Originally posted by poundlee To say that the big 10 stinks because teams like Michigan State (#9 in the big 10) can't beat the #2 team in the ACC is a joke.
I say the Big Ten "stinks" , among many other reasons, because they keep having losing records in bowl games. You seem to think they're great if they manage to win a few.
(1) It certainly matters where you play games. You can root for southern teams and then ignore the reality, but based on your prior posts you know this fact but choose to ignore it when it is convenient.
(2)You are simply nuts if you think it isn't a home game when florida plays Michigan in Florida. It wouldn't be a neutal site if Michigan played Florida in a dome in Detroit but there is no interest in making this fair.
(3) The #2 team in the Big 10 (or #3 according to you) lost at USC. The #2 Pac 10 team (Arizona state would probably get similarly blown out) if they played in Columbus.
(4) If you take the four best teams in the big 10 who played in bowl games two won, two lost. Michigan beat the defending national champions in Florida. Penn State a .500 team in the big 10 beat Texas A&M a .500 team in Texas. Wisconsin the #4 big ten team lost to a top 3 Sec team in a close game and Illinois lost. That is a split against teams that placed better than you. It is impressive.
(5) As for the three teams in the Big 10 who have no business in any bowl game: Purdue won; Michigan State played very well against the #2 team in ACC. Indiana lost.
It is a good performance.
Originally posted by no1marauder I say the Big Ten "stinks" , among many other reasons, because they keep having losing records in bowl games. You seem to think they're great if they manage to win a few.
Not hard to see why some times when they send 6 and they end up
playing against the best of some other conferences. The ACC vs.
Big Ten challenge is painful to watch though, the bottom teams in
the Big Ten are no where near as good and the bottom teams of the
ACC. Shame they don’t have more conference challenges in foot
ball and basket ball, there are enough of them that it would make
for a good tournament.
Kelly
Originally posted by poundlee (1) It certainly matters where you play games. You can root for southern teams and then ignore the reality, but based on your prior posts you know this fact but choose to ignore it when it is convenient.
(2)You are simply nuts if you think it isn't a home game when florida plays Michigan in Florida. It wouldn't be a neutal site if Michigan played Florida ...[text shortened]... n State played very well against the #2 team in ACC. Indiana lost.
It is a good performance.
The facts are that the combined records for Big Ten teams in the bowl games BEFORE the games was almost identical to the record of their opponents: 55-29 v. 59-28. Wisconsin, Penn State and Indiana had better records than their foes and Purdue was 7-5 against MAC Central Michigan's 8-5 (and Purdue had killed them during the year). In 2 of the 3 other games, the Big Ten team had one less win; only in the BC-Michigan State game was there a substantial difference.
If you dump the two supposed mismatches (BC-Michigan State, Purdue-C. Michigan), the records are Big Ten 41-19 Opponents 41-20. Yet the Big Ten went 2-3 in those games and were badly beaten in 2 of them while the other 3 games were all close.
If Ohio State wins, you can say the Big Ten did OK. If they lose, it's another sub-par performance esp. compared to the other power conferences.
I just don't see how you can consider this a bad performance by the Big 10. Its top four games are tough. Two wins in the home state of their BCS conference opponents. One in which an unranked team beat the #12 team in the nation. No other conference has a game like the Rose Bowl where your #2 team plays a BCS#1 in their home stadium and Wisconsin (big 10 #4) played a close game against a top 3 SEC team. Going .500 in that situation is impressive. The other 3 games are sort of silly. Certainly Purdue winning does not hurt the big 10's cause, Michigan State played well against the ACC #2 and Indiana lost. Other conferences bowl schedules simply are easier.
This of course ignores the fact that their top team is in the Championship game for the 3rd time in six year. They won one lost one and have yet to play. If Ohio State wins it is icing on the cake. Even if they lose and are runners up for the second year in a row, in know way does that mean the big 10 stinks. It still has the best team over a two year period.
Originally posted by poundlee I just don't see how you can consider this a bad performance by the Big 10. Its top four games are tough. Two wins in the home state of their BCS conference opponents. One in which an unranked team beat the #12 team in the nation. No other conference has a game like the Rose Bowl where your #2 team plays a BCS#1 in their home stadium and Wisconsin (big know way does that mean the big 10 stinks. It still has the best team over a two year period.
Home state in a bowl game doesn't mean jack; if you watched the games you'd know that the fan reactions in those games were evenly divided. Stop using that excuse; it's pathetically lame.
That the #2 team in a BCS Automatic Conference is unranked tells you what? Wisconsin had a better record than Tennessee and lost. Very impressive for the Big Ten.
Ohio State being the Championship Game proves nothing; they only got in because they stopped playing and a bunch of other teams lost (they were #7 after their victory over Michigan). USC, Oklahoma, Georgia and others were clearly better teams by the end of the season. If OSU gets blasted again, will fools like you stop insisting they're the "best team"?
EDIT: The SEC is 6-2 in bowl games and the Big 12 and Pac-10 are 4-2.
I see you no longer argue Big East or ACC vs. Big 10.
Home state is huge. You can hear the difference in cheering and the the climate effects the way the game is played.
The has a tougher schedule than a lot of these conferences. At worst, Penn State/ Wiscosin (excluding the fact that they are road games) is a wash between equally matched teams. Michigan/ Illinois is a split with both being road games and the Big 10's loss against the PAC 10s top team.
I am not sure what bottom teams prove. Purdue won, Indiana lost and to consider the Big 10's 9 seed (Michigan State) playing the ACC's #2 and keeping it really close a loss is a joke. I'll call it at worst a split.
Plus, a national championship game is pending.
If you want to compare conferences it doesn't make sese to only look at win loss record (or you might think teams like Hawaii are great) adjust for where you play and whether your #1 seed plays their #1 seed or thier #9 seed.
Originally posted by poundlee I see you no longer argue Big East or ACC vs. Big 10.
Home state is huge. You can hear the difference in cheering and the the climate effects the way the game is played.
The has a tougher schedule than a lot of these conferences. At worst, Penn State/ Wiscosin (excluding the fact that they are road games) is a wash between equally matched teams. Mi t) adjust for where you play and whether your #1 seed plays their #1 seed or thier #9 seed.
You don't even bother to read posts that disagree with you, do you? I gave the overall records between Big Ten teams and their opponents above; they are virtually identical. And I compared their records in EACH GAME and the Big Ten and their opponents were equally matched. The bottom line is that the Big Ten is poised to again lose more bowl games than they win; that will be the 7th time in the last 8th years.
There have been only 3 Big East games played, so that's not enough to compare. I correctly picked the ACC to have a bad bowl season; they are 2-5 (they could still wind up with the same record as the Big Ten). Perhaps an argument can be made that the Big Ten is as good as the ACC in years where Florida State is down.
Don't add numbers up when you can look at games individually. I can't imagine you'd dispute that Michigan State - B.C. is a complete mismatch so to count a well played mismatch as a loss and use it conclude a conference stinks is silly.
Furthermore, to ignore the fact that a conference's top team has been the most dominant team in teh country over a two year peiod is also unfair.
Finally, home/away even compounds matters. So it isn't right to just skip ignore it. Similarly, Illinois -USC in the Rose bowl is a joke. Have games like Arizona State vs. Ohio State in Columbus and B.C. vs. Illinois in some Midwest dome and you'd expect a different result.
Originally posted by poundlee Don't add numbers up when you can look at games individually. I can't imagine you'd dispute that Michigan State - B.C. is a complete mismatch so to count a well played mismatch as a loss and use it conclude a conference stinks is silly.
Furthermore, to ignore the fact that a conference's top team has been the most dominant team in teh country over a t n Columbus and B.C. vs. Illinois in some Midwest dome and you'd expect a different result.
I LOOKED AT THE GAMES INDIVIDUALLY, you idiot. In 6 games against BCS automatic conferences opponents, the Big Ten had the better record in 3 and a worse record in 3. That sounds pretty even to me. They went 2-4; very impressive.
The Big Ten should just skip playing bowls if the system is soooooooooooooooooooooo unfair to them. It's a damn shame that no one wants to play bowl games in Wisconsin in January. TFB. But keep crying.
EDIT: Remember this moron:
Wisconsin, Penn State and Indiana had better records than their opponents.
I am starting to understand why you are the #1 moron. In every sport you play the whole season for home field advantage. It is often the first thing people mention when talking NFL playoff games. But in college, we should 100% ignore it.
When comparing conferences, look at conference record. in the games you mentioned, the Big 10 had the same in one game and a worse in the other two. They won the evenly matched game and of course as all SEC appologists do you ignore unranked Michigan's win over Florida (a top 10 AP team) in Florida.
(1) Penn State has the same conference record as Texas A&M. Game is in Texas. Penn State wins anyway. A big plus for the big 10.
(2) Wisconsin (4th team in big ten) has a worse record than Tennesee (a three way tie for first in SEC). Loses a close.
(3) Indiana is 3-5 in the big 10. They stink. They play a team with a better conference record and lose.
It is clearly false to say that Penn State, Wisconsin and Indiana played teams that they were better than.
02 Jan '08 16:38
Michigan vs Florida
Back to Top