))
What Big Ten Teams Should Strive to Be? (Part 2) | Big Jeff's Insights
Manage episode 492541005 series 3605396
Content provided by JR + Bleav and JR. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by JR + Bleav and JR or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://ppacc.player.fm/legal.
In this episode of the Big Ten Huddle podcast, hosts JR and Zack team up with Big Jeff for part two of the Big Jeff Insights series. They dive into a detailed comparison of nine Big Ten teams: Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers, and Wisconsin. For each team, they analyze three key aspects:
The program they’re most like now: A current counterpart reflecting their present state.
The program they should strive to be like: A realistic goal for improvement.
The program they most want to be like: A stretch goal representing their ultimate aspiration.
This episode builds on part one (check it out if you missed it!) and focuses on the "bottom half" of the Big Ten, based on conference win rates since 1970. Big Jeff brings data-driven insights, blending historical performance, recruiting trends, and NFL draft production to frame each comparison.
Key Topics Discussed
Historical Performance: Conference win rates since 1970 provide context for each team’s trajectory.
Recruiting Trends: Five-year national recruiting averages highlight talent acquisition.
Player Development: NFL draft pick production over the last five years measures success in developing talent.
Program Comparisons: Each team is matched to programs reflecting their current status, realistic goals, and dream scenarios.
Team Comparisons
Here’s a breakdown of the teams discussed, with Big Jeff and JR’s insights:
Michigan State
Most like now: Auburn – Both have past success but recent struggles, overshadowed by in-state giants (Michigan and Alabama).
Should be like: Texas A&M – Bright future potential with strong coaching (Jonathan Smith vs. Mike Elko).
Most want to be like: Penn State – Seeking top-15 consistency within the Big Ten.
Indiana
Most like now: Not fully detailed, but implied as a historically struggling program with recent upticks (e.g., 8-1 season).
Should be like: TBD (transcript truncated).
Most want to be like: TBD (transcript truncated).
Note: Indiana’s 29% win rate since 1970 and poor NFL draft production (tied for 77th nationally) underscore their challenges.
Wisconsin
Most like now: Oklahoma State – Solid but not elite, with a strong coach (Mike Gundy vs. Wisconsin’s tradition).
Should be like: Utah – Consistent, physical football with a stout defense.
Most want to be like: Clemson – Aiming for top-10 status and playoff appearances.
Purdue
Most like now: Mississippi State – Sporadic success under standout coaches (Joe Tiller, Jeff Brohm vs. Dan Mullen, Mike Leach).
Should be like: Kentucky – Consistent bowl appearances (8 straight years until recently).
Most want to be like: Washington – 60% win rate and playoff contention.
Northwestern
Most like now: Vanderbilt – Academic focus, inconsistent winning, though Northwestern has higher highs.
Should be like: Iowa – Consistent success despite modest recruiting.
Most want to be like: Stanford (David Shaw era) – Top-10 teams and Rose Bowl runs.
Rutgers
Most like now: Virginia – Underperforming despite talent-rich regions (New Jersey vs. Virginia/Maryland).
Should be like: Kentucky – Physical style and bowl consistency under Greg Schiano.
Most want to be like: Iowa – Doubling their win rate with steady success.
JR’s alternative: Tennessee – A lofty goal inspired by recent win percentage parity.
7-9. Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota
Due to the truncated transcript, these teams were not fully detailed but were introduced as part of the episode’s scope. They follow the same comparison framework.
Useful Timestamps
00:00:00 - 00:06:07: Introduction – JR and Big Jeff set the stage, explaining the comparison methodology.
00:06:07 - 00:12:34: Michigan State – Detailed analysis of their comparisons.
00:12:34 - 00:13:49: Indiana – Discussion begins, focusing on historical struggles and recent gains.
00:37:20 - 00:38:30: Wisconsin – Comparisons to Oklahoma State, Utah, and Clemson.
00:39:23 - 00:42:12: Purdue – Breakdown of Mississippi State, Kentucky, and Washington comps.
00:42:28 - 00:46:11: Northwestern – Vanderbilt, Iowa, and Stanford comparisons.
00:46:45 - 00:49:19: Rutgers – Virginia, Kentucky, and Iowa (plus JR’s Tennessee twist).
00:49:20 - 00:51:00: Wrap-up – Final thoughts and teaser for future episodes.
Note: Timestamps are approximate due to the truncated transcript; remaining teams (Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota) likely follow in sequence.
Additional Notes
The episode emphasizes historical context (since 1970) to set realistic expectations, not current power rankings (e.g., Indiana’s playoff run doesn’t change their "bottom half" status here).
Big Jeff’s data includes win rates, recruiting ranks, and NFL draft stats, offering a unique lens on team potential.
JR and Jeff debate alternatives (e.g., Arizona State for Michigan State, Duke for Rutgers), adding depth to the conversation.
This sets up future episodes on 2025 predictions, leveraging this historical baseline.
Follow Us
Twitter: @thebigtenhuddle
Instagram: @thebigtenhuddle
TikTok: @thebigtenhuddle
Contact Us
Email: [email protected]
394 episodes
Share
