Re: 2014-15 College Football Part II: SEC vs World
I really hate the notion that the Big Ten needs Michigan. Or Ohio State. It needs to bring the other schools up to that level and have consistent high-level performers. I mean, the SEC had Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Arkansas (at one point), this year they had Ole Miss and Miss State.
**** that idea that we need two teams to prop up our conference.
**** it all you want. It's simply reality.
Ole Miss and Mississippi State are very likely to fall right back into obscurity. The Alabamas and the Auburns and the LSUs will continue to carry that conference while flash in the pan teams spice things up from time to time.
Here's the thing though: The SEC backed those MS schools this year. They didn't yearn for yesteryear and wonder when LSU and Florida will return to the top of the standings.
Meanwhile, north of the Mason-Dixon, the Big Ten has been whining for years that Michigan, PSU, and Nebraska are ruining the conference by being mediocre, fighting the fact that Wisconsin and Michigan State have moved into the top tier in the league. Contrary to that line of thinking, more than three or four select programs are allowed to be good.
Is the Big 12 terrible because Texas has dropped off? No. Baylor and TCU, one being a team that was trash for basically it's entire history until five years ago, the other a school that wasn't even in the conference until a few years ago, were in playoff talks all season long. Along with K-State, the Big 12 was never considered "down" this year.
What about the Pac 12? USC wasn't on top of the world, but the Pac 12 was still considered great with Oregon and Arizona leading the way.
The SEC has seen Missouri come in and go to two conference title games, yet they aren't considered down.
The Big Ten needs to get out of the shadow of Bo and JoePa and Osborne. Those days are gone. Right now it's Meyer, Dantonio, and that revolving door at Wisconsin that keeps putting up 10 wins a season.
