Major conference versus major conference bowl wins and losses so far - adjusted for realignment (AAC, MW, MAC, CUSA - don't take umbrage, I'm just attempting a fair comparison within the group):

B10:
Winner - Michigan State, Nebraska
Losers - Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Rutgers (ND as a major),
TBD - Ohio State
Not Counted - Maryland Loss to Marshall

So far 2-5

My guess is they finish at 3-5, with OSU nipping Clemson (I don't really know why Clemson will lose as I hope they win and think they have a better offense but another Duke/TAMU might develop)

ACC:

Winner - Syracuse, Louisville
Losers - GT, BC, Miami, Duke
TBD - FSU, Clemson
Not Counted - Pitt MAC win, UNC AAC win,
Do you count ND?

So far 2-4 not counting ND's win in this total

My guess is that the ACC finishes 3-5 with FSU winning and Clemson somehow losing.

P12

Winner - UCLA, Arizona, Oregon,
Loser - Washington State, Stanford
Not Counted - Washington BYU win, Oregon State MW win, USC MW win

3-2

B12

Winner - Kansas State, Texas Tech,
Loser - Texas
Not Counted - Baylor playing AAC team
TBD - OU, Oklahoma State

So far 2-1

My guess is that the B10 finishes 3-2 with Oklahoma State winning and Oklahoma losing to Bama.

SEC

Winner - LSU, SC, TAMU, Ole Miss
Loser - Georgia,

So far 4-1

My guess is the SEC finishes 5-3 with Auburn losing to FSU, Mizzou losing, and Bama winning.

That would play out as:

SEC 5-3
B12 3-2
P12 3-2
ACC 3-5 (not counting ND's win for the ACC)
B10 3-5 (counting Rutgers loss to ND)

This year the five major conferences will have played 9 bowls against the MAC, AAC, MW, and CUSA. Next year I think that drops to what - 3 or 4?

The ACC really needed that win by Duke. Watching Georgia today was a lot like watching Duke last night.

(01-01-2014 08:56 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Major conference versus major conference bowl wins and losses so far - adjusted for realignment (AAC, MW, MAC, CUSA - don't take umbrage, I'm just attempting a fair comparison within the group):

B10:
Winner - Michigan State, Nebraska
Losers - Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Rutgers (ND as a major),
TBD - Ohio State
Not Counted - Maryland Loss to Marshall

So far 2-5

My guess is they finish at 3-5, with OSU nipping Clemson (I don't really know why Clemson will lose as I hope they win and think they have a better offense but another Duke/TAMU might develop)

ACC:

Winner - Syracuse, Louisville
Losers - GT, BC, Miami, Duke
TBD - FSU, Clemson
Not Counted - Pitt MAC win, UNC AAC win,
Do you count ND?

So far 2-4 not counting ND's win in this total

My guess is that the ACC finishes 3-5 with FSU winning and Clemson somehow losing.

P12

Winner - UCLA, Arizona, Oregon
Loser - Washington State, Stanford
Not Counted - Washington MW win, Oregon State MW win, USC MW win

3-2

B12

Winner - Kansas State, Texas Tech,
Loser - Texas
Not Counted - Baylor playing AAC team
TBD - OU, Oklahoma State

So far 2-1

My guess is that the B10 finishes 3-2 with Oklahoma State winning and Oklahoma losing to Bama.

SEC

Winner - LSU, SC, TAMU, Ole Miss
Loser - Georgia,

So far 4-1

My guess is the SEC finishes 5-3 with Auburn losing to FSU, Mizzou losing, and Bama winning.

That would play out as:

SEC 5-3
B12 3-2
P12 3-2
ACC 3-5 (not counting ND)
B10 3-5

This year the five major conferences will have played 9 bowls against the MAC, AAC, MW, and CUSA. Next year I think that drops to what - 3 or 4?

The ACC really needed that win by Duke. Watching Georgia today was a lot like watching Duke last night.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this year Maryland was in the ACC played an ACC schedule and was an ACC bowl rep and Louisville was in the AAC this year played an AAC schedule and was an AAC bowl rep

Minuteman, at the top of the thread I stated it was based on realignment - Maryland to the B10, Louisville to the ACC, Rutgers to the B10.

But I will change the topic description to make it clearer.

This year the AAC is AQ conference and UCF is a realignment school so that would qualify for this year.

Look, it's pretty transparent what you're trying to do, you're trying to suggest that the ACC has held it's own in comparison to the B1G this bowl season. Nice try with the realignment twist, but if you're comparing this seasons results between conferences, it matters where teams actually played this season. You don't get credit for Louisville, who will likely be a much different team when they actually join the ACC without Bridgewater. Although you say you're not including Notre Dame, by even mentioning them you're insinuating that the ACC deserves some type of special consideration for their win, even though there are no plans of them ever becoming a football member. Using that logic, I suppose the Big east should have claimed some type of similar credit last year, when ND played in the championship game. Conversely neither Rutgers nor Marylands athletes were recruited to play in the B1G, they were recruited for the BE and ACC respectively. Maryland's loss goes to the ACC, like it or not. So as it stands right now, the B1G has two wins, both against ranked foes, Stanford and Georgia, and the ACC has one win against Minnesota, a team that will not register a single vote in the final poll. Maybe FSU and Clemson will change the ACC's fortunes, that remains to be seen. But as things stand tonight, the B1G has had the better showing so far, dismal as they have been for the most part.

(01-01-2014 11:22 PM)hoops22 Wrote:  Look, it's pretty transparent what you're trying to do, you're trying to suggest that the ACC has held it's own in comparison to the B1G this bowl season. Nice try with the realignment twist, but if you're comparing this seasons results between conferences, it matters where teams actually played this season. You don't get credit for Louisville, who will likely be a much different team when they actually join the ACC without Bridgewater. Although you say you're not including Notre Dame, by even mentioning them you're insinuating that the ACC deserves some type of special consideration for their win, even though there are no plans of them ever becoming a football member. Using that logic, I suppose the Big east should have claimed some type of similar credit last year, when ND played in the championship game. Conversely neither Rutgers nor Marylands athletes were recruited to play in the B1G, they were recruited for the BE and ACC respectively. Maryland's loss goes to the ACC, like it or not. So as it stands right now, the B1G has two wins, both against ranked foes, Stanford and Georgia, and the ACC has one win against Minnesota, a team that will not register a single vote in the final poll. Maybe FSU and Clemson will change the ACC's fortunes, that remains to be seen. But as things stand tonight, the B1G has had the better showing so far, dismal as they have been for the most part.

Well, by final results comparison only, the Big Ten hasn't shown well. Each and every game has been very competitive and enjoyable. In that regard the Big Ten has won big this year.

Still though, I have a sour taste in my mouth right now due to final scores. Thankfully the Michigan State win was a great win and definitely helps the perception.

I do agree with you as to the purpose of this thread and quite frankly I just don't get it. Big Ten folks aren't out trying to paint our results as anything other than unacceptable and we aren't trying to compare it to other conferences in order to make it seem better.

How about comparing blow outs and seeing what conferences had teams that truly made their conferences look inferior.

The only one The Big Ten might have had that could be considered would be the Michigan game. That isn't surprising considering just how much of a colossal let down Michigan has been for the conference this year.

(01-01-2014 11:29 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-01-2014 11:22 PM)hoops22 Wrote:  Look, it's pretty transparent what you're trying to do, you're trying to suggest that the ACC has held it's own in comparison to the B1G this bowl season. Nice try with the realignment twist, but if you're comparing this seasons results between conferences, it matters where teams actually played this season. You don't get credit for Louisville, who will likely be a much different team when they actually join the ACC without Bridgewater. Although you say you're not including Notre Dame, by even mentioning them you're insinuating that the ACC deserves some type of special consideration for their win, even though there are no plans of them ever becoming a football member. Using that logic, I suppose the Big east should have claimed some type of similar credit last year, when ND played in the championship game. Conversely neither Rutgers nor Marylands athletes were recruited to play in the B1G, they were recruited for the BE and ACC respectively. Maryland's loss goes to the ACC, like it or not. So as it stands right now, the B1G has two wins, both against ranked foes, Stanford and Georgia, and the ACC has one win against Minnesota, a team that will not register a single vote in the final poll. Maybe FSU and Clemson will change the ACC's fortunes, that remains to be seen. But as things stand tonight, the B1G has had the better showing so far, dismal as they have been for the most part.

Well, by final results comparison only, the Big Ten hasn't shown well. Each and every game has been very competitive and enjoyable. In that regard the Big Ten has won big this year.

Still though, I have a sour taste in my mouth right now due to final scores. Thankfully the Michigan State win was a great win and definitely helps the perception.

I do agree with you as to the purpose of this thread and quite frankly I just don't get it. Big Ten folks aren't out trying to paint our results as anything other than unacceptable and we aren't trying to compare it to other conferences in order to make it seem better.

How about comparing blow outs and seeing what conferences had teams that truly made their conferences look inferior.

The only one The Big Ten might have had that could be considered would be the Michigan game. That isn't surprising considering just how much of a colossal let down Michigan has been for the conference this year.

There have been 2 and a partial good football games today. Michigan State / Stanford was a great game. Central Florida / Baylor is a good one that is not over yet. The Wisconsin / South Carolina game was good until Wisconsin's quarterback went down. The Nebraska / Georgia game was ugly on both sides with a few spectacular plays (defensive busts) dotting the sloppy futility and poor officiating that hurt both teams. L.S.U. without Mettenberger still had a dominating defense, but the game was a yawner for both schools offensively.

The Big 10 has been competitive with the exception of Michigan's lousy defensive effort. So far it is a typical bowl season. A few teams came with their A game and were ready (see Duke) but most look lethargic and out of rhythm. A true playoff will at least help keep them sharp. The layoff won't be as long. In my opinion this is why it is too difficult to get an accurate read on conference strength using bowl match ups, but still it's all we have right now.

(01-02-2014 12:02 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-01-2014 11:29 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-01-2014 11:22 PM)hoops22 Wrote:  Look, it's pretty transparent what you're trying to do, you're trying to suggest that the ACC has held it's own in comparison to the B1G this bowl season. Nice try with the realignment twist, but if you're comparing this seasons results between conferences, it matters where teams actually played this season. You don't get credit for Louisville, who will likely be a much different team when they actually join the ACC without Bridgewater. Although you say you're not including Notre Dame, by even mentioning them you're insinuating that the ACC deserves some type of special consideration for their win, even though there are no plans of them ever becoming a football member. Using that logic, I suppose the Big east should have claimed some type of similar credit last year, when ND played in the championship game. Conversely neither Rutgers nor Marylands athletes were recruited to play in the B1G, they were recruited for the BE and ACC respectively. Maryland's loss goes to the ACC, like it or not. So as it stands right now, the B1G has two wins, both against ranked foes, Stanford and Georgia, and the ACC has one win against Minnesota, a team that will not register a single vote in the final poll. Maybe FSU and Clemson will change the ACC's fortunes, that remains to be seen. But as things stand tonight, the B1G has had the better showing so far, dismal as they have been for the most part.

Well, by final results comparison only, the Big Ten hasn't shown well. Each and every game has been very competitive and enjoyable. In that regard the Big Ten has won big this year.

Still though, I have a sour taste in my mouth right now due to final scores. Thankfully the Michigan State win was a great win and definitely helps the perception.

I do agree with you as to the purpose of this thread and quite frankly I just don't get it. Big Ten folks aren't out trying to paint our results as anything other than unacceptable and we aren't trying to compare it to other conferences in order to make it seem better.

How about comparing blow outs and seeing what conferences had teams that truly made their conferences look inferior.

The only one The Big Ten might have had that could be considered would be the Michigan game. That isn't surprising considering just how much of a colossal let down Michigan has been for the conference this year.

There have been 2 and a partial good football games today. Michigan State / Stanford was a great game. Central Florida / Baylor is a good one that is not over yet. The Wisconsin / South Carolina game was good until Wisconsin's quarterback went down. The Nebraska / Georgia game was ugly on both sides with a few spectacular plays (defensive busts) dotting the sloppy futility and poor officiating that hurt both teams. L.S.U. without Mettenberger still had a dominating defense, but the game was a yawner for both schools offensively.

The Big 10 has been competitive with the exception of Michigan's lousy defensive effort. So far it is a typical bowl season. A few teams came with their A game and were ready (see Duke) but most look lethargic and out of rhythm. A true playoff will at least help keep them sharp. The layoff won't be as long. In my opinion this is why it is too difficult to get an accurate read on conference strength using bowl match ups, but still it's all we have right now.

My opinion differs on the Big Ten games. So be it.

(01-01-2014 08:56 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Major conference versus major conference bowl wins and losses so far - adjusted for realignment (AAC, MW, MAC, CUSA - don't take umbrage, I'm just attempting a fair comparison within the group):

B10:
Winner - Michigan State, Nebraska
Losers - Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Rutgers (ND as a major),
TBD - Ohio State
Not Counted - Maryland Loss to Marshall

So far 2-5

My guess is they finish at 3-5, with OSU nipping Clemson (I don't really know why Clemson will lose as I hope they win and think they have a better offense but another Duke/TAMU might develop)

ACC:

Winner - Syracuse, Louisville
Losers - GT, BC, Miami, Duke
TBD - FSU, Clemson
Not Counted - Pitt MAC win, UNC AAC win,
Do you count ND?

So far 2-4 not counting ND's win in this total

My guess is that the ACC finishes 3-5 with FSU winning and Clemson somehow losing.

P12

Winner - UCLA, Arizona, Oregon,
Loser - Washington State, Stanford
Not Counted - Washington BYU win, Oregon State MW win, USC MW win

3-2

B12

Winner - Kansas State, Texas Tech,
Loser - Texas
Not Counted - Baylor playing AAC team
TBD - OU, Oklahoma State

So far 2-1

My guess is that the B10 finishes 3-2 with Oklahoma State winning and Oklahoma losing to Bama.

SEC

Winner - LSU, SC, TAMU, Ole Miss
Loser - Georgia,

So far 4-1

My guess is the SEC finishes 5-3 with Auburn losing to FSU, Mizzou losing, and Bama winning.

That would play out as:

SEC 5-3
B12 3-2
P12 3-2
ACC 3-5 (not counting ND's win for the ACC)
B10 3-5 (counting Rutgers loss to ND)

This year the five major conferences will have played 9 bowls against the MAC, AAC, MW, and CUSA. Next year I think that drops to what - 3 or 4?

The ACC really needed that win by Duke. Watching Georgia today was a lot like watching Duke last night.

The SEC is already 5-1. You forgot MSU's win. You also forgot the Vandy game, which has not been played.

My Dawgs stunk up the joint today, unfortunately.

Lurker - I forgot to list MSU and Vandy because they have non B-5 conference opponents. I was getting tired at the end of the post, I even forgot VT played. Then again considering the QB play at VT the past few years, maybe they didn't really play.

(01-02-2014 08:49 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Lurker - I forgot to list MSU and Vandy because they have non B-5 conference opponents. I was getting tired at the end of the post, I even forgot VT played. Then again considering the QB play at VT the past few years, maybe they didn't really play.

You mean VT has a quarterback? I thought that guy was a linebacker playing quarterback in the wing T.

(01-02-2014 08:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-02-2014 08:49 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Lurker - I forgot to list MSU and Vandy because they have non B-5 conference opponents. I was getting tired at the end of the post, I even forgot VT played. Then again considering the QB play at VT the past few years, maybe they didn't really play.

You mean VT has a quarterback? I thought that guy was a linebacker playing quarterback in the wing T.

It's the damndest thing I've seen in years. He never improved past his Sophomore year. Between that and the absolute human screw up kicker it's been a dismal period at VT. Journel cost Tech Sugar bowl with he and his buddies antics and you never knew when he would play or be busted for some form of stupidity. I've come to expect this at State and not be surprised. But I don't think Frank's been the same person since his wife's accident.