CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: CWSooner on June 23, 2020, 05:05:18 PM
-
If you got to schedule an OOC program for your school to play every year for a decade, who would it be?
For Oklahoma, in my order of preference:
1. Notre Dame
2. Ohio State
3. Alabama
4. USC
5. Nebraska
-
I think most would take Notre Dame as their 1.
Some might slot a team ahead of them, just to be different.
-
If you got to schedule an OOC program for your school to play every year for a decade, who would it be?
For Oklahoma, in my order of preference:
1. Notre Dame
2. Ohio State
3. Alabama
4. USC
5. Nebraska
well, kiss my grits
my order of preference would be:
1. Oklahoma
2. -------------
-
I think most would take Notre Dame as their 1.
Some might slot a team ahead of them, just to be different.
Not really,outside of the fact I like to watch them get stomped
-
Not Notre Dame. They can die in a fire.
For Purdue, I can think of a few:
- Georgia Tech - I like that we're both kinda nerdy engineering schools. Would be a nice 'crootin pipeline to GA as well.
- UCLA - We have the John Wooden connection. And I'd be able to see Purdue live and in person 5 times in a decade since it's driving distance.
- Kentucky - Neighboring state, both basketball schools primarily and our football programs are also-rans in major conferences.
- UNC - Again, both basketball schools primarily, but occasionally have something exciting happen football-wise.
- Colorado - Not even sure why. I like Boulder. Maybe I'd find a way to fly there on a business trip around gametime a few of the years Purdue comes out.
-
Not really,outside of the fact I like to watch them get stomped
I mean it would almost have to be a border state, or maybe Cincinnati, and out of all of the available options W Virginia would be the only one that would even come close to being as enjoyable as ND would be, for a ten year stretch.
I guess you could always pad the SEC record with a Kentucky series, but that would be an absolute snooze fest after the first game or two.
-
Well then V-Tech maybe
-
1. The USC
2. Auburn or Georgia
3. Oklahoma
4. Florida State
5. Ohio State (kinda OOC)
-
5. Ohio State (kinda OOC)
Love to see that penciled in as a cross over - ANNUALLY.And if the 'Skers want a waterboarding - pencil them in too or the Fighting Ferentz's or Ski-U-Mah
-
Love to see that penciled in as a cross over - ANNUALLY.And if the 'Skers want a waterboarding - pencil them in too or the Fighting Ferentz's or Ski-U-Mah
Sounds like y'all are scared of a certain team from the West... Lafayette...
-
:67: when are the Boilers on the schedule next,maybe Rondale will be gone.That QB lit up the good guys
-
Not Notre Dame. They can die in a fire.
Amen. I hope Michigan quits playing them unless they agree to join the B1G. Why do them a favor and play them? Really just a waste of time playing them in my opinion. Does nothing to help recruiting nationally and they recruit a lot of the same players in the midwest already. F 'em.
Top 5, I'd say.
1) Miami Hurricanes
2) USC Trojans
3) Texas Longhorns
4) Georgia Bulldogs
5) LSU Tigers
Specifically in that order. And why? Recruiting purposes. If Michigan played a home and home with Miami every year, they could recruit SoFL way more effectively. And Miami sucks right now and basically none of the top kids in the area even go to Miami anymore. They are all either going to UF/FSU or leaving the state. It's actually more rare that a top SoFL kid goes to Miami than it is he leaves the state.
-
Love to see that penciled in as a cross over - ANNUALLY.And if the 'Skers want a waterboarding - pencil them in too or the Fighting Ferentz's or Ski-U-Mah
OSU will be UW's crossover for 6 years starting soon. 2021 maybe? Anyway, I hope UW can steal one.
-
Amen. I hope Michigan quits playing them unless they agree to join the B1G. Why do them a favor and play them? Really just a waste of time playing them in my opinion. Does nothing to help recruiting nationally and they recruit a lot of the same players in the midwest already. F 'em.
Top 5, I'd say.
1) Miami Hurricanes
2) USC Trojans
3) Texas Longhorns
4) Georgia Bulldogs
5) LSU Tigers
Specifically in that order. And why? Recruiting purposes. If Michigan played a home and home with Miami every year, they could recruit SoFL way more effectively. And Miami sucks right now and basically none of the top kids in the area even go to Miami anymore. They are all either going to UF/FSU or leaving the state. It's actually more rare that a top SoFL kid goes to Miami than it is he leaves the state.
Miami would like it to play Michigan. They'd get some fans in the stands.
-
1. Miami - the state of FL should have a true state champ
2. Texas - another big recruiting state
3. USC - another big recruiting state
4. ND - payback for 1991
5. Clemson
-
Top 5, I'd say.
1) Miami Hurricanes
2) USC Trojans
3) Texas Longhorns
Who'd a thought even 10yrs back all 3 would be struggling as long as they have
-
Any of the Blue Bloods obviously. UGA has only played OU once. Texas would be good, we owe them (and they owe us).
USC and ND would always come up in such a list. Penn State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, teams that line up and intend to try and mash you.
The most commonly played team of note is Clemson in history.
UNC would make my list for personal reasons, and the fact that both claim to be the oldest state university in the country.
And Eastern Michigan of course.
-
And Eastern Michigan of course.
Just threw that out there didn't you,or tearing a page out of Bama's lates season OOC opponents
-
Miami would like it to play Michigan. They'd get some fans in the stands.
Hell, I'd go. I've been to a couple Hurricanes games. Been to some Dolphins games too. Before and after the renovation to the stadium. It was kind of a dump, but that NFL stadium is super nice now after all that money they just spent renovating it. Nice stadium, but it's really far away from the city of Miami and even further from Coral Gables. And the stadium is pretty much always full when the Dolphins play- and it's pretty much always empty when the Hurricanes play.
Jim needs to set up annual homes and homes with Miami asap.
-
If it's annual, it needs to be somewhat close, which kinda limits the field, outside ND, I suppose.
Random ones
Washington - Battle of UWs
Vandy - Free wins against a good academic school and Nashville is nice
Arkansas - Bert Bowl
Honestly, I see no need for this for UW because of geography.
-
Sounds like y'all are scared of a certain team from the West... Lafayette...
Well they are the only team that has consistently demonstrated the ability to hang with OSU, this Millennium.
I for one would prefer to keep Nebraska as the fixed crossover, but understand that the series is a dud, since no one from either fan base seems to have even noticed that the two teams play every year.
In fact I have even seen multiple OSU fans suggest that OSU should start playing Nebraska every year, as if that is not already a thing. They already have what they are clamoring for, but are seemingly too dense to connect the dots.
-
Well they are the only team that has consistently demonstrated the ability to hang with OSU, this Millennium.
Exactly.
That has to be bewildering to Buckeye fans. Boiler fans can't make heads or tails of it either.
There's no reason these teams should even be in the zip codes of each other most of the past two decades, and yet here we are.
-
sandbagging
-
I kind of wish we didn't have divisions. Going through those team of the decade and you realize how rarely you actually play some other teams in the conference.
-
Exactly.
That has to be bewildering to Buckeye fans. Boiler fans can't make heads or tails of it either.
There's no reason these teams should even be in the zip codes of each other most of the past two decades, and yet here we are.
That brings us to another display of Buckeye fans having something wrong with their memories. Most behave as though the most recent Spoiling was some sort of an isolated, once in a generation type of event.
-
Well they are the only team that has consistently demonstrated the ability to hang with OSU, this Millennium.
I for one would prefer to keep Nebraska as the fixed crossover, but understand that the series is a dud, since no one from either fan base seems to have even noticed that the two teams play every year.
In fact I have even seen multiple OSU fans suggest that OSU should start playing Nebraska every year, as if that is not already a thing. They already have what they are clamoring for, but are seemingly too dense to connect the dots.
I deeply loathe fixed crossovers, though I guess IU-Purdue makes them a needed evil in some way.
-
I deeply loathe fixed crossovers, though I guess IU-Purdue makes them a needed evil in some way.
I know people don't get it, because we want to be "fair" or something, but the conference can just let us have our fixed crossover without needing the rest of you guys to do it.
