The New Big 10 Football Categories – Where Does Your Team Fit?”
And which teams are considered true “Blue-Bloods”.
It’s an exciting time for the Big 10 and especially for the sport that dictates almost everything – FOOTBALL. Football is the sport that generates the majority of athletic program revenues and thus defines the health of Big Ten athletic programs. From a money perspective, the far and away leaders in football are the SEC and Big 10. And now with the Big 10 adding USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington from the former Pac 12 conference, the 18-team Big 10 behemoth is even healthier, wealthier and hopeful to challenge the SEC for football supremacy.
So, with the new team additions, Big Jeff attempted to put all 18 teams into Big 10 Football Categories. Here’s what that looks like.
Big 10 Football Categories (Hierarchy)
- The Blue Bloods: Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, USC
- The Almost Blue Bloods: Oregon, Washington
- Former Bluebloods: Nebraska
- The Overachievers (“Development Programs”): Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern
- The Underachievers (“Under-development Programs”): UCLA, Illinois, Maryland
- The Up and Downers: Purdue, Minnesota, Michigan State
- The Weak Links: Indiana, Rutgers
Criteria Used
What criteria did I use to help generate the categories? Certainly, there are many ways to divide this up and any individual performing this exercise would define it differently, but I used the following five criteria to help me.
- Historical Significance – since 1970
- Recent Success – last 4 years
- Rabid Fan Base – in football
- Program Resources – mostly based on Athletic Department revenues
- Access to Talent – through their state/and adjacent states
This does not mean the rankings across these dimensions let me easily put teams into a category based on anything like a specific formula, but I used some statistics backed up by my Big Ten football “tribal knowledge” to rank teams. See Exhibit 1 below where I rank each team from 1 to 4 across all five criteria. I will reference some of this data later when discussing specific teams.
Exhibit 1: Big 10 Criteria Rankings to Put Teams into Categories
| Big Ten Rank | School | Total Athletics Revenue | Program Resources | Historical Significence (since 1970) | Recent Success (4 Years) | Rabid (Football) Fan Base | Access to Talent | Average Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ohio State | $251,615,345 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4.0 |
| 1 | Michigan | $210,652,287 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4.0 |
| 3 | Penn State | $181,227,448 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3.8 |
| 4 | Oregon | $153,510,555 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3.6 |
| 5 | USC | Unavailable | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3.4 |
| 6 | Michigan State | $172,799,513 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2.8 |
| 7 | Iowa | $151,483,092 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2.6 |
| 7 | Wisconsin | $150,100,977 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2.6 |
| 7 | Washington | $145,184,864 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2.6 |
| 7 | UCLA | $103,061,344 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2.6 |
| 11 | Nebraska | $143,423,944 | 2 | 3.5 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2.3 |
| 12 | Illinois | $145,735,330 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2.2 |
| 13 | Minnesota | $135,198,272 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2.0 |
| 13 | Maryland | $107,526,374 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2.0 |
| 15 | Purdue | $115,139,432 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1.8 |
| 16 | Rutgers | $109,601,529 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1.6 |
| 17 | Northwestern | Unavailable | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.4 |
| 18 | Indiana | $166,761,471 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.2 |
Now let’s go deeper into each Category to further elaborate on my thinking for each.
The Blue Bloods: Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and USC.
What’s the definition of a Blue Blood? Each person will have their own, but this is especially where I relied on my 5 criteria model to help, but I would also add if you don’t have fairly recent National Championship, you can’t be called a blue blood.
The two no brainer blue bloods are Ohio State and Michigan. They both rank the highest “four” and are very strong across all 5 criteria, are strong compared to blue bloods in other conferences and their sheer Athletic Department strength and revenues make them amongst the strongest in the nation with Ohio State at $251M in Athletic Department revenues (in 2022) #1 in both the Big Ten and nationally and Michigan at $211M in revenue #2 in the Big Ten and #4 nationally.
