Anyone who knows what they're talking about isn't going to be surprised that the B1G is proving again it's clearly the best conference. By a lot.
B1G 7-1
- Thread starter QChawks
- Start date
Conference bowl records through Dec. 29
Big Ten: 5-0
Sun Belt: 4-1
Big 12: 4-2
American: 3-2
ACC: 4-3
Mountain West: 3-3
Independents: 1-1
C-USA: 4-5
MAC: 1-4
Pac-12: 1-7
SEC: 0-3
Big Ten: 5-0
Sun Belt: 4-1
Big 12: 4-2
American: 3-2
ACC: 4-3
Mountain West: 3-3
Independents: 1-1
C-USA: 4-5
MAC: 1-4
Pac-12: 1-7
SEC: 0-3
Last edited:
LSU is most overrated team in country.
Their resume is not much better than Iowa's. They beat a three loss Auburn team. Only other win over above .500 team is 7-6 Texas A&M. They lost to Troy!!
Isn't the Sun Belt 4-1 and CUSA 4-5 and Mountain West 3-3
And that Texas A&M couldn't shake off their old habits from the Big 12 and gave up 55 to Wake!
Last edited:
You are right. NCAA.com had some teams mixed around in the wrong conferences on their listing.
Sun Belt (4-1)
Arkansas State (lost to Middle Tennessee 30-35)
Georgia State (beat Western Kentucky)
Troy (beat North Texas)
Appalachian State (beat Toledo)
New Mexico State (beat Utah State)
C-USA (4-5)
Florida Atlantic (beat Akron)
Louisiana Tech (beat SMU)
Marshall (beat Colorado State)
Middle Tennessee (beat Arkansas State)
North Texas (lost to Troy)
Western Kentucky (lost to Georgia State)
UAB (lost to Ohio)
Southern Miss (lost to Florida State)
Florida International (lost to Temple)
Mountain West (3-3)
Boise State (beat Oregon)
Wyoming (beat Central Michigan)
Fresno State (beat Houston)
Colorado State (lost to Marshall)
San Diego State (lost to Army)
Utah State (lost to New Mexico State)
We can all agree on one thing: The NCAA Selection
Committee said the reason Ohio State did not make
the Final Four.....They had a devastating loss to Iowa.
So tonight the Buckeye defense sacked the USC QB
over and over and over again. Coach Urban Meyer
said the strategy was not to let the USC QB plant his
feet to make throws. It worked
Committee said the reason Ohio State did not make
the Final Four.....They had a devastating loss to Iowa.
So tonight the Buckeye defense sacked the USC QB
over and over and over again. Coach Urban Meyer
said the strategy was not to let the USC QB plant his
feet to make throws. It worked
The dream scenario would be the Big Ten going undefeated and the SEC going winless.
Because they have 9 wins.
I bet if MI only had to play two ranked teams, they'd have 9+ wins as well....
Anybody hear the announcers in the northwestern game? There was a chop block called on NW and the color guy/SEC homer said something like "they dont cut block in the SEC. They man up and agree ahead of tme to go man on man to settle things".
So ridiculous all the time
So ridiculous all the time
Yes, and Ohio State lost to Iowa by 30.
I get it. Everything SEC is overated and worthy of our disdain. I'm simply saying if you take a second to lose the hard on for hating everything Alabama and the SEC, the original statement I responded to that Wisconsin had a better resume than Alabama is dubious at best.
Some of you make it seem like I'm touting Alabama as so great. I'm not at all and have clearly said their schedule was not good and that they are a weak #4. My point is the alternative (Wisconsin or Ohio State) was not clearly better.
Last edited:
You're right, I missed Northwestern. Was focused too much on Michigan.
Again, my point was not to tout Alabama as great. While ESPN and others have a clear SEC bias, I think the reverse can happen as well. Yes, Alabama did not have a great schedule, as FSU turning out to be crap this year really hurt them, but, as many of us were saying about the Hawkeyes in 2015, you play the schedule you were given.
Had Ohio State taken care of business in Iowa City, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The fact is while Alabama doesn't have a great resume there is no other team whose resume is clearly better than theirs. Therefore, like it or not, there is no obviously better alternative to Alabama in terms of resumes. You may dislike Wisconsin or Ohio State less than Alabama but that doesn't mean objectively speaking they are more deserving of the CFP than Bama.
True, but whom has Michigan beat in the Top 25?
You're only presenting one side of the argument. Michigan lost to every team they played this year worth a s#!t. Their best win is what...Purdue? Otherwise, they beat 4-7 Florida, 4-8 Cincinnati, 5-7 Air Force, 5-7 Indiana, 4-8 Rutgers, 5-7 Minnesota, and 4-8 Maryland. Lol, that is worthy of being ranked near the Top 15?
C'mon, I get the SEC was down this year, but this is just blind hatred of the SEC and nothing more than a tribal mentality of "we good, they bad."
That is absolutely the reason they didn't make the CFP.
Funny, Ohio State got the benefit last year of making the CFP despite not winning the conference and losing head to head against the conference champion (Penn State). This year, though, being on the other end of it, it's now a problem?
True, but remember in 2007 when Michigan lost to App St? Season is bigger than one game.
I will agree with you, though, that their resume is not much more impressive than Iowa's. And I actually think Iowa's is more impressive than Michigan's, which is why it absolutely amazes me that anyone would think Michigan is on par with LSU in terms of resumes.
Yes, the SEC is down this year (even though they still have 3 legitimate Top 10 teams), but I don't think that means LSU is the "most overrated team in the country," and I certainly don't believe it means Michigan is on par with them.
I will say after watching Michigan State and Ohio State beat the crap out of their opponents, it does make me feel really good about the upper echelon of the B1G. The B1G is representing itself well so far this year. I hope it continues with Wisconsin. Unfortunately, I do not feel the same about Ped State. After their fans' performance on this board in September with tirelessly (not to mention obscenely and obnoxiously) defending Joe Paterno and the university, I can never bring myself to hoping they win any football game ever again.
That’s what I thought when I saw it as well. I was pretty certain that they only played Auburn (lost), LSU (won), and Miss St (won- barely).
I don't usually root for Penn State, Wisconsin and Michigan - and will feel dirty in doing so - but an unbeaten conference record would be a nice change for the conference.
Wisconsin will be the tough one here. Friggin' road game for them. I know Miami is a paper tiger of sorts, but I seriously doubt Miami would win if it were in Madison.
Wisconsin will be the tough one here. Friggin' road game for them. I know Miami is a paper tiger of sorts, but I seriously doubt Miami would win if it were in Madison.
If the B1G goes 8-0, the NC should be officially VOIDED...
Somehow Alabama’s strength of schedule was #4 last night and Ohio States was #7. Where the hell is espn pulling these numbers from.
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
ESPN and the NCAA should be honest and call this tournament by its right name: The Alabama Invitational. It's BS to have two SEC teams, and I hope both Alabama and Georgia get their cleats knocked off. "National Championship" when 40% of the country isn't even allowed to participate? Sure it is. 
BTW: There's that little thing where Alabama didn't win its division and, of course, didn't win its conference, yet it's one of the four best teams in the country. That kind of illusion makes David Copperfield jealous.
BTW: There's that little thing where Alabama didn't win its division and, of course, didn't win its conference, yet it's one of the four best teams in the country. That kind of illusion makes David Copperfield jealous.
So let's say that their SOS and such were about equal which they were. By taking Alabama, the Committee, (in my experience it is never good to leave anything up to a committee) said that the third best team in the SEC, not the 2nd best team is better than the first or second best team in the Big Ten. They lost the last game of their season to Auburn by 2 touchdowns a three loss team. How does that give them a better record? Surely you don't believe that a three loss team should be rated number 7 in the country which shows a definite bias toward the SEC. The only other 3 loss team in the top 10 was USC which Ohio State just manhandled.
Just sayin. Rankings really don't mean anything. Otherwise a ranked team would never lose to an un-ranked or lower ranked team.
That was their strength of record, not strength of schedule. Basically it's supposed to measure how hard it would be given schedule and so on to achieve the record they had. It's a shitty metric ESPN uses just like their FPI, which is awful.
If they wanted a team that couldn't even get to their conference championship game...should have just put 4 SEC teams in and gotten it over with.
Saw a guy last night in the bar that was could have been Copperfields twin. That's all I got. LolESPN and the NCAA should be honest and call this tournament by its right name: The Alabama Invitational. It's BS to have two SEC teams, and I hope both Alabama and Georgia get their cleats knocked off. "National Championship" when 40% of the country isn't even allowed to participate? Sure it is.
BTW: There's that little thing where Alabama didn't win its division and, of course, didn't win its conference, yet it's one of the four best teams in the country. That kind of illusion makes David Copperfield jealous.
What exactly are you trying to say? I don't get whatever point you're making as it relates to what I wrote. Part of the issue is the lack of intelligibility in your sentences and incoherence in whatever case you're making (you're all over the map in making points).
A few things, though. Auburn is a 3-loss team because they went to the SEC title game and lost. Alabama has a better record than Auburn because they have only one loss (that's pretty simple math). USC had two losses going into the Cotton Bowl (the same as Ohio State). Why is Alabama the 3rd best team in the SEC? Since you emphasize record so much, they clearly have a better one than the "2nd best team." And does that mean Ohio State was the 3rd best B1G team last year?
Your last paragraph makes absolutely no sense.
ESPN and the NCAA should be honest and call this tournament by its right name: The Alabama Invitational. It's BS to have two SEC teams, and I hope both Alabama and Georgia get their cleats knocked off. "National Championship" when 40% of the country isn't even allowed to participate? Sure it is.
BTW: There's that little thing where Alabama didn't win its division and, of course, didn't win its conference, yet it's one of the four best teams in the country. That kind of illusion makes David Copperfield jealous.
Lol. That was the whole point of the CFP, to get the 4 best teams in regardless of conference. Hence why Ohio State made it last year (in theory). But I'm sure you were bitching about the SEC bias last year when the Buckeyes got in despite getting runner up in their division.
Suppose the script was flipped and Alabama won their conference championship game but had lost to Auburn and had gotten blown out on the road at say Mississippi St. by 30. Ohio State had been ranked #1 all year and lost on the road to PSU to finish with one-loss for the year but consequently missed the B1G title game. Let me guess, you would be all in favor of 11-2 Bama going over one-loss Ohio State? Riiiiiiiiiiight.
Did Alabama have a tough schedule this year? No. Does a team with two losses, one of which is a blowout loss to a 7-5 team, deserve to be ahead of them? No.
Let's be real here. There is no great case to be made for Ohio State, especially after they got the benefit of the very same thing last year. Would it be an absolute outrage had Ohio State made it over Alabama this year? Probably not. But there is no logical justification for it, either. Face it. The outrage is simply because people are sick of Alabama and hate them. Fine, I get it, but don't try to come off as if there is some grand conspiracy here that defies logic and reasoning or that somehow Ohio State is the victim in all of this. You hate Alabama. That's your logic. Period.
Last edited:
I treat OOC and Bowl season for the Big 10 like I treat Christmas. As much as I don't like certain Big10teams when Iowa plays them I root for them OOC and in Bowls. Like a certain day a year I forgive and forget. I mean the mighty USC should have been basically shut out and Iowa put 55 on OSU. All the years people piled on the Big 10 cause of Bowl rusults. When our 5th place team was playing a 2nd place team in another conference. Would love the Big 10 to run the table.
Bear on Gameday was just making his case for why the bowl records don't really mean that much. Said that Northwestern was a big favorite so they should have won, TAMU battled it out with a really good Wake team and could have won, USC isn't really very good, Iowa had to make a late play to win, Wazzou's QB was out and Purdue squeaked by Arizona. Thankfully Kirk and Des chided him for all of his excuses, but still. That was just a ridiculous take. I don't remember analysts making excuses for the B1G a few years ago when they had a terrible bowl record but were big underdogs in most of the games.
He was quoting Fitgerald though. He said Pat said those things and don't cut block like we do in the Big Ten.
Point taken but OSU beat OU by 21 in Norman and beat the 8th ranked team on the road and also had home victories over the 3rd and 9th ranked teams. Both should have stayed home but at the minumum,,OSU had a 3 top 10 wins and 4 top 15 wins compared to Alabama not even having a top 15 win.
It is ridiculous, especially about USC not being very good. So far, the B1G elites have blown out their opponents. In years past, it seems the opposite has occurred, and of course all the "experts" say that is evidence of the B1G not being very good. Go figure.
...against a team who was favored, so his point would actually support the B1G on that one.
For the record, I don't disagree with the committee's decision to take Ohio State last year anymore than I disagree with Alabama this year.
Penn State shouldn't have lost to Pitt last year and Ohio State shouldn't have lost to Iowa this year. My point is this ridiculous idea that because Alabama basically got the same benefit of the doubt Ohio State did last year (I mean by not even winning your division) that somehow there is a clear SEC bias. Last I checked, Ohio State was playing in the B1G last season.
And this is exactly why the playoff is just as much of a joke as the BCS, if not more so. If you are one of the annointed “eye test” teams hyped by the media, you don’t have to earn it on the field. OSU didn’t earn it last year, and Alabama didn’t earn it this year. Conference championships mean jack shit under this setup. If you lose it’s held against you, and if you win you get zero credit.
The playoff is a joke until they go to 8 or make ND join a conference. This year easily could have been ND, 2 SEC teams and Clemson or Oklahoma. Go to 8 with the 5 champs and 3 at large especially if ND won't join a conference. I get pissed when I listen to Golic and others talk about ND's chances when not in a conference.
Bowl season isn't the end-all-be-all of conference measures, but it is a big part of the OOC schedule.
The B1G played ~14 (depending on how you judge Wisky's BYU game) out of conference games against P5 opponents in their normal schedule. This bowl season, the B1G plays 8 such games. So 36% of their games against P5 opponents this year are in the bowl season. The other P5 conferences probably have similar numbers.
36% of your OOC P5 games are kind of a big deal.
The B1G played ~14 (depending on how you judge Wisky's BYU game) out of conference games against P5 opponents in their normal schedule. This bowl season, the B1G plays 8 such games. So 36% of their games against P5 opponents this year are in the bowl season. The other P5 conferences probably have similar numbers.
36% of your OOC P5 games are kind of a big deal.
