Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The alternatives of "first place" and "loser" are childish.

Of course, we are a pretty childish bunch of people these days.  We want everything and we want it now.  And we want it free.  Let somebody else pay for it.

for Husker fans, since Devaney went back to back in 70 & 71, it's been MNC or nothing.

yes, back in the 70's and 80's beating the Sooners and winning the Big 8 was a good season, but there was always that issue if the coach couldn't win the big bowl and take home the national trophy.

I'm certain it's the same with the Sooners.

tough as hell on coaching staffs, but that expectation stuck

Whew, thanks for clearing that up.

You act like it is obvious and I think it is too, but there are people here who argue (usually in jest, I think) that:

I don't think there's any "natural" reason for Oklahoma to be as good as it is.  Norman is not an 18-year-old's idea of Fun City, and Oklahoma is not a large population state.  Texas is next door, but Texas contains 5 P5 programs plus a gazillion smaller colleges plus other P5 and G5 neighbors (more of the former since A&M bolted to the SEC) fishing those same waters.

I trust that you know Oklahoma a lot better than I do but my thinking on this was that a substantial portion of Northern Texas is basically "local" to Oklahoma.  Ie, if you are a hot-shot HS football star in a North Dallas suburb I think the "helmet" geographically closest to you is in Norman.  

The Vols historically have poached players from Georgia obviously, as well.  That has become tougher to do now.  If you are a Blue Chipper in HS, you are thinking 3 years to the League and Alabama, Clemson, Auburn, UGA, Florida ... sound more appealing.

If you are a 3.5 star, you might prefer UK and get to play earlier, perhaps.  UK is an interesting story.

I don't disagree with that.  I just tossed out the "Is Michigan still a helmet?" question to see your thoughts on it.
Are some of the programs that Stewart Mandel has as "Kings" not yet helmets?  And are some of those he has dropped to "Barons" still helmets?
Clemson and Nebraska would be two programs as examples.

My thoughts:
Michigan:
I obviously have no love for the Wolverines and unlike a lot of tOSU fans who want them to be good because that makes tOSU look better when the Buckeyes beat them I'd be perfectly happy if Michigan never won another CFB game.  

Total aside:  
My theory on this is that there is a short term, an intermediate term, and a longterm view:
Short term (right now):  It is always fun to watch your rival lose.  In the moment I loved watching ApSt take them down.  

Intermediate term (this season):  It is better for tOSU if Michigan is good because it props up tOSU's SoS and makes the Buckeyes look better.  

Long term (more than one year):  Ohio State recruits head-to-head against Michigan more than any other school and consequently anything bad that happens to Michigan is necessarily good for Ohio State.  The worse they are, the better the argument to play at Ohio State is.  

Back to Michigan:
I believe that they are still a "helmet" or "king" because they still get press coverage like one.  When Harbaugh got hired it was BIG news because it was Michigan.  When that stops, they aren't a helmet or king anymore.  Several Michigan fans on here make the argument that "helmet status" became permanent in the 1970's and can never be lost.  I think that is probably a comforting thought if you are a fan of Michigan or Nebraska or Tennessee but I also think it is nuts.  Very little in life is permanent and if Michigan (or any other current helmet) sucks long enough, they'll lose it and become another Minnesota (school with lots of ancient hardware but nobody cares today).  

Nebraska:
I think that Nebraska either has already lost helmet status or they are a lot closer to it than Michigan.  There are a couple reasons. First, Michigan had LOTS more success pre-Schembechler than Nebraska did pre-Devaney.  Nebraska is basically Devaney/Osborne/Solich and not much else.  Second, Nebraska hasn't managed to get into the national conversation as much lately.  Even though Michigan ultimately lost their last two games in 2006 they did get to 11-0 and #2 and into a HUMONGOUS #1 v #2 game.  Then just a couple years ago they got to 10-1 and looking like a CFP team before losing their last two.  Nebraska hasn't been in any late season BCSBCG/CFP discussions in a LONG time.  IMHO, the next few years under Scott Frost are critical for the Cornhuskers.  If they don't get back to being in the conversation soon, they are no longer a helmet/king.  

Clemson:
Mandel promoted them to King and I think he was premature on that.  Some Clemson fan will probably show up now and post pictures of the four tOSU/Clemson final scoreboards:

• 29-23 Clemson in the 2019 CFP Semi-Final
• 31-0 Clemson in the 2016 CFP Semi-Final
• 40-35 Clemson in the 2014 Orange Bowl (2013 season)
• 17-15 Clemson in the 1979 (1978 season) Gator Bowl (game that got Woody fired)

Yeah, I know.  Clemson has been phenomenal lately and they are 4-0 all-time against Ohio State.  That is great but they don't have anything close to the long-term sustained success that Ohio State and the other helmets have.  They have Dabo, a great run from the mid-70's to the early-90's and nothing else.  Note also that all four games against Ohio State came during Clemson's two great runs.  They didn't play teams like Ohio State the rest of the time because Ohio State was in big-boy bowls and Clemson wasn't.  

I trust that you know Oklahoma a lot better than I do but my thinking on this was that a substantial portion of Northern Texas is basically "local" to Oklahoma.  Ie, if you are a hot-shot HS football star in a North Dallas suburb I think the "helmet" geographically closest to you is in Norman.

Yes, that's largely true.  Dallas is almost exactly midway between Norman and Austin.
But I don't think that most kids in northern Texas grow up thinking that they live in Baja Oklahoma.  They're still Texans, and the flagship university in Texas is still Texas.  Recruiting them requires overcoming that.
I'm not saying that OU doesn't get a lot of Texas kids.  We do.  But we get fewer of them than we used to get, partly due to the decline in P5-level defensive players coming out of Texas high schools, I think.
And we lose Oklahoma kids too.