I recognize that people probably look at it like somehow we're benefiting by our fixed crossover being a "weak" team... But so be it. Not like Purdue and IU are going to be playing that crossover game wondering which team will lose its undefeated record.
We know we're on the bottom of the totem pole. Let us have our little piddly bucket game at the conference's kids table and we'll try to stay out of your way.
-
Gimme regional rivalries and/or old foes.
1. VT
2. Pitt
3. Penn St
4. Ohio St
5. UVA
Honorable mention to Kentucky
-
In fact I have even seen multiple OSU fans suggest that OSU should start playing Nebraska every year, as if that is not already a thing. They already have what they are clamoring for, but are seemingly too dense to connect the dots.
well, they're probably truck drivers
-
That WV-Pitt-Penn St trio had some moonshiney spirit to it, didn't they?
-
I know people don't get it, because we want to be "fair" or something, but the conference can just let us have our fixed crossover without needing the rest of you guys to do it.
I recognize that people probably look at it like somehow we're benefiting by our fixed crossover being a "weak" team... But so be it. Not like Purdue and IU are going to be playing that crossover game wondering which team will lose its undefeated record.
We know we're on the bottom of the totem pole. Let us have our little piddly bucket game at the conference's kids table and we'll try to stay out of your way.
I just assumed it would make something jagged with the scheduling layout across many years.
That said, if someone concocted a nice rotation that kept IU-Purdue, which has to be kept, I'm all for it. If someone whines "it's not fair," they can go kick rocks. It's not fair IU and Purdue are stuck in a state with a history of poor talent that's somehow also over-recruited and has Notre Dame, but that's CFB.
One thing I've always about, what if you had a straight rotation, but installed an exemption that if you had a rivalry, it could be a non-conference game placed where tradition dictates? Like the SEC ditches crossovers, but moves things around so UT and Bama can play that one weekend.
-
better solution would be to have a ten team conference with 9 conference games
-
That WV-Pitt-Penn St trio had some moonshiney spirit to it, didn't they?
Hmmm. Not that I know of.
-
Hmmm. Not that I know of.
The SEC honk thinks that a trio of Union, non-Confederate teams are a backwards bunch.
That's kind of funny.
-
For Iowa:
1. Notre Dame
2. Air Force
Notre Dame was a traditional rival, but only old people remember it. Air Force because my brother-in-law and sister live in Colorado Springs, and it would be a great annual event. I would like to see Iowa play a service academy occasionally. Iowa played Air Force once in the 1950s right after the academy opened. I don't think they played another service academy, unless it was Iowa Pre-Flight during WW-II. Not sure that would even qualify.
For FSU:
1. Notre Dame
2. Iowa State
3. Purdue
4. Wisconsin
5. Minnesota
6. Northwestern
More opportunities to see the 'Noles play in the Midwest.
-
The SEC honk thinks that a trio of Union, non-Confederate teams are a backwards bunch.
That's kind of funny.
I was just saying they had heated games.
-
West Virginia initially was just Virginia. They then seceded, which we're told was bad.
Sort of interesting history, Robert E. Lee's first campaign was into the mountainous mud of WV and was a failure.
The mountainous portions of NC/SC/GA were not slave holders and generally not in favor of secession. My Dad told me our relatives hid out in the mountains wanting nothing to do with the fight. The county in which he was born is called Union County, but perhaps not a reflection of that.
I suspect I would have hid in the mountains as well.
-
Prolly would have joined you
-
We know we're on the bottom of the totem pole. Let us have our little piddly bucket game at the conference's kids table and we'll try to stay out of your way.
That's the same line you guys sold Urbz in'18
-
East Tennessee was also a "union sympathizing area", and mountainous, and of course with few slaves because the land was not conducive to large plantations.
Lincoln especially wanted that region "freed" and controlled by union forces and mused about creating a new state. There was a "state" called Franklin at one point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Franklin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Franklin)
-
my order:
1) OU - long history. Hated yet respected the program
2) Miami - easy to dislike
3) Colorado - easier to dislike
4) Missouri - close proximity and long history
5) Washington - off and on history, great place to visit
-
Well they are the only team that has consistently demonstrated the ability to hang with OSU, this Millennium.