But most telling is their success on the field. I used statistics from Sports-Reference.com to compile Big Ten football school’s records going back to the 1970’s. See Exhibit 2 below for what that looks like for each school in conference winning percentage per decade.
Exhibit 2: Conference Record Win % by Decade
Data is record within the conference only.
| Original Teams | 20's % | 10's % | 00's % | 90's % | 80's % | 70's % | TOTALS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ohio State | 91% | 88% | 80% | 74% | 70% | 88% | 81% |
| Michigan | 85% | 63% | 66% | 78% | 83% | 88% | 76% |
| Iowa | 69% | 57% | 61% | 49% | 68% | 29% | 54% |
| Penn State (1993) | 61% | 64% | 56% | 73% | 63% | ||
| Wisconsin | 55% | 76% | 55% | 52% | 37% | 40% | 52% |
| Purdue | 52% | 29% | 51% | 38% | 42% | 54% | 43% |
| Minnesota | 50% | 40% | 38% | 28% | 34% | 45% | 38% |
| Michigan St | 41% | 67% | 40% | 57% | 53% | 61% | 54% |
| Maryland (2014) | 41% | 27% | 32% | ||||
| Illinois | 40% | 24% | 33% | 42% | 64% | 37% | 40% |
| Northwestern | 38% | 50% | 48% | 34% | 15% | 28% | 35% |
| Nebraska (2011) | 29% | 53% | 45% | ||||
| Indiana | 26% | 26% | 23% | 33% | 36% | 31% | 29% |
| Rutgers (2014) | 25% | 13% | 18% | ||||
| Number Teams | 14 | 14 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 10 |
Ohio State
Ohio State has been a consistent football juggernaut across all these decades, though the 1980’s was certainly weaker with a 70% winning percentage mostly under the realm of Earl Bruce (1979 to 1987). In the 1990’s, Ohio State picked up steam under John Cooper winning at 74%, then Jim Tressel took the program even higher winning at a 80% clip in the 2000’s, including winning the 2002 season National Championship.
Urban Meyer took it to new heights in the 2010’s winning at 88% and won the 2014 National Championship, leading to Ryan Day taking over in the 2020’s, who is winning at 91% and has never lost to any Big Ten team other than Michigan. It’s crazy to me that some have Ryan Day on the hot seat, but that is a story for another day.
Michigan
Michigan is a different story though. If this were 3 years ago, we may be having a different conversation about Michigan, but Jim Harbaugh righted the ship in the 2021 season making the college football playoff for the first time, and then of course leading Michigan to the ultimate in 2023 with a National Championship. This recent 3-year run puts Michigan’s 2020’s winning percent at 85% and leaves no doubt Michigan remains a blue blood, but their winning ways were much less consistent in the 2000’s (66%) and 2010’s (63%).
In fact, if you look at Michigan’s average placement within the Big Ten across decades (see Exhibit 3 below), they were either 1st or 2nd across all of them except glaringly only had the 5th best conference record in the 2010’s at 53-31 (or 63%), behind in order Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan State, and Penn State. Certainly, Jim Harbaugh will forever be cemented as a legend with the Wolverine faithful based on his last 3 years at Michigan where he was 3-0 vs Ohio State after starting 0-5.
Exhibit 3: Best Conference Records by Decade
Big Ten teams average place by decade.
