concept.
But that doesn't have anything to do with Delaney. The conference had a contract with the Rose Bowl to face their champ off against the Pac 10 champ. It's the reason we had to settle for the Bowl Coalition in 1992 rather than what otherwise would have been the BCS.
Penn State was a great team that year and I'm still traumatized by the historic ass-kicking they gave Ohio State in Happy Valley, but they didn't have the SOS to compete with Nebraska. All of their ranked wins were against teams with 4 blemishes on their record (Oregon, USC, Ohio State, Michigan). Nebraska had beaten 11-1 Colorado, 10-2 Miami, 9-3 KSU.
Title splits weren't accomplished by an organizations collaborating and saying, "they both deserve it, so you guys give yours to team A and we'll give ours to team B so neither is left out." They were mathematical aggregations of dozens of individual voters. When there were splits, it was consensus disagreement over who was better among the voters of different selector orgs.
That year more voters in all major selector orgs thought Nebraska was more deserving. What were they supposed to do?
Also undefeated in 1969 but didn’t win a title
Back to back undefeated seasons but Nixon told the press he liked Texas so they got the title instead
That was the worst. The entire Midwest voted for Nebraska. Even Smizik from Pittsburgh voted for Nebraska but he’s an asshole anyway.
People shit on Sankey, but I love that he’s willing to go to bat for any SEC team no matter the circumstances. It makes him look like a tool sometimes, but if your commissioner isn’t willing to look like a tool for you, then they’re a bad commissioner.
Delaney would bend over backwards for Michigan or Ohio State but would always dick over Penn State every chance he got. 2016 stumping for OSU to make the playoff over Penn State who won the head to head AND conference title tells you all you need to know. That was the year OSU got in and promptly lost to Clemson like 34-0 in the first round while Penn State and USC put on an all time classic in the Rose Bowl.
Well, it used to be the Big Two Little Eight!
Same in our old conference, Nebraska, Oklahoma and the Little 6
We have periodically shown up throughout the B1G's history.
Tangentially, I remember lightly trash-talking Purdue fans as being part of the little 8 before our game in 2000, which we promptly lost.
You inflicted some of our most painful losses, in fact! I was (-)5 years old for the 1974 game but that was a whopper.
Old man and remembering MSU kicking us in the dick randomly every few years checking in
Reminds me of the inverse of 2007 when both Ohio State and Michigan lost their bowl games after there were arguments over if Michigan should've been in the BCS title game instead of Florida.
It should have, since they did the LSU Bama repeat just a couple years later
SEC bias is insane. They also left out Wisconsin (for getting clobbered in the CCG) for Bama less than a decade ago
[deleted]
27-21 in the CCG as only loss means you get moved below a team that didn’t play a CCG game? Why should Wisconsin have been left out
They dominated Miami in the bowl who was top 10
Amen. If it’s Oklahoma or Texas instead of Oklahoma state on the jerseys, no way Alabama gets in the bcs game. It has been blue bloods versus everyone else forever. They use conference bias to bolster blue bloods. Always have.
If Michigan had lost to Ohio State earlier in the season they could’ve rematched. Alabama dropped to 4 after losing to LSU, but moved back up to 2 after playing more games and other teams lost
Didn’t even really get clobbered. It was never more than a 2 score game and the final was 27-21. They were outplayed and got beat, but they did much more than just try to save face in some blowout.
Clobbered in the sense that OSU had control of that game, but yeah that game and how they treated you guys wasn’t right. You guys went on to beat top 10 Miami by 2 scores in the bowl game, absolutely belonged over a team that didn’t even make their CCG
3 of the SEC titles in the last 20 years were from unearned opportunities to be there
Tbf, I feel like only 2 of them were undeserved. If Michigan make it in 2006 then Alabama do in 2011, and given Florida made it in 2006, Oklahoma State should have made it in 2011. Overall, only one of those can be seen as undeserved (it's 2011 Bama)
I'm biased but we were driving to win the game, and Ohio state got away with a blatant pass interference. That's hardly controlling the game.
Yeah it was maddening that Wisconsin wasn't getting talked about for the 4 spot that year. We can hope the SEC will stop getting the unquestioned benefit of a doubt, but we all know they will have 7 in the preseason AP poll and the charade will start again!
The sec getting the benefit of the doubt was earned from 2006 through 2011. It’s a delayed cycle. 2004 undefeated aubuRn was left out. When Florida killed Ohio state in 2006, it opened eyes. I think Indiana killing alabama this year will have a similar impact. The big 10 will start getting that “bias” soon based on so many different teams being elite. It’s not big 2 and the rest anymore.
I doubt it with how ESPN dominates viewership and the media spins. Crazy how our media package is bigger when you guys get way more viewers, Sankey got you guys a bad deal
The sec is culturally different. Folks from this area prioritize college football and baseball way more than most places. It’s must see TV. That’s why the games get watched more. There isn’t as much to do as them fancy big 10 places. The big 10 folks are busy making money, and therefore have more nil money, while sec places are drinking, cooking and watching football.
Who gets benefits of the doubt is constantly changing but on a delayed basis. It’s always which blue blood from which conference based on around the 5 to 10 previous seasons.
People say the SEC, but that was Bama bias. LSU absolutely hated having to play the same team twice.
This year was a great example of just how hard it is to beat the same team again.
