The Big Ten takes a lot of criticism from the rest of the college football world, mainly because of Ohio State’s lack of success the past two years in the BCS Title game, but year after year it is a solid conference from top to bottom. Year after year you will find a Big Ten team fighting for a National Title.
So what I have decided to do was to look at the conference as a whole during this decade.
First, we know that the Big Ten is not the best with numbers—they are a conference of eleven, yet still call themselves the Big Ten. Also, they hand out conference titles to teams tied for first place, even if there is a tiebreaker for head to head.
Below are the conference standings since the year 2000, with the conference titles in parentheses.
1t. Ohio State 50-14 (2002, 2005, 2006, 2007)
1t. Michigan 50-14 (2000, 2003, 2004)
3. Iowa 38-26 (2002 & 2004)
4. Wisconsin 36-28
5. Purdue 35-29 (2000)
6. Penn State 32-32 (2005)
7. Northwestern 28-36 (2000)
8. Minnesota 24-40
9. Michigan State 22-42
10. Illinois 21-43 (2001)
11. Indiana 16-48
Just looking at those standings, you can see why people refer to the Big Ten as the Big Two and the Little Nine. During this decade, only one year (2001) did not have either Ohio State or Michigan take at least a share of the title.
I like to look at the Big Ten in three tiers.
First, you obviously have Ohio State and Michigan. The next tier has Iowa, Wisconsin, Purdue, and Penn State.
- B/R Ticket Guide
Finally, Northwestern, Minnesota, Michigan State, Illinois, and Indiana make up the third tier. One would argue that you could place Northwestern in the second tier, but that’s splitting hairs.
The one team that jumps out to me is Penn State. I know they had a rough start to the decade, but I did not expect to see them behind Purdue and Iowa. Nittany Lion fans believe (sometimes falsely) that they are in the same category as Michigan and Ohio State, but clearly they are not.
The Big Two are competing on a national level year in and year out. Yes, Penn State did finish No. 3 in the polls in 2005, but USC and/or Texas would have beaten them handily that year.
I was surprised to see Purdue with such a good conference record, mainly because I see them as a team who preys on the lower half, but when it comes to stiffer competition, they fail. In the past eight years, the Boilermakers have only two seasons ('05 & '07) where they finished with a sub-.500 conference record.
Some other interesting statistics from this decade:
Michigan has had at least five conference wins each season.
- Michigan has had at least five conference wins each season.
- Michigan State and Minnesota have had only one season over .500.
- There have been three teams with perfect conference records: 2002 Ohio State, 2002 Iowa, and 2006 Ohio State.
- The Buckeyes are 22-1 over the last three seasons.
- In 2001 & 2007 combined, Illinois is 13-3. The rest of the years combined, they are 8-40.
- Indiana had one season at .500 (2001). The rest of the time, the Hoosiers were below .500.
- Although ranked fourth since 2000, the Badgers have not won a conference title since 1999.
- Northwestern has more winning seasons in the Big Ten than Penn State.
- Three times this decade a team has failed to win a conference game: 2003 Illinois, 2005 Illinois, and 2007 Minnesota.
With Michigan rebuilding this season, they might take a step back behind Ohio State, but they have a long way to go before they fall into that second tier. Wisconsin has a strong core back, as well as Penn State, and you can never count out Iowa.
But I wouldn’t be surprised at the end of this decade to see us still talking about the Big Two and the Little Nine in the Big Ten conference.
This post has been syndicated from the In The Bleachers College Football Blog. Check out the blog at http://inthebleachers.net for all of your college football news and to subscribe to the podcast.
comments (12) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
Good Work and some interesting numbers. I like the Northwestern with more winning seasons than PSU.
4 months ago
Of course Northwestern has more winning seasons than PSU -- PSU didn't join the conference until 1994.
Otherwise, interesting take on the teams in the Big Ten. Purdue was a bit of a surprise in overtaking Penn State, but they had some good seasons earlier in the decade.
from 4 months ago
Since 2000 Northwestern has more winning seasons than PSU.
from 4 months ago
You're right, but I thought Bob was talking about overall win/loss records for Northwestern in the Big Ten versus overall win/loss records for PSU, stemming all the way back to the formation of the conference.
I probably should've read that a little more closely.
4 months ago
Us Penn State fans try to forget the 00 and 01 seasons as well as the 03 and 04 seasons but the fact is that PSU was abismal those years. Actually, it surprises me that PSU is at .500 considering how God awful those 4 years were. Although I think its fairly safe to say that Penn State has begun to establish itself in the upper half of that second tier in these past 3 seasons.
Just 1 note. 1- Does NU have more winning seasons because you're only counting this decade or is that overall since PSU joined the conference?
Good read and nice stats.
4 months ago
“…but year after year it is a solid conference from top to bottom.”
It seems to me that you spent your entire article disproving this statement. I don’t know many sports fans from outside of the Big 10 (+1) who take the conference seriously. Be honest, Ohio State and Michigan are the only top tier teams. Besides that they play two of the easiest schedules in college football because they play other Big 10 (+1) schools. When they aren’t busy trying to hype up Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Indian, Northwestern, Michigan State, ext. they are busy trying to justify one Mac opponent after another by ironically using their “tough” schedule as justification. The funny thing is you can’t even rely on the two top teams to win their Mac games!
How many people really believe that if you moved Ohio State or Michigan into the SEC, Big 12, Pac 10 or even ACC that they would compete for a BCS title?
Would Ohio State beat USC in conference play? Texas? Oklahoma? Tennessee? Georgia? Florida? LSU? Virginia Tech? Missouri?
I’m not saying that the Big 10 is the worse conference in college football… but it is not the best and it is NOT solid from top to bottom.
from 4 months ago
You go and joke about the Big Ten's OOC Schedule and forget that the SEC does the same thing. Their OOC schedule as a whole is a joke, but they use their conference toughness as a fall back. The same can be said for the Big 12. So your entire argument in that sense is pretty moot.
Ohio State just got done playing a home and home with Texas and now have one with USC. Michigan plays Notre Dame year after year, and just finished with Oregon. I don't know what you want them to do. Look at some of your SEC teams, or Big 12 team...they are playing FCS opponents year after year. You mention Texas...they struggled to beat Arkansas State last year.
I would think that Ohio State would be in the top tier of any of those conferences you mentioned. It wasn't too long ago that they went to Texas and came out with a victory, but many forget that because all they see is the two losses in the BCS title games. What about Michigan beating Florida last year in a bowl game, the same Michigan team that started the year 0-3.
Before you spout off on how bad the Big Ten is in your eyes, look at them as a whole, instead of looking at Ohio State's record in the title game the last two years.
4 months ago
"look at them as a whole"
Which team should I look at? Michigan or Ohio State?
4 months ago
IntheBleachers,
This isn't entirely directed at anyone in particular, but notice how often Vandy, Ole Miss and Kentucky fans take credit for the overall strength of SEC when in reality, the powerhouse teams in that conference are Florida, Georgia, LSU, Tennessee and Auburn ('Bama is questionable but resurging and Arkansas is the SEC equivalent to Penn State). While those five powerhouse teams are arguably the best in college football at this time, I get a little tired (even as a skeptical Ohio State fan) of SEC homers (BIG difference from diehard Gator, Bulldog, Vols and Tigers fans, whom I actually respect) who start yapping about how their conference is God's Gift to College Football when in reality, each conference has on average about two or three powerhouse teams, a few middle-of-the-road teams, and several flat-out awful teams.
4 months ago
The Big Ten is no different than the other conferences. Every conference has its "traditional powerhouses", its "middle ground", and its "perennial cellar dwellers that occasionally have good seasons". Seven different teams have been champs or co-champs at least once since 2000. Hardly the "Big Two" that the haters would have you believe it to be.
4 months ago
Matt, you are very typical of the modern day Big Ten hater. You speak in terms as if the history of college football began when Florida beat Ohio State 41-14.
Ohio State and Michigan have the easiest schedules in the country because "they only play other Big Ten schools"? Let me guess - you were born in 2006 and have no knowledge of anything prior to your birth year? If that is true, then I suppose we can forgive your abundance of stupidity. In fact, I commend you on your ability to type so well being only 2 years old. Well done, buddy!
Look, the Big Ten has had a couple of down years. Nobody is denying it. But to imply that these two years are somehow a reflection of the Big Ten as a whole throughout all of history is stupid, dishonest, retarded, inane, ridiculous, and dumb.
4 months ago
The Pac 10 is USC the top teir then everyone else
Big 12 Texas and Oklahoma top teir then missu, K State, Texas Tech, Nebraska are the next teir
SEC LSU and Florida Top tier
write a new comment