| Original Teams | 20's % | 10's % | 00's % | 90's % | 80's % | 70's % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ohio State | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Michigan | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Iowa | 3 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 9 |
| Penn State (1993) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | ||
| Wisconsin | 5 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Purdue | 6 | 10 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 4 |
| Minnesota | 7 | 9 | 9 | 11 | 9 | 5 |
| Michigan St | 8 | 3 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 3 |
| Maryland (2014) | 8 | 11 | ||||
| Illinois | 10 | 13 | 10 | 7 | 4 | 7 |
| Northwestern | 11 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 10 |
| Nebraska (2011) | 12 | 7 | ||||
| Indiana | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Rutgers (2014) | 14 | 14 | ||||
| Number Teams | 14 | 14 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 10 |
Interestingly as most old-time Ohio State and Michigan fans know, the 1970’s included a time referenced as “The Ten-Year War” between Ohio State’s Woody Hayes and Michigan’s Bo Schembechler from 1969 to 1978, which was Hayes last year at OSU, and in the 1970’s the two teams dominated the Big Ten and had identical 69-9-1 conference records (and 88% win rate) in the decade. This period was also known as the time of the “Big Two/Little Eight” as no other program won a Big Ten title in the 1970’s. The next best winning percentage was third place Michigan State at just 61%.
Penn State
A step down from OSU and Michigan are Penn State and USC but I still call them blue bloods. On Penn State, James Franklin was about right when back in 2018 after another loss to Ohio State he said “We’re great but not elite”. But I would just adjust it to say they are really good, but not great. If they were great, Penn State would have made the college football playoffs at least once over the 10-year College Football playoff era. Being elite means you win a National Title.
Since entering the Big Ten in 1993 PSU has a 63% conference win percentage (Exhibit 2), which places them 3rd in the conference but with a huge gap vs Ohio State and Michigan. Looking at their conference record by decade (Exhibit 3), PSU has finished an average 3rd when they entered the Big Ten in the 1990’s but each decade since they have averaged finishing 4th, and they have 4 total conference championships in their 31 years in the Big Ten. They also have not won a National Title since 1986 under Joe Paterno who led them to a 14-10 victory over Miami in the Fiesta Bowl.
All this feels like pretty under whelming performance and is why many Penn State fans just think James Franklin has not done enough, since I feel Penn St. has everything a team needs to challenge for national titles, but they have not really been close. Still, their past national titles, great game day atmosphere and rabid fan base keep them as blue bloods in my book.
USC
The final blue blood is USC. Based on my Exhibit 1 criteria, I have them ranked 5th best in the new Big Ten but gave them only a 2 for Program Resources but maybe that should be a 3 since it’s hard to know given their private school status. Their recent success is a 3 since it’s been good but not great. They won consecutive National Titles under Pete Carroll in 2003 and 2004 and prior to that you had to go back to 1978 under John Robinson for a Natty.
Looking at their Pac 12 conference record (see below Exhibit 4) amongst the 4 teams moving to the Big Ten reveals USC has the best win percentage since 1970 at 71%, well ahead of second-best Washington at 62%. USC was great in the 1970’s at an 80%-win mark and of course 2000’s under Pete Carroll with a 76%-win rate. On the downside though, the past 2 decades USC is lagging behind Oregon in win rate and even in the 2020’s Washington is significantly better. So yes, USC remains a blue blood but much better is expected of Lincoln Riley and it will be even more challenging with their entry to the Big Ten in 2024.
Exhibit 4: Former Pac 12 and Other Teams Conference Records by Decade
| New BIG Teams | 20's % | 10's % | 00's % | 90's % | 80's % | 70's % | TOTALS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Former Pac 12 Teams | |||||||
| USC (2024) | 66% | 69% | 76% | 58% | 77% | 80% | 71% |
| Washington (2024) | 72% | 60% | 37% | 73% | 68% | 68% | 62% |
| UCLA (2024) | 56% | 51% | 49% | 59% | 72% | 68% | 59% |
| Oregon (2024) | 76% | 73% | 68% | 52% | 41% | 29% | 56% |
| Former Other Teams | |||||||
| Nebraska (2011) | 75% | 59% | 90% | 90% | 81% | 79% | |
| Maryland (2014) | 34% | 51% | 29% | 69% | 71% | 51% | |
| Rutgers (2014) | 45% | 33% | 25% | 32% |
The Almost Blue Bloods: Oregon, Washington
Oregon
The Oregon Ducks might be the school with the most momentum in college football. They have a dynamic, young coach in Dan Lanning, the coolest uniforms in the sport, and the immense financial backing of Nike founder Phil Knight which is paying huge dividends on the recruiting trail tied to NIL. And this momentum is not just recent – the Ducks have experienced a steady increase in win rate since 1970’s atrocious 29% as Exhibit 4 reveals – 29%, 41%, 52%, 68%, 73%, and 76% so far in the 2020’s. In fact, the win rate stats show Oregon has easily been the best team in the Pac Ten since 2010.
The only thing they lack is a National Championship. Oregon made the CFP Championship in the 2014 season but lost to Ezekiel Elliott and Ohio State 42-20. I have a hard time giving Oregon blue-blood status until they win that elusive National Title.
Washington
Hmmm. Should I really be putting the Washington Huskies even at Almost Blue Blood status? This one probably could be debated but I think the numbers justify it. First, Washington has the second-best Pac 12 win percentage at 62% since 1970. If you applied that percent to the Big Ten, Washington would come in at 4th best in conference win percent just behind the Big Ten’s 3rd best team Penn State at 63%.
Plus, the Huskies have been extremely consistent in winning across the decades since 1970, at 60% or better every decade, with the lone exception that I will call the Washington “lost decade” of the 2000’s with a very poor 37%-win rate. This was low-lighted by Ty Willingham’s 4 years (2005 to 2008) of an overall record of 11-37, and Steve Sarkisian’s mediocre teams (12-13) to end that decade, before Chris Peterson built back the program in the 2010’s.
Washington does have the 1991 National Title to brag about and of course they have had strong momentum the last 2 years in the Kalen DeBoer/Michael Penix era that led to their appearance in the National Championship game in the 2023 season vs Michigan, which to me cements their status as an Almost Blue Blood. The question is, will new coach Jedd Fisch who came over from Arizona take the program to new heights, keep their status, or regress?
Former Blue bloods: Nebraska
Nebraska
I feel for you Husker fans. As a 1990 Indiana grad, I know how painful it is to see your once blue-blood program deteriorate into mediocrity or worse. Some still call Indiana a basketball blue blood, but I call them a blue blood has-been. I equate Nebraska football with Indiana basketball. The good news is, to get back to blue blood status you don’t even need to win a National Title in my view, but you have to be relevant, have consistent winning seasons and make deep playoff runs. It’s been a long time since the Huskers or basketball Hoosiers have done that.
Looking at Exhibit 1, I rate Nebraska 11 of 18 Big Ten teams based on my five criteria. Nebraska is most hurt by lack of access to talent in their’s and adjacent states, along with terrible recent success. Exhibits 2 and 3 show in the 2020’s Nebraska had sadly just the 12th best record in the Big Ten of 14 teams better than only lowly Indiana and Rutgers with a conference win rate of just 29%. In fact, including non-conference games in the 2020’s Nebraska is tied with, you guessed it, Indiana football with an identical record of 15-29. Wow – just a shocking statistic when you consider what Nebraska once was.
Looking back to Exhibit 4 shows how dominant the Huskers used to be with 90% Big 8 conference records in both the 80’s and 90’s (thank you Tom Osborne!) and 81% back in the 70’s. And this can’t be all blamed by their joining the Big 10 in 2011 because even in the 2000’s Nebraska’s conference win percent dipped big time down to 59%. The four years of Bill Callahan (2004 to 2007) was the main culprit where the Huskers had a conference record of 15-17. There is great hope that Matt Rhule is the coach to re-establish Husker blue blood status.
The Overachievers (Development Programs): Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern
Iowa
Going back to 1970, I look at Iowa as the first conference overachiever. From Exhibit 1, I rank Iowa 7th in the Big Ten pecking order with threes in all categories, except a one for Access to Talent as Iowa and surrounding states has limited football talent. But the Hawkeyes have been and remain an excellent development program, consistently taking good solid talent and turning that into extremely productive football players who are fundamentally sound and know how to play winning football. Iowa usually only loses when the talent gap is too great and that is a tribute to their good coaching.
