College Football: Week 12 Shows that the Big 12 Conference is Weak

The loss by No. 2 Oklahoma State and No. 5 Oklahoma this weekend sends an overdue wakeup call to the rest of the nation that the Big 12 is a weak conference this year.

All OSU had to do is win one game against an unranked team. The unranked team they had to beat owned a record of 2-4 in conference and 5-4 overall entering the game. This was an unranked team that lost four straight games to Texas, Baylor, Missouri, and Texas A&M earlier in the year. No. 2 Oklahoma State lost to an Iowa State team that held on for a 13-10 home win over 2-9 University of Kansas the week before.

Not surprising, this is not the first team in the Big 12 with a Top 10 ranking to fall to an unranked team this season. This loss was actually worse than Oklahoma State’s. No. 3 Oklahoma lost at home to Texas Tech 45-40 October 22.

Texas Tech was 4-2 entering the game with back-to-back losses in-conference to Texas A&M and Kansas State at home. Since beating Oklahoma, the 5-6 Red Raiders have lost four in a row.

Wait, Oklahoma did it again. Ranked in the Top 10, OU fell to a team that had not been ranked in the Top 25 in over five weeks? No. 5 Oklahoma upset loss to No. 25 Baylor Saturday night to help further prove that the 2011 Big 12 conference is overrated and weak. There are no dominate teams in conference.

What’s the problem in Big 12 country? Is parity in a tough conference the reason why the teams are cannibalizing each other within the Big 12?

Based off preseason rankings… no, the Big 12 is not that tough of a conference.

Preseason rankings included four teams from the Big 12 in the AP Top 25 and five in the USA Today Coaches’ Poll. Oklahoma was ranked No. 1 in both polls.

Of the four teams ranked in the AP preseason only two of those teams are currently ranked Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Texas A&M and Missouri are no longer ranked. Texas was the fifth team ranked in the preseason USA Today Coaches’ Poll. Texas is also no longer ranked in either poll as of end of week 12.

What about K State?

Kansas State has been one of the bigger surprise teams in the nation. The Wildcats won their first seven games of the season and was ranked as high as No. 10 in the nation. During their seven-game winning streak the only ranked team they beat was then No. 15 Baylor. The other two ranked teams KSU has played this year ended in defeats to OU and OSU. Not really an impressive record.

In times like these Big 12 conference apologist will turn to the non-conference schedule to settle the debate. What marquee victory can show that the Big 12 is truly a power conference and parity is the reason for the upset losses?

Here’s the list of Big 12 teams versus other power conference teams: Iowa State beat 7-4 Iowa and 4-6 Connecticut, Kansas State beat 6-5 Miami, Oklahoma State beat 2-8 Arizona, Texas beat 6-5 UCLA. The biggest win would have to be Oklahoma’s win over 7-4 Florida State.

What about Big 12 losses in non-conference games?

Texas A&M lost to 10-1 Arkansas, Kansas lost to 8-3 Georgia Tech, and Missouri lost to 6-5 Arizona State.

We could add Mountain West or Conference USA wins to pad the victories we can but this is about being a power conference with quality wins.

Strength of schedule rankings that exists for college football fans should have no part of this clear cut point of view. The difficulty of the Big 12 schedule is not that difficult. Florida State was the only ranked power conference team that was defeated by a Big 12 school and now FSU is 7-4.

Hopefully voters, the media, and college football fans will come to understand that no matter how one looks at it, the Big 12 is not an elite conference this year.

This year’s Bedlam Series will be hyped by the media but will prove nothing that we do not already know about the Big 12, it’s a weak conference. 

What would you like to clarify? Don't forget to sign up for email notifications and as a reader/follower. Follow HogManInLA on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/HogManInLa

The 2010-2011 Director’s Cup Trophy has been Awarded

All 13 spring NCAA sporting events have finished and Stanford has won their 17^th straight Director’s Cup. For those of you unfamiliar with the Director’s Cup, this honor was first awarded for the 1993-1994 season to the university that placed highest in all 20 predetermined sporting categories for their school. Colleges that participate in the Director’s Cup include all Division 1, Division 2, Division 3, and NAIA universities that officially compete in national collegian sporting events.  

Division 1 schools are evaluated on 20 sports, 10 men and 10 women’s sports.

Division 2 schools are evaluated on 14 sports, 7 men and 7 women’s sports.

Division 3 schools are evaluated on 18 sports, 9 men and 9 women’s sports.

NAIA schools are evaluated on 12 sports, 6 men and 6 women’s sports.

Each school is awarded points for the final ranking of their individual teams. The team sporting events vary from school to school as not all universities participate in the same divisions and/or sporting events.

Stanford finished the Director’s Cup with 1,550.25 points beating second place Ohio State (1,277.05 pts) by 273.20 points. The Atlantic Coast Conference had three teams in the top 10; Duke, North Carolina, and Florida State. Texas A&M had a strong finish in the Director’s Cup with wins in Men and Women’s Outdoor Track and Field and a showing in the final 8 of the College World Series. Both the PAC-10 and Southeastern Conference tied with six total teams in the top 25. The Big East did not place a team in the top 25. Notre Dame was the only Independent team to rank.

Director’s Cup Top 25 Conference Totals

Southeastern Conference – 6

PAC-10 – 6

ACC – 5

Big 10 – 4

Big 12 – 3

Independent – 1

The Top 25 Universities:

1. Stanford – PAC-10
2. Ohio State – Big Ten
3. California – PAC-10
4. Florida – SEC
5. Duke – ACC
6. North Carolina – ACC
7. Virginia – ACC
8. Texas A&M – Big 12
9. Florida State – ACC
10. Oklahoma – Big 12
11. UCLA – PAC-10
12. Texas – Big 12
13. Penn State – Big Ten
14. Southern California – PAC-10
15. Michigan – Big Ten
16. Arizona – PAC-10
17. Maryland – ACC
18. Notre Dame – Independent
19. LSU– SEC
20. Georgia– SEC
21. Washington– PAC-10
22. Tennessee – SEC
23. Illinois – Big Ten
24. Arkansas – SEC
25. Alabama– SEC

The final 13 NCAA Championships ended as followed:

Baseball – South Carolina

Softball – Arizona State

Women’s Golf – UCLA

Men’s Golf – Augusta State

Women’s Lacrosse – Northwestern

Men’s Lacrosse – Virginia

Women’s Rowing – Brown

Women’s Tennis – Florida

Men’s Tennis – Southern California

Women’s Outdoor Track and Field – Texas A&M

Men’s Outdoor Track and Field – Texas A&M

Men’s Volleyball – Ohio State

Women’s Water Polo – Stanford

Division 2 Winner – Grand Valley State (MI)

Division 3 Winner – Williams (MA)

NAIA Winner – Azusa Pacific (CA)

What would you like to clarify? Don't forget to sign up for email notifications and as a reader/follower. Follow HogManInLA on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/HogManInLa

Proposed Rule Changes for College Football Recruiting

SEC and College Football Recruiting

Incase you missed the news the SEC is hoping to change recruiting across the board in college football. After SEC coaches had to succumb to the hard cap recruiting rules, which only allows coaches to sign 25 players instead of over signing in the event that 2 or 3 players do not make their grades, they want to gain a thought advantage in other areas.

Here are their seven proposed rule changes:

1. Earlier start date for first contact with recruits for off-campus visits.

2. Allowing university officials to “friend” players and their families on Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites.

3. Allowing coaching staff members to accept calls from recruits, family members of said recruit, and coaches of said recruits.

4. Allowing coaches to text recruits again. This seems to be a movement that will gain support throughout the college recruiting ranks. The proposal would come with limits for each player.

5. Changing the contact calendar from the current four period system consisting of contact, evaluation, dead period, and on-campus to a three period calendar on-campus, off-campus, and dead period.

6. Allowing players to make earlier official visits.

7. Banning all non-scholastic events from NCAA campuses. The main focus would be a ban on 7 on 7 tournaments which the SEC has already banned.

Just to Clarify

Some of the rule changes are much needed while others are begging for trouble.

1. Visiting with a recruit off-campus before their senior season can be a very important step for a college coach. If college coaches are allowed to offer high school and junior high children scholarships, then it may be a good idea to speak with the kid first before extending that offer. Making blind offers to any player off of their highlight reel without speaking to them first has always been confusing. You may see an attractive person and think you want to marry that person based on their looks but after talking to them you may think differently.

2. I don’t understand why coaches would want to “friend” any recruit or their parents on any social networking site. That is just a recipe for disaster. I understand this allows additional attempts to market the school, team, and coach to those individuals but this also allows those individuals to post anything they want on your Facebook page. If they think you lied to them or if their child is not getting the amount of attention they feel they need, hello Mitch Mustain’s mother, everyone will know about it before you have an opportunity to settle the matter privately.

3. Coaches should be allowed to field calls from a recruit, their parents and/or guardians, and their high school coach. The NCAA forces teams to report secondary violations if a coach answers the phone from a recruit during certain “dead” times. These children and their parents are trying to make a best life decision about their future. They should be allowed to call a coach and ask questions and find out what’s what.

4. Texting recruits with certain restrictions should be allowed. Some of the restrictions should include a total amount per month, within certain time frames, and only if the parents or guardians and the recruits have given permission to a coach. The recruit should only be allowed to receive text messages from the head coach and one other member of a team’s coaching staff. Hitting a recruit up by the head coach, the recruiting coordinator, and the recruit’s position specific coach is too much. Teams would take advantage of this rule and allow special teams coaches to text a kid because he might return kickoffs next year.

5. Changing the contact periods as long as it stays unilateral for all teams should be a no brainer.

6. The cutoff date for earlier official visits would sway my vote one way or the other. A football recruit that is a junior in standing should be allowed to make official visits during the spring or summer semesters before their senior season. Some recruits graduate early so they can enroll in college for the spring semester and participate in spring football practices. In theory this gives the player a better opportunity to play in the fall. Thus an early official visit during the second half of their junior season should be allowed. Official visits during their junior and senior seasons should be limited. The current rule allows for 5 official visits. Would the total number of visits stay at 5 or be raised to 6 or 7?

7. The ban of 7 on 7 tournaments on NCAA campuses is confusing. Why would coaches not want recruits on their campus in as many different ways as possible? This would give kids an opportunity to play on their home field and get a taste of what it might be like to be a player for said team. If the SEC has missed the boat on 7 on 7 tournaments I doubt they would have much trouble raising awareness for their individual tournaments. Would the bleed over from this include other tournaments such as volleyball, baseball, wrestling, etc…? This might be the worst and least thought out rule change of the bunch. 

What would you like to clarify? Don't forget to sign up for email notifications and as a reader/follower. Follow HogManInLA on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/HogManInLa