Big 12 Statement 9.1.2021

The Far Cyde

Active Member
Sep 15, 2019
121
-39
28
45
giphy.gif
Let’s discuss criteria. This is mine:

I think you have to look at several factors: recruiting rankings, NFL draft picks, CFP appearances, national championships.

Why do you agree or disagree?
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Cyclones1969

JP4CY

Lord, beer me strength.
Staff member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2008
74,536
95,518
113
Testifying
Let’s discuss criteria. This is mine:

I think you have to look at several factors: recruiting rankings, NFL draft picks, CFP appearances, national championships.

Why do you agree or disagree?
I think:
The thread is a B12 Statement thread about possible expansion.
If you want to start a thread about comparing conferences, please start one.
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,999
20,961
113
Im not arguing and I’m not moving the goal posts. We’re talking about comparing conferences, post OU/TX departure (but you already know that). You correctly pointed out they have not left yet. Ok fine.

How do we compare conferences when they leave?
So you think the PAC is a power conference but if the Big 12 picked up Cincy and BYU they would not be?

For the record, the last CFP poll, which is the last meaningful poll in terms of playoffs looked like this
#8 Cincy
#10 ISU
#16 BYU
#17 USC
#21 Okie St
#25 Oregon

And for the record if a league had 4/10 in the CFP ranking, that would be higher than even the SEC if you included OU and UT (6/16) Big 10 was 4/14.
 
Last edited:

Cyclones1969

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
8,885
6,077
113
55
Reported for trying to derail the topic repeatedly.

Do you really think Trent is here to discuss the topic at hand?

I mean the statement was as legally vanilla as it could be.

all Trent is trying to do is basically forward the whole Iowa State will be demoted schtick of a typical hawk fan schtick they’ve been saying for a decade now.

you would think he would want to discuss the game this weekend, since he’s a panther alum.
 

The Far Cyde

Active Member
Sep 15, 2019
121
-39
28
45
It is good to get a few posts under the belt of the new user name before the old one gets banned. Gives you a little plausible deniability.

It will get banned. He can't help himself.
The only way I will be banned is if rules are applied unevenly. So you are probably right. I am here to discuss ISU athletics just like everyone else.

I am not the only poster discussing relative conference strength in this very thread. I have given criteria. That criteria is unpopular for obvious reasons. So back to being labeled a hok troll for unpopular opinions.
 

JM4CY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 23, 2012
37,897
74,615
113
America
The only way I will be banned is if rules are applied unevenly. So you are probably right. I am here to discuss ISU athletics just like everyone else.

I am not the only poster discussing relative conference strength in this very thread. I have given criteria. That criteria is unpopular for obvious reasons. So back to being labeled a hok troll for unpopular opinions.
Feels more like you're trying to pick a fight for some reason and getting annoyed because no one takes you seriously.
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
48,460
39,261
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
The only way I will be banned is if rules are applied unevenly. So you are probably right. I am here to discuss ISU athletics just like everyone else.

I am not the only poster discussing relative conference strength in this very thread. I have given criteria. That criteria is unpopular for obvious reasons. So back to being labeled a hok troll for unpopular opinions.
When someone takes a username that indicates they are a Cyclone fan but clearly aren't they are a troll.
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
26,461
19,621
113
Let’s discuss criteria. This is mine:

I think you have to look at several factors: recruiting rankings, NFL draft picks, CFP appearances, national championships.

Why do you agree or disagree?

Recruiting rankings, no.
NFL draft picks, no.
CFP appearances, sure.
National Championships, sure.
Then something like Massey or FPI to gauge the depth of the league as opposed to just looking at the top of it.
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,999
20,961
113
Recruiting rankings, no.
NFL draft picks, no.
CFP appearances, sure.
National Championships, sure.
Then something like Massey or FPI to gauge the depth of the league as opposed to just looking at the top of it.
CFP appearances? There have been a grand total of 9 teams that have made the CFP. Not a lot of data points there.
 

ribsnwhiskey

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 6, 2009
9,068
4,283
113
80246
The only way I will be banned is if rules are applied unevenly. So you are probably right. I am here to discuss ISU athletics just like everyone else.

I am not the only poster discussing relative conference strength in this very thread. I have given criteria. That criteria is unpopular for obvious reasons. So back to being labeled a hok troll for unpopular opinions.

You're a hawk troll.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: I@ST1

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,999
20,961
113
The only way I will be banned is if rules are applied unevenly. So you are probably right. I am here to discuss ISU athletics just like everyone else.

I am not the only poster discussing relative conference strength in this very thread. I have given criteria. That criteria is unpopular for obvious reasons. So back to being labeled a hok troll for unpopular opinions.
How about looking at final rankings on a three year rolling average or something like that? You'd think that, I don't know, how good teams actually are might be a good criteria.

Well, it's a good criteria unless you are trying to make a really bad point that a reconstituted Big 12 with Cincy and BYU wouldn't be a power conference while the PAC or ACC would.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyclonsin