Author
Topic: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?
(Read 11798 times)

nuwildcat · « **on:** January 02, 2018, 05:33:16 PM »

I'm not sure that can be said definitively

4 of our 7 wins were by 1 score so it's not like we necessarily dominated our respective opponents

Also, there is some validity to the thought that not getting one team (or two

) in the playoff means everyone moved down a peg on the proverbial ladder to (theoretically) play a weaker team

That said, I'm guessing there should be 4 B1G squads in the Top 10 when the initial rankings come out and that this recent postseason showing should bolster our image ... at least temporarily

The SEC does seem to be top heavy of late so I'm not sure they can legitimately beat their chests as 'the best' either

In other words, I honestly don't know the answer

FearlessF · « **Reply #1 on:** January 02, 2018, 05:37:06 PM »

yes

would have been a resounding yes, but Harbaugh let us down

847badgerfan · « **Reply #2 on:** January 02, 2018, 05:40:17 PM »

The conference is pretty deep - probably deeper than most.

The West went 4-0.

The East went 3-1.

I'm thinking NU, which should have gotten that Outback bid, would have won that game.

Is it the best? Honestly I really don't care.

EastAthens · « **Reply #3 on:** January 02, 2018, 05:47:18 PM »

I will give the Big 10 their due as the best conference this year like the ACC last year. Congrats. It certainly was not the SEC either year.

Go Dawgs!

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #4 on:** January 02, 2018, 06:26:02 PM »

Ehh. I don't rank conferences by bowl results. I usually downplay it the years that the B1G does badly, so I'm not exactly going to beat my chest over our results this year.

There's too much noise and not enough signal for my taste. Too many people want to extrapolate out from minimal data sets to prove a point. Bowl results depend on matchup, luck, etc. Too often one team is just rusty after the long layoff while others are more emotionally invested.

As you point out, a few balls bounce the other way and we're 3-5 instead of 7-1. I know that Purdue, to regain the lead late in the 4th quarter against Arizona required:

After a pair of incompletions, Sindelar has to dump a short pass on 3rd and 10, to DJ Knox who managed to scamper for 21 yards and keep the drive alive. He wasn't untouched. He had to break a tackle to make that gain, or it's 4th down.
An Arizona DB dropping a sure interception on a Sindelar pass on 1st and 10.
A 2nd-and-10 play where the shotgun snap was BADLY missed, and instead of falling on the ball like most QBs are taught to do, Sindelar--on a torn ACL, scoops it up, scrambles, gets a pass off and complete for no gain, making it 3rd and long instead of 3rd and completely ridiculous.
On that 3rd-and-10 play, Sindelar throws a long ball to Anthony Mahoungou [who had dropped numerous passes all through the 3rd quarter], which is VERY well contested by the DB, which Mahoungou has to make a circus catch over him and then wrestle him 4 yards into the end zone. 8 times out of 10 the receiver doesn't catch that ball. Strangely it should have been defensive pass interference, but that *also* wasn't called.
Then Arizona got the ball back, and after burning our safeties ALL game long, one came up with a critical interception on an overthrown pass to seal it.

As a fan I want to claim that this team just never stopped fighting, and they willed themselves to victory. That Purdue won because Purdue was the better team.

But I know better. These teams were very evenly matched. If either team was "better" than the other, it was by small margins. Purdue managed to escape with a win.

Are we really going to claim that just because 4 of 7 games decided by a score or less happened to go our way that we're the best conference?

Yes, we are going to claim that 7-1 makes us the best conference. Because sports fans do that sort of thing. But claiming it doesn't make it true.

OrangeAfroMan · « **Reply #5 on:** January 02, 2018, 09:59:10 PM »

No, the 8 bowl games did not prove anything. The 178 regular season games did.

The Big Ten was best - Michigan was the 6th or 7th-best team. That's strong.
The ACC was a 2-team show the whole way.
The SEC isnt going to be the best with Florida and Tennessee both sucking. South Carolina should be 4th in the East, not 4th in the conference.
The PAC isn't going to be the best with Oregon absent. With the big games ASU, Arizona, and UCLA had, all were only around .500 overall.
The XII isn't going to be the best until they learn what defense is. Seriously, it's stupid.

The Big Ten was best because OSU, PSU, and maybe Wisconsin could beat anyone. Because MSU came back to life and Northwestern mattered.
Yes, the B10 has 5 anchors that drag it down (including both newcomers). But it was still the best without Michigan or Nebraska mattering....and that's a big deal. There were enough quality teams without those helmets.

jhetfield99 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 03, 2018, 12:15:12 AM »

I don't need to add much, lots of luck involved but it sure was a fun week.

ELA · « **Reply #7 on:** January 03, 2018, 07:51:42 AM »

You could make an argument for the Big Ten, SEC or ACC. The bowl season was a nice notch in the Big Ten's belt, but it didn't "prove" anything. It's just nice that the conference is back to being in the discussion, wherever you rank it.

TresselownsUM · « **Reply #8 on:** January 03, 2018, 09:03:56 AM »

You could make an argument for the Big Ten, SEC or ACC. The bowl season was a nice notch in the Big Ten's belt, but it didn't "prove" anything. It's just nice that the conference is back to being in the discussion, wherever you rank it.

I disagree on some level, I do think these games matter in terms of perception and can help give a better idea of who's best. The regular season games also mattered, so they need to be looked at in total but the bowls give a chance to see each conferences best teams square off, and also allow us to see some mid tier teams square off, and those games don't happen enough during the regular season so we need these to judge teams and conferences.

I'm pretty sure everyone thought after the first couple of teams in the SEC that the SEC was not good, and that theory if you will played out on the field. The PAC 12 took it on the chin big time, that can't be dismissed. Do I think the PAC 12 is the worst conference? I dunno, but after seeing it go 1-8 I think it was I feel pretty confident in saying the ACC and BIG were better.

I'm tired of hearing things like "auburn didn't want to be there" Don't try and discredit UCF for playing a good game. Isn't coaching, motivating a team part of what makes a program? If Auburn can't get up to play in a new years day bowl game that's a program issue, and means the team and coaching staff is flawed in that regard.

PSUinNC · « **Reply #9 on:** January 03, 2018, 09:14:57 AM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on January 02, 2018, 09:59:10 PM

No, the 8 bowl games did not prove anything. The 178 regular season games did.

The Big Ten was best - Michigan was the 6th or 7th-best team. That's strong.
The ACC was a 2-team show the whole way.
The SEC isnt going to be the best with Florida and Tennessee both sucking. South Carolina should be 4th in the East, not 4th in the conference.
The PAC isn't going to be the best with Oregon absent. With the big games ASU, Arizona, and UCLA had, all were only around .500 overall.
The XII isn't going to be the best until they learn what defense is. Seriously, it's stupid.

The Big Ten was best because OSU, PSU, and maybe Wisconsin could beat anyone. Because MSU came back to life and Northwestern mattered.
Yes, the B10 has 5 anchors that drag it down (including both newcomers). But it was still the best without Michigan or Nebraska mattering....and that's a big deal. There were enough quality teams without those helmets.

Very well said. HOwever, putting two teams in the national championship game certainly gives the SEC its bragging rights as well.
So to me it's about defintion - 'Best' meaning strongest top to bottom? Big Ten. 'Best' meaning best teams? I think that's gotta be the SEC (Auburn included).

847badgerfan · « **Reply #10 on:** January 03, 2018, 09:30:50 AM »

1-3 in the Big Ten vs. 1-3 in the SEC would be really interesting games right now.

ELA · « **Reply #11 on:** January 03, 2018, 10:14:00 AM »

Quote from: TresselownsUM on January 03, 2018, 09:03:56 AM

You could make an argument for the Big Ten, SEC or ACC. The bowl season was a nice notch in the Big Ten's belt, but it didn't "prove" anything. It's just nice that the conference is back to being in the discussion, wherever you rank it.

I disagree on some level, I do think these games matter in terms of perception and can help give a better idea of who's best. The regular season games also mattered, so they need to be looked at in total but the bowls give a chance to see each conferences best teams square off, and also allow us to see some mid tier teams square off, and those games don't happen enough during the regular season so we need these to judge teams and conferences.

I'm pretty sure everyone thought after the first couple of teams in the SEC that the SEC was not good, and that theory if you will played out on the field. The PAC 12 took it on the chin big time, that can't be dismissed. Do I think the PAC 12 is the worst conference? I dunno, but after seeing it go 1-8 I think it was I feel pretty confident in saying the ACC and BIG were better.

I'm tired of hearing things like "auburn didn't want to be there" Don't try and discredit UCF for playing a good game. Isn't coaching, motivating a team part of what makes a program? If Auburn can't get up to play in a new years day bowl game that's a program issue, and means the team and coaching staff is flawed in that regard.

I do agree it matters a lot for perception. It would have mattered even more if ESPN had showed the conference standings as frequently as they do when the SEC is rolling, but the story was still out there.

Kris61 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 03, 2018, 10:53:38 AM »

The flip side is the Big Ten also got a lower percentage of its teams to the postseason compared to the other conferences. Big Ten got of 8 of 14. The ACC and SEC got 9 of 14. The PAC 12 got 9 of 12 and the Big XII got 8 of 10.

I get the argument of the ACC and SEC only playing 8 conference games but that wouldn't fly with the PAC 12 and Big XII.

That being said, I wouldn't have a big problem if someone said the Big Ten was the best conference this year.

847badgerfan · « **Reply #13 on:** January 03, 2018, 11:16:27 AM »

Maryland would have been #9 if not for being decimated at the QB position. They had some good things going to start the season, including the win in Austin.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

nuwildcat

OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

FearlessF

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

847badgerfan

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

EastAthens

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

betarhoalphadelta

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

OrangeAfroMan

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

jhetfield99

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

ELA

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

TresselownsUM

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

PSUinNC

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

847badgerfan

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

ELA

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

Kris61

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?

847badgerfan

Re: OT - Did going 7-1 in its bowls prove the B1G is the best conference?