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

[betarhoalphadelta]

Had the B1G gone 1-7, folks would be talking about it a good bit.

Hence my point. 5 of 8 games were decided by one score. 4 of those 5 were wins. Had there been slight bounces in either, we'd have gone 3-5.
Of course, we're sports fans, so we'd all be talking about how maybe the middle of the conference was weak, but did you see those OSU and Wisconsin bowl games? The top of the conference was fine!
As I said, we try to explain events that due to small sample sizes can hardly be described as anything but random with a narrative. 

[ELA]

Heh, I was just watching something about the '99 NBA ECQF Game 5 between the #1 Heat and the #8 Knicks.  How Allan Houston hit the game winner (and it was just best of 5 back then) with a fortunate bounce off the front of the rim, which sent the Knicks through (and they eventually made it all the way to the NBA Finals).  That the Knicks were prepared to fire Van Gundy after that series and bring in Phil Jackson as coach, but they couldn't fire a guy coming off an NBA Finals appearance.  So instead Jackson went to the Lakers, convinced Kobe and Shaq to give it a go together, when the Lakers were on the cusp of trading Shaq.

So basically the only reason the 2000s Lakers dynasty happens is because Allan Houston's shot off the front of the rim bounced forwards, instead of backwards, which meant Jeff Van Gundy was a good coach.  Not that he drew up a play proving that he was a good coach, simply the direction the ball bounced determined how good of a coach he was.  That's just how sports are.

[Cincydawg]

Interesting NBA tale, and consistent with my thoughts.  A lot of games could have gone either way.  Someone wins.  

Unless a conference really dominates OOC play, at least at the top, I don't see much difference beyond how the ball bounces.

A bunch of wins 24-21 are great, but as noted could have been 27-24 if this or that happened.

[Cincydawg]

Am I correct that the "best conference" claims got started with the Internet and ESPN?

I vaguely recall comments by TV guys during games that "X" was the best conference in 1970, but I don't think it aroused much controversy, perhaps because people had no outlet for their thoughts.  I know when teams from the Big 8 finished 1-2-3 it was sort of obvious, but I suspect in many years it really was not very clear.

And it of course requires some idea of how one decides it, e.g., a conference might have 2-3 GREAT teams and 10-11 bad teams versus another that has 1 great team, 5 good teams, 5 OK teams, and 3 bad teams etc.

One can't logically just tote up the OOC records because you can have a top team from A playing a crap team from B, AND because there are so few OOC games of any real note.  Then you have UGA beating ND by a point in a game that could go either way.  Should we presume UGA was really better than ND?  Eh.  NW beat UK in a game that could have gone either way, same with LSU and ND.  UGA beat OU in another contest.

So, eh, I'm happy for anyone to claim X is the best conference based on Y.  Fine with me.  I'm happy my Dawgs won the SEC which for me is the one real claim to a something in CFB.  Win your conference first.

[847badgerfan]

It's 8 AM CST, 35 degrees F, sunny, and the Big Ten went 7-1 in bowl games.

[FearlessF]

warm here in Iowa and the Hawkeyes won the pinstripe bowl over an ACC team

[Cincydawg]

Another thing FOR SURE is if the SEC went 7-1 in bowl games, someone would be posting about it.

SEC.

[OrangeAfroMan]

The SEC went 9-2 in bowls a couple of years ago, I don't recall much of anything about it. 

The last time the B10 was more than a game over .500 in bowls was 2002, so 2017 seems noteworthy.  

[847badgerfan]

Another thing FOR SURE is if the SEC went 7-1 in bowl games, someone would be posting about it.

SEC.

No question. 

What we need is more SEC posters though. Or we just get rid of conference boards and everyone posts on one.

Hmm. Have to think about that.

[Cincydawg]

I favor having one main site to talk about college football.  This conference thing is too limiting.

[OrangeAfroMan]

No question.

What we need is more SEC posters though. Or we just get rid of conference boards and everyone posts on one.

Hmm. Have to think about that.

The SEC board only has 3-4 people going.  I'll never be able to wrap my head around why people enjoyed having a mental midget as the main draw there.  The guy was demented, but when he was finally gone, so went his audience.

[Cincydawg]

I think the change overs killed the audience.  Most didn't follow.  I've been on other boards where this happened as well for obvious reasons.

If we had one active board here, it would gradually attract others.

[OrangeAfroMan]

Did the ACC board ever have much traffic?  All I ever saw was one oddball posting long, obscure things on it.  A VT fan I think?

[FearlessF]

The SEC went 9-2 in bowls a couple of years ago, I don't recall much of anything about it.

your recall is worse than this old man's