Exhibit 2 shows, the 70’s was brutal for the Hawkeyes with just a 29%-win rate which 9th and only better than #10 and perennial Big Ten doormat Northwestern. Then Iowa legend Hayden Fry took over in 1979 and ever since the program has been a consistent winner, with Fry winning Big Ten titles in 1981, 1985 and 1990, until current coach Kirk Ferentz took over in 1999. Incredibly, Iowa has had just 2 coaches across the past 45 years and Ferentz is entering his 26th year as coach!
That consistency of coaching has resulted in conference winning percentages of 61% in the 2000’s, 57% in the 2010’s and 69% in the 2020’s. In fact, Exhibit 3 shows Iowa has had the third best in-conference win percentage in the 1980’s, 2000’s and so far in the 2020’s. Iowa has a proven formula that works. It just won’t win you a National Championship, but that’s OK.
Wisconsin
The Badgers have some very strong similarities to Iowa and are another overachieving program. Typically, Wisconsin has not had many periods where they were bad. In my hierarchy rankings (Exhibit 1), I put Wisky in a 4-way tie for 7th amongst a group including Iowa, Washington and UCLA. Wisconsin’s ranking are the exact same as Iowa’s with all 3’s except a ranking of 1 for Access to Talent.
Like Iowa, the Badgers recruit good players and keep them for 4 or 5 years and develop them to perform better than their overall recruiting rankings. You end up with older, more experience players going against some other schools like Ohio State with more talented but certainly less mature and experienced players. It helps equalize things, but the transfer portal has eliminated some of that advantage.
Exhibit 2 also clearly shows the program changing event and impact when Barry Alvarez came over from Notre Dame as their DC to take over the football program. After a rough 1-10 start in 1990, Barry leveraged his knowledge from playing and coaching at Nebraska to make the Badgers into a physical program with emphasis on running the ball and playing hard nosed defense. After his first year, Alvarez worst overall record was 4-5-2 in 1995 and the Badgers went 52% in conference in the 1990’s and 55% in the 2000’s.
Bret Bielema took over in 2005 and continued the winning formula including 3 straight Rose Bowl appearances from 2010 to 2012, and in the 2010’s Wisconsin peaked with a 76% conference winning percentage, second only to Ohio State. Yes, they benefitted from the clear weakness of the Big Ten West during this time, but they were good enough to fully take advantage. I fully expect Luke Fickell to continue Wisconsin’s winning ways.
Northwestern
Our last Overachiever (Development Program) is Northwestern. The Cats are the most impressive and unlikely underachiever. My hierarchy rankings in Exhibit 1 have them 17 of 18 Big Ten teams and only ahead of Indiana. But I have probably under ranked them but not by much. Their high academic standards make it very hard to get Access to Talent, their fan base is not rabid for football, and their program resources I assume are relatively worse than the rest of the Big Ten – but difficult to know since they are a private school.
What means the most is results, and that is where the Cats have shined given the challenges they face as a program. The tipping point came with the 1992 hiring of Gary Barnett. After 3 middling years of going 8-24-1 overall, the cardiac Cats broke through in the legendary 1995 season 10-2 overall, including going 8-0 in-conference and winning the Big Ten title before losing in the Rose Bowl in a shootout 41-32 to Keyshawn Johnson and USC.
Northwestern’s conference win percent went from 15% in the 1980’s to 48% in the 2000’s and 50% in the 2010’s under the Cats 1995 team leader and middle linebacker Pat Fitzgerald. While this winning rate was not spectacular, any fan prior to 1990 would take this in a second and added to the 1995 Rose Bowl game, Northwestern also maximized their talent to surprisingly make the Big Ten Championship game in both 2018 and 2020 against Ohio State.
The Underachievers: Illinois, Maryland, UCLA
Now how about those teams that have mostly disappointed relative to their resources and access to talent – the underachievers. Not a great group to be in since it produces great fan base frustration.
