Who has the advantage?

Northern teams: Washington, Oregon, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St

Southern teams: USC, Texas, T a&m, Oklahoma, LSU, bama, Georgia, Clemson, Fla St, Miami, Florida, Tennessee

I think the south had the advantage except for the last couple of seasons. Now, I think it is very close. NIL has made it more feasible for kids from the south to play for teams that are further away.

Not too long ago, only Ohio St had the size, strength and athletes to compete against the best southern teams.

Any thoughts?

It is hard to think of USC as a south team when they are a card carrying member of the B1G. I put them in the north.

Well, you evened up the teams by adding ewe dub dragging down the North and sc for the South.

A TON of SEC players have come to B1G in the NIL-Portal era. I did not anticipate how a couple of Big Ten teams could load up on portal athletes from the south to the degree that we have.

It has been quite a leveling of the playing field between the two power conferences…

48 minutes ago, Jon Sousa said:

It is hard to think of USC as a south team when they are a card carrying member of the B1G. I put them in the north.

I agree, USC isn’t a southern team. This won’t be popular, but college football has been dominated in modern history by the south. While I will admit that certainly tOSU was the best team last season, I don’t think UM would have beaten UGA the year before. Neither here nor there though, it’s not Michigan’s fault that they didn’t play GA, it’s GA’s fault, so they were justifiably the champions.

Maybe it’s starting to change, but the South has a bit of an advantage in that there are so many top football recruits that come from southern states, and also that in the south the NFL is secondary to college football for the most part.

However, NIL and the money it brings is changing the narrative it seems. The one thing some of the big Northern teams do have access to is money, and that money can bring in southern recruits and transfers. Time will tell how things will ultimately adjust, but it’s a certainty that the dust hasn’t settled yet in the new frontier of college football! Perhaps the stranglehold that the south has had may be coming to an end, or at least the playing field is leveling.

1 hour ago, Charles Fischer said:

A TON of SEC players have come to B1G in the NIL-Portal era. I did not anticipate how a couple of Big Ten teams could load up on portal athletes from the south to the degree that we have.

It has been quite a leveling of the playing field between the two power conferences…

I remember posting on more than one occasion that NIL would level the playing field. I just never expected it to happen as quickly as it has.

Now if only the 18-team B1G could find a way to level the playing field a little better intra-conference. Recently Ohio State's Caleb Downs was asked the difference in playing an SEC schedule vs. a B1G schedule (remember he played, and played very well, at Alabama his first year).

He said exactly what I thought he'd say remarking that you really only needed to be in top form for 2-3 of the 9-Game B1G contests to prevail. He then remarked that in the SEC you better be on your toes always as you are going to face "DUDES every game!" That is a bit of an overstatement but still truer of the SEC than the B1G IMHO.

Historically, I am inclined to think the North has proven to have the advantage. Princeton, Yale, Chicago, Notre Dame, Army, Michigan, Nebraska, etc for decades dominated championships.

It really wasn’t until the SEC mastered the art of paying players under the table that the South became dominant.

I think NIL has re-leveled that playing field somewhat.

I fear we are moving into an era that the schools with the richest donors will hold the real advantage.

15 minutes ago, Nevada Dawg said:

Now if only the 18-team B1G could find a way to level the playing field a little better intra-conference.

Meh. I think after this year is completed and a Big-10 team wins the 'Natty for the third time in a row, that it will be shown that while the SEC is deeper?

The Big-10 has the best teams.

3 minutes ago, PittDuck said:

Historically, I am inclined to think the North has proven to have the advantage. Princeton, Yale, Chicago, Notre Dame, Army, Michigan, Nebraska, etc for decades dominated championships.

It really wasn’t until the SEC mastered the art of paying players under the table that the South became dominant.

I think NIL has re-leveled that playing field somewhat.

I fear we are moving into an era that the schools with the richest donors will hold the real advantage.

So you’re saying that the Southern teams have only dominated college football bc they started paying players, and otherwise the northern teams that once upon a time dominated in a much different era and landscape would have continued their dominance?

If you truly believe this then I won’t even try to argue with you because it would be pointless! Come on man, you certainly know better than this!

7 minutes ago, Charles Fischer said:

Meh. I think after this year is completed and a Big-10 team wins the 'Natty for the third time in a row, that it will be shown that while the SEC is deeper?

The Big-10 has the best teams.

This I can’t really argue with, if the B1G wins three in a row, they have absolutely closed the gap at the top and 3 in a row proves it. I think the B1G has consistently had one or two of the top teams for awhile, give or take a few years in the modern era. Also, the addition of Oregon and USC and others have only strengthened the conference.