King Barry would beg to differ, but that memory is fading very fast. The 2003 game was awesome. But, he was 3-2 against OSU this Millennium (2-0 in CBus).
UW hangs with OSU mostly. Just can't get the damn win. None since 2010 (also awesome - loudest game I've been to).
-
King Barry would beg to differ, but that memory is fading very fast. The 2003 game was awesome. But, he was 3-2 against OSU this Millennium (2-0 in CBus).
UW hangs with OSU mostly. Just can't get the damn win. None since 2010 (also awesome - loudest game I've been to).
Since 2000, Purdue is 5-8 vs OSU.
Wisconsin over the same time frame is 4-13. One fewer win, but quite a few more losses.
Penn St is 5-15, matching Purdue's win total, while nearly doubling the loss total.
Michigan St is 3-13, as the only other team with any sort of consistent success vs OSU during this millennium.
The Wolverines are 3-17, and Iowa is 2-7.
Purdue is way out in front.
-
Purdue is way out in front.
I didn't say they were not.
To clarify, King Barry has the best record of any coach against OSU, this Millennium.
-
What about Clemson?
Or South Carolina teams totally?
-
What about Clemson?
Or South Carolina teams totally?
We're talking Big Ten teams, but if we aren't, then Clemson has the best record.
-
How many games does it take before "best record" is considered? Lincoln Riley is 1-0 vs. The OSU.
-
I didn't say they were not.
To clarify, King Barry has the best record of any coach against OSU, this Millennium.
Let's see, 1990 -2005 Wisconsin was 5-7-1 vs OSU. Not bad.
Danny Hope was 2-2 vs OSU as Purdue HC, 2-1 if you are into asterisks. So either way, that is a little bit better.
Brohm is 1-0 vs OSU.
-
What about Clemson?
Or South Carolina teams totally?
The state of SC is collectively undefeated vs OSU.
-
The state of SC is collectively undefeated vs OSU.
Might be true for GA as well (1-0, never played Tech).
-
Since 2000, Purdue is 5-8 vs OSU.
Wisconsin over the same time frame is 4-13. One fewer win, but quite a few more losses.
Penn St is 5-15, matching Purdue's win total, while nearly doubling the loss total.
Michigan St is 3-13, as the only other team with any sort of consistent success vs OSU during this millennium.
The Wolverines are 3-17, and Iowa is 2-7.
Purdue is way out in front.
Pelini was 1-1
50% is pretty gooood
-
Let's see, 1990 -2005 Wisconsin was 5-7-1 vs OSU. Not bad.
Danny Hope was 2-2 vs OSU as Purdue HC, 2-1 if you are into asterisks. So either way, that is a little bit better.
Brohm is 1-0 vs OSU.
This millennium started in 1990?
-
in order for bama:
#1 psu - clear #1, already done this before, have a ton of history together, already a pseudo-rivalry.
#2 texas or ou - texas mainly cause i want a chance to even the series and they're a blue blood. ou cause of crimson brotherhood and also blueblood.
#3 nd - similar to texas.
#4 usc - have decent history together, just not as much as psu.
#5 osu
-
Exactly.
That has to be bewildering to Buckeye fans. Boiler fans can't make heads or tails of it either.
There's no reason these teams should even be in the zip codes of each other most of the past two decades, and yet here we are.
I think it is a product of a lot of things, notably:
- When Purdue has had chances, they've taken advantage with some big upsets.
- Purdue's losses have generally been blowouts while their wins have usually been close. Ie, Ohio State's last three wins over Purdue include a 56-0 blowout in 2013 and a 49-0 blowout in 2010. Purdue's last three wins over Ohio State were 49-20 (a big win), 26-23 in OT, and 26-18.
- Missing each other a LOT and most of those were seasons in which tOSU would have been a HUMONGOUS favorite.
Since 2009 Purdue is 3-3 against Ohio State. That is BY FAR the best winning percentage against tOSU for any team that has played the Buckeyes at least four times in that time-frame. Next best is MSU at 3-6 and after that is PSU at 2-9.
Here is that history:
2019: DNP: tOSU went 13-1, PU went 4-8
2018: PU won in a stunning upset made even more stunning by the lopsided 49-20 final score. tOSU went 13-1, PU went 6-7.
2017: DNP: tOSU went 12-2, PU went 7-6
2016: DNP: tOSU went 11-2, PU went 3-9
2015: DNP: tOSU went 12-1, PU went 2-10
2014: DNP: tOSU went 14-1 with an NC, PU went 3-9
2013: tOSU won 56-0. tOSU went 12-2, PU went 1-11
2012: tOSU won 29-22. tOSU went 12-0, PU went 6-7
2011: PU won 26-23 in OT. tOSU went 6-7, PU went 7-6
2010: tOSU won 49-0. tOSU went 12-1, PU went 4-8
2009: PU won 26-18 in a stunning upset. tOSU went 11-2, PU went 5-7
Over the 11 years from 2009-2019 Purdue's three wins were two stunning upsets by PU teams that finished a combined 11-14 against tOSU teams that finished a combined 24-3 and one win in the only year of the last 11 when Purdue finished with a better record than Ohio State.
The small sample size is part of it. If the teams had played every year and PU pulled off two upsets and one win when they finished with a better record they would have gone 3-8 rather than 3-3. Even if PU had pulled off yet another upset they still would only be 4-7.
-
Yeah, the only one that makes any sense is 2011, when OSU was between Tressel and Meyer.
-
so, that's how Pelini got a win?
-
Yeah, the only one that makes any sense is 2011, when OSU was between Tressel and Meyer.
I attended both the 2011 and 2012 games and the strange part to me is that Ohio State absolutely should have won in 2011 and Purdue absolutely should have won in 2012 but neither happened.
2011:
Ohio State was down 20-14 late and scored what should have been the game-winning TD with less than one minute to play. Unfortunately for the Buckeyes, the XP was no good so the game went to OT tied 20-20. The Buckeyes got the ball first in OT and promptly lost six yards on a rushing loss and a sack bringing up 3rd and 16 from the 31. Then the Buckeyes completed a 15 yard pass bringing up 4th and 1 at the 16. The Buckeyes settled for the FG and Purdue scored a TD to win 26-23.
2012:
Early in the 4th quarter the Buckeyes were trailing 20-14 (again) and committed an illegal block that resulted in a safety and an eight point, 22-14 deficit. Ohio State forced a punt and got the ball back with about six minutes remaining and ended up being intercepted with a little under three minutes remaining and still down by eight points. At that point Ohio Stadium emptied out. Purdue had the ball and Ohio State was down 22-14 with under three minutes to go and the game looked to be over. By a series of miracles Ohio State forced a punt, scored a TD, got a 2pt conversion, scored another TD in OT, held PU scoreless on their OT possession, and won 29-22.
-
OSU is 5-12-1 vs the SEC, btw. 2-11 in bowls.
-
OSU is 5-12-1 vs the SEC, btw. 2-11 in bowls.
Purdue > SEC!
-
OSU is 5-12-1 vs the SEC, btw. 2-11 in bowls.
Of course you recognize that SEC teams have an advantage playing in bowl games that are mostly located in SEC Country. Play the bowls in Cleveland, Chicago, Minneapolis, etc., and the results might be different.
-
This millennium started in 1990?
Well yeah, if you think about it. You see, there was no "decade zero" so....
JK, I thought that we had switched gears from that to King Berry's record vs OSU. If we are to only zero in on this Millennium, which began in 2000 imo because I'm not actually one of those "there was no year zero!" guys, his record was 3-2 vs OSU. So that's pretty good.
-
2012:
Early in the 4th quarter the Buckeyes were trailing 20-14 (again) and committed an illegal block that resulted in a safety and an eight point, 22-14 deficit. Ohio State forced a punt and got the ball back with about six minutes remaining and ended up being intercepted with a little under three minutes remaining and still down by eight points. At that point Ohio Stadium emptied out. Purdue had the ball and Ohio State was down 22-14 with under three minutes to go and the game looked to be over. By a series of miracles Ohio State forced a punt, scored a TD, got a 2pt conversion, scored another TD in OT, held PU scoreless on their OT possession, and won 29-22.
Also Braxton Miller got knocked out of the game.
Smooth Jazz was brought in off of the bench in the first meaningful minutes of his career, and saved the day via miraculous comeback.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGSHFU8dU6k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGSHFU8dU6k)
-
Of course you recognize that SEC teams have an advantage playing in bowl games that are mostly located in SEC Country. Play the bowls in Cleveland, Chicago, Minneapolis, etc., and the results might be different.
Yeah, and ticket sales would suffer.
The Big Ten can't have it both ways - waxing poetic about the Rose Bowl and how pious it be, then bitch about having to play bowls in FL. There's a reason. It's out of our hands. Bitching about the infrastructure and traditions while worshiping other traditions is called hypocrisy.
And anyway, Glendale is like 150 miles closer to Columbus than it is to Gainesville!!! :57:
-
OSU is 5-12-1 vs the SEC, btw. 2-11 in bowls.
The tie was against Auburn in some sort of a post season game, back before they were referred to as "bowl games" (1917).
-
I can remember back in the day that making one of the Big Four Bowls was a sign you'd had a very good year - Cotton, Orange, Sugar, Rose. Your team was 10-1 or 11-0. Your team now played a very good to elite member of another conference (usually). I always figured "we" would blow them out because we were 10-1 and that one was a fluke loss.
The Gator Bowl was a kind of consolation prize, but still a decent bowl, and everything else meant you had a mediocre season at best, Independence, Tangerine, Peach, whatever. Your team made a bowl game but not because they were particularly good, usually, except that Nebraska team that fell to the Sun Bowl and blasted the Dawgs into smithereens.
That could happen, a national contender team could fall way way down just because .... some late loss usually. The Huskers were not happy about it. I forget who knocked them down ...
1969?
I am getting old. I am thankful I still feel pretty good. I can tell you younger folks that staying in decent shape when you are 48 is a worthy cause. Do something for yourself, it gets much harder 20 years later. And that Shingrix vaccine knocked me back for two days.
-
Yeah, and ticket sales would suffer.
The Big Ten can't have it both ways - waxing poetic about the Rose Bowl and how pious it be, then bitch about having to play bowls in FL. There's a reason. It's out of our hands. Bitching about the infrastructure and traditions while worshiping other traditions is called hypocrisy.
And anyway, Glendale is like 150 miles closer to Columbus than it is to Gainesville!!! :57:
I don't think that "the Big Ten" is either waxing poetic or bitching about bowl games in Florida. But the reality is that SEC teams usually get to play bowl games pretty close to home in weather that is very comfortable to them. And Big Ten teams usually get to play in bowl games far from home in weather that is a lot warmer than what the weather back home is like.
Imagine that Florida had an annual game with Alabama and it was always played in Birmingham.
Better still, imagine that Florida had an annual game with Wisconsin and it was always played in Milwaukee.
-
The idea that ticket sales would suffer is silly. If you put Ohio State and Alabama in Soldier Field on January 1, the game would sell out within minutes - mostly to OSU fans.
-
The idea that ticket sales would suffer is silly. If you put Ohio State and Alabama in Soldier Field on January 1, the game would sell out within minutes - mostly to OSU fans.
Yes, it would.
-
Does Fro know that Oklahoma isn't in the Big Ten? Or the North, for that matter?
-
Does Fro know that Oklahoma isn't in the Big Ten? Or the North, for that matter?
They are north of me, and in the Big something conference, I can't keep them straight anyway.
I don't think playing in the south is a particular advantage for southern teams. The lesser bowls don't sell out, the crowd noise is generally pretty tame, and playing in better weather is better. I bet Ohio State would rather play in Orlando than Chicago.
-
The idea that ticket sales would suffer is silly. If you put Ohio State and Alabama in Soldier Field on January 1, the game would sell out within minutes - mostly to OSU fans.
I suppose it would, though it would probably have to be a playoff game, as you'd likely see some drop in enthusiasm if it wasn't.
In any case, I am probably betraying my brethren, but I'm super OK with not having to stand outside in the freezing weather for a bowl (to the extent I attend live games ever anymore). I remember Wisconsin-Minnesota of 2008. It sucked. I've no great desire for anyone else to repeat that if they don't have to.