We have a horrendous record against USC in bowl games. But I am glad that we got to make Tebow cry a year later
Don't fucking mention 2007 around me 😭
I stopped watching football for years after that national championship lol was devasted as a kid
Indiana fans have a big stick up their butt about the Big Ten vs SEC thing and a lot of it comes from Kentucky basketball. I’d be lying if I didn’t find it all a little cringe.
I don’t think about the SEC at all when IU is playing UK in basketball, and for a long time, UK was SEC basketball.
My Dad and all his friends were happier to see Ole Miss lose today than I think they’d be if we win the cfp. Maybe it’s just the fans I know.
I was definitely pulling for Ole Miss because wanting to play Miami on their home field is stupid.
Right? The only conference I put any thought into on the basketball side was the ACC because of the yearly challenge.
And the non-stop glazing by the Disney networks.
it ain't easy being #2
Y’all still own the all-time record between us by a significant margin iirc. That’s something.
This is true and should be said aloud more
Before Michigan's 4 game run I thought I might see the gap close here soon. Unfortunately, it still stands a fairly large 10 win gap. So we are a decade away from an absolutely insane game if it ever comes.
Homer me is going "well last streak was 8 and the one before that was 6, it still might happen in my life time"
Just like how we still lead the all—time H2H against the 🦆, by thirteen games.
Rural southern car dealers are no longer the x factor in cfb
[deleted]
It doesn’t bother me that much coming from a GW flair, but when I see fans of teams like Michigan, OSU, PSU, ND bring this point up I just can’t help sit back and enjoy the projection. They’re just mad because they paid just as much for players as we did and got jack-all out of it.
Big 2, Little 16
This comment is gonna be funny when Indiana threepeats
I mean yeah the two are Indiana and Oregon, what do you think he meant
Man, screw the B1G. Indiana, you're cool.
I’ll ask this. How long has Oregon been in the conference they are currently in?
We didn't win a national championship in our last conference, let alone the BIG10.
Unless I've been in a coma and missed something huge.
I know. OP seems to think that no matter what a big 10 team is going to win the natty.
Giant * being current B1G members have won titles predating their admission. Washington and Nebraska won titles in the 90s, USC in the 00s.
That's why the title says "as a member of the B1G."
I am curious... The conference pride thing is only a reddit thing within my IRL circle. Most of my friends are rooting for Miami or Indiana. In their minds Ohio State is still good if they only lose to a team in the natty or winning the natty. It has nothing to do with conference.
Nope. I live in rural Tennessee. Conference pride is a huge down here.
I have a theory it has to do with the fact that Tennessee and now Alabama not being dominant teams anymore so you have to lean on the overall conference( which also isn’t dominant anymore which leaves them absolutely in shambles)
I live in Bham, Alabama and travel between Bham and Baton Rouge regularly. I don't see conference pride down here. I see Auburn fans hating Bama and Bama fans hating Auburn. I also see LSU fans hating everyone. lol
I am literally sitting here at work now right now listening to arguments why “bowl games don’t matter” regarding the SEC conference strength.
lol I am not saying you are wrong. It is why I asked on reddit. The world is a big place. I just never run into that type of conversation in my wheelhouse but you see it in every single thread on this sub. I get looped into more conversations about recruiting, SEC intra-conference hate and now trolled about Ohio State losing. lol
That's actually bonkers.
Though Michigan still sucks
Conference pride is fun when my conference but cringe when not my conference
Have they tried cheating? I hear it helps
I mean if we're being technical, MSU wasnt "awarded the title". They finished #2 to Notre Dame in both polls
They won the NFF (organization that runs the hall of fame) poll that year, which is one of the 4 polls the NCAA record book recognizes as a consensus title selector. But anyway, if you want to only count AP and Coaches, the thread title only has to be changed by one year to go back to MSU's 1965 coaches poll title.
There were more than 2 polls that selected national champions in those days, and its legit to claim it since they had the same record as Notre dame and tied when they played
Did Oregon win a National Championship last year?
Did a major selector say they did?
Anderson & Hester and Wolfe, both recognized by the NCAA, selected them, even though there is no controversy to suggest that they should have been declared national champions with the case like 2017 UCF
That's a ridiculous argument. There is a playoff now. Back in the 60s that is how champions were selected.
But if you don't want to recognize MSU in 1966, then go to 1965 where they were #1 in the coaches poll
I'm not arguing against Michigan State's titles (mostly yanking your chain tbh), I was telling you who awarded a National Championship matters. AP and Coaches are the biggest 2 pre-CFP.
This is it. It’s over. No sec honk can reasonably defend the sec > big 10 anymore. If Indiana or Oregon win, but kinda more so Indiana, the big 10 is established as the best conference by a mile. 3 different teams winning in a short time frame with a fourth finishing in the semifinals is elite.
I wasn't watching college football back in 1994. What happened exactly to Penn State?
Different era, but they beat a ranked Ohio State by 50 and moved from #1 to #2 and never were able to get back to 1 since both them and Nebraska were undefeated.
Their offense had 5 first round picks and extremely similar PPG on offense and defense as 2019 LSU.
Nebraska was damn good too, but it should have been another split title
Almost lost to IU and Illinois. IU took them to the wire in State College the year before, too.
Part of this is because both Michigan and Ohio state have systemically worked together to kept other schools in the conference down.
As much as they claim to hate each other, their admins have sure worked closely to create rules that benefit them and keep others down. They’ll also report other schools in tandem for rules violations.
You should have this saved for next season also.
I’m rooting for Indiana because they’re the only tolerable team left. I don’t care about Big Ten stuff
Notre Dame won the NC in 1966.
Top heavy conference