This From Corn Nation-Big Ten Plays Slow...

Submitted by HAIL 2 VICTORS on

http://www.cornnation.com/2010/6/11/1512791/the-good-and-the-bad-of-moving-to

Playing in the old big 10

There is no denying that the Big 10 is down.  There were two 1-7 teams, a 2-6, a 3-5 and two 4-4 teams.  It’s been 8 years since a Big 10 team has won the BCS title (OSU).  Michigan is down, and appears to be in turmoil.  At this point I would only consider PSU, OSU, Wisc, and Iowa to be quality programs.  A friend of mine told me he figured Nebraska would own the new conference. When I questioned him as to why, he responded by saying, “ You guys play fast, and they play slow”.  I would have to agree with him, The Big 10 is known for playing slow football, that is a return to yester year.  While some of you may long for three yards and a cloud of dust, that era is dead.  So why is this a problem, Nebraska will suffer from being in the third slowest conference in football, and the pundits/ voters will knock them.  Playing in the Big 10 (even with the addition of Nebraska, Mizzou, Rutgers, Notre Dame, and Iowa State, to make it a 16 team conference), will have us playing in the third worst Conference in terms of speed, rankings, and talent.

maizedandconfused

June 11th, 2010 at 9:57 PM ^

I always wonder how you "clock" football in a qualitative fashion.. I mean, is it total run plays vs pass plays? Average 40 time at each position? total number of plays?

Cmon Big twel.... Big 10 #12. Every game is 60 minutes, and it takes that same amount of time to finish every single game.
Go ahead and try and pass almost every down, let those aggressive DEs and OLBs not worry about run support and pin their ears back and get after it.  This sounds like a veiled "im slightly worried about a potential size disadvantage" argument.

Ill be interested to see how many teams rush for over 200 on them when they switch over (this year or next?).. over/under at  3?

psychomatt

June 11th, 2010 at 9:58 PM ^

It's not like they've been tearing it up the past 10-15 years. One good season and now they are going to dominate the B10? OK. We will see who is slow in 2011.

blueheron

June 11th, 2010 at 10:13 PM ^

No, no.  We play SMASHMOUTH football in the Big 10.  Ask Mark Dantonio.

- - -

Seriously, that is a very annoying false dichotomy (speed / strength).

zguy517

June 11th, 2010 at 10:18 PM ^

I can agree the big ten is down, but did you really just use the conference records to show it? Well then the SEC is down too! They have been .500 in conference for the last whatever number of years!

HoldTheRope

June 12th, 2010 at 12:38 AM ^

Seriously. The Big Ten might not have the best athletes in the country (for example. compared to the SEC), but we do well enough given our geographical disadvantages in recruiting.

I think Nebraska should be focusing on the fact that their offense has been anemic in a conference that has, to put it lightly, kind of sucked defensively. And now they're coming to a conference that, you know, does play defense.

lhglrkwg

June 12th, 2010 at 2:46 AM ^

the idea that the big10 is still a slow, three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust conference is out dated and just wrong. the only teams maybe like that are wisconsin and iowa and they are good at what they do. we have at least 4 teams (michigan, osu, penn st, purdue) who run the spread. this isn't a slow conference anymore