-
I think a weekend in Chicago would be attractive to some. You'd have to do some convincing that safety wouldn't be a problem.
-
There would certainly be more merchandising opportunities, selling OSU hand warmers, scarves/scarfs, ski masks, ect.
-
I suppose it would, though it would probably have to be a playoff game, as you'd likely see some drop in enthusiasm if it wasn't.
In any case, I am probably betraying my brethren, but I'm super OK with not having to stand outside in the freezing weather for a bowl (to the extent I attend live games ever anymore). I remember Wisconsin-Minnesota of 2008. It sucked. I've no great desire for anyone else to repeat that if they don't have to.
Heck, even the chicken bowl in Santa Clara a few years ago was chilly lol...
Not enough to be a problem, but enough that I had to wear a light jacket. I really only brought the jacket as a precaution because the afternoon when we landed in San Jose was warm enough, but by gametime it got a bit brisk.
-
Heck, even the chicken bowl in Santa Clara a few years ago was chilly lol...
Not enough to be a problem, but enough that I had to wear a light jacket. I really only brought the jacket as a precaution because the afternoon when we landed in San Jose was warm enough, but by gametime it got a bit brisk.
Ahhh Bay Area chilly. Not cold enough for a real coat, but just enough to be a bit annoying.
-
I think a weekend in Chicago would be attractive to some. You'd have to do some convincing that safety wouldn't be a problem.
Why?
-
Gang bangers no longer have "boundaries" in Chicago. The violence has extended into River North, and even the Mag Mile.
-
I'm reading a book by Tom Wolfe about Atlanta called "A Man in Full" that takes place about 20 years ago. He notes in it that Ponce de Leon, a main E-W artery was the dividing line between the white north and the black south. That is changing now as the city becomes more white, but it definitely was true, some N-S roads changed names as they cross PDL Ave. for that reason.
(https://i.imgur.com/xA2XoRe.png)
The book is just OK I think, probably not worth reading unless you live here. My neighbor gave it to me.
-
I'm reading a book by Tom Wolfe about Atlanta called "A Man in Full" that takes place about 20 years ago. He notes in it that Ponce de Leon, a main E-W artery was the dividing line between the white north and the black south. That is changing now as the city becomes more white, but it definitely was true, some N-S roads changed names as they cross PDL Ave. for that reason.
(https://i.imgur.com/xA2XoRe.png)
The book is just OK I think, probably not worth reading unless you live here. My neighbor gave it to me.
I enjoy his writing style, and I guess I'm supposed to read one of his other books.
-
Gang bangers no longer have "boundaries" in Chicago. The violence has extended into River North, and even the Mag Mile.
Strikes me as a tad pearl-clutch-y, but I'll take your word for it.
-
Glad to hear. I read the papers and watch the news every day.
-
I don't think that "the Big Ten" is either waxing poetic or bitching about bowl games in Florida. But the reality is that SEC teams usually get to play bowl games pretty close to home in weather that is very comfortable to them. And Big Ten teams usually get to play in bowl games far from home in weather that is a lot warmer than what the weather back home is like.
Imagine that Florida had an annual game with Alabama and it was always played in Birmingham.
Better still, imagine that Florida had an annual game with Wisconsin and it was always played in Milwaukee.
Then who's to blame? Why weren't there any bowls played for 60 years in Milwaukee or Cleveland or Buffalo? BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS TO GO THERE ON JANUARY 1st! Bowls were meant to be a reward for a good season, back before they really counted. Detroit in January isn't a reward for anyone.
If B10 people don't like it, they should take measures to change it. They haven't, so they can't cite it as being unfair.
And FYI: Florida played Alabama in the first 2 SECCGs in Birmingham and the better team won each game (1-1).
And FYI2: The SEC Champion traditionally went to the Sugar Bowl, played in the Superdome since 1975 and I'm pretty sure the weather is comfortable for everyone involved.
-
The idea that ticket sales would suffer is silly. If you put Ohio State and Alabama in Soldier Field on January 1, the game would sell out within minutes - mostly to OSU fans.
Okay, care to discuss the other 99% of matchups that wouldn't immediately sell out? Especially after the novelty has worn off and it's just another bowl game played in freezing temps?
This "yeah, but" crap of citing the most exceptional example possible is garbage and you know it.
-
I don't think playing in the south is a particular advantage for southern teams. The lesser bowls don't sell out, the crowd noise is generally pretty tame, and playing in better weather is better. I bet Ohio State would rather play in Orlando than Chicago.
Yes, let's have the players vote.
The outcome might surprise the old fogies obsessed with weather and Rust Belt pride.
-
Gang bangers no longer have "boundaries" in Chicago. The violence has extended into River North, and even the Mag Mile.
is this related to the riots? I have not heard anything about this prior to the riots. I'd suspect the extension is short term...
-
Okay, care to discuss the other 99% of matchups that wouldn't immediately sell out? Especially after the novelty has worn off and it's just another bowl game played in freezing temps?
This "yeah, but" crap of citing the most exceptional example possible is garbage and you know it.
Playoff. A bowl game would be fine, depending on the matchup. The Pinstripe is doing pretty well, in NYC. I think a bowl game at Wrigley would do well.
Jim Delany wanted the playoffs to include a rotation including New York, Chicago, LA and Miami. Slive said no, Swofford said no, Bolsby was skeptical but caved to no, and Scott was on board.
-
is this related to the riots? I have not heard anything about this prior to the riots. I'd suspect the extension is short term...
Not related to the riots. They couldn't quite get into River North or to the Mag Mile because the Mayor opened up all the bridges. Those who did make it in were arrested and removed, with little or no damage done to most businesses.
This is related to gang bangers. It's risen in the past couple of years. They know where the getting is good. Of course, there hasn't been a horrible amount of this lately, but that's because most all the businesses were on lockdown. They'll be back when things open up. Trust me.
I grew up in Chicago. We won't go down there anymore. Kinda sad, really, because we enjoyed it. The last time we were down, we did not feel safe after dark.
-
Not related to the riots. They couldn't quite get into River North or to the Mag Mile because the Mayor opened up all the bridges. Those who did make it in were arrested and removed, with little or no damage done to most businesses.
This is related to gang bangers. It's risen in the past couple of years. They know where the getting is good. Of course, there hasn't been a horrible amount of this lately, but that's because most all the businesses were on lockdown. They'll be back when things open up. Trust me.
I grew up in Chicago. We won't go down there anymore. Kinda sad, really, because we enjoyed it. The last time we were down, we did not feel safe after dark.
that is too bad... i spent a lot of time downtown in the past.
-
I know you did.
Bad things have been happening lately on your former campus, by the way. Violence has spiked there too.
-
it's an old argument, a dead horse that's been beaten for decades
playing on your home field is an advantage, playing in your backyard, not on your home field is an advantage, playing with a decided crowd favorite in the stands is an advantage
we all know the reason bowl games are played in the south
-
I know you did.
Bad things have been happening lately on your former campus, by the way. Violence has spiked there too.
That's too bad. Hyde Park was a little gem and each year I was there it felt better/safer. Yes, there were crimes committed against residents and students but they were mostly theft. There were peaks each year as new students left bikes unchained or walked around late at night with money in their pockets. But as the school year progress, the rates declined. Chicago has been on our list of places to retire. Downtown and Hyde Park were the locations we considered.
-
Retire HERE??
Most of "us" are leaving.
-
Retire HERE??
Most of "us" are leaving.
Yea.. taxes and state health are a negative. But I love the idea of walking out of my condo and have an array of restaurants, stores and entertainment in close proximity. And I always felt Chicago >> NY. My wife would prefer the keys... cold bothers me less. And if we decide to go more rural, my bet would be on Northern Michigan (not UP).
But I'm 20 yrs away. I may not make it that far... or have fewer choices.
-
Cut it down to 10 years and make it happen. Sarasota would fit the bill for you, for sure. Clearwater too.
-
Do try to stay on topic fellas. O0
Sorry, couldn't resist.
-
Do try to stay on topic fellas. O0
Sorry, couldn't resist.
thank you. had to check and make sure i didn't wander over to bigxii land.
-
Retiring to an area that encourages walking is HUