New Year, Same B1G Story...
by ProveIt on Jan 2, 2012 10:19 PM EST
Email
Print...but the story I am talking about isn't a sub-500 bowl record.
Conference Champ Wisconsin lost to Conference Champ Oregon by a score in a coin flip.
Conference 2nd Sparty defeated Conference 2nd UGa in triple OT
Division 2nd PSU lost to Houston something ugly- can anyone fault PSU given their other issues?
Division 3rd Nebraska lost to Division 2nd South Carolina by 17
Division 3rd Purdue defeated a MAC team (though the margin should have been a lot more)
Division 4th Iowa lost to Conference 4th (equivalent of Division 2nd-3rd) Oklahoma by 17
Division 4th Ohio State lost to Division 3rd Florida by 7
Division 5th Northwestern lost to Conference 7th (equivalent to Division 4th) Texas A&M by 11
Division 5th Illinois defeated Division 2nd UCLA by 6 in a game with no head coaches (no I don't consider UCLA division champs, and barely consider them Division 2nd)
...and in the final bowl, Division 2nd tSUN vs. Division 1st Virginia Tech.
Notice the pattern? I've noticed it for a decade. The problem isn't that the B1G sucks. The problem is...
The bowls love us a little too much. More specifically, the bowls like the eyes we put on the games and the seats we fill in the stadiums.
Excluding the mid-majors we played 2 teams that finished the same in their conference as the B1G representative finished in ours. In the remaining 6 we faced off against teams that finished higher in their respective conference - not exactly apples to apples.
So far, we have done as expected - remove the mid majors and the headless UCLA-Illini match up and we lost the games where we were lower, split the games where we were evenly matched, and didn't get the luxury of playing teams that finished lower.
What I saw this year is what I see almost every year - the major that finished higher in their respective conference usually wins. The bowl record problem isn't that we suck, it is that our division 4th isn't better than their division 3rd, etc.
...and you know what? I really don't mind, because I would rather win just 30-40% of the games playing mostly up than 80% playing down. I certainly don't mind playing in better bowls.
Heads up - get used to it... because if Delany is able to join with the SEC and mid majors and get the BCS reduced to 1 title game to eliminate AQ status, the B1G will negotiate a tie in with a 2nd major bowl and continue getting match ups like this regularly.
FanPosts must be substantive. If you are merely referencing an article, video, or other form of content, please post a FanShot instead. If you are expanding or starting a discussion, feel free to continue with your FanPost.
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bowls are too important to national reputation
The B10 can’t afford to keep having losing records every year. The whole media rips on the B10 all year because of it, which hurts in the polls and in recruiting. It isn’t logical, but life rarely is. Downgrade the matchups a touch, let some other conferences take a beating from the SEC, and watch public opinion of the B10 rise.
There really isn't such a thing as a "Touch"
In years where the B1G and SEC place to in the BCS (most years), you would need to eliminate 1 top bowl for the rest to align to even matches.
I don’t care about the polls outside the BCS, and it apparently isn’t hurting the B1G’s chances of getting an at large bid.
I don’t see it making a big difference in recruiting. Crediting a notable difference requires ignoring the rating services severe biases in the “Objective” portions of their calculations (hard to prove the subjective parts).
The media is deserving of no particular concern having no notable insight, and lackluster effort in their analysis. I don’t even think any of the losses were upsets (depending on the source of the prediction).
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Yes, there is
Free up SEC #3 or 4 for the Cotton Bowl and make the B10/SEC pairs easier. Or drop an SEC game to add an ACC or P12 game instead.
Frankly, I don’t care that you don’t care about polls and the media. The average fan gets their information that way, so they buy whatever story the media is selling. That influences poll voters. Poll voters impact the BCS. The SEC shouldn’t always get the benefit of the doubt, but the media has made that the case just like everyone is now convinced the B10 is slow and not very good. The average fan believe that a B10 team should never beat an SEC team in a bowl despite the stats showing it happens frequently. That’s the power of the media.
The B10 won the 3 games they were favored in plus MSU pulled a slight upset. Besides PSU and NE, the other 4 games were within 5 points of the spread.
media bias = ESpin bias.
Honestly, the ESpin bias really really IS there. It would be easy enough for the “media” to spin the B1G record as a non-story by mentioning the mismatches like ProveIt does in the OP.
However, the media/ESpin makes it a “story” by ripping on the B1G. I am convinced it really does go back to the formation of the Big Ten Network. It is only going to get worse as the Pac-12 Network begins operating and starts exchanging programming with the BTN.
“downgrading” the matchup is not going to change the media/ESpin bias. That’s just going to take time.
For better or worse
OK, just for worse, ESPN is CFB coverage. I don’t think the bias is because of the corporate finances, but because it is an insular culture where they just talk to each other all the time. Someone starts an idea and it just goes round and round until it is completely overblown and they have little contact with the outside world to keep them grounded in reality. It doesn’t help that they are in a strongly NFL/MLB area and they think the rest of the country thinks the same way.
Downgrading the bowls slightly, by playing the ACC in a bowl or two or maybe adding another P12 bowl instead of the SEC in FL would help because it improves the record. When the bowl record is better, the soundbites about horrible bowl seasons go away. That means no negative talk leading into the next season, and so on. Right now the Cotton Bowl is about SEC #5 versus B12 #2 or 3. The B10 could free up SEC #3 or 4 for that slot instead, and make the Outback and Gator (and even the Cap 1) one slot lower in the SEC. That level of change would lead to more wins over the SEC and fewer total losses. Going 1-9 on 1/1 in 2 years is killing us.
Do you really think a change in bowl record will suddenly make ESPN praise the B1G?
…good luck with that one. They will just start talking about creampuff wins.
As noted, the bowls aren’t going to voluntarily drop their selection order. They are buying that order with their appearance fee.
The match ups above are a result of the bowls selecting outside the conference finishing order and the number of BCS teams. Possessing what the B1G believes are “4 of the top 10 brands in college football” you can expect the bowls to drop a slot in selection to get a bigger draw.
Also… using the standard reference (1 BCS team) the BCS is always #1
The Cap 1 selects #2 from B1G and SEC – altering the selection order does not equate to even match ups.
The Cotton and Outback select evenly #3 from the SEC typically based on division – the B1G hasn’t modified the selection having just formed divisions, so Outback selects B1G #3 and Cotton selects B12 #2.
The Gator selects SEC #6 and B1G #4 – altering the selection order does not equate to even match ups.
Had a B1G champ won out they would have played in the title game. The B1G still got 2 BCS representatives. The B1G collects the appearance fee regardless of winning or losing. If you get past recruiting site biases, recruiting is up in the B1G (though it might take a hit this year). Obviously it isn’t hurting the B1G, just your feelings.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Did I say that?
Try reading what I actually write, not what you want it to say.
A better bowl record will get them to shut the hell up about the B10’s bowl record and how horrible it is. I don’t want or need media praise of the B10, but I’d like to end the undeserved bashing that the current bowl tie-ins cause.
You can’t change who the bowls pick, but you can change what conference and what selection they get matched up with.
Your standard reference is pointless when talking about the SEC. They always get 2 BCS teams. Is counting to 5 too difficult for you? Matching B10 #2 versus SEC #3 doesn’t guarantee a fair match but it has better odds than playing SEC #2. Is that concept too advanced for you? And the Gator selection varies with the Insight every other year, so it’s 4 or 5.
I pay no attention to recruiting sites. I judge based on the players on the field and the NFL draft. The SEC has been whipping the B10 for a while and it hasn’t stopped yet.
It would do nothing.
As noted, it is likely ESPN would move onto the next complaint.
As noted, your claims are false – the problem isn’t the tie-ins, it is the bowls selecting outside the conference finishing order. This would continue with any other conferences.
Claims of correction by changing conferences is false - the conferences don’t control who the bowls select, just the selection order. Change the opposing conference and you still get a mismatch.
You are wrong about the effect of including BCS at large bids – the B1G gets 2 BCS at large bids more often than the SEC. If you are going with the facade of being B1G knowledgeable, you need to get the little things like that right.
Please enter 4 tokens and try again.
The NFL roster was about 9% (less than 3 players) per program favoring the SEC with Nebraska added to the B1G – and that was the most SEC favorable numbers in years. At best, you can claim their cream puffs are doing better than out cream puffs, which I wouldn’t deny… but this is hardly whipping. Good luck blaming this primarily on the bowl records.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
People fill the seats
I couldn’t agree more with Provelt:
“Notice the pattern? I’ve noticed it for a decade. The problem isn’t that the B1G sucks. The problem is…The bowls love us a little too much. More specifically, the bowls like the eyes we put on the games and the seats we fill in the stadiums.” I lived out in Ohio for a couple of years, coming from California, and I was amazed by how NCAA Football was a religion, specifically the Buckeyes. But I assume the states around the area felt similar about thier teams. Without a doubt the B1G can fill seats, and have fans, no matter what the bowl and no matter what the team record. Just as people will show up for their personal, political, or religious beliefs, no matter what, even if it is a dying cause or proven scientifically wrong, people will show up. The same is with teams and their fans from the B1G, they will not lose big bowls or TV spots.
- Matt D
In states where college football is king...
…it is part of our culture, a connection to where we grew up and days gone by.
I only return to Ohio every few years, but I connect to my home regularly thru Buckeye football.
The often overlooked part is the population shift – the population isn’t shifting because some states are having lots of babies and others aren’t… it is because people are moving… and when they move they take their NCAAF allegiance with them.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
