I have no clue about Elliott. I just mean in general.
He has good instincts for the "hole" and the speed I mentioned along with being an adequate receiver and a very, very good blocker. Another aspect is his hips, the guy has great hip movement that he uses when he plants to go around blocks, and he reads his blocks superbly. I am biased, of course, but I think he'll fit well with the right Team whenever he comes out and I'd expect him to be a mid-first or second round pick.
To be honest, I hope Urban Meyer can convince him to stay in school one more year.
Originally posted by: keets I have no clue about Elliott. I just mean in general. ...
To be honest, I hope Urban Meyer can convince him to stay in school one more year.
Good luck with that. I can't blame the kids for going pro but as a college fan it sure is frustrating at times! At least you know Urban will likely have the position re-loaded with another superstar if Elliott does leave.
Originally posted by: garnettstyle Griffin didn't have a great NFL career because he was too small.
I find it hilarious someone would compare this years Michigan State team to the one 5 yrs ago. Since that Alabama loss, they have not lost a bowl game.
I found it hilarious when you said that OSU is the co-champion of their division. Third place in the Big 10.......OUCH !!!!
Yet they are still the team no one wants to play. Have you seen the Notre Dame forums lately?
We'd love to play OSU, heck, I was pulling for OSU and they let me down. Anyway, OSU is 1-1 against the final Top 25. Didn't play enough quality opponents and if they had they would have lost those. Hey, wait until next year, right?
Who's we?
They're only loss was to the #3 team by a last second field goal.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Ya, I came to the same conclusion the other night and posted the following:
I was just doing some more research and couldn't help but notice that Las Vegas ( the general betting public) thinks the following:
The SEC is favored in 9 out of their 10 Bowl games. The only team that is not favored to win is Florida vs Michigan
The BIG Ten is favored in 4 out of 10 games. Michigan, Ohio State, Minnesota (over Central Michigan) and Indiana ( over Duke)
The PAC 12 is favored in all nine games there is a line on. Oregon vs TCU there is no line. Waiting on injuries to clear up.
So they have the SEC going 9-1. The PAC 12 going 10-0 or 9-1 and the Big Ten going 4-6.
Since each of these conferences has ten teams going it will be easy to see who comes out on top.
The Big Ten has 4 match ups with the SEC and 3 with the PAC 12. These will be interesting
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
According to the FIX Network we don't even have to play the games. Don't the lines just reflect where the money is being bet and not the relative strengths of the Teams being bet on??
Going through the match-ups, some more fun with numbers:
SEC teams play 4 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
Big Ten teams play 6 ranked teams, 3 of which are Top 10
Pac 12 teams play 2 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
No Pac 12 v. SEC matchups. No Big 10 v Big 12 match-ups
So while the head-to-head match-ups will be telling, I don't think raw standings will because it is not a true apples to apples comparison.
Note: I used the rankings ESPN is using on its Bowl Schedule page.
I actually think there are a number of games that will be telling to see where the conferences are against each other.
We have been told all year here how the Big Ten conference was this year and how down the SEC was.
Let's see how a #14 Michigan matches up against a #19 Florida.
All year we have been told how Alabama can't take credit for beating a mediocre Geogia team. Let's see how they do against Penn St who I called mediocre all year to objections here.
Both conferences best teams play each other in MSU vs Alabama. Can't get better the that.
Oh snap. Tennessee who was called a terrible team on these very boards when Alabama's wins were discussed plays a 10-2 Northwestern. I was told how great NW was all year. Funny thing is that Tennessee is a 8 pint favorite.
Then in the BiG 10 vs PAC 12 we have two great games to judge.
11-2 Stanford vs 12-1 Iowa and 8-5 USC vs 9-3 Wisconsin
Good stuff
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Originally posted by: garnettstyle Something tells me if the sec had three 1 loss teams, the committee would find a way to put 2 in.
Ohio State got robbed
Ohio finished third in the Big Ten. They had no claim whatsoever.
Only because Iowa didn't have to play the 3 best teams. Ohio State is actually co-champions in their division.
They finished third. They didn't play in the title game, let alone win it. If you don't even make your conference title game, you have no claim on the CFP in my eyes.
Originally posted by: garnettstyle Something tells me if the sec had three 1 loss teams, the committee would find a way to put 2 in.
Ohio State got robbed
Ohio finished third in the Big Ten. They had no claim whatsoever.
Only because Iowa didn't have to play the 3 best teams. Ohio State is actually co-champions in their division.
They finished third. They didn't play in the title game, let alone win it. If you don't even make your conference title game, you have no claim on the CFP in my eyes.
Finished 1st in the east division. The Big 10 acknowledges co-champions of a division when 2 teams have the same record.
Take away one fluke play(the Michigan punt against Mich State) and the Buckeyes would be conference champions.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Something tells me if the sec had three 1 loss teams, the committee would find a way to put 2 in.
Ohio State got robbed
Ohio finished third in the Big Ten. They had no claim whatsoever.
Only because Iowa didn't have to play the 3 best teams. Ohio State is actually co-champions in their division.
They finished third. They didn't play in the title game, let alone win it. If you don't even make your conference title game, you have no claim on the CFP in my eyes.
Finished 1st in the east division. The Big 10 acknowledges co-champions of a division when 2 teams have the same record.
Take away one fluke play(the Michigan punt against Mich State) and the Buckeyes would be conference champions.
q
Michigan State beat OSU. All you had to do was win that game against a second and third Qb at home. You couldn't do it on your own. Don't blame A fluke play. Early in this thread you said Michigan Star should be undefeated. Make up your mind. Oh ya, it doesn't fit your argument now.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I think Iowa probably has 3 wins against top 30 teams. Pitt was just ranked last week, so they couldn't be that far removed from the top 30. Wisconsin is a top 30 team no doubt. If you just want to look at SOS, Iowa should be ahead of both Baylor and TCU. Alabama's offense has struggled in 2 out of their last 3 games.
Who cares that Alabama's offense the past two of three weeks? It has no merit what so ever. But since you opened Pandora's Box let me run with it.
You say Alabama's offense has struggled the past three weeks. The past three weeks they gained 396 yards, 396 yards and 364 yards For the heck of it Alabama gained 502 yards against Wisconsin. What did Iowa gain against Wisconsin? What, 226 yards you say?
Iowa is exactly where they should be. That or 10th.
If Alabama beats LSU this week it will be interesting to see if they land in the 2 or 3 spot.
SOS is only one of the points the committee looks at. Who they play, how they play and when they play goes into it as well. While wins are wins they way Iowa beat Wisconsin and Pittsburgh are marginalized.
mark
You would have a case if Alabama were undefeated. Alabama barely beat a bad Tennessee team. Those close Iowa games were against good teams, with the Wisconsin game on the road.
I'm not making a case. I was just refuting your ridiculous statement. Besides Tennessee is far from a bad team and you brought them into discussion, not me.
Obviously the committee disagrees with you. Then again they are unbiased.
mark
I think you are getting more ridiculous by the day. Tennessee is not a good team. And yes the committee has proven they are very SEC bias. 2 SEC teams in the top 4. Last year at this time they had 3 SEC teams in the top 4.
How could one forget these . That bad Tennessee team plays against the forum juggernaut 10-2 Nortwestern. Let's see how that works out.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Alabama losing to a unranked team should be left out of the top 6.
And here is where you said Michigan State should still be undefeated after the Nebraska loss when it fit your argument. Therefore if they win the game like you said they should then no matter what happened against Michigan is moot.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Notre Dame in your scenario. But it looks like this point will become mute tonight. Oklahoma could still be a factor as well as a one loss team.
mark
Lol. Ya, it did. Baylor just wouldn't stop scoring. I wish Baylor played a lick of defense because they would be exciting in the playoffs. So let's say MSU, OK and Baylor win out. You would take MSU over OK or Baylor? I don't know. Not saying it's impossible to happen but I think I would take Ok or Baylor. Although it's close. MSU gets credit for the win over Oregon but Oregon's brand new transfer QB was hurt and they still barely beat Oregon and they got the fluke win against Michigan. Their only good win was against Ohio State who we all think is a great team but they haven't played anybody so it's hard to know for sure. Will be interesting to see what the committee comes up with. This week I say:
You forgot to mention that Mich state also lost on a fluke play that was a bad call by the official, so they should probably be undefeated.
I see a pattern developing here
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Originally posted by: PM770 I think Tennessee is a decent team. They aren't terrible by any stretch, but they are also a 4 loss team. Most of their losses are quality losses (Arkansas is the lone bad loss), but they only have 1 decent win (Georgia).
This is what I said about Tennessee on 11/6. So I certainly never called them a "terrible" team. I stand by this still today. They are a decent team. And I do think NW is better and can't wait to get +8 on them. NW has been very good to me all year in this respect.
Regarding the SEC - Big Ten matchups, I think they are fairly balanced.
Northwestern-Tennessee and Alabama-Michigan State should be very good, evenly matched games regardless of what point spreads are saying. I'll be taking the points in both of those games (I look forward to either mockery or congratulations on 1/2).
One game is a definitive Big Ten advantage (Michigan-Florida) and one has a definitive SEC advantage (Georgia-Penn State).
I don't think I ever thought Penn State was anything more than mediocre all year and regarding Georgia it felt like Alabama was getting (and continues to get, in truth) credit for beating a Top 5 team when Georgia is far from that. That said, I do expect they are better Penn State who is mediocre.
I wonder how much time it takes you to go back pages to see my posts?
I am rooting for MSU in the playoffs, which I am sure you hope they get beat considering you are a Big 10 hater.
I will be rooting for the Big Ten in every game this bowl season just as always. Your hatred towards anything not Big Ten and everything anti Alabama clouds your judgement and makes you say the silliest things. I try to remain centered and will call out BS.
Last year the Big Ten went 5-5 in Bowl games ( 6-5 if you count the championship). A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was. Is the bar set so low that 5-5 is good? Where I come from 5-5 is a fail. When the Big Ten starts winning 7/10 games I'll jump on the band wagon. Until then the SEC and PAC 12 are still the better all around conferences. When the Big Ten's best team is a 10 point underdog against the SEC's best team its telling. When the Big Ten's Western Division Champ (12-1) is a touchdown underdog vs the Pac 12's North's Division Champ it's telling. When one of the SEC's terrible teams Tennessee is an eight point favorite against one of the best teams in the Big Ten 10-2 Northwestern it is telling.
But, games are played on the field thank goodness and we will see for ourselves. I don't know if you took navvaro up on his bet but I'll make you a wager well. Since the Pac 12, Big Ten and SEC all play ten games each I'll say the Big Ten comes in third amongst these conferences. So you get two chances to beat me. All the Big Ten has to do is finish above EITHER the Pac 12 or the SEC and you win. The Championship game can be included or excluded. Up to you.
The bet. The loser is not allowed to post in next years college football thread. Deal?
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Originally posted by: PM770 Regarding the SEC - Big Ten matchups, I think they are fairly balanced.
Northwestern-Tennessee and Alabama-Michigan State should be very good, evenly matched games regardless of what point spreads are saying. I'll be taking the points in both of those games (I look forward to either mockery or congratulations on 1/2).
One game is a definitive Big Ten advantage (Michigan-Florida) and one has a definitive SEC advantage (Georgia-Penn State).
I don't think I ever thought Penn State was anything more than mediocre all year and regarding Georgia it felt like Alabama was getting (and continues to get, in truth) credit for beating a Top 5 team when Georgia is far from that. That said, I do expect they are better Penn State who is mediocre.
Going by rankings and records, the Michigan vs Florida game is not a mismatch.
Going by rankings and records, the Georgia vs Penn State game is without a doubt a mismatch. Same with the UCLA vs Nebraska game. UCLA is 8-4 and Nebraska is 5-7 and it is a home game for UCLA.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
I think Michigan State is underrated. The other 3 teams all overrated.
I wouldn't bet because the odds on all 4 are terrible.
Dabo is good, but not quite in the same class as the other 3 coaches. I would put the other 3, + Urban , and Jimbo in my top 5.
Jim Harbaugh on the cusp.
I don't like any of those odds either. The only one that is semi palatable is Oklahoma in my opinion.
I share your same view on the coaches.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Originally posted by: garnettstyle I wonder how much time it takes you to go back pages to see my posts?
I am rooting for MSU in the playoffs, which I am sure you hope they get beat considering you are a Big 10 hater.
I will be rooting for the Big Ten in every game this bowl season just as always. Your hatred towards anything not Big Ten and everything anti Alabama clouds your judgement and makes you say the silliest things. I try to remain centered and will call out BS.
Last year the Big Ten went 5-5 in Bowl games ( 6-5 if you count the championship). A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was. Is the bar set so low that 5-5 is good? Where I come from 5-5 is a fail. When the Big Ten starts winning 7/10 games I'll jump on the band wagon. Until then the SEC and PAC 12 are still the better all around conferences. When the Big Ten's best team is a 10 point underdog against the SEC's best team its telling. When the Big Ten's Western Division Champ (12-1) is a touchdown underdog vs the Pac 12's North's Division Champ it's telling. When one of the SEC's terrible teams Tennessee is an eight point favorite against one of the best teams in the Big Ten 10-2 Northwestern it is telling.
But, games are played on the field thank goodness and we will see for ourselves. I don't know if you took navvaro up on his bet but I'll make you a wager well. Since the Pac 12, Big Ten and SEC all play ten games each I'll say the Big Ten comes in third amongst these conferences. So you get two chances to beat me. All the Big Ten has to do is finish above EITHER the Pac 12 or the SEC and you win. The Championship game can be included or excluded. Up to you.
The bet. The loser is not allowed to post in next years college football thread. Deal?
mark
Not making a deal with you because you don't speak the truth. Its very clear that you are a Big 10 and Ohio State hater. Even the Esecpn hacks are admitting the Big 10 is the best conference and the sec is not good this year. Just look at the rankings. The SEC has 2 good teams this year. The rest are mediocre unless you thinK Florida is a good team LOL. Pac 12 is ok but they are not as good as last year. Their second best team has 5 losses. The Big 10's 5th best team BEAT the Pac 12 champion.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
I don't hate OSU. I very very much respect their program. OSU hacks are another story. I simply stated that when they were ranked number one each and every week that they were over rated and didn't deserve the spot based on performance and their schedule. Turned out I was right. Ive been rooting for BIG TEN in Bowl games exclusively ever since my first Rose Bowl as a kid. I just can't stand BIG TEN fan boys. They tend to be embarrassing for the rest of Big Ten guys. Clear?
So ok you don't want to take my wager. Noted. I wouldn't either as the Big Ten will not have a better recored in the bowls compared to the PAC 12 or SEC. It's not a slight, it's just probably what's going to happen. I hope I'm wrong. I'm a realist.
Let's just see how Florida vs Michigan, Georgia vs Penn State, NW vs Tennessee, MSU vs Alabama, Wisconsin vs USC ( this 5 loss team is favored) , Iowa vs Stanford turn out. I don't think ESPN knows what they are talking about either.
I have a feeling even if the SEC goes 9-1 (favored in 9) and the PAC 12 goes 10-0 ( favored in all where there is a line) and the Big Ten goes 4-6 you find some random website that says the Big Ten is the best and you will be sure to post it here. Me, eye test and the bowl games will determine that.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was.
Mark, I hope your feud with garnett would'nt spill over to us all, lumped in with how he expresses his bias. The point isn't how great the conference did, but how it fared in comparison the other major conferences. Speaking only for myself, I'll just say that it gets a little daunting to hear ad nauseum how great the SEC is so I take pleasure when the falter, especially at OUR expense. Watching OSU completely beat Alabama last year was pure joy.
Looking at the link below should tell anything anyone wants to know. Pat that, I think we should let the Teams play the games before we beat each other to death and cause bad feelings that will linger.
A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was.
Mark, I hope your feud with garnett would'nt spill over to us all, lumped in with how he expresses his bias. The point isn't how great the conference did, but how it fared in comparison the other major conferences. Speaking only for myself, I'll just say that it gets a little daunting to hear ad nauseum how great the SEC is so I take pleasure when the falter, especially at OUR expense. Watching OSU completely beat Alabama last year was pure joy.
Looking at the link below should tell anything anyone wants to know. Pat that, I think we should let the Teams play the games before we beat each other to death and cause bad feelings that will linger.
Yes, the Pac 12 has been best in the bowls the past two years. 12-5.
Yes, the Big Ten fared much better then any would thought possible at 5-5. But doesn't that tell you something? Low expectations. Some didn't think they would win a game.
Anyways, I'm with you and didn't mind seeing SEC guys eat some crow that year : ). I just hope it wasn't a one year thing. The experts seem to think it was. I do as well truth be told. Hope I'm wrong.
Let the games be played on the field and let the best teams win.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Not that I saw posted. Had some Bama takers for the BCS title game and I wound up sporting a Bama avatar for a month, you'd think I'd learn my lesson by now but OSU is no Bama.
If he doesn't want to play I'm not going to call him out on it, that's his prerogative.
The thing about bowl games now is that only the playoff games really matter. The others are rewards for a good season. Besides bragging rights you just can't put too much stock in those games. Coaching changes are going on, you have players that are going to be drafted not giving 100% and some coaches give the younger, unexperienced players some playing time to get them ready for the next season. The winning fans will brag and the losing fans will make excuses, that's why I love it. When we lost to Ole Miss this year I said "heck, we had 5 turnovers that cost us 24 points and they had that pass bounce off the players helmet go 10 feet in the air and catch it on the run for a TD". Didn't matter, it just wasn't our night plus Ole Miss played pretty dang good. It's better to take your lumps and be quite, I would never brag about 3rd place.
IMO, the SEC will go 6-3 at best. Losers, Gators, Georgia, LSU.
Bama vs Sooners for the title. I'll watch the first 2 games before picking the winner.
Originally posted by: PM770 Regarding the SEC - Big Ten matchups, I think they are fairly balanced.
Northwestern-Tennessee and Alabama-Michigan State should be very good, evenly matched games regardless of what point spreads are saying. I'll be taking the points in both of those games (I look forward to either mockery or congratulations on 1/2).
One game is a definitive Big Ten advantage (Michigan-Florida) and one has a definitive SEC advantage (Georgia-Penn State).
I don't think I ever thought Penn State was anything more than mediocre all year and regarding Georgia it felt like Alabama was getting (and continues to get, in truth) credit for beating a Top 5 team when Georgia is far from that. That said, I do expect they are better Penn State who is mediocre.
Going by rankings and records, the Michigan vs Florida game is not a mismatch.
Going by rankings and records, the Georgia vs Penn State game is without a doubt a mismatch. Same with the UCLA vs Nebraska game. UCLA is 8-4 and Nebraska is 5-7 and it is a home game for UCLA.
I generally ignore your inane comments but... how on earth is the Foster Farms bowl in Nor Cal (where people HATE all things So Cal) a home game for UCLA? It's 400+ miles from UCLA to Levis' stadium. Other than a few area UCLA alumni who will be there not too many people from sunny So Cal are rolling to cold Nor Cal for a meaningless football game in December. I hate to disparage the fans of my team but we don't travel well. On the other hand Nebraska fans, even when 5-7, travel! I bet you the stadium will be 70% red. I still remember Nebraska at UCLA about 1984 or '85. The Rose Bowl was predominately red that day and Nebraska whooped UCLA. In true LA fashion we left at halftime! LOL! The golf course, where the tailgating takes place, was filled with Nebraska license plates. It was rather funny. I would anticipate the Foster Farms Bowl 2015 to be the same. A ton of Nebraska people and very few UCLA fans. Lots of empty seats also! Not a home game for the Bruins for sure.
Is Adolphus Washington going to be suspended for the Notre Dame game? He was arrested for solicitation.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I remember listening to the 1972 UCLA-Nebraska game- The Bruins won in a stunning upset 20-17
I don't remember that one although I am sure my parents were dragging me to UCLA games at that time. My first clear college football memory was the '76 Rose Bowl against Ohio State. UCLA won in a major upset. I was about 7. We watched on TV. I remember playing catch in the backyard at halftime. Good times!
I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
A good choice of words because it wasn't so in the aftermath of what you described, but it did start around the time of spring drills. At that time I remember reading how SEC fans were already downplaying what took place in the Playoff. All this feeds into the fact that an expanded system is needed because what we essentially have right now is a Power Five Conference Playoff. It is in a way reminiscent of the way MLB functions where the Major Market Teams dominate unless a another Team owner delves deeply into his pockets. Another comparison might be the NCAA Basketball Championship where some smaller, lesser known schools are able to be competitive and are included.
Most of the smaller FSB schools won't threaten the P5 Teams, so why not allow them to compete so we cheer for a true underdog??
I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
I actually mentioned 5-5 in bowl games and 6-5 including the championship. Those are facts.
I also pulled out the key games where there is good symmetry as the games to judge:
USC vs Wisconsin
Iowa vs Stanford
MSU vs Alabama
Michigan vs Florida
Northwestern vs Tennessee
Penn State vs Georgia
The balance I don't care too much about as I view them insignificant. If the Big Ten goes 4-2 in these games I will be impressed. Fair enough?
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Originally posted by: PM770 I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
I agree on your first statement. It would seem the championship game should count.
As to your second, ok. You have proven to all of us the Big 10 is best and the SEC or the Pac 12 or whoever you want to be is the worst. I now feel less of myself, as a human, for thinking otherwise.
As to the third it seems like you are setting it up in case you don't win as much as you hope to in these bowl games. Sort of setting up your excuses ahead of time. Let's play the games and then make excuses!
Originally posted by: PM770 I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
I actually mentioned 5-5 in bowl games and 6-5 including the championship. Those are facts.
I also pulled out the key games where there is good symmetry as the games to judge:
USC vs Wisconsin Iowa vs Stanford MSU vs Alabama Michigan vs Florida Northwestern vs Tennessee Penn State vs Georgia
The balance I don't care too much about as I view them insignificant. If the Big Ten goes 4-2 in these games I will be impressed. Fair enough?
mark
... and if they don't go 4-2 it's because of the SEC bias!
Comments
He has good instincts for the "hole" and the speed I mentioned along with being an adequate receiver and a very, very good blocker. Another aspect is his hips, the guy has great hip movement that he uses when he plants to go around blocks, and he reads his blocks superbly. I am biased, of course, but I think he'll fit well with the right Team whenever he comes out and I'd expect him to be a mid-first or second round pick.
To be honest, I hope Urban Meyer can convince him to stay in school one more year.
I have no clue about Elliott. I just mean in general.
...
To be honest, I hope Urban Meyer can convince him to stay in school one more year.
Good luck with that. I can't blame the kids for going pro but as a college fan it sure is frustrating at times! At least you know Urban will likely have the position re-loaded with another superstar if Elliott does leave.
"Yet they are still the team no one wants to play. Have you seen the Notre Dame forums lately?"
On the Notre Dame forums/groups that I peruse, we were far more concerned with drawing Houston, rather than Ohio or Iowa.
M
Garnettstyle wrote:
"Yet they are still the team no one wants to play. Have you seen the Notre Dame forums lately?"
On the Notre Dame forums/groups that I peruse, we were far more concerned with drawing Houston, rather than Ohio or Iowa.
M
That's only because there would be nothing to gain and everything to lose if a power 5 team played Houston.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Griffin didn't have a great NFL career because he was too small.
I find it hilarious someone would compare this years Michigan State team to the one 5 yrs ago. Since that Alabama loss, they have not lost a bowl game.
I found it hilarious when you said that OSU is the co-champion of their division.
Third place in the Big 10.......OUCH !!!!
Yet they are still the team no one wants to play. Have you seen the Notre Dame forums lately?
We'd love to play OSU, heck, I was pulling for OSU and they let me down. Anyway, OSU is 1-1 against the final Top 25. Didn't play enough quality opponents and if they had they would have lost those. Hey, wait until next year, right?
Who's we?
They're only loss was to the #3 team by a last second field goal.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
SEC vs Big10
Guess ESPN is not the only SEC biased network. Check out Foxsports.
SEC vs Big10
Ya, I came to the same conclusion the other night and posted the following:
I was just doing some more research and couldn't help but notice that Las Vegas ( the general betting public) thinks the following:
The SEC is favored in 9 out of their 10 Bowl games. The only team that is not favored to win is Florida vs Michigan
The BIG Ten is favored in 4 out of 10 games. Michigan, Ohio State, Minnesota (over Central Michigan) and Indiana ( over Duke)
The PAC 12 is favored in all nine games there is a line on. Oregon vs TCU there is no line. Waiting on injuries to clear up.
So they have the SEC going 9-1. The PAC 12 going 10-0 or 9-1 and the Big Ten going 4-6.
Since each of these conferences has ten teams going it will be easy to see who comes out on top.
The Big Ten has 4 match ups with the SEC and 3 with the PAC 12. These will be interesting
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
SEC teams play 4 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
Big Ten teams play 6 ranked teams, 3 of which are Top 10
Pac 12 teams play 2 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
No Pac 12 v. SEC matchups. No Big 10 v Big 12 match-ups
So while the head-to-head match-ups will be telling, I don't think raw standings will because it is not a true apples to apples comparison.
Note: I used the rankings ESPN is using on its Bowl Schedule page.
I was going through this thread and found this in an old post of mine. I guess this one we will find out!
Going through the match-ups, some more fun with numbers:
SEC teams play 4 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
Big Ten teams play 6 ranked teams, 3 of which are Top 10
Pac 12 teams play 2 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
No Pac 12 v. SEC matchups. No Big 10 v Big 12 match-ups
So while the head-to-head match-ups will be telling, I don't think raw standings will because it is not a true apples to apples comparison.
Note: I used the rankings ESPN is using on its Bowl Schedule page.
I don't think we ever know for sure but it's fun nonetheless. It's "something" to compare anyway.
Going through the match-ups, some more fun with numbers:
SEC teams play 4 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
Big Ten teams play 6 ranked teams, 3 of which are Top 10
Pac 12 teams play 2 ranked teams, 1 of which is Top 10
No Pac 12 v. SEC matchups. No Big 10 v Big 12 match-ups
So while the head-to-head match-ups will be telling, I don't think raw standings will because it is not a true apples to apples comparison.
Note: I used the rankings ESPN is using on its Bowl Schedule page.
I actually think there are a number of games that will be telling to see where the conferences are against each other.
We have been told all year here how the Big Ten conference was this year and how down the SEC was.
Let's see how a #14 Michigan matches up against a #19 Florida.
All year we have been told how Alabama can't take credit for beating a mediocre Geogia team. Let's see how they do against Penn St who I called mediocre all year to objections here.
Both conferences best teams play each other in MSU vs Alabama. Can't get better the that.
Oh snap. Tennessee who was called a terrible team on these very boards when Alabama's wins were discussed plays a 10-2 Northwestern. I was told how great NW was all year. Funny thing is that Tennessee is a 8 pint favorite.
Then in the BiG 10 vs PAC 12 we have two great games to judge.
11-2 Stanford vs 12-1 Iowa and 8-5 USC vs 9-3 Wisconsin
Good stuff
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Not as sweet as this 85 yard TD run.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Iowa would be the better match against ND and OSU would be the better match against Stanford.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Something tells me if the sec had three 1 loss teams, the committee would find a way to put 2 in.
Ohio State got robbed
Ohio finished third in the Big Ten. They had no claim whatsoever.
Only because Iowa didn't have to play the 3 best teams. Ohio State is actually co-champions in their division.
They finished third. They didn't play in the title game, let alone win it. If you don't even make your conference title game, you have no claim on the CFP in my eyes.
Something tells me if the sec had three 1 loss teams, the committee would find a way to put 2 in.
Ohio State got robbed
Ohio finished third in the Big Ten. They had no claim whatsoever.
Only because Iowa didn't have to play the 3 best teams. Ohio State is actually co-champions in their division.
They finished third. They didn't play in the title game, let alone win it. If you don't even make your conference title game, you have no claim on the CFP in my eyes.
Finished 1st in the east division. The Big 10 acknowledges co-champions of a division when 2 teams have the same record.
Take away one fluke play(the Michigan punt against Mich State) and the Buckeyes would be conference champions.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Something tells me if the sec had three 1 loss teams, the committee would find a way to put 2 in.
Ohio State got robbed
Ohio finished third in the Big Ten. They had no claim whatsoever.
Only because Iowa didn't have to play the 3 best teams. Ohio State is actually co-champions in their division.
They finished third. They didn't play in the title game, let alone win it. If you don't even make your conference title game, you have no claim on the CFP in my eyes.
Finished 1st in the east division. The Big 10 acknowledges co-champions of a division when 2 teams have the same record.
Take away one fluke play(the Michigan punt against Mich State) and the Buckeyes would be conference champions.
q
Michigan State beat OSU. All you had to do was win that game against a second and third Qb at home. You couldn't do it on your own. Don't blame A fluke play. Early in this thread you said Michigan Star should be undefeated. Make up your mind. Oh ya, it doesn't fit your argument now.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I think Iowa probably has 3 wins against top 30 teams. Pitt was just ranked last week, so they couldn't be that far removed from the top 30. Wisconsin is a top 30 team no doubt. If you just want to look at SOS, Iowa should be ahead of both Baylor and TCU. Alabama's offense has struggled in 2 out of their last 3 games.
Who cares that Alabama's offense the past two of three weeks? It has no merit what so ever. But since you opened Pandora's Box let me run with it.
You say Alabama's offense has struggled the past three weeks. The past three weeks they gained 396 yards, 396 yards and 364 yards For the heck of it Alabama gained 502 yards against Wisconsin. What did Iowa gain against Wisconsin? What, 226 yards you say?
Iowa is exactly where they should be. That or 10th.
If Alabama beats LSU this week it will be interesting to see if they land in the 2 or 3 spot.
SOS is only one of the points the committee looks at. Who they play, how they play and when they play goes into it as well. While wins are wins they way Iowa beat Wisconsin and Pittsburgh are marginalized.
mark
You would have a case if Alabama were undefeated. Alabama barely beat a bad Tennessee team. Those close Iowa games were against good teams, with the Wisconsin game on the road.
I'm not making a case. I was just refuting your ridiculous statement. Besides Tennessee is far from a bad team and you brought them into discussion, not me.
Obviously the committee disagrees with you. Then again they are unbiased.
mark
I think you are getting more ridiculous by the day. Tennessee is not a good team. And yes the committee has proven they are very SEC bias. 2 SEC teams in the top 4. Last year at this time they had 3 SEC teams in the top 4.
How could one forget these . That bad Tennessee team plays against the forum juggernaut 10-2 Nortwestern. Let's see how that works out.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Clemson #1 in AP, Ohio State #1 in coaches poll.
Big Ten has 6 ranked teams.
North Carolina finally gets some respect at #17.
Michigan State should still be undefeated.
Alabama losing to a unranked team should be left out of the top 6.
And here is where you said Michigan State should still be undefeated after the Nebraska loss when it fit your argument. Therefore if they win the game like you said they should then no matter what happened against Michigan is moot.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Notre Dame in your scenario. But it looks like this point will become mute tonight. Oklahoma could still be a factor as well as a one loss team.
mark
Lol. Ya, it did. Baylor just wouldn't stop scoring. I wish Baylor played a lick of defense because they would be exciting in the playoffs. So let's say MSU, OK and Baylor win out. You would take MSU over OK or Baylor? I don't know. Not saying it's impossible to happen but I think I would take Ok or Baylor. Although it's close. MSU gets credit for the win over Oregon but Oregon's brand new transfer QB was hurt and they still barely beat Oregon and they got the fluke win against Michigan. Their only good win was against Ohio State who we all think is a great team but they haven't played anybody so it's hard to know for sure. Will be interesting to see what the committee comes up with. This week I say:
You forgot to mention that Mich state also lost on a fluke play that was a bad call by the official, so they should probably be undefeated.
I see a pattern developing here
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I am rooting for MSU in the playoffs, which I am sure you hope they get beat considering you are a Big 10 hater.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
I think Tennessee is a decent team. They aren't terrible by any stretch, but they are also a 4 loss team. Most of their losses are quality losses (Arkansas is the lone bad loss), but they only have 1 decent win (Georgia).
This is what I said about Tennessee on 11/6. So I certainly never called them a "terrible" team. I stand by this still today. They are a decent team. And I do think NW is better and can't wait to get +8 on them. NW has been very good to me all year in this respect.
Northwestern-Tennessee and Alabama-Michigan State should be very good, evenly matched games regardless of what point spreads are saying. I'll be taking the points in both of those games (I look forward to either mockery or congratulations on 1/2).
One game is a definitive Big Ten advantage (Michigan-Florida) and one has a definitive SEC advantage (Georgia-Penn State).
I don't think I ever thought Penn State was anything more than mediocre all year and regarding Georgia it felt like Alabama was getting (and continues to get, in truth) credit for beating a Top 5 team when Georgia is far from that. That said, I do expect they are better Penn State who is mediocre.
I wonder how much time it takes you to go back pages to see my posts?
I am rooting for MSU in the playoffs, which I am sure you hope they get beat considering you are a Big 10 hater.
I will be rooting for the Big Ten in every game this bowl season just as always. Your hatred towards anything not Big Ten and everything anti Alabama clouds your judgement and makes you say the silliest things. I try to remain centered and will call out BS.
Last year the Big Ten went 5-5 in Bowl games ( 6-5 if you count the championship). A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was. Is the bar set so low that 5-5 is good? Where I come from 5-5 is a fail. When the Big Ten starts winning 7/10 games I'll jump on the band wagon. Until then the SEC and PAC 12 are still the better all around conferences. When the Big Ten's best team is a 10 point underdog against the SEC's best team its telling. When the Big Ten's Western Division Champ (12-1) is a touchdown underdog vs the Pac 12's North's Division Champ it's telling. When one of the SEC's terrible teams Tennessee is an eight point favorite against one of the best teams in the Big Ten 10-2 Northwestern it is telling.
But, games are played on the field thank goodness and we will see for ourselves. I don't know if you took navvaro up on his bet but I'll make you a wager well. Since the Pac 12, Big Ten and SEC all play ten games each I'll say the Big Ten comes in third amongst these conferences. So you get two chances to beat me. All the Big Ten has to do is finish above EITHER the Pac 12 or the SEC and you win. The Championship game can be included or excluded. Up to you.
The bet. The loser is not allowed to post in next years college football thread. Deal?
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Clemson 5.5 to 1
Alabama 10/11
OKLA 9/4
I think Michigan State is underrated. The other 3 teams all overrated.
I wouldn't bet because the odds on all 4 are terrible.
Dabo is good, but not quite in the same class as the other 3 coaches. I would put the other 3, + Urban , and Jimbo in my top 5.
Jim Harbaugh on the cusp.
Regarding the SEC - Big Ten matchups, I think they are fairly balanced.
Northwestern-Tennessee and Alabama-Michigan State should be very good, evenly matched games regardless of what point spreads are saying. I'll be taking the points in both of those games (I look forward to either mockery or congratulations on 1/2).
One game is a definitive Big Ten advantage (Michigan-Florida) and one has a definitive SEC advantage (Georgia-Penn State).
I don't think I ever thought Penn State was anything more than mediocre all year and regarding Georgia it felt like Alabama was getting (and continues to get, in truth) credit for beating a Top 5 team when Georgia is far from that. That said, I do expect they are better Penn State who is mediocre.
Going by rankings and records, the Michigan vs Florida game is not a mismatch.
Going by rankings and records, the Georgia vs Penn State game is without a doubt a mismatch. Same with the UCLA vs Nebraska game. UCLA is 8-4 and Nebraska is 5-7 and it is a home game for UCLA.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Michigan State still the dog. 7.5 to 1
Clemson 5.5 to 1
Alabama 10/11
OKLA 9/4
I think Michigan State is underrated. The other 3 teams all overrated.
I wouldn't bet because the odds on all 4 are terrible.
Dabo is good, but not quite in the same class as the other 3 coaches. I would put the other 3, + Urban , and Jimbo in my top 5.
Jim Harbaugh on the cusp.
I don't like any of those odds either. The only one that is semi palatable is Oklahoma in my opinion.
I share your same view on the coaches.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I wonder how much time it takes you to go back pages to see my posts?
I am rooting for MSU in the playoffs, which I am sure you hope they get beat considering you are a Big 10 hater.
I will be rooting for the Big Ten in every game this bowl season just as always. Your hatred towards anything not Big Ten and everything anti Alabama clouds your judgement and makes you say the silliest things. I try to remain centered and will call out BS.
Last year the Big Ten went 5-5 in Bowl games ( 6-5 if you count the championship). A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was. Is the bar set so low that 5-5 is good? Where I come from 5-5 is a fail. When the Big Ten starts winning 7/10 games I'll jump on the band wagon. Until then the SEC and PAC 12 are still the better all around conferences. When the Big Ten's best team is a 10 point underdog against the SEC's best team its telling. When the Big Ten's Western Division Champ (12-1) is a touchdown underdog vs the Pac 12's North's Division Champ it's telling. When one of the SEC's terrible teams Tennessee is an eight point favorite against one of the best teams in the Big Ten 10-2 Northwestern it is telling.
But, games are played on the field thank goodness and we will see for ourselves. I don't know if you took navvaro up on his bet but I'll make you a wager well. Since the Pac 12, Big Ten and SEC all play ten games each I'll say the Big Ten comes in third amongst these conferences. So you get two chances to beat me. All the Big Ten has to do is finish above EITHER the Pac 12 or the SEC and you win. The Championship game can be included or excluded. Up to you.
The bet. The loser is not allowed to post in next years college football thread. Deal?
mark
Not making a deal with you because you don't speak the truth. Its very clear that you are a Big 10 and Ohio State hater. Even the Esecpn hacks are admitting the Big 10 is the best conference and the sec is not good this year. Just look at the rankings. The SEC has 2 good teams this year. The rest are mediocre unless you thinK Florida is a good team LOL. Pac 12 is ok but they are not as good as last year. Their second best team has 5 losses. The Big 10's 5th best team BEAT the Pac 12 champion.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
So ok you don't want to take my wager. Noted. I wouldn't either as the Big Ten will not have a better recored in the bowls compared to the PAC 12 or SEC. It's not a slight, it's just probably what's going to happen. I hope I'm wrong. I'm a realist.
Let's just see how Florida vs Michigan, Georgia vs Penn State, NW vs Tennessee, MSU vs Alabama, Wisconsin vs USC ( this 5 loss team is favored) , Iowa vs Stanford turn out. I don't think ESPN knows what they are talking about either.
I have a feeling even if the SEC goes 9-1 (favored in 9) and the PAC 12 goes 10-0 ( favored in all where there is a line) and the Big Ten goes 4-6 you find some random website that says the Big Ten is the best and you will be sure to post it here. Me, eye test and the bowl games will determine that.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
MSU +9 1/2 vs Alabama
OKLA -3 1/2 vs Clemson
Ohio State -6 1/2 vs ND
Stanford -6 1/2 vs Iowa
Cannot get my head around Florida/Michigan
Liking Northwestern +9 over TN
Mark, I hope your feud with garnett would'nt spill over to us all, lumped in with how he expresses his bias. The point isn't how great the conference did, but how it fared in comparison the other major conferences. Speaking only for myself, I'll just say that it gets a little daunting to hear ad nauseum how great the SEC is so I take pleasure when the falter, especially at OUR expense. Watching OSU completely beat Alabama last year was pure joy.
Looking at the link below should tell anything anyone wants to know. Pat that, I think we should let the Teams play the games before we beat each other to death and cause bad feelings that will linger.
2014-2015 Bowl records.
A lot of Big Ten fans rejoiced on what a great Bowl season it was.
Mark, I hope your feud with garnett would'nt spill over to us all, lumped in with how he expresses his bias. The point isn't how great the conference did, but how it fared in comparison the other major conferences. Speaking only for myself, I'll just say that it gets a little daunting to hear ad nauseum how great the SEC is so I take pleasure when the falter, especially at OUR expense. Watching OSU completely beat Alabama last year was pure joy.
Looking at the link below should tell anything anyone wants to know. Pat that, I think we should let the Teams play the games before we beat each other to death and cause bad feelings that will linger.
2014-2015 Bowl records.
I dont lump you in with my man garnett.
Yes, the Pac 12 has been best in the bowls the past two years. 12-5.
Yes, the Big Ten fared much better then any would thought possible at 5-5. But doesn't that tell you something? Low expectations. Some didn't think they would win a game.
Anyways, I'm with you and didn't mind seeing SEC guys eat some crow that year : ). I just hope it wasn't a one year thing. The experts seem to think it was. I do as well truth be told. Hope I'm wrong.
Let the games be played on the field and let the best teams win.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I don't know if you took navvaro up on his bet
Not that I saw posted. Had some Bama takers for the BCS title game and I wound up sporting a Bama avatar for a month, you'd think I'd learn my lesson by now but OSU is no Bama.
If he doesn't want to play I'm not going to call him out on it, that's his prerogative.
Mike
IMO, the SEC will go 6-3 at best. Losers, Gators, Georgia, LSU.
Bama vs Sooners for the title. I'll watch the first 2 games before picking the winner.
For you older fans......
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
Regarding the SEC - Big Ten matchups, I think they are fairly balanced.
Northwestern-Tennessee and Alabama-Michigan State should be very good, evenly matched games regardless of what point spreads are saying. I'll be taking the points in both of those games (I look forward to either mockery or congratulations on 1/2).
One game is a definitive Big Ten advantage (Michigan-Florida) and one has a definitive SEC advantage (Georgia-Penn State).
I don't think I ever thought Penn State was anything more than mediocre all year and regarding Georgia it felt like Alabama was getting (and continues to get, in truth) credit for beating a Top 5 team when Georgia is far from that. That said, I do expect they are better Penn State who is mediocre.
Going by rankings and records, the Michigan vs Florida game is not a mismatch.
Going by rankings and records, the Georgia vs Penn State game is without a doubt a mismatch. Same with the UCLA vs Nebraska game. UCLA is 8-4 and Nebraska is 5-7 and it is a home game for UCLA.
I generally ignore your inane comments but... how on earth is the Foster Farms bowl in Nor Cal (where people HATE all things So Cal) a home game for UCLA? It's 400+ miles from UCLA to Levis' stadium. Other than a few area UCLA alumni who will be there not too many people from sunny So Cal are rolling to cold Nor Cal for a meaningless football game in December. I hate to disparage the fans of my team but we don't travel well. On the other hand Nebraska fans, even when 5-7, travel! I bet you the stadium will be 70% red. I still remember Nebraska at UCLA about 1984 or '85. The Rose Bowl was predominately red that day and Nebraska whooped UCLA. In true LA fashion we left at halftime! LOL! The golf course, where the tailgating takes place, was filled with Nebraska license plates. It was rather funny. I would anticipate the Foster Farms Bowl 2015 to be the same. A ton of Nebraska people and very few UCLA fans. Lots of empty seats also! Not a home game for the Bruins for sure.
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I remember listening to the 1972 UCLA-Nebraska game- The Bruins won in a stunning upset 20-17
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
larryallen73-
I remember listening to the 1972 UCLA-Nebraska game- The Bruins won in a stunning upset 20-17
I don't remember that one although I am sure my parents were dragging me to UCLA games at that time. My first clear college football memory was the '76 Rose Bowl against Ohio State. UCLA won in a major upset. I was about 7. We watched on TV. I remember playing catch in the backyard at halftime. Good times!
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
A good choice of words because it wasn't so in the aftermath of what you described, but it did start around the time of spring drills. At that time I remember reading how SEC fans were already downplaying what took place in the Playoff. All this feeds into the fact that an expanded system is needed because what we essentially have right now is a Power Five Conference Playoff. It is in a way reminiscent of the way MLB functions where the Major Market Teams dominate unless a another Team owner delves deeply into his pockets. Another comparison might be the NCAA Basketball Championship where some smaller, lesser known schools are able to be competitive and are included.
Most of the smaller FSB schools won't threaten the P5 Teams, so why not allow them to compete so we cheer for a true underdog??
I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
I actually mentioned 5-5 in bowl games and 6-5 including the championship. Those are facts.
I also pulled out the key games where there is good symmetry as the games to judge:
USC vs Wisconsin
Iowa vs Stanford
MSU vs Alabama
Michigan vs Florida
Northwestern vs Tennessee
Penn State vs Georgia
The balance I don't care too much about as I view them insignificant. If the Big Ten goes 4-2 in these games I will be impressed. Fair enough?
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
I agree on your first statement. It would seem the championship game should count.
As to your second, ok. You have proven to all of us the Big 10 is best and the SEC or the Pac 12 or whoever you want to be is the worst. I now feel less of myself, as a human, for thinking otherwise.
As to the third it seems like you are setting it up in case you don't win as much as you hope to in these bowl games. Sort of setting up your excuses ahead of time. Let's play the games and then make excuses!
I keep seeing 5-5 as the Big Ten bowl record. Why is the championship game being ignored? Isn't that the most important of all games? It seems odd to keep leaving it out of the record.
Furthermore, the Big Ten went 4-1 (3-0 in the "Big 6") on New Years Eve, New Years Day & the Championship game, while the SEC was going 1-4 (0-3 in the "Big 6") This perception is not based on some degraded expectations. 4-1 in the major bowls including the National Champion. Why are we getting this nonsensical revisionism? The Big Ten had a great 2014-15 bowl season. Period.
The danger of looking at raw bowl records is that it is not apples to apples. As I pointed out in a previous post, the Big Ten is playing a better caliber of teams in the bowls (more Top 25 and more Top 10). The Pac-12 has 10 bowl games this year and 4 of them will be against the Mountain West, Conference USA and an independent (BYU). The Big Ten has one such game (MAC) and also has 2 teams with 5-7 records who are only here because of the academic record. The Pac-12 always does well because they are forced to play a large percentage of those 2nd tier bowls against the smaller conferences. I know they want to get into the bigger bowls, but the SEC, Big Ten & Big 12 have gobbled them all up, so this is not a criticism on the Pac-12. This is a criticism of using raw bowl record as meaningful in any way.
I actually mentioned 5-5 in bowl games and 6-5 including the championship. Those are facts.
I also pulled out the key games where there is good symmetry as the games to judge:
USC vs Wisconsin
Iowa vs Stanford
MSU vs Alabama
Michigan vs Florida
Northwestern vs Tennessee
Penn State vs Georgia
The balance I don't care too much about as I view them insignificant. If the Big Ten goes 4-2 in these games I will be impressed. Fair enough?
mark
... and if they don't go 4-2 it's because of the SEC bias!