In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 394
Online now 466 Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
For those interested, Steve Wiltfong provides an outstanding breakdown of Purdue's current commits and analyzes their remaining needs in the 2013 class.
A look at Purdue’s recruiting class led by in-state quarterback commit Danny Etling. What the Boilermakers currently have on the board and who theyre in on moving forward.
This post was edited by Todd Worly 21 months ago
Might want to link it Todd
Sorry - thought I had! Thanks for the heads up.
"Snake Oil" prospects!!
Purdue is a solid program. The B1G is far more deep than people give it credit for imo.
Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Iowa, Purdue, Nebraska, Illinois, all solid programs.
Minnesota and Penn St used to be good, but meh.
PSU will rebound just fine, imo.
*Deeper, not more deep. /sorryforgrammarnazi
Agree that we are a pretty deep conference, especially in terms of prestige. The conference just needs to get some better coaching imo. I'm not sure they're there yet, but with much improved coaching Purdue, Illinois, and Northwestern could really make some waves - like those old Joe Tiller teams that used to scare the crap out of me.
Agree with Illinois and Purdue, but I don't think Northwestern is going to attract a better coach than they've got. I'd say they are fortunate for every year that Fitzgerald stays there.
You posted this on our board last week: "I hope you guys manage to keep all your recruits. Excluding sanctions, I think the future looks bright at Penn State. O'Brien seems like he's the right man for the job."
This is a little off topic, but it's related to what some of you have mentioned regarding the overall strength of the conference. One major factor, IMO, is the national media's endless lovefest for the SEC since 2006. I've spoken to recruits that have multiple offers at elite B1G schools, and the second a lower-tier SEC offer (Kentucky, Ole Miss, Vandy) comes in, they're literally on cloud nine. I really don't care where any of them end up, but that always baffles me. The B1G has remained competitive with the SEC, but I really think the tables could turn once the perception in the national media changes. For that to happen, a B1G team may have to win a national title.
A natty is a must. Everything else gets glossed over and rolled into the Natty discussion.
Remember I said excluding sanctions. I think PSU will get back eventually, but its going to take a long time imo.
I agree with you. It'll be interesting to see what happens if a similar situation as last year plays out in the SEC, but a B1G team goes undefeated. Would a one-loss SEC team make it in ahead of an undefeated B1G team, especially if the B1G team didn't have any overly impressive nonconference wins (this would obviously exclude Michigan), and the SEC team's one loss was a narrow defeat against the number one team in the country? I don't think that SHOULD happen, but I never thought I'd see a conference hyped up as much as the SEC is, so I could see it actually happening.
Just to follow up on my last post, let's say Iowa or Ohio State were to run the table this year. I know OSU is banned from the postseason, but I'm just using it to make a point. Neither Iowa nor Ohio State would have any overly impressive nonconference wins. And Iowa doesn't play OSU, Wisconsin or Illinois this year. Those are just two examples off the top of my head, but a one-loss LSU or Alabama could certainly get in over an undefeated B1G team. Again, I wouldn't agree with it, but wouldn't be surprised.
Just busting balls, it was too easy to pass up. I do find it hilarious to say Purdue and Illinois are solid and PSU is meh.
wearing a wizard hat,
agreed, it's total BS the way they are hyped, in 06 we lost to the #1 team in their stadium by 3 points, stayed at #2 but did not go to the NC. This year bama gets beat at home and gets a rematch. That pretty much sums it all up as far as the sec trend goes.
This is why the BCS needs to be done and replaced by a 16 team playoff.
The BCS is being replaced in 2014.
But I prefer an 8 or 12 team playoff over a 16 team playoff.
I think 16 is too many.
* * * N E O . R E T R O * * *
Four, six, eight, 16, whatever - any type of playoff would be better than the current system, IMO.
absolutely agree and @ Frank could be too many but fcs and D2 have 16 so i figured D1 should be able to handle it also
That's what I am saying.
Division III actually has a 32 team playoff following a 10 game regular season. The main difference in that set up is that there are something like 240-250 programs in Division III, which is about double the number of teams in the FBS, so it makes sense to have a much bigger playoff pool.
wow thats huge playoff for football! but yea with that many teams i guess you'd have to do it like that.
You know, you cut the number of teams total and the number of teams in the playoffs in half, you get down to the FBS number with 16 team playoff.
Yep, and with that many teams, it's still very difficult to get in. It's similar to what would happen if there were a 16 team playoff in FBS - basically every team that makes it is very good. Every now and then, you'll get a 7-3 team that wins there conference and gets an automatic bid, and they'll typically get destroyed in the first round. But in general, it's mostly 10-0 and 9-1 teams across the board.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports