This thing about beating winning teams....

[td75]

I've looked at Big Ten records from the 50s-80s and let me tell you, if you think Ohio State and Michigan were getting fat by beating a bunch of 7-4 ballclubs, you're WRONG.....They were beating bad Iowa teams, bad Minnesota teams, piss poor Illinois teams, awful Purdue teams and yes, mediocre Indiana teams...They were not typically beating a bunch of winning teams, look it up!!

Many years the Big Ten only had two teams over .500!!!

 

[hookyIU1990]

I've looked at Big Ten records from the 50s-80s and let me tell you, if you think Ohio State and Michigan were getting fat by beating a bunch of 7-4 ballclubs, you're WRONG.....They were beating bad Iowa teams, bad Minnesota teams, piss poor Illinois teams, awful Purdue teams and yes, mediocre Indiana teams...They were not typically beating a bunch of winning teams, look it up!!

Many years the Big Ten only had two teams over .500!!!

Which is exactly why the conference wants to keep a school like Indiana from ascending. The top 3-4 teams need the tomato cans to pad the conf schedule.

 

[Walt542]

You also have to consider how many of those teams we played would be winning teams if they had played their entire out of conference schedules. I get pretty tired of hearing that old saw about beating winning teams. IU beat most of the teams on their schedule. What else could they do? They still play in one of the best conferences divisions in the country. I’m all in.

 

[jbriegel]

There is a bit of a difference between being “good” vs being “successful”. Considering the money, time, effort, etc that goes into playing and winning one football game all wins are good wins. Doesn’t matter so much that you beat a “good” team or a team with a winning record but that you won. With success comes accolades, air time, and so forth

and regardless of what the black and gold say or think we are now much more successful than they are. They could be better but who cares. Success is measured by wins and loses and in reality that is what has kept us down for so long. This isn’t little league - the next level of college football is where I hope we stay. Go Hoosiers !

 

[fkfootball]

We no longer suck. That in itself is progress.

 

[destewart]

I've looked at Big Ten records from the 50s-80s and let me tell you, if you think Ohio State and Michigan were getting fat by beating a bunch of 7-4 ballclubs, you're WRONG.....They were beating bad Iowa teams, bad Minnesota teams, piss poor Illinois teams, awful Purdue teams and yes, mediocre Indiana teams...They were not typically beating a bunch of winning teams, look it up!!

Many years the Big Ten only had two teams over .500!!!

I took a quick glance at different periods for Big Ten schools. Between 1970 and 1980, Ohio Stare won 27 games over teams with winning records. Between 1960 and 1970 Purdue won 25 games over teams with winning records. Between 1950 and 1960 Iowa won 23 games over teams with winning records. Between 1990 and 2000 Northwestern won 22 games over teams with winning records. Between 2000 and 2010 Michigan won 39 games against teams with winning records. Between 1980 and 1990 Illinois won 27 games against teams with winning records. Between 1970 and 1980 Michigan State won 16 games against teams with winning records. Between 1980 and 1990 Wisconsin won 15 games against teams with winning records. Between 1980 and 1990 INDIANA won 10 games against teams with winning records. Between 2010 and 2020 Penn State won 40 games against teams with winning records.
NOTE: during the 1950’s most teams played 9 games. During the 1960’s mostvteams played 10 games. During the 1970’s through 2000 most teams played 11 games. Since 2000 most teams played 12 games.

 

[Crossblock]

I've looked at Big Ten records from the 50s-80s and let me tell you, if you think Ohio State and Michigan were getting fat by beating a bunch of 7-4 ballclubs, you're WRONG.....They were beating bad Iowa teams, bad Minnesota teams, piss poor Illinois teams, awful Purdue teams and yes, mediocre Indiana teams...They were not typically beating a bunch of winning teams, look it up!!

Many years the Big Ten only had two teams over .500!!!

Remember, during the early years of your comparative, Schools had a 120 Scholarship Limit. Ohio state was notorious for filling the ends of it's bench with really good players who could have started for other Big 10 Teams (One can speculate on how that occurred so consistently), Many people have the idea that Michigan and Ohio State dominated the Big 10 forever. However if you go back to the 50's and early 60's you will see that Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin had multiple Rose Bowl Appearances from about 1956 through 1963. This was followed by appearances by Michigan State, Illinois, Purdue and of course IU. Granted this was in the era where the Big 10 did not allow the same team to go to the Rose Bowl 2 years in a row, so those Teams may not have been Big 10 Championship Teams, but they were winning teams.

Michigan actually did not do well in the 1950's and mid 1960's. It was only in the late 1960's and 1970's that you began to see the year to year dominance by OSU and Michigan.

 

[td75]

I took a quick glance at different periods for Big Ten schools. Between 1970 and 1980, Ohio Stare won 27 games over teams with winning records. Between 1960 and 1970 Purdue won 25 games over teams with winning records. Between 1950 and 1960 Iowa won 23 games over teams with winning records. Between 1990 and 2000 Northwestern won 22 games over teams with winning records. Between 2000 and 2010 Michigan won 39 games against teams with winning records. Between 1980 and 1990 Illinois won 27 games against teams with winning records. Between 1970 and 1980 Michigan State won 16 games against teams with winning records. Between 1980 and 1990 Wisconsin won 15 games against teams with winning records. Between 1980 and 1990 INDIANA won 10 games against teams with winning records. Between 2010 and 2020 Penn State won 40 games against teams with winning records.
NOTE: during the 1950’s most teams played 9 games. During the 1960’s mostvteams played 10 games. During the 1970’s through 2000 most teams played 11 games. Since 2000 most teams played 12 games.

So your post proves my point. If a team played 11 games and only beat one or two teams with a 6-5 record, that just means they beat a whole bunch of losing ball clubs. This is football, they don't get the opportunity to compete 35 times a year like a bball team.

Indiana had its best season in years and I would argue one of the better Big Ten seasons for any conference team not named UM, PSU, OSU, or MSU.

When's the last time a Big Ten team beat three out of those four? Hell of an accomplishment, records be damned imo.

 

[82hoosier]

I've looked at Big Ten records from the 50s-80s and let me tell you, if you think Ohio State and Michigan were getting fat by beating a bunch of 7-4 ballclubs, you're WRONG.....They were beating bad Iowa teams, bad Minnesota teams, piss poor Illinois teams, awful Purdue teams and yes, mediocre Indiana teams...They were not typically beating a bunch of winning teams, look it up!!

Many years the Big Ten only had two teams over .500!!!

Hate to break it to you but what you call mediocre Indiana teams were traditionally worse than Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois and Purdue.

 

[Bligedy]

I've looked at Big Ten records from the 50s-80s and let me tell you, if you think Ohio State and Michigan were getting fat by beating a bunch of 7-4 ballclubs, you're WRONG.....They were beating bad Iowa teams, bad Minnesota teams, piss poor Illinois teams, awful Purdue teams and yes, mediocre Indiana teams...They were not typically beating a bunch of winning teams, look it up!!

Many years the Big Ten only had two teams over .500!!!

Try to beat everyone on the schedule and don't apologize when you beat any of them.

Nobody cared that Ohio St was way down or that Michigan was average when Mallory Beat them. And they shouldn't.

 

[hoosier roadtrips]

Remember, during the early years of your comparative, Schools had a 120 Scholarship Limit. Ohio state was notorious for filling the ends of it's bench with really good players who could have started for other Big 10 Teams (One can speculate on how that occurred so consistently), Many people have the idea that Michigan and Ohio State dominated the Big 10 forever. However if you go back to the 50's and early 60's you will see that Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin had multiple Rose Bowl Appearances from about 1956 through 1963. This was followed by appearances by Michigan State, Illinois, Purdue and of course IU. Granted this was in the era where the Big 10 did not allow the same team to go to the Rose Bowl 2 years in a row, so those Teams may not have been Big 10 Championship Teams, but they were winning teams.

Michigan actually did not do well in the 1950's and mid 1960's. It was only in the late 1960's and 1970's that you began to see the year to year dominance by OSU and Michigan.

I once checked on this because I knew Michigan was down in the 1950s and 1960s and MSU was very good in those decades. The Spartans won 14 out of 18 game with the Wolverines during those years.

 

[hoosier roadtrips]

Hate to break it to you but what you call mediocre Indiana teams were traditionally worse than Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois and Purdue.

You can't say Iowa was from 1962 to 1981. It did not have a winning season during that time. It did get to a Rose Bowl in 1957 and 1959 before that long drought.