Rumor: Pitt Joining the Big Ten

[Senser81]

as far as academics go pitt meets the requirements. which is being a member of this.

http://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5474

Interesting. I did not know that.

[BUCK3YE5]

I bet Pitt is better than Penn State next year...

[Senser81]

I bet Pitt is better than Penn State next year...

Thats nice.

[Woy]

I bet Pitt is better than Penn State next year...

Of course you would.

[jHammack]

I bet Pitt is better than Penn State next year...

Once again you make a great contribution to the discussion at hand, which of course has nothing to do with Pitt being better than Penn State next year.

[Hasselbeck]

Oh, they're a legitimate conference? Whoops.

Uh.. yeah actually they are.

[Hasselbeck]

Oh noes?! :yawn:



All-time bowl records between the Mountain West and other conferences.

MWC vs. ACC 1-0
MWC vs. Big 12 1-0
MWC vs. Big East 1-2
MWC vs. C-USA 5-4
MWC vs. MAC 1-1
MWC vs. Pac-10 6-5 (butt rape?)
MWC vs. SEC 2-0
MWC vs. Sun Belt 1-0
MWC vs. WAC 6-2
MWC vs. Independents 1-2

And yet, never played the Big Ten in a Bowl Game.

MWC in the BCS: 2-1

With one of those wins over Pitt, the new awesome team you added to the Little 12.

The Mountain West is a conference that has steadily improved year after year in every major sport.

[Sven Draconian]

They were 8-4 actually...

Guaranteed? Penn State played 3 cupcakes, lost to Ohio State and Iowa and still made a pretty good bowl game. Where Pitt played 2 tougher opponents out of conference and traveled to their rivals field (Ohio State was home this year). Pitt won 10 games this year and they would have won 8-9-10 in the Big 10 this year and still went to a good bowl game.

Yes, generally the Big 10 is tougher, however I don't think Pitt will have a problem especially because playing Penn State each year will increase the amount of players they take from Penn State.

Your theory is that Pitt's recruiting will increase....by having a loss to Penn State every year.

[jHammack]

Your theory is that Pitt's recruiting will increase....by having a loss to Penn State every year.

The last time Pitt and Penn State played who won? And who stopped the series Pitt or Joe Pa and Penn State? /argument.

[NAHSTE]

Oh noes?! :yawn:



All-time bowl records between the Mountain West and other conferences.

MWC vs. ACC 1-0
MWC vs. Big 12 1-0
MWC vs. Big East 1-2
MWC vs. C-USA 5-4
MWC vs. MAC 1-1
MWC vs. Pac-10 6-5 (butt rape?)
MWC vs. SEC 2-0
MWC vs. Sun Belt 1-0
MWC vs. WAC 6-2
MWC vs. Independents 1-2

And yet, never played the Big Ten in a Bowl Game.

Why don't you watch some regular season college football for fuck's sake, and you'll know that the MWC has butt raped the Pac-10 recently. Or are you too busy actually getting butt raped?

[jHammack]

The MWC is very good at the top and could contend in the major conferences, but the lower half of that conference is not good. But they are legitimate. And stop bringing up the assraping of Pitt by Utah.. It brings back terrible memories.

[Pitty]

What would the Big10 have to gain by adding Pitt? Its just another mouth to feed. They have pretty good athletics, but they weren't/aren't Penn State when it comes to football tradition. And, perhaps more importantly, Pitt doesn't have the academic prestige of most Big10 institutions.

Unless its Notre Dame, I don't see the Big10 adding another team any time soon.

Top 20 Medical School. Top 5 Philosophy Department. Top 15 in research dollars donated (#1 in 2007). Average SAT score of 1250 for Arts & Sciences, 1350 for Medical/Business.

Sorry but Pitt is better than most Big 10 schools academic wise.

[NAHSTE]

Also, the MWC being 2-0 all time vs. SEC in bowl games means they'd be like 100-0 vs. the Big Ten if we extrapolate the record.

[Sportsbuck]

Point is that you are over ranking your conference. You think much too highly of the teams than what they are. Okay how about this:

Conference recruiting Rankings:

Class of 2010:
1. SEC
2. Pac-10
3. Big 12
4. BIG TEN

2009:
1.SEC
2. Pac 10
3. ACC
4. BIG TEN

2008:
1. SEC
2. Pac 10
3. ACC
4. BIG TEN

2007:
1. SEC
2. Pac 10
3. ACC
4. Big 12
5. Big East
6. BIG TEN

2006
1. SEC
2. Pac 10
3. Big 12
4. ACC
5. BIG TEN

2005:
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Pac 10
4. Big Ten

2004:
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Pac 10
4 BIG TEN

2003:
1. SEC
2. ACC
3. Pac 10
4. Big 12
5. BIG TEN

2002:
1. SEC
2. Big 12
3. PAC-10
4. ACC
5. Big East
6. BIG TEN

So your argument is that the Big Ten is a bad conference because of rankings that are made purely to sell subscriptions?

[Woy]

Also, the MWC being 2-0 all time vs. SEC in bowl games means they'd be like 100-0 vs. the Big Ten if we extrapolate the record.

The Capital One Bowl proves that statement wrong.

Sorry NAHSTE. :ooops: