Post Week 13 - 2011 Bowl Projections
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 6:54 AM CST
in Bowl Projections
Email
PrintIt's all about pecking orders at this point. Where does your team rate against its peers. Some teams get a bump because of name brands and history. Some teams are only chosen because they have to be. In the Big Ten, the order tends to work itself on merit most years. The new wrinkle this year will be the B1G Championship loser.
It will be a very unusual year that will see the Championship Game loser get to the BCS. Look to the SEC and (old) Big 12 as a guide. You're in a better position finishing with 1 or 2 losses and being runner up in a division than losing the Title game. Whether it's Wisconsin or Michigan State, I expect that the loser will not go to the BCS. I also expect that they'll get passed over for the Capital One Bowl. Get used to seeing the Title Game loser in the Outback Bowl. This won't be the last time that happens.
As for the projections, let's remember that there are rules:
- The best teams don't always go to the best games. In the end, butts in the seat and eyes to the television are the biggest factors.
- The order of BCS selection is 1) Replacement for #1 Team; 2) Replacement for #2 Team; 3) Fiesta Bowl; 4) Sugar Bowl; 5) Orange Bowl.
- Until a team is officially bowl banned, we assume that they can and will go. So, no USC. And now, no Miami. Ohio State, Oregon, North Carolina...you're in consideration until otherwise notified.
- If a Big Ten or Pac-10 team qualifies for the BCS Championship Game, the Rose Bowl will NOT be required to take a non-automatic qualifier. This was only required of the Rose Bowl the first time (2010 season) it occurred over the current four-year contract.
- The Insight Bowl picks its Big Ten team ahead of the Gator Bowl this year. It will rotate the other way next year.
Got it? Good. Let's get on to the projections.
 |
 |
 |
Can anyone give LSU a better game than Alabama? Arkansas is a really good football team. I think that they're dead even with Oklahoma State. They can't stay within 24 points of these teams. I hate the idea of a rematch, but if you want the best two teams, here they are. |
 |
 |
 |
Rose Bowl is happy. It gets its conference anchors and the two teams that are generally acknowledged to be the best in each league. |
 |
 |
 |
I still think OU wins Bedlam. Regardless, the Big 12 will get only one BCS bid and is almost certain to face Stanford in the Fiesta Bowl. |
 |
 |
 |
I'm just going to post this link about Michigan. They're still a flawed team, but they've also managed to get themselves to 10 wins and a BCS berth. That's impressive. And yes, I expect to see the Wolverines at about 13 or 14 in the standings when all is said and done next week. Houston needs to beat Southern MIss in the C-USA championship to get here. I think they will. |
 |
 |
 |
Now that no one believes in Clemson again, aren't they at their most dangerous? Still, I'll take VT for their seemingly annual trip to Miami. When UConn beats Cincinnati this weekend, that means that Louisville will get the Big East's automatic bid and become the first BCS team to have lost to a Sun Belt team. Viva Big East! |
 |
 |
 |
You could see Sparty, Arkansas, or Georgia here, but I'm betting that the CapOne picks two teams who have never been to the bowl before. |
 |
 |
 |
Win 10 games, lose your title game, go to the Outback Bowl. |
 |
 |
 |
Late at night. Out of sight. That's where Jim Delany wants the Nittany Lions, right? I think that you'll see next week's winner of Baylor/Texas here. |
 |
 |
 |
I think the B1G representative is entirely dependent upon who the Chick-Fil-A picks from the SEC (see below). If the Gator is left with Florida, it'll take Ohio State. If it has Auburn, it'll take Iowa. [EDIT: The Gator Bowl President has now come out and said that he wants OSU-UF. The only question remains whether he'll have the chance. Safer money is probably on Auburn-Clemson in the Chick-Fil-A, OSU-UF here, and Iowa-aTm in the Texas Bowl] |
 |
 |
 |
It has now been over 700 days since Ohio State's last recorded victory over Michigan. You could see Missouri or Iowa State here, but I'm betting that Texas A&M gets picked to get more fans in the stadium. |
 |
 |
 |
Both these teams cliched bowls with their wins on Saturday. C-USA would like to send a West Division team here, but they won't have one available by this selection. |
 |
 |
 |
Northwestern or Illinois? Expect the Cats to be picked as Illinois figures out its coaching mess. |
 |
 |
 |
When Miami announced that they were banning themselves from a bowl this year, it meant that the ACC had no chance of serving as the backup for Army (which couldn't get to six wins this year). That opens the door for the Big Ten to match up with And when UCLA was pushed into the Pac-12 championship game as a sacrificial lamb to Oregon, that ensured that they'll finish 6-7 and that the Pac-12 won't fill this slot. Welcome Big 12 extra Iowa State. |
 |
 |
 |
When you can't get to six wins, you find yourself On the Couch with the Queso Bowl. Call it a hunch, but I don't think that we'll see the Gophers here next year. Indiana? Yeah. They'll be back. |
 |
 |
 |
Arkansas State has accepted this bid, and will face off against the second choice from the MAC. |
 |
 |
 |
Tennessee's loss to Kentucky meant that this bowl slot can't be filed by the SEC. The Sun Belt is the backup. |
 |
 |
 |
Two very even teams in a game that should be in the 40s. |
 |
 |
 |
Here's where bowl picking gets messy. Clemson-Auburn would be the game here if you go by the records. But, those two teams have played each of the past two seasons and will open next year against each other in Atlanta. That means limited fan interest. Since the next team from the ACC would be FSU (who was in Atlanta last year), look for the Gators to get picked over Auburn to avoid the frequent Tiger-on-Tiger matchup. |
 |
 |
 |
If Houston goes to the BCS, this won't be the C-USA champion. |
 |
 |
 |
Rout by Virginia Tech aside, it was still a really nice year by Virginia. |
 |
 |
 |
Vandy's second bowl bid in four years. They still don't get to leave the city. |
 |
 |
 |
It wouldn't surprise me if MIzzou doesn't get one of the Big 12's tieins, and has to fend for itself on the open market. I wonder if this is the only bowl happy to have a Big East Tie In. |
 |
 |
 |
BYU has accepted this bid already. |
 |
 |
 |
Is there a quieter 10-2 team than Kansas State (home win over Iowa State next weekend presumed)? It's going to be 7-5 Cal or 7-5 Washington here. After the BCS, that's the best that the Pac-12 has left. |
 |
 |
 |
They can pick the first post-BCS Big East team or Notre Dame. Not exactly a tough choice. Expect the winner to be overrated by 10 spots in next year's preseason poll. Expect the loser to be overrated by 10 spots in next year's AP poll. |
 |
 |
 |
I expect that this will be the Baylor-Texas loser. On the other side, it will be the 7-5 team that the Alamo Bowl doesn't choose. |
 |
 |
 |
MAC is the backup for Navy. |
 |
 |
 |
A nice matchup for Charlotte. This bowl always seems to get a good pairing. |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
SDSU fills in for C-USA, which can't fill its spot. |
 |
 |
 |
6-6 ASU is on the list of biggest disappointment. High on the list... |
 |
 |
 |
Not where Boise thought that they'd end up. |
 |
 |
 |
When 5-6 PItt faces 5-6 Syracuse, the Beff O'Bradys is on the line. If that doesn't get you fired up... |
 |
 |
 |
Congratulations to U-LaLa on accepting their first ever bowl bid. UConn will need to beat Cincy this weekend to become bowl eligible. It says here that they do. They fill in for C-USA, which can't fill this slot. |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Pac-12 can't fill their slot here, either. The MAC is happy to help out. |
245 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So you don't think...
…6-7 UCLA would be given a waiver to appear in a bowl game as conference runner-up? Especially if the Pac-12 has more than one spot it can’t otherwise fill?
I don't
And there is precedent, the 2007 Miami Redhawks were in the same situation and did not get a waiver.
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 7:41 AM CST up reply actions
Sure
I can just imagine the lobbying the PAC-12 will be doing to get that waiver, given the money involved for the conference.
In PAC 12 country
it’s considered practically a given that UCLA gets that waiver. They may be delusional, but I think they’re right. As MNWildcat says below, it’s UCLA (and the PAC 12) we’re talking about, not Miami of Ohio and the MAC.
So they go to a bowl with a losing record
and an interim coach, because Neuheisel is about to get canned.
Some people just need a high five. In the face. With a chair.
I just don't see it
But weirder things have happened.
Some people just need a high five. In the face. With a chair.
Yeah, I don't know anymore.
I didn’t think about Neuheisel getting canned. That levels things a bit. But still. It’s UCLA and the PAC-12. So I have my reservations.
They have to apply first
ESPN’s P12 blogger doesn’t think they will apply with no coach and a horrible end to the season. The bowls with P12 ties may have to persuade UCLA to apply.
I have to say...
you seem to have a foregone conclusion that Sparty will lose the conference championship. Keep picking against us. The team seems to be doing fine without your support.
Sparty and Wisky
are interchangeable. If you want to think of them in Pasadena and the Badgers in Tampa, that’s fine. I just think that Wisconsin wins the rematch.
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 9:21 AM CST up reply actions
Was your "the two teams that are generally acknowledged to be the best in each league" comment
reserved for whoever wins the B1G CCG? Or is it just Wisconsin? Honest question.
Because I don’t really understand how Wisky would be generally acknowledged as the best team in the B1G (if that’s what you’re implying), when they have a worse conference record than MSU and lost the head-to-head match-up. State’s beaten the second and third best teams in the conference and they seem to get the least amount of love.
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 2:17 PM CST up reply actions
Don't sweat what BamaHawkeye thinks...
He’s been down on MSU all season, and ultimately we’ll settle this shit on the field. Go Green!
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
I work in Bama
and if Bama Hawkeye keeps giving kudos to Michigan and dissing my Spartans, well, I may have to look him up….:)
Paul -
Go Sparty! Go Bucks!
::shrug::
I don’t consider BamaHawkeye to have it out for Michigan State or anything, I just think his point of view is representative of the country as a whole. I find it so weird that, for the second year in a row, MSU is drawing the short-end of the stick in terms of national perception.
Obviously MSU controls their own destiny this year, unlike last year (which is all we can ask for), but I just find it so odd that everyone thinks Wisconsin is an another league when compared to State considering, y’know, State BEAT them…
Awkno. Maybe I’m over-thinking it?
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 4:33 PM CST up reply actions
Be objective
MSU hasn’t had big stage success in forever. Before last year’s split, they hadn’t won the B10 since 1990. Thanks to the last 2 years, Dantonio has a better record than every coach since Munn (‘47-’53). After their best season since 1999 or maybe even 1966, they got embarrassed in last year’s bowl game. They haven’t won any bowl since 2001.
Why would any non-Spartan give MSU the benefit of the doubt?
I keep forgetting
that most of the people on these boards have parents younger than me. So my long range memory overwhelms John L. Smith and Muddy Waters, both of whom seem like 5 minutes to me. I remember George Perles and Duffy much more clearly…
Paul -
Go Sparty! Go Bucks!
Be objective?
Based on my reasoning above, aren’t I being the MOST objective?
Whether we want to believe it or not, last year has no impact on this year. This year has no impact on next year. History has very little to do with anything, contrary to what most U of M fans tend to believe.
Why would anyone HAVE to give MSU the benefit of the doubt? Had they not already played and beaten Wisconsin, I’d understand that. But why, when Michigan State has now beaten Wisconsin three years in a row, are they consistently ranked behind them? We can bang the history drum all we want, but that just blatantly ignores head-to-head results.
Maybe you could argue MSU’s homefield advantage has been the difference and I might buy that. But still, doesn’t that AT LEAST make MSU Wisconsin’s equal?
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 6:30 PM CST up reply actions
Unless the '09-'10 season has been stricken from the record
I’m pretty sure Wisconsin beat MSU in 2009.
And MSU might get a bit more of the benefit of the doubt if they didn’t combine their high quality wins (Wisconsin, Michigan, etc) with terrible losses (Alabama, Iowa, Notre Dame, Nebraska). Say what you want about Wisconsin, but at least we haven’t been embarrassed in their losses the last couple years.
As others have said: win Saturday night and it doesn’t matter. For the record, I hope we paste MSU. They’re probably the team I hate most in the Big Ten.
Three out of the last four years then.
Mistake. The three years we were at home (the reason I included the homefield advantage qualifier in my last few sentences) we won — that’s all I was saying.
I mean, losing to Ohio State isn’t any worse than losing to Notre Dame, right? How is that more embarrassing? Getting killed by Alabama is bad, but Wisconsin didn’t represent the B1G any better with a loss to TCU.
“They’re probably the team I hate most in the Big Ten.”
Um. Okay?
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 8:23 PM CST up reply actions
Loss comparison (2010 & 2011)
MSU: 6-37, 7-49, 13-31, 3-24 (29-141 overall)
Wisc: 24-34, 19-21, 31-37, 29-33 (103-125 overall)
That’s a big difference. At least, that’s how I see it.
You don't get bonus points in the standings for making it close.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
And I hate MSU because:
1) Their fans refuse to recognize legitimate reasons to not be high on MSU. See: every Sparty fan in this thread.
2) They keep beating us, which is an annoying “yeah, but…” they can keep bringing up despite everything I say.
So yes, I want Wisconsin to past MSU in Indy.
Sounds like an Iowa-Northwestern situation.
by The Mexican't on Nov 27, 2011 10:35 PM CST up reply actions
Sounds like an inferiority complex
Oh wait, that IS the Iowa-Northwestern situation.
Carry on, then.
News to me
I had no idea Iowa felt inferior to NU.
by surfmen93 on Nov 28, 2011 10:32 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
living in Madison and being a Spartan
I find this to be a common sentiment. It’s funny how he calls it a “yeah but…” when it’s a fact. Not sure why you guys get your little badger panties in such a bunch and “hate” a team that beats you. Only team I feel that for would be explitive deleted.
I'm not a badger fan by any means
but WI represented the B10 much better in the Rose Bowl than MSU did in the Capital One Bowl. It’s not even close. MSU looked like a JV team playing the varsity. You can’t objectively say that losing 49-7 and 21-19 are even remotely equivalent.
Or, maybe the better question is...
How would MSU have done against TCU?
I’m fairly confident that Michigan State could have also lost a close game to the Horned Frogs. That’s all I’m saying with that.
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 10:33 PM CST up reply actions
Considerably better than MSU
But they still would have lost. AT least WI would have looked like they belonged on the same field as AL.
I don't think they would have.
I don’t think anyone from the Big Ten would have.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Of course you don't
Because then you would have to admit that other B10 teams were significantly better than MSU last year.
OSU was beating the crap out of AR for a half and still won the game. That’s the same AR that took AL down to the wire.
WI played an undefeated and #3 TCU down to the wire.
There’s a reason that MSU ended up ranked #14 while OSU was #5 and WI was #7.
Really? Which B1G teams were "significantly better" than MSU last year?
Wisconsin? MSU 34 – WI 24
OSU? You could make the argument that they were better, but “significantly?” I see no evidence to back it up.
Iowa? Sure, they beat us, and also lost 5 games.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
The answer lies in your last sentence.
Body of work means something. Wisconsin crushed teams along the way (as they did this year) and then had two games where their own coaches got in the way (TCU especially). Michigan State played valiantly and won some memorable games against teams that weren’t all that great but hats off to Sparty for winning them. And then they got shellacked by an average team and a great one.
Do you think Iowa State is better than Oklahoma State? Is Texas Tech better than Oklahoma? SMU better than TCU? Single games are that, single games. They absolutely and obviously deserve to be counted and considered when taking into account a body of work but people also have eyeballs. For the last two years I’ve watched Wisconsin and Michigan State many times and each time I come away far more impressed with Wisconsin.
MSU may yet win the conference and, in doing so, would be a most deserving representative of the B1G. But Spartan fans need to step back and think objectively as to how so many people without ties to MSU tend to think the Badgers are better. And as an Iowa fan it’s not as though I love Wisconsin.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Nov 28, 2011 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
If MSU wins next weekend
I’m curious if people like you will finally consider them to be the better team. We’re the only team with 1 loss in the conference and yet this perception persists.
Of course I will
because it will happen on a neutral field and likely not rely on the flukiest of fluke plays to win. Sorry if that wasn’t hard enough evidence for me the first go-round.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Nov 28, 2011 12:19 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
That WOULD be understandable...
… had Michigan State not been completely in control almost the entire second half.
Was the final play lucky? Without a doubt. But the performance on the whole was not — Michigan State deserved to win that football game. I’m getting the feeling that only State fans feel this way — is this true?
by The Birchman on Nov 28, 2011 1:08 PM CST up reply actions
Um...
…MSU controlled almost the entire 2nd half? Sure, except for the 10 minutes leading up to the Hail Mary. Wisconsin had all the momentum leading into OT which is why the world still wonders why BB called that stupid TO. You’re talking to someone who HATES Wisconsin, but c’mon, pretending that Wisky didn’t have the momentum at the end is silly.
I didn't say they didn't have the "momentum"
(which I don’t really buy as a real thing).
All I implied was that MSU lead the entire second half and by two possessions into the fourth quarter. Wisconsin didn’t cut it to a one-possession game until 8 minutes to go in the 4th quarter. Even then, they didn’t score again until under 2 minutes and we know what happened after that.
Two late scores does mean that Wisconsin had the momentum. But it also means that MSU was in control much of the second half until they unraveled late, which was my original point.
by The Birchman on Nov 28, 2011 3:40 PM CST up reply actions
Eh...
…ok, I guess I buy that. But to say they were still in control during the period that WI was coming back (basically all of the 4th quarter) simply because they lead the game is a stretch. By that standard, Minnesota controlled most of the 4th quarter of the 2003 Michigan debacle or the 2006 Insight Bowl simply because they were ahead while enduring those epic collapses.
Well... I mean... Yeah.
I think we’re kind of arguing the same thing — albeit in different ways.
By leading most of the fourth-quarter (whether treading water or not), Michigan State proved, on the whole, that this win was not some kind of fluke They had to be much better than Wisconsin during the minutes that they were to get up by that many points in the first place, right?
In your two Minnesota examples, had Minnesota narrowly escaped collapsing, I don’t think I’d call them lucky. I’d call them better than the other teams for more of the game than they were worse… If that makes any sense.
by The Birchman on Nov 28, 2011 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
You're on solid ground...
…if you want to call MSU better. You are not on solid ground to say they controlled the part of the game where the Badgers were knocking out a 30 second scoring drive or a 87 yard 3 minute scoring drive sandwiched around 2 MSU 3 and outs. That’s all I’m saying.
For the majority of the game, Michigan State was in control
Give the first 10 and five of the final six minutes to the Badgers, and give us the other 44.
This isn’t as hard as it’s being made out to be.
Yes, but you have to count the full 60 minutes
not just the parts that go your way.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
by HoyaGoon on Nov 28, 2011 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
I feel like the whole 60 minutes
was counted in the score, in which MSU had a higher one
by chuggingspartan on Nov 28, 2011 2:49 PM CST up reply actions
Only team with 1 loss in the conference, with arguably the toughest schedule in the B1G.
Not that that should matter or anything.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
I don't understand why all the Spartan fans are whining about "respect".
If Dantonio’s team wins on Saturday the team will get it. Until that happens, take pride in the team’s division title and shut the fuck up.
by The Mexican't on Nov 28, 2011 4:05 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
You know, I've been thinking.
When life gives you lemons, don’t make lemonade! Make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don’t want your damn lemons; what am I supposed to do with these?! Demand to see life’s manager! Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons! Do you know who I am?! I’m the man who’s gonna burn your house down! WITH THE LEMONS! I’m gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down! *cough cough
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
#FireCraigJames
Follow @GSchofield50
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Nov 28, 2011 7:33 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I personally like when you guys get all pissy towards us.
It’s especially entertaining to look back at the preseason articles where people were downing on us. If you look at the more recent posts, all of our wins are downplayed extremely. I don’t want your fucking respect, I want to laugh in your face when we win :)
You were being quite reasonable until
You talked about getting the short end of the national perception stick. That isn’t objective, since it presupposes that MSU deserves more than they are getting. That’s why I mentioned people not giving MSU the benefit of the doubt.
Beat Wisconsin on Saturday night
And it won’t matter what anyone thinks. If you don’t- well it won’t matter what people think then either.
That's kinda what I'm saying
At least MSU gets to play for it this year, whereas last year public perception determined it. And hell, they might lose. But until then, why are people just assuming Wisconsin is going to blow MSU out or something? I’ve seen nothing this year to believe that will be the case.
I just continue to be baffled by why MSU is considered second-tier. Are they second-tier historically? Probably, yeah — and maybe that’s what people go off of. But there’s no way they can be thought of that way this year — they’ve beaten the two other best teams in the B1G and had the best conference record.
It’ll all be decided Saturday obviously and I guess all of this will be moot. I was just genuinely interested as to why people don’t think State should be in the discussion for best team in the B1G, that’s all.
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 6:37 PM CST up reply actions
Because "Sparty No" keeps happening?
I don’t see a lot of people (except maybe WI or MI fans) saying it will be a blow out, or that MSU isn’t in the same class as WI. I do see lots of people that believe WI will win and that WI is the better team. Two last second or last minute road losses versus losing at a perpetually overrated ND by 18 and at NE 24-3 has some influence on that.
Hearing all the Spartan fans say all the same things last year until AL squashed them like a bug is also a factor. Until MSU shows up for a big game not at home, people don’t believe that they can.
That's fair.
Again — I’m not saying that Michigan State is DEFINITELY better than Wisconsin. Actually, I’m not convinced myself that they’re gonna win on Saturday. I guess I just don’t understand why — and maybe this isn’t how everyone feels — that Wisconsin is the runaway favorite against a team that’s proven they can beat them.
The ND loss is bad. But ANY loss is bad. Losing to Ohio State is really bad too, right? You’re probably right in that margin of defeat is the main driver of MSU’s perception and I guess I understand that. People could probably reason that Wisconsin was just terribly unlucky, whereas MSU was overmatched or something. I just found the whole thing puzzling, but I guess I could see where it’s coming from now. I’ve just always hated the history arguments.
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 10:46 PM CST up reply actions
Losing to OSU is arguably worse.
ND finished 8-4. OSU is 6-6.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
I find it funny you favor Wisconsin and state the 'road factor' of MSU
MSU has three of the five best road wins in the B1G this season. WIsconsin blows on the road. Flat out blows.
They blow ?
If they blow how come MSU needed a hail mary to beat them when they were on the road? Just sayin…
This comes from an NU fan that thinks Michigan State deserves to be in the same breath as Wisconsin. I see the two teams as very even. Wisconsin offense is better, but MSU defense is better. This a matchup I am looking forward to seeing again.
MSU is not getting the deserved credit for this season.
It was a melodramatic counter-point to the rest of this jibber-jabber
Is Wisconsin the better football team? Right now, no.
Is Michigan State the better football team? Right now, yes.
Will Wisconsin have a chance to prove they are equal to Michigan State as a football team? This upcoming weekend, sure.
Does any of this other nonsense matter? Not at all.
Of course, the point that State isn’t good on the road when they’ve completed three of the five best road wins through the entire B1G this year is a pretty laughable sentiment that still stands, but whatever. We’ll see on Saturday who’s going to Pasadena, and this nonsense can end once and for all
So...
Wisconsin merely has a chance to prove they are “equal” to MSU this weekend?
Good to know. I’ll proceed accordingly and look forward to the “nonsense” continuing next week even if Wisconsin wins convincingly.
Then you'll have won at the right time.
As it stands, one team is 7-1 in conference with the most difficult in-conference slate (and has beaten the other team head-to-head), while the other is 6-2 in conference with a slightly above average in-conference slate (and has lost to the other team head-to-head).
Again, this isn’t difficult. People are just too much in awe of the UNLV and [directional] Dakota beatdowns to notice.
Nebraska had a more difficult conference slate.
Their cross-division games: Wisconsin, Penn State, Ohio State.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Are you aware that
most of the people that are favoring WI over MSU didn’t watch WI’s OOC blowouts of crappy teams? I’d say it’s more the recent MSU road chokes (ND and NE this year, IA and the bowl last year) that are shaping public opinion.
It’s easy enough to fix. Win the B10 and win the Rose Bowl. Then you’ll get a lot more support in B10 country and nationally.
If that's public perception, then public perception is hilariously askew
If you want to look at one of the two teams that underperforms away from their friendly confines, you would look directly at Wisconsin. If you’re using common sense, of course.
Yes...
…I’m sure their nationally televised pantsing of Penn State and Nebraska isn’t factoring in at all.
That wasn't my point.
You made some bland aside about beating up on nobodies. I pointed out that it isn’t the beatdowns of the nobodies that made people take notice.
A tip.
When a Gopher fan who HATES the Badgers feels compelled to point out the absurdity of a statement you make (and to do so is forced to use facts that in some way compliment the team he hates) it’s a pretty good sign you’re no longer on solid footing.
I don't need to be on 'solid footing' according to you
I need to be aware of the right kind of facts.
That’d be 7-1 vs. 6-2; 3-1 vs. 2-2; 37-31.
We blow on the road
which is why we lost by 6 and 4 points.
Fantastic argument.
Michigan State lost by 3 TDs to Nebraska and 18 to Notre Dame on the road. Yeah, they didn’t lose to Iowa, but Iowa is FAR from impressive this season.
And we all know that Michigan sucks.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
#FireCraigJames
Follow @GSchofield50
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Nov 28, 2011 10:58 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Wisky lost to Ohio State.
6-6 Ohio State, who MSU beat on the same field Wisky lost to them on.
Also in case you forget, Wisky lost to MSU already.
Wisky doesn’t “blow” on the road, but they are not as good a team as they are in Madison. That’s the case for almost every team, especially this year in the B1G, where the home field advantage seems to be more significant than ever.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
No argument here with your comments.
Problem I have with the above comment by your Sparty friend is the hyperbolic use of “blow” to characterize the fact that Wisky is not as good on the road. The OSU loss was troubling to be sure but neither road loss on the season was an abject disaster that warrants saying Wisky “flat out blows” on the road. And saying such a thing frankly undermines MSU’s well deserved win in EL because it surely isn’t saying much to say you won by 6 on a last second hail mary against a team that “blows” on the road.
I've said multiple times I intentionally overstated it because I wanted to give people a glimpse of how ridiculous it looks to be so biased
It looks pretty stupid, doesn’t it?
Ah. My bad.
You are three steps ahead of all of us. Carry on making ridiculous statements in covert (and purported) attempts to teach us lessons. Can’t wait for the next one!
Uh huh.
Condemn me for my admittedly intentional hyperbole, and follow through with some of your own.
How…hypocritical of you.
Okay.
My hyperbole/sarcasm/etc. is obvious from my post. Yours was not as evidenced by multiple people calling you on the “intentional” hyperbole. Though this is likely because we’re not bright enough to pick up on the obvious clues you left for us.
It would really help make you look less ridiculous
if it was obvious when you’re intentionally exaggerating.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
It's quite simple, really
Do you REALLY believe that Wisconsin ‘flat-out blows’ on the road?
They aren’t the same team they are at home, I think that’s obvious. But no team in the top 20 ‘flat-out blows’ at anything football-related.
And, for the record, I don’t need to look any more or less ridiculous to anyone on this site. I tried the part of policing common sense and statistics 101 here. That apparently doesn’t fly when it’s supposed to be all about trash-talking and avoiding as much reason and logic as possible. I honestly don’t know if I’ve posted anything serious on this site for a solid month, because, why bother?
10-7, 31-17, and 37-21, all against bowl-eligible teams on the road.
Anyone else care to match that? Oh wait, you can’t.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Show me WI's comparable road loss
Oh wait, you can’t. How about the road loss to ND? No, because MI and Stanford beat them at home. Last year’s bowl loss? No, because only MI lost as badly. Last year at Iowa? No, because nobody else lost to IA like that.
Win the B10 and win the Rose Bowl, and then MSU will get lots of respect. Until then, it’s just empty talk from East Lansing.
Wisconsin lost to Ohio State.
That’s significantly worse. Why do we just refuse to remember that?
I don’t care that it was a close game. Ohio State was not good and Wisconsin lost. You don’t get bonus points for keeping it close against a bad team.
by The Birchman on Nov 29, 2011 8:31 AM CST up reply actions
Yeah, YOU don't get bonus points
for a 10-7 win over Ohio State either.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
#FireCraigJames
Follow @GSchofield50
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Nov 29, 2011 9:10 AM CST up reply actions
But -- and maybe I was unclear --
you DO get credit for, y’know, actually winning the game.
by The Birchman on Nov 29, 2011 9:12 AM CST up reply actions
Just to be clear
I expect a reasonably close game. I think someone wins by 7-10 points (these type of game rarely seem to come down to one possession) and I favor WI, but I think MSU would win 30-40% of the time. That’s close to a toss up.
Fair enough.
I’d argue somewhere between “toss-up” and “Wisconsin slightly favored” myself. But the whole “Sparty sucks on the road” meme that’s been going around is, to borrow a phrase from the late great Douglas Adams, at right angles to reality. We have at least two, probably three, wins on the road better than Wisconsin’s best. By margin, we have a worse loss than Wisconsin’s worst (but by strength of opponent, neither of our losses is nearly as bad as Ohio State).
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
That's overstating it in a big way.
1) NW over Nebraska and Nebraska over PSU are probably the two best road wins in the conference. We have the next best (Iowa), but the rest depends on how you sort the hodgepodge of 6-6 teams. Even if you put OSU and NW at the top, we’re not the only team with a road win over either, so at best we have three of the top seven. (Mind you, that’s still a lot better than anyone’s giving them credit for. You’d think being one of two teams to go 3-1 on the road in conference – and that without Indiana or Minnesota, unlike the other (Penn State) – would cause people not to think “those guys suck on the road”.)
2) Wisconsin lost two close games on the road, one against the team with the best record in the conference and the other against a bowl-eligible team. They beat another bowl eligible team (granted, that team was in the midst of an epic Zookening) and flat-out thumped Minnesota (who had turned the corner from “pathetic” to “scrappy but outgunned”). They aren’t the same type of death machine away from Camp Randall, but if 2-2 with both losses close against reasonably good teams qualifies for “flat out blows”, I’d hate to see what you’d think of a team that really does suck away from home (see: Iowa).
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
You're right - I WAS overstating it in a big way
I figure I might as well be as ludicrously positioned on my side of the fence as the rest are on the opposite.
The bottom line is, Michigan State has been the very best team on the road in the B1G this season, while WIsconsin isn’t nearly the same team away from Camp Randall. The flawed notion that MSU is, and should be, a significant underdog in this game because of their road woes is utterly idiotic.
I think a fair point differential would be anywhere from MSU -1.5 to Wisconsin -1.5 – this is going to be a good game more likely than not, and it’s simply a matter of being on the right side at the right time. As the first contest can attest to. Of course, I’m sure Wisconsin’s pasting of lesser opponents will bump up the point differential – but that kind of ignores the fact that MSU actually beat this team in October outright, no?
This is all so stupid anyway. We’ll see on Saturday who hoists the B1G championship – the rest of this badgering matters not.
"The rest of this Badgering matters not."
I see what you did there.
by The Birchman on Nov 29, 2011 9:57 AM CST up reply actions
Where are all these people?
I haven’t seen many people saying MSU is or should be a “significant underdog” in the CCG. What I have seen are a lot of people that think WI will win. Those aren’t the same thing. It doesn’t mean everybody sees this as another Oregon/UCLA type of game.
I doubt the team cares what this one blogger thinks.
At least this blogger has been consistant. I was really doubtful when early on in season, Michigan was projected to a BCS bowl, now it’s going to happen. Well played.
I'd be worried if the team needed his support in the first place...
Covering Michigan Basketball for Maize n Brew.
Twitter
So if you think Minnesota goes up
who goes down? I would guess Illinois, but they have talent coming back. Purdue, maybe? Any chance you see 11 teams becoming bowl eligible?
Wouldn’t that be something?
Some people just need a high five. In the face. With a chair.
There are a handful
but the obvious one is Michigan State.
And no, I don’t believe that. I think Sparty could be better next year than this year. I just didn’t want to disappoint all of those who are certain of my bias.
Actually the Gophers could go from 1-3 to 4-0 in the non-con. That would be enough to do it. @UNLV, New Hampshire, W. Michigan, Syracuse.
As for teams that will take a step back, I’m curious about Penn State. I don’t know how the offense gets better, and if the defense slips at all, they could drop. Illinois & Northwestern could take steps back as well.
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 10:07 AM CST up reply actions
And the important thing
is that starting with the 2014 deals, the B1G will need at least one more bowl tie-in. 9 teams eligible is going to become the norm, the not exception. Those contracts won’t be negotiated until after the 2012 season, but shouldn’t the B1G want a piece of the Pinstripe Bowl in NYC or the bowl in DC? Wouldn’t that make more sense than two bowls in Texas?
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
"I thought it was laughable when you first put it up, but you were obviously smarter than me." - PurdueMatt
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
More sense in terms of what?
Ratings? Maybe. Recruiting? Maybe not. Getting B1G exposure in Texas might be more appealing in the recruiting sense, where there is more talent to mine as opposed to NYC.
Some people just need a high five. In the face. With a chair.
DC is a hotbed of recruiting
that’s come on in the past 5 years or so. Plus, like every conference, there are a lot of B1G alumni in the DC area. I think it would be in the conference’s interest to get a bowl game there, even if it is lower tier.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
That brings up the next question
Under which scenario does the B1G have the most leverage to negotiate an additional tie-in for 2013: One BCS bid and everybody dropped down a notch, or two BCS bids?
If we're talking about who replaces Minnesota in the Queso Bowl next season
it won’t be Sparty. While I can see them taking a step back (unless Cousins returns for his twelfth year), they won’t step back far enough to stay home for the holidays.
I think the most likely candidate for this spot on the couch is Illinois, followed fairly closely by- dammit, this is hard to say- Northwestern. This season four of our five FBS victories came over teams ranked (according to Pre-Snap Read’s week 13 re-ranking): 114 (Indiana), 106 (Minnesota), 99 (Boston College), 91 (Rice), with only Nebraska (26) not in the bottom quartile. That’s not good. We couldn’r even beat Army (101). And our team loses a lot of senior leadership (to the extent that helped this season) and more importantly, Dan Persa and Jeremy Ebert. I’m not ready to shovel dirt on our 2012 campaign yet, but I would not be shocked to see our recent trend (9-3, 8-4, 7-5, 6-6 the past four years) continue.
I think Minnesota gets the White Tuxedo Bowl next year
I could see them improving to 6-6 and bowl eligibility and still find themselves sitting at home anyway based on recent history, assuming the B1G doesn’t get another bowl tie-in.
Disagree on NU
We had more than our fair share of reverse karma this season (turnovers against Michigan, Penn State, and Iowa – many for points). NU was in every game, and even with a tougher non-conference schedule, a weaker Illinois with Minny and Indiana on the schedule will help get us back to the 6 win+ category. We do have depth at skill positions, although I will grant that there are some question marks on both lines next year and sheer terror for what the secondary will look like.
I’m not sure if they drop all the way to the Queso Bowl, but it’s hard not to expect PSU to go through some difficult transition next year. Also, are we certain that Purdue gets back to 6 wins? They still have ND on the non-conf slate, and I see them slipping to Minny before NU does.
We'll sure find out
I am torn on our Cats next year. You’re both bringing up valid points. Persa-Ebert-Dunsmore and the O-line are major losses. However, Colter and Siemian had some good reps and the other receivers look solid as well. Defensively they will sorely miss Mabin and Phillips, but Campbell grew a lot this year. If there are some coaching changes on the defensive side (Brown at least) I could see them getting to 8 with some of the breaks going their way. It’s all on the defense. Penn State was the reverse NU this year (good D, bad O). They ended up 9-3. Defense wins more games than offense.
I think Purdue will be better next year
The most important play makers will be back (including 2 quarterbacks capable of starting). The cornerbacks will be excellent and we will have a very good stable of running backs. The main thing I would worry about would be the offensive line.
I like Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio State, Nebraska, Northwestern, and Illinois to do better next year. MSU, Michigan, Penn State, Iowa, and Wisconsin to take steps back. I don’t think Michigan will have a worse team, but the schedule next year is murderous and it will be difficult for them to go 10-2. If they go 10-2 or better, it will be one of the best performances of the year.
2013 and 2014 will be potential national title years, though…
by lonewolf371 on Nov 27, 2011 10:22 AM CST up reply actions
I’m a Sparty slappy, so I’m biased, but I do think MSU has a good chance of being better next year than this year, and the schedule sets up more favorably (most of the hard games are home, rather than away, though that also means our 14 game home winning streak is in jeopardy).
The defense returns the vast majority of the 2-deep, the OL should be an asset (returns 4 starters, and 9/11 on the 2-deep, and the only tangible loss is Foreman – McGaha has bumped around at every OL position without ever starting consistently).
Question marks will be QB and WR, with an emphasis on chemistry. I feel good about a RS Junior who has been in the system for 3 years sitting behind one of the most prolific passers in MSU history coming in, and there is a lot of talent behind Cunningham, Martin, and Nichol.
I think MSU is set up pretty well for another 10 win season and a run at the Big Ten Title game next year – though obviously, it is too early before I’m willing to set any predictions in stone… As Coach Dantonio said back in 2007, “I’m going to be the coach here for a long time. It’s not over. It’s just starting.”
Yes. I’m drinking the Kool-Aid.
MSU
It could just be wishful thinking on my part. I think Kirk Cousins played very well this year for the most part, though. Also, with the MSU-Michigan game being in Ann Arbor next year I think there’s a pretty good chance that Michigan will have the tiebreaker for the conference title game.
by lonewolf371 on Nov 27, 2011 11:22 AM CST up reply actions
The passing game will be the big question mark
Besides that we return almost everyone else. There’s always uncertainty when you replace a QB, but I feel pretty good about Maxwell stepping in. He was a 4* recruit and elite 11 QB in high school. He’ll be a RS junior who’s had 4 years to learn our system and he’s looked good in limited playing time.
That does bode pretty well
Maybe next year will be your year to make a splash nationally.
by lonewolf371 on Nov 27, 2011 12:34 PM CST up reply actions
We'll have our chance
Season opener is vs. Boise State on Friday night. Win that, it’ll help our perception tremendously and help the B1Gs generally.
Unfortunately
Boise will have a new QB so everybody will downtalk any MSU win and a loss will be magnified. It’ll be even worse if Boise loses their coach.
Illinois's got talent, yeah
but maybe a coaching change would do them in for just a year. Who knows, though?
I would think that Purdue might sink a bit but be on that 4-6 win mark, joining Minnesota, Northwestern, and Illinois.
Indiana will be Indiana.
Wisconsin is due for a regression
Lot of seniors and you figure Ball is probably gone. Add to that the fact that Wisconsin mortgaged the future to win this year with Wilson, not a terrible idea, but it just means Wisconsin will be dealing with an inexperienced QB next year as opposed to this year. Will still easily make a bowl, but I think Wisconsin slides back 2 games or so.
I see MSU in the same boat. Lot of upperclassmen and a multi-year starting QB. Plus, I’m betting that Worthy bolts for the NFL after the season he’s had (it will be interesting to see the leave early or stay dynamic that works itself out with the new CBA). Again, not looking at a huge dropoff, Dantonio has recruited well, so probably the same 2-3 games drop that Wisky goes through.
The interesting variable will be (ugh) Michigan and OSU. Does Year 2 of Hokemania! bring further improvements? How well does OSU respond to Urban Meyer? And what will the extent of their penalties be?
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I can completely see Wisconsin regressing, though I'm hoping they stave it off somewhat.
Cons: losing Russell Wilson and Montee Ball (Ball would be really foolish or really full of Badger pride to come back next year), as well as some O-lineman. Nick Toon is also gone.
Pros: Wisconsin has never been a school super reliant on our QB (though Scott Tolzein and Russell Wilson are very nice to have). Hopefully Joe Brennan or whoever else steps up learned something over the last two years. We’ll still have our TE, which is always quality. And Jared Abbredaris looks fantastic.
James White looked awesome last year, and though he has regressed something (partly due to Montee Ball being spectacular), I’m hopeful he can regain that 2010 form.
Also, our O-line always loses NFL talent and reloads. Not tremendously worries there.
With a few breaks, I think we could get to 10 wins again. But we’l see
Not to sound like a homer (I simply know more about State's team than any other)
But, save potentially Worthy jumping to the big league, our defensive two-deep depth chart is laden with underclassmen and juniors. The number is somewhere around 20/22 (including Worthy). As for the offense, Andrew Maxwell is completely unproven, but was an Elite 11 QB when he was being recruited (I know, worthless) and has looked decent in his limited time at the helm (less worthless) – with first-team reps, I’m sure he’ll be solid if unspectacular at worst. Our backs and offensive line will return almost fully intact, and the wide receiving corps has been stacked for years; we’ll lose some reliable pieces there, but it’ll be easy to reload and move forward.
Basically, I don’t expect much of a drop from the Spartans come next season.
If Worthy goes pro our defense will return
8 of 11 starters and 18 of 22 on the two deep. Plus, Hoover will be back after missing the year due to injury and we red-shirted every freshman besides one.
How many of MSU's defensive starters
are draft-eligible (i.e. juniors or RS sophomores)? I ask because I legitimately don’t know. But some of them, I assume, are at least contemplating a jump to the pros. The great unknown is how the new CBA will affect the stay-or-go decision. You saw this last year how much first round salaries declined (Newton’s signing bonus and overall deal was less than half of Bradford’s the year before, both as the #1 overall), and I don’t know what the comparison is for 2nd and 3rd round picks versus 2010. On the other hand, drafted players’ contracts are shorter, allowing them to become free agents sooner and sign a big contract then, kind of like the old NBA model. It will be interesting to see if the depressed salaries keep kids in school longer, or whether they bolt earlier so as to get to their second, and more lucrative contract, sooner.
I really don’t know what the answer will be, and it will be interesting to find out.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Worthy, Johny Adams (CB) and Chris Norman (LB) are the only junior starters
Worthy is likely gone, but I’d be shocked if Adams or Norman went pro early. The defense is very young with 6 underclassmen as current starters. If guys don’t leave early we’ll have 6 current starters play at least 2 more years.
Is Gholston a true soph
or a redshirt? Again, only because I don’t know and RS sophomores would be draft-eligible as well. Even if he is, I’m not saying he’s gone, just that there is a possibility.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
True soph
I think there’s a decent chance he goes pro after next year.
I would think think that's almost a given
Kid has had a monster year and will project incredibly high going into next season.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Next year's WRs worry me, but that's my only question mark.
I think Maxwell will be fine, the D could be even better than this year (even without Worthy), and the O-Line should be really good. Remember we have multiple guys that were projected to start on the OL this year who have missed all or most of the season with injuries (Burkland, Treadwell, Conway, Barrent).
Coach D has our program in as good a shape as it’s been in in my lifetime – we’ve had some talent in the past, but never this kind of depth.
The WRs are supposedly talented, but they haven’t shown much of anything in the limited PT they’ve gotten. Fowler had flashes last year, but has been hurt all season, and the others haven’t played at all. I think Tony Lippett will move to WR full time next year, and he’s clearly a stud athlete.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
To be fair, the wide receivers behind the three seniors haven't had a chance to play because they have simply been very reliable
And, in this offensive scheme, there is not often a time that calls for more than three wideouts in a given set. I think Fowler and Lippett will be plenty good.
I think they "could" be very good, but I can't say that emphatically because I haven't seen enough of them.
Of course, I trust our coaching staff and their track record in bringing in and developing talent, so I guess I should expect success out of those guys.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
Happy that Purdue is going to a bowl.....
but sad that Danny Hope will remain our coach.
Also, I was wrong about Michigan to the BCS. I thought it was laughable when you first put it up, but you were obviously smarter than me.
Ever Grateful. Ever True.
purdue Matt'd
Yup
Off Tackle Empire
The quintessential Big Ten smoking room.
by Graham Filler on Nov 27, 2011 10:27 AM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Careful what you post
You may end up being my next signature…
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 10:08 AM CST up reply actions
You're not wrong about it yet.
Michigan has to climb two spots without playing a game just to be eligible (and that’s not a guarantee that they would be selected, given that it won’t be the Rose Bowl picking a replacement for a B1G team in the title game like it was for Illinois in ‘07). It’s possible, given that the teams closest ahead of them are all playing, but any one of 1) a Georgia upset of LSU (unlikely), 2) a Baylor win over Texas (fairly likely), or 3) a close Wisconsin win in the B1G title game (also fairly likely) and they’re toast.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
I don't know about #3
I think the addition of one loss to the equation would drop MSU below Michigan, regardless of whether or not it’s close.
Looking at today’s BCS rankings, the computers already somehow have Michigan higher than Michigan State. (Don’t ask me how…….). Any loss in the title game would increase that gap, and would also drop you down the human rankings.
(Sidenote….the computers are completely fucking ridiculous. Two of them have 7-5 MISSOURI ranked 8-9 spots higher than Wisconsin…..ARE YOU KIDDING ME?)
Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.
Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog
Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?
by Packers3485 on Nov 27, 2011 11:26 PM CST up reply actions
Computers
As someone else said, it’s the Big 12 circle jerk.
And Michigan is ranked higher than MSU because of Michigan’s non-conference slate.
Penn State only dropped two spots for getting curbstomped by Wisconsin.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think we might do the same if we lose a close one. (Granted, PSU’s percentage dropped enough that if we had the same drop we would likely fall behind; hence the need to keep it close.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
You can't look at that in a vacuum
PSU was 19 with 0.3055 at 9-2. The only 9-2 behind PSU was #20 TCU. The next 5 were 8-3, 8-3, 8-3, 7-4 and 6-4.
PSU ended up 21 at 9-3 with 0.1382. That’s a huge points drop. Behind them were 7-4 TX, 8-3 WV, 10-2 USM and 7-5 MO. 21 was as low as they could go with their record.
MSU is 13 at 0.5369 and WI is 15 at 0.4576 while MI is 16 at 0.4310. MI is the last 2 loss team except for TCU and USM. Even a close loss will cost MSU more than 0.1059 in the standings. The humans and computers dislike the B10 this year, so another conference loss will hurt. AR lost almost 0.2 for losing to the #1 team is a conference the computers like. Losing to #15 will exact a bigger punishment, since the computers can’t use the score at all.
I doubt it.
PSU gets the benefit of the doubt with pollsters because they are PSU. MSU usually gets a giant kick to the bottom of the stairs with a loss, regardless of where/when/against whom it occurs.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
the link in his post wasnt enough?
you want buckyor to post a picture of zook’s pink slip?
Lots of B1G teams
I like it.
Only thing is, Ohio State may end up in the Gator Bowl with Florida. Gator Bowl President said he wants Florida and Ohio State in there
Visit Inside The Shoe
A Buckeye blog dedicated to bringing you the most up to date and interesting info about Ohio State Sports!
by Ian_InsideTheShoe on Nov 27, 2011 1:24 PM CST reply actions
OSU will be taken before Iowa
That’s a choice that makes itself this year. And this is from a Hawkeye.
"If you need a rah-rah speech at halftime, you’re playing the wrong sport." - Pat Angerer
I still thought OKSt had a shot at the title game due to playing Oklahaoma next
along with the computers loving them. Then there would be the voters who would revolt last second and bump them to number 2 from 3 (similar to Michigan getting bumped from a rematch in 06). Unfortunately, the coaches (and assistants) have lost their minds and put OKSt 5th in the USA Today poll. Va Tech and Stanford are 3 and 4. There is no way they will jump Bama, and I think that is too big a deficit for OKSt to overcome, even if they win convincingly next week. I can’t believe VT and Stanford are ahead of them. OKSt is much more deserving of the 3rd spot. I guess LSU/Bama is inevitable. Which means I will refuse to watch the title game.
Va Tech should not be top 5.
Even Boise State thinks the Hokies’ schedule was weak.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
I don't have a problem with va tech at five
But there is no way that they should be ahead of Okie State. Or Stanford. Who is the Hokies best win? Where would that rank for Okie State or Stanford. No better than 4th, right?
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
"I thought it was laughable when you first put it up, but you were obviously smarter than me." - PurdueMatt
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 4:02 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
VT's best win
Is probably @ GT since GT was ranked at the time. That would be #2 on Stanford’s list, basically equal to ND (USC is their best win). It’s not like Stanford has played a tough slate either. It would be #3 on OkSU’s list (KSU, Baylor then UT = ND = GT).
It's not that bad
OkSU closed the gap to AL from 0.1083 to about 0.06 while only moving to #5. A win over OU will move them up more. If VT also loses to Clemson, that moves OkSU up even closer. OkSU is already higher in the computers. If about 1/3 of voters move OkSU to #2, they’ll jump AL.
Don't assume the voters will follow a logical progression next week.
They never do in the final week.
An OkSt win would put them #2 in all the computers by itself, which makes up 1/4 of their current deficit by itself. If the voters leap OkSt over VT and Stanford and even 1/4 of them put them ahead of Alabama, that’s enough. (Time to root for Clemson, I guess. Then VT gets taken out of the equation on their own.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Fuck Clemson
Rooting for Clemson to do something you want is not going to work. Their loss to NC State did not help the B1G for at-large bowl prospects.
Everyone in SEC country is drinking Bama koolaid
but I think if OkST wins big, they get the BCS bid. Voters would prefer no rematch if they have a good case for someone else.
Paul -
Go Sparty! Go Bucks!
That is what I'm thinking...
this is no perfect system and whoever gets in there (Bama, OSU, Va. Tech) besides LSU if LSU can get by UGA, someone is going to feel like “life is not fair” for whatever reasons. I do think that if OSU beats OU big or at least by ten, the voters will vote against a rematch no matter. I just hope LSU can beat UGA so we don’t end up in there after losing to them close which will not likely happen but could, but hell I’ll take that also and hope the Tigers can win—rather them beat UGA though.
Reporter: What would you say a Greg Studrawa offense is like? Stud:
"Attack and be very physical…fly around…attacking, come after you and come after you and come after you…." Me: I love this answer.
GET TO THE RIM HEAT (and SKY)! ATTACK THE PAINT!
Cap One will take Arkansas over South Carolina
Razorbacks have had more hype this year and haven’t been there in five years.
"If you need a rah-rah speech at halftime, you’re playing the wrong sport." - Pat Angerer
tough call
Arkansas staying Top 8 in the polls will make them hard to pass on.
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
"I thought it was laughable when you first put it up, but you were obviously smarter than me." - PurdueMatt
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 27, 2011 5:28 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Watched the Hogs a few times this year
They are a good team and will be a good catch for whichever bowl. And they have a rabid fan base, the Gamecocks not so much.
Paul -
Go Sparty! Go Bucks!
now im bummed out, i want to see Florida vs Iowa
one question. i was under the impression a bowl couldnt pick a 6-6 team over a 7-5 team, im probably wrong, but if im not how would OSU be picked over Iowa?
"Your spelling and grammar errors belie a seriously skilled thought process"- therealCatnuts
by justsomehawkeyefan on Nov 27, 2011 5:49 PM CST reply actions
That rule went away
a few years ago. Now the only restrictions are on the Cap 1 and Outback not taking a team with 2 more losses and the CCG winner not sliding past the 4th bowl slot (Gator/Insight).
That rule only applies when
the BCS only takes one team from B1G. If two teams go to the BCS, CapOne and Outback can take whoever (or whomever) they like.
by Disinterested Par-tay on Nov 28, 2011 10:50 AM CST up reply actions
#tOSU4CapOne
/divesforcover
In the name of the Woody, the Bo, and the Mustache Ride. Amen.
by Pariahwulfen on Nov 28, 2011 12:47 PM CST up reply actions
Not quite.
The Capital One has that restriction regardless of whether we get two BCS teams. The Outback is only restricted if we get only one.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
People were ranking ASU in the top 25 based on almost no real proof
likewise i have no proof that i called ASU being a mediocre team at best………….but i totally called it.
"Your spelling and grammar errors belie a seriously skilled thought process"- therealCatnuts
by justsomehawkeyefan on Nov 27, 2011 5:51 PM CST reply actions
well
ASU beat the crap out of USC at the end of September, a few weeks after beating Missouri. At that time they looked like a pretty good team. Since the loss to Oregon, however, they’ve just been mailing it in.
So Michigan atually moved down
To number 16 in the BCS. They need Georgia to lose, the B1G title to be a blowout/ ugly game that makes the loser look bad. They also need to root against Baylor, who could move past them with a win over Texas.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
M should want:
MSU to win (will make their loss less bad, so that helps them, Wisconsin win makes M loss to MSU worse), LSU to win (will get Georgia out of their way), and also want Baylor to lose (a W over Texas could catapult them past M, though Baylor needs to move up in the human polls, is already past M in CPU polls).
I hope only the first of those three happens.
For MIchigan to feel comfortable about the BCS
A majority of the following has to happen:
Oklahoma State wins
Virginia Tech wins
Houston loses
Kansas State loses
As things stand today, locks for the BCS are the six AQ’s, Stanford, Alabama and Houston, with one spot up for grabs. Any upset in either the ACC title game or Bedlam seriously hurts Michigan’s chances, particularly the later scenario. The BCS does not have a history of skipping eligible teams for a team ranked lower that may “draw more”, and while you can see Michigan selected ahead of K-State, leaping both K-State and OkState, from what the computers consider to be the best conference this year, is a tall task.
http://pittsfieldindex.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pittsfield-Ratings-Index/142673082487903
by PittsfieldIndex on Nov 27, 2011 8:17 PM CST up reply actions
I'm think Boise fans
might take issue with you saying eligible teams don’t get skipped for bigger draws.
If Okie State wins, they might get the CG bid...
….which would drop Alabama to the Sugar.
Have fun playing Bama, Wolverines.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
Doubt it.
If that happened, Michigan would go to the Fiesta and play Stanford.
Picks:
Sugar: Alabama (to replace LSU)
Fiesta: Michigan (to replace Okie St.)
Fiesta: Stanford
Sugar: Houston/Big East
Orange: Big East/Sugar
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
"I thought it was laughable when you first put it up, but you were obviously smarter than me." - PurdueMatt
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 28, 2011 10:32 AM CST up reply actions
This would make me smile.
But as Bama said, it won’t happen.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
It's not that bad
1. MI’s lead over Baylor is pretty big. A win over UT won’t be enough to jump MI.
2. Either WI or MSU will drop behind MI. There’s no way a 3-loss B10 team stays ahead of MI.
3. A UGA loss would certainly help, as would KSU losing and maybe even OU losing.
If Baylor moves up one spot on every ballot and one spot in every computer, they win.
That’s not a “big” lead.
(As for #2: Wisconsin would, certainly. MSU might not – Penn State just dropped two spots for getting dump-trucked by the Badgers, if we lose a close game we could stay ahead.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Numbers
MI leads Baylor by 0.0400 overall, 356 points (1256-900) in the Harris poll and 201 points (658-457) in the Coaches Poll.
That’s about the same size lead in each human poll that Baylor has in the computers. I don’t think beating UT closes that gap, and that assumes they can beat UT.
PSU didn’t drop much because they were already the lowest of the 9-2 teams. A 10-3 team will fall behind 10-2 MI, and maybe behind some of the 9-3 teams.
1) If Baylor beats Texas, the computers will vault them above Michigan rather easily
2) There’s no way? That’s doubtful, considering the Spartans hammered the Wolverines. If the Badgers squeak by the Spartans, I wouldn’t be surprised if the polls reflect as much.
3) Yes, they would certainly help. Mostly because the Wolverines need help.
Computers already have Baylor above MI
There is a limit on how much higher they can bump Baylor.
2. There is no way. The long history of human polls says a team losing the CCG will drop, and MI is barely behind them. As much as the computers already hate the B10, another conference loss will hurt MSU a lot.
We're the equivalent of 2.5 spots on every ballot and computer ahead.
And the gap actually grew last week (albeit very slightly). Drop, yes; if it’s a closely contested game we might not drop much. (Especially since, with so many teams off this week, the coaches are actually able to watch the game instead of just checking the box score before scribbling down a ballot.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Look at the numbers
MSU would have to drop only 0.1 with MI not gaining at all. PSU dropped almost 0.17, and would have gone lower but everyone below them has a much worse record and/or resume. AR dropped almost 0.2 for losing to the consensus #1 team, and dropped behind all the 1 loss teams, including Boise.
The computers can’t use the score, so being close doesn’t matter to them. They’ll see another loss in a conference they hate. The humans will see 3 losses and drop MSU to below all the 10-2 teams because that’s what humans do. MI is the last of the AQ 10-2 teams and only 3 spots behind, so most people will slide MSU behind them. It’s natural.
Sure there is
Eventually the top is full of the other B12 teams and top SEC teams. There is a hard ceiling for Baylor in the computers.
Craig James voted Arkansas #3 on his AP ballot. Boise State is 24.
No comment, except that I am very thankful the media poll doesn’t count in the BCS.
by OSUreds on Nov 27, 2011 8:11 PM CST via iPhone app reply actions
Won't he lose his voting rights
Once he’s a convicted felon?
by MSUDersh on Nov 27, 2011 8:17 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Fire Craig James.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
#FireCraigJames
Follow @GSchofield50
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Nov 27, 2011 8:19 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
You have to wonder why ESPN hasn't gotten rid of him.
A simple Google/Twitter search makes it clear he is the most hated analyst in the country.
by OSUreds on Nov 27, 2011 8:35 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Of hardcore CFB fans...
…which make up the vocal minority of viewers. This is also why Lou Holtz still has a job.
Aren't the crazies devided on Holth?
Yet united in our hatred for James/May?
In the name of the Woody, the Bo, and the Mustache Ride. Amen.
by Pariahwulfen on Nov 28, 2011 12:50 PM CST up reply actions
Craig James is a moron
this is one of his lesser demonstrations
I don't think Michigan will get to #14.
They’re way behind MSU and Georgia right now, fairly far behind Wisconsin, and Baylor is not too far behind (and has a chance to beat Texas and move up). If Georgia wins (unlikely), there’s no chance. If Wisconsin wins in a close game in the title game (they have looked mortal, if still very good, away from Camp Randall; I don’t think it will be a blowout either way), MSU might stay ahead (Penn State only dropped two spots for losing to Wisconsin in a massive curbstomping). If Baylor beats Texas, they only need to make up the equivalent of one position on every ballot and in every computer to move ahead, and that’s certainly doable. Any one of those things, and Michigan is at #15 at best.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
ESPN has set the narrative
And that narrative is that Wisconsin is a couple fluke plays away from being undefeated, is playing some team in the conference championship game that isn’t the second best team (Michigan), if the Big Ten gets two teams in it should be Wisconsin and Michigan, Alabama has qualified for the BCS Title Game and Richardson has won the Heisman.
At least, that’s what I gleaned from the weekend.
http://pittsfieldindex.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pittsfield-Ratings-Index/142673082487903
by PittsfieldIndex on Nov 27, 2011 8:30 PM CST up reply actions
But Michigan's problems
And the problems of much of the B1G is that the computers hate them. I think Baylor winning may be the biggest threat to them, simply because beating Texas (on name) has a certain cache with human voters that may give them enough of a boost to jump UM.
I’m getting to the point where I think the conference may unavoidably be a one bid league.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
Er, apparently the BCS rules are weirder than I thought
http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcs
So apparently, if a conference only has one team in the top 14, a second team can be selected from that conference if they’re in the top 18.
So then it becomes a question of how far down the rankings a BCS Bowl will go to pick a team like Michigan. And I hate to say it, but it would make a close MSU loss an interesting event next Sunday (if MSU managed to stay top 14 with a loss, UM doesn’t get a BCS game; if MSU and Michigan were top 18 we could be a in a money trumping on the field results situation; if MSU and Michigan are out of top 14, B1G is one bid; if Michigan is top 14 and MSU is not, BCS for Michigan).
But let’s not do that, just have MSU win and Baylor lose and Michigan and MSU are both in the big bowls.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
Wrong link
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/54347/oklahoma-state-making-strides
Part at bottom has relevant Big Ten implications.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
Or maybe I'm wrong again
http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597
Apparently, that leeway only applies if there are not 10 selectable teams in the top 14, which will not be the case.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
Nope.
The only time that can happen is if they can’t fill all the slots with top-14 teams due to too many teams from the same conference. Looked like a possibility in 2007 but didn’t happen. Not possible this time.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Suppose the B1G CCG winner and loser are both BCS #14 or higher
Does the loser get an at-large at 10-3?
Otherwise, who gets the at-large in place of the B1G getting 2 bids? The Oklahoma State – Oklahoma loser? Georgia (SEC CCG loser and SEC 3rd bid?)
Georgia has no at-large hopes
If they want a BCS bid, they have to beat LSU.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
OkSt or K-State, most likely, depending on who loses Bedlam.
Or Virginia Tech if they lose to Clemson.
Honestly, I don’t think the Big Ten gets two. I have a feeling Michigan is going to end up at #15, and conference title game losers almost never get selected if they weren’t in the national title hunt to begin with.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Looking at the computer rankings
I think both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State get BCS bids. The computers love them (and hate the Big Ten).
If Oklahoma wins, I don’t think Okie State drops that much. Both teams will be 10-2 and higher in the BCS than any Big Ten team.
If Oklahoma State wins, I think Oklahoma doesn’t drop that much in the computer polls either (the #6 average losing to the #3 average). Even at 9-3, I’m guessing Oklahoma would still be considered a bigger “TV and Tickets” draw than K-State.
With two losses in the last three and a bunch of key players injured?
I think taking K-State is more likely should Oklahoma lose. Wouldn’t be shocked to see Oklahoma, but teams that lose their last game rarely get BCS at-large bids (unless it’s very, very obvious they deserve one).
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
BCS rule fun:
If a non-AQ team finishes higher than an AQ conference champ and is in the top 16, they become an automatic selection in the BCS. If Houston does choke it away this week, the rule might still come into play since TCU is hanging around the 16 spot range. The Big East champ is almost a lock to stay below them.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
On the subject of who declines next year...
I’m a UM fan. I look at losing defensive line talent, an excellent center, and playing tOSU on the road with a coach (whoever it is) who has a ton of talent, time to settle in, and potentially a team that’s playing its bowl game (because, you know, LOIC) and I wonder if they might not wind up with two conference losses. Add to that playing Bama in the opener, and you get a worse record, even if UM has a marginally better team. Plus, sooner or later their luck runs out against Notre Dame. Maybe another year with the coordinators, Borges and Mattison makes them enough better that they wind up in the CCG, but I can see them losing four games. If—and it’s a big if—Hoke and company continue to recruit like they’ve started, UM gets to top tier in the Big Ten in 2013 and beyond, not 2012.
Hope I’m wrong.
Yeah, Sparty, it sucks that a team you beat convincingly might go to a better bowl. But, you know what, you went to a better bowl than Iowa did last year and they kicked your ass. This year, if you had beaten Notre Dame, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. If MSU is as good as their fans think they are, they don’t lose to the Irish.
You could say that about anyone with a loss though, right?
Along those same lines of logic, if Oklahoma St. is as good as everyone thinks they are, they wouldn’t have lost to Iowa State. So they CAN’T be the second best team in the country, right?
I’m not saying the ND loss isn’t horrible — it is. But there are plenty of very good teams that lose to teams they should handle easily. See St., Oklahoma. Or Wisconsin for that matter (OSU).
by The Birchman on Nov 27, 2011 10:38 PM CST up reply actions
And as a result...
The Notre Dame loss still counts. Sucks for you guys but that’s the way it is.
by lonewolf371 on Nov 27, 2011 11:03 PM CST up reply actions
Wait... What?
Your point is that any team with a bad loss automatically loses all credibility in their qualifications as a potential BCS team?
by The Birchman on Nov 28, 2011 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
No, you've got as much credibility as anyone else...
My point is that when you put yourself in a position to be screwed by an unfair system, bitching about the unfair system gets old really quick. I don’t think UM “deserves” a BCS bid. But I don’t think any of the teams I’m hearing might go ahead of them “deserve” it either.
I suspect that Arkansas may be the team that’s getting screwed the worst, but they also had a crack at changing it.
How many three-loss, non-conference championship teams have there been in BCS bowls again?
I’m old. I remember an undefeated Michigan team not going to a bowl at all. In Ann Arbor, we were pretty sure how Sparty voted on that one.
by patrickdolan on Nov 28, 2011 5:12 PM CST up reply actions
As an MSU fan, I know that we don't deserve an at-large BCS bid
Our non-conference other than ND was a total joke and we only beat two ranked teams. But if we beat Wisconsin on Saturday, I’ll know that beyond the shadow of a doubt, we will have earned that spot.
As much as MSU fans need to stop worrying about Michigan’s BCS chances (myself included), UM fans need to stop gloating about possibly backing into a BCS bid with the same kind of schedule that they criticized MSU for playing last year.
No gloating here
MSU won in East Lansing because they were clearly the better team. I don’t think it’s fair the division winner might go to an inferior bowl than someone who didn’t win the division. Should the situation be reversed some time in the future, I really don’t expect MSU fans to say the same, but I’ll be pleasantly surprised if they do.
That said, 10-2 and beating tOSU is more than I expected a year ago today. A little luck with the bowl may be unfair, but it’s pleasant, and I intend to enjoy it.
A Florida bowl isn’t bad. And I hope you beat the shit out of an SEC team while you’re there.
What I’d really like to see is a UM/MSU rematch. I think UM has improved, and it would be an excellent gauge of how much. But that’s what 2012 is for, no?
by patrickdolan on Nov 28, 2011 4:57 PM CST up reply actions
I think this is a pretty fair representation of the whole thing.
Michigan’s been a lot of fun to watch this year and there’s a reason they’re in this discussion at all.
Michigan State gets to play for their shot at a BCS bid, Michigan doesn’t get that luxury. I think a lot of State fans (myself included), forget this fact. Sure, Michigan’ll probably get in when all is said and done, but State’s earned a shot at a Big Ten title. Just win the game and the rest doesn’t matter.
by The Birchman on Nov 28, 2011 5:07 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly...
Whatever else is true, the two most deserving teams get to play in Indy. I hope it’s a good game. I tend to lean Wisconsin, because I have friends who teach there, but I’m not a UM fan who automatically cheers for whoever MSU is playing. (Now, tOSU…)
by patrickdolan on Nov 28, 2011 5:19 PM CST up reply actions
Not that anyone cares about projecting the belk bowl
But I would assume that the belk bowl (played in charlotte) would rather have the notorious t.o.b. and the wolfpack fanbase. That matchup (with west va.) would probably draw over 55k fans, not bad for a pre-new years bowl with mediocre weather.
by Joe Hamilton's Chauffeur on Nov 28, 2011 10:04 AM CST via mobile reply actions
Also
UNC is locked into the eagle bank bowl, because they have two fewer conference wins than any of the other bowlers.
by Joe Hamilton's Chauffeur on Nov 28, 2011 10:27 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Correction
Should have been military bowl. Keeping track of these 8th to tier bowl sponsorships is impossible.
by Joe Hamilton's Chauffeur on Nov 28, 2011 10:30 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Are you sure
that’s conference wins that are binding? I thought when I looked into this last year it was total wins.
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Patrick Vint
"I thought it was laughable when you first put it up, but you were obviously smarter than me." - PurdueMatt
http://www.offtackleempire.com
by Bama Hawkeye on Nov 28, 2011 10:34 AM CST up reply actions
I am
The 2011 conference media guide specifies conference wins apply for the “one loss rule.”
by Joe Hamilton's Chauffeur on Nov 28, 2011 10:39 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
If we get a UGA vs. Hawaii result...
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
#FireCraigJames
Follow @GSchofield50
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Nov 28, 2011 12:20 PM CST up reply actions
Other than the Big East champ
I think both Houston and Michigan would most want to play each other in a BCS game, since both could look at it as “Yeah, that’s winnable.”
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
I'll take the over.
Don’t care what it’s set at, I’ll take it.
Case Keenum vs. Michigan’s defensive backs? Yikes.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
See: Georgia vs. Hawai'i
Michigan’s front four will eat Houston alive.
Covering Michigan Basketball for Maize n Brew.
Twitter
Hawaii hadn't played anyone. At all.
Houston has at least played Tulsa (whose only other losses were to Oklahoma, OkSt, and Boise) and will play Southern Miss as well. No, that’s not a good schedule, but Hawaii struggled in many of their games against a schedule that would have ranked in the 30s or 40s among 1-AA teams (according to Sagarin). Houston has had relatively few struggles, all early in the season, and will have a strength of schedule most likely in the 90s or low 100s (compared to Hawaii’s 150-something).
I do think Houston would struggle in that game, but it wouldn’t be a snuff film like Georgia-Hawaii.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
NEBRASKA vs SOUTH CAROLINA in the Capital One bowl would be nice see.
I think the Huskers have all 3 previous games where we played the Gamecocks but they are playing very well this season, finishing off their season wiping Clemson off the map. And watching how Pelini & Co match up against Spurrier & Co would be interesting to watch as well.
On a side note, I think Bucky is going to obliterate Sparty this weekend, to the point that any bowl that was considering inviting Sparty will consider otherwise.
I dislike you and your opinions
/tongueincheek
Cousins is going to have a game similar to what he
experienced against the Huskers, only worse – poor timing being the B1G Championship game and all.
Ball is going to chalk up at least 4 more TDs against Sparty, and Wilson is going to drive Sparty’s D completely nuts.
Good thing I’m halfway around the globe or you’d have to buy me a beer after you’ve witnessed what I have written here pan out. :)
by MSS1960 on Nov 28, 2011 4:29 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
I'll believe Wisconsin can maul a good team away from Camp Randall when I see it.
So far, I see two losses, a two-score win against the Zooker, and a mauling of a not-good Minnesota team.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Playing in Indy might neutralize some of that Camp Randall magic
but watching them last week against PSU was fun to watch and they looked much more like, and played much more like, a harmonized and stronger team.
I know Sparty has been playing much better since their visit to Lincoln, and I hope the game is close but Bucky is going to be out for revenge big time.
You going to be there?
I think State will be out for, you know, a B1G title
Motivation isn’t going to be an issue for either side.
They looked like that against Nebraska early in the season too.
Didn’t carry over when they left home. And it’s not like they’ve been on a major roll of late – they were dangerously close to a Zooking just two weeks ago. Much stronger correlation between road/home split than recent/early-season split.
No, I won’t be there. 16-hour drive each way is a bit much.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
I must have missed the part where I said MSU was going to maul Wisconsin.
Wisconsin may win (I think it’s somewhere between a toss-up and them being a slight favorite), but I don’t see them destroying even a halfway decent team, much less a good one, away from Camp Randall. I don’t think we’re going to destroy them either.
(Calling Iowa a “good team” might be a bit of a stretch, but if they qualify, there’s your answer anyway.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Lookin' like Indy might be very friendly to the Spartans...
MSU’s allotment of tix sold out in 2 hours. WI couldn’t sell all theirs, so they are now available for the general public.
Hoping to see a “Sea of Green” in the oil dome on Saturday!
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
It may be that a lot of Wisc fans bought earlier
After all, they were considered one of the favorites to make it here before the season. We’ll find out, though.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanShots on Off Tackle Empire
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
