Charles Fischer Administrator No. 1 Share Posted 10 hours ago Did you hear the TV analysts suggesting that Indiana did not belong, and thus the B1G is overrated? They continued that line to where they arrived at how, "The Big-12 and ACC are no different than the B1G." This, over ONE game? It is the Pac-12 all over again... Mr. FishDuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevada Dawg No. 2 Share Posted 9 hours ago I will say that I think that, top to bottom, the PAC-12 was a stronger and more competitive league than the current B1G, in football at least. The addition of the West Coast teams strengthened the league IMHO, but it was possible for the three or four really solid teams to go a month at times without facing an opponent that appreciably raised the solid teams' pulse levels. Sorry, that's my opinion and I'm sticking with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Marsh No. 3 Share Posted 8 hours ago On 12/20/2024 at 10:29 PM, Nevada Dawg said: I will say that I think that, top to bottom, the PAC-12 was a stronger and more competitive league than the current B1G, in football at least. The addition of the West Coast teams strengthened the league IMHO, but it was possible for the three or four really solid teams to go a month at times without facing an opponent that appreciably raised the solid teams' pulse levels. Sorry, that's my opinion and I'm sticking with it. The B1G has always had 1-3 teams that were top tier in college football and a whole lot of nothing else. The Pac-12 was competitive from top to bottom, the bottom team usually found a way to upset someone they shouldn't, but the top end was not as good as the B1G top end usually. This year in the B1G isn't much different. The top three teams are all pretty strong in Oregon, Penn State and Ohio State. Indiana got the invite and I think they deserved it because they played their schedule and their only loss was to Ohio State. Their schedule wasn't a strong schedule and they did precisely what they were supposed to do ... Win. I'm going to throw shade at Bama because they had 3 pretty weak OCC games and Wisconsin, who weren't very good but it was a decent team from a scheduling standpoint. But Bama didn't lose 2/3 of their games to ranked teams. They loss them to 6-6 Vanderbilt and Oklahoma. And I'll be honest... I don't think Indiana would have lost those games. Bama has a higher ceiling certainly... But they also proved this year they had a lower floor. I do believe Indiana needs to up their OCC schedule. However, they went from winning 9 games in three seasons to 11 games this year. They made a massive hire in Cignetti and Indiana has an OCC designed to get them some wins in a season... They weren't expecting to win this much in year one of Cignetti. Indiana deserved to be in this playoff. But what we'll soon find is that at least a third of the teams don't belong in the playoff as competitive teams. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JabbaNoBargain No. 4 Share Posted 8 hours ago (edited) Indiana didn’t belong, as it turns out imo…but the only way to find out was to put them in. No 11-1 team from the P2 should be left out. That doesn’t mean Alabama did belong imo. Just means Indiana had an easy schedule with only 2 playoff team matches including tonight. They went 0-2 in those games, and it was a bad 0-2. Edited 8 hours ago by JabbaNoBargain 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike West No. 5 Share Posted 7 hours ago Indiana is a solid program in need of excellent players on the LOS. If they had that, they're top ten material. Both their OTs suffered from weakness. Their DL was mediocre. Their skill players are very good. They need a break away WR. Even with that they'd be dangerous. Lane Kiffin complained about the Irish victory. Well, Ole Miss looked worse against both Kentucky and Florida, so he's got nothing to complain about. Talk about no offense. I've never seen a unit disappear as fast as Mississippi's. As to Alabama, they looked even worse against Oklahoma. So all this stuff about potential is a bunch of malarkey. You perform, or you don't. This is truly the first year you can say "your record is exactly what it says it is" in the SEC. You were either very good, or pretty average. Beating a top five program and losing shortly after is like, well, Vanderbilt! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJacksPlaidPants Moderator No. 6 Share Posted 2 hours ago Tonight’s OSU/Tenn game will be a good litmus test on the strength of the conference. If OSU wins handily then that changes the narrative. All of the top teams from both conferences have great defenses, but the SEC has pretty erratic QB play. Notre Dame is an excellent football team. They should beat UGA in the Sugar Bowl. Their defense will overwhelm Stockton, but I think the Dawgs defense can do the same against Leonard. It should be a good one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
30Duck Moderator No. 7 Share Posted 1 hour ago I don't think the B1G was bad mouthed, 3 really good teams at the top, Oregon, osu2 & Penn State, Indiana was a book that was judged by its cover. It's unlikely that the B1G is going to be much deeper next season, though Michigan will have the "$10 Million Dollar Man" at quarterback. The ND-Georgia game is interesting. I can't get a read on ND from a W over Indiana. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