Illinois
The Illini are 9th in Big Ten athletic department revenue at $146M which is right in the middle. I rank Illinois 12th in my Big Ten hierarchy rankings dragged down by my ranking of a 1 for rabid fan base. Maybe that should be a two but given of continuous disappointments from a long line of coaches who can blame Illinois fans for being less than enthusiastic. Illinois should be better with their access to some good player talent in the greater Chicagoland area.
Looking at Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 by decade helps tell the story. From the 1970’s to the 1990’s the Illini performed well in conference placing 7th, 4th and 7th again. About where I would expect for this program. The 1980’s was the peak where they won at a 64% conference clip with coach Mike White providing strong program leadership from 1980 to 1987 including a 40-26-1 conference record and a Rose Bowl appearance in 1983 under star QB Jack Trudeau going 9-0 in the Big Ten. The decade ended with John Mackovic’s strong 4 years (1988 to 1991) going 22-9-1.
Since then, it’s been mostly sub-.500 seasons under a series of coaches who in one season would catch lightning in a bottle. First case was Ron Turner’s 2001 and 10-2 Sugar Bowl season who followed that up with 5-7, then 1-11 seasons. Turner finished 35-57. Second case was Ron Zook’s 2007 season 9-4 record and Rose Bowl appearance, followed by 5-7 and 3-9 seasons.
Since Mackovic left in 1991, Illinois has not built any momentum from their really good seasons and the result is extremely sub-par results of 33% conference win rate in the 2000’s, 24% in the 2010’s (better only than Rutgers but worse than Indiana – yikes!) and just 40% in the 2020’s under Bret Bielema. Not nearly good enough with the resources Illinois has.
Maryland
The Terrapins have a small relative athletic budget, but their location means they have great access to talent in the “DMV region” with access to the robust Northern Virginia market and other big east coast cities. The potential is there as witnessed by Exhibit 4’s conference records in the ACC in the 1970’s and 1980’s at 71% and 69% respectively, which is excellent. They have had some really good coaches including Jerry Claiborne from 1972 to 1981 compiling a 77-37-3 overall record and then Bobby Ross from 1982 to 1986 who in 5 seasons had a 39-19-1 record. It can be done at Maryland.
Results since the 1990’s which saw a meager 29% conference win rate have been mostly poor, but the exception is the Ralph Friedgen era (2001 to 2010) where Maryland won at a pretty satisfying 51% clip in conference in the 2000’s. Since then it’s been mostly disappointing with a 27%-win rate within the Big Ten conference in the 2010’s and then a better 41% in the 2020’s under Mike Locksley
But Maryland always seems to get off to a strong start to the year, only to fizzle once the core Big Ten season starts. But now that the conference eliminated divisions, maybe Maryland can achieve more to their potential moving forward. It should not be understated how tough winning in the Big Ten East was annually playing blue bloods Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State.
UCLA
Finally, we have underachiever UCLA. They have lived in the shadow of USC football for a long time and similar to Maryland, they had some really good success in the past winning at 68% within the Pac 8/12 in the 1970’s and 72% in the 1980’s under Terry Donahue who had an overall record of 151-74-8 over 20 years including 4 Rose Bowl appearances. UCLA also has a National Championship but all the way back in 1954.
Past success shows it can be done at UCLA, but they dipped to a still good 59% Pac 10 win rate in the 1990’s (included Bob Toledo’s teams), then down to 49% in the 2000’s, 51% in the 2010’s and 56% in the 2020’s under Chip Kelly.
UCLA is a mixed bag. On the positive there is tremendous talent in Southern California and the school has a lot to sell but on the negative side their athletic revenues were just $103M in 2022 and their athletic department has really struggled overall financially. Still, I think you have to rank UCLA as underachieving but given their strong focus on basketball and relative lack of resources, I do wonder what is realistic for the Bruins and what should be considered success?
The Up and Downers: Michigan State, Minnesota, Purdue
These teams have had some success under the right coach, but haven’t sustained that success, so you never know what you will get over say a 5-year timeframe with these teams.
Michigan State
Let’s start with clearly the most successful of the Up and Downers. Exhibit 1 shows I rate Michigan State 6th in the Big Ten based on my 5 ranking criteria. The Spartans have the fourth biggest athletic department revenues, which is impressive. They get 3’s across the board except for recent success due to the roller coaster ride former head coach Mel Tucker has taken them on after the impressive 11-2, 2021 campaign.
Exhibit 2 speaks to the up and down nature of the program. Michigan State was very steady and consistent winning over .500 in conference during the 1970’s through the 1990’s. In fact, did you know the Spartans were the third most successful team in the conference in the 1970’s at 61% when Ohio State and Michigan were dominant.
The last 3 decades have seen the Spartans bounce from a 40% conference win rate in the 2000’s, up to an outstanding 67% in the 2010’s under what should be considered legendary coach Mark Dantonio (overall record 114-57 or 67%) that included x Big Ten Championship appearances and a 2022 appearance in the CFP playoffs. Then Sparty has fell back down to just a 41% win rate in the 2020’s. Again, down up and back down again. Sparty does have 3 National Titles including the last one in 1966. I fully expect to see Michigan State back to the top half of the Big Ten under Johnathan Smith’s leadership. Anything else would be a big disappointment.
Purdue
Roll the dice and the Boilermakers could just as likely really good as they are to be really bad. I think they are more up and down than even the Spartans. Check out Exhibit 2 to see this. Purdue has a solid 54% conference win rate in the 1970’s on the backs of some really good QBs (list them), then fell off to 42% in the 1980’s and 38% in the 1990’s. Then Purdue turned it around in the 2000’s with a 51% win rate only to see it fall off a cliff to 29% win ratio in the 2010’s and then back up to 52% in the 2020’s from the successful Jeff Brohm era. Phew. Up, down, up, down, up and now what under new coach Ryan Walters?
That 2000’s success came from the “golden” Joe Tiller era that went from 1997 to 2008, and interestingly unlike the vast majority of successful Big Ten coaches, Tiller immediately started as successful with a 9-3 overall record in his initial 1997 season. This is quite unusual. Of course, this included the huge success of star QB Drew Brees who helped the Boilers to the 2000 season Rose Bowl game. In fact, Tiller’s teams finished in the Top 25 rankings 5 times and 4 straight from 1997 to 2000 coinciding with Brees time in West Lafayette, but the Boilers have not finished in the Top 25 since 2003, despite being in the very weak Big Ten West.
The fact Purdue only finished in the Top 25 with a generational QB and the demise of the Big Ten West and the entry of the four new Pac 12 teams in 2024 does not bode well for the future.
Minnesota
Did you know Minnesota 6 football National Championships? Impressive, except when you find out the last one game in 1960. And the one before that in 1941. In Exhibit 1, I have Minnesota in the back half of the Big ten ranked tied for 13th. Close access to talent is a major issue and getting the talent rich Southern kids to play ball up in Minnesota can’t be easy. On the positive though athletics revenue is a solid $135M and Minnesota is in a major city with lots of job potential. But I just don’t think the Gophers win expectation should be very high and their historical performance from Exhibits 2 and 3 reflects that.
The Gophers won in conference at 45% in the 1970’s, but then 34%, 28% and 38% from the 1980s through the 2000’s respectively. Glen Mason was able to consistently get the Gophers into the Top 25 and into Bowl Games in his reign from 1997 to 2006 (64-57 overall) that included a 10-3 mark in 2003.
Under PJ Fleck the Gophers have rowed their way to an impressive 50-34 overall record (59.5%) and a conference win rate in the 2020’s of 50% which is their best since 1970. The challenge for Minnesota is now their scheduled should get much tougher without playing the easier Big Ten West schedules. I think PJ Fleck will have to coach and recruit well to keep the Gophers from falling to Weak Link status.
The Weak Links: Indiana, Rutgers
Indiana
Unfortunately, my alma mater Indiana should probably be in a category of their own. They are without a doubt historically the worst Big Ten football program, and likely the worst across the entire Power 5 conferences. The Hoosiers have the distinction of having the most all-time losses of any D-1 program with a record of 482-689-38.
But since the start of 1970, IU is a little better than I thought. In both the 70’s (mostly under coach Lee Corso) and 80’s (mostly under coach Bill Mallory) when the Big Ten really was ten teams, their conference winning percent in both decades (see Exhibits 2 & 3) at 31% and 36% respectively was actually 8th best in the Big 10.
Northwestern was 10th both decades and Iowa and then Minnesota alternated as the 9th worst. IU was 2nd to last in the 1990’s at a 33% conference win rate, but from there it gets really ugly with 2000’s thru 2020’s win percents at 23%, 26% and 26%. Only Rutgers struggles since entering the Big Ten in 2014 have kept Indiana from being the worst team but that is not saying much.
Indiana has had brief periods when they were pretty good but typically this lasts no more than maybe 2 to 3 seasons. In fact, here is a scary stat. Since 1970, Indiana has only 11 of 54 seasons (20%) with an overall record better than .500. Their Big Ten record has only been over .500 eight times (15%) and they went a stretch of 26 years where they did not finish above .500 in the Big Ten (from Bill Mallory’s 5-3, 1993 squad to Tom Allen’s 5-4, 2019 team). Since 1970, the most consecutive seasons Indiana had an overall record better than .500 was two, which they did only 4 different times (1987-1988, 1990-1991, and 1993-1994 all under Bill Mallory; and then 2019-2020 under Tom Allen).
This makes Mallory practically look like a coaching God and he was clearly the best coach IU has had during this stretch, but his overall record is still a mediocre 68-78-3, meaning since 1970 not a single IU coach has a winning overall record. New coach Curt Cignetti is well aware of this and doesn’t care and really believes he is the man to break this streak but wow, does he have his work cut out.
Rutgers
The final Big Ten team and “weak link” is Rutgers. They rank very poorly across all 5 of my categories from Exhibit 1, but their hope is a solid 3 ranking in Access to Talent given their location in New Jersey with a ton of U.S. population and good talent in close proximity. Of course, it takes the right coach and Greg Schiano may be that guy as he went 68-67 overall in his first stint at Rutgers from 2001 to 2011 when they were in the Big East and since taking over the program again in 2020 is 19-28 overall but just came off a 7-6 season including a Pinstripe Bowl appearance.
The task is still dauting since despite leading Rutgers to 6 bowl appearances Schiano’s first 11-year stint, Rutgers still has only finished the season in the Top 25 twice since 1970 and it includes the vaunted 11-2, Ray Rice 2006 season when Rutgers finished 12th. Since joining the Big Ten in 2014, Rutgers has had a conference worst 13% conference winning percentage (Exhibit 2) in the 2010’s and an improved but still conference worst 25% conference win percent in the 2020’s so far.
The good news though is Schiano’s record in this second round with Rutgers has improved each year and he has proven he can win given he had 5 straight winning seasons his first time with the program. He also can tap into his experience and knowledge within the Big Ten having served as Defensive Coordinator with Ohio State for 3 years.
A final note on categorizing teams is I almost had a “Basketball Schools” category which would have included Indiana, Maryland, Michigan State, Purdue and UCLA. Implied in this is the basketball schools focus more on basketball and not football, and therefore sub-optimize their football performance. The problem is real results don’t necessarily support that. Michigan State is a good example of how you can be good at both at the same time as they were in the 2010’s.
Well, that’s my take on grouping the Big Ten teams into Big 10 Football Categories. I am sure many have some things they agree with and don’t. What do you think? What would you change?
Big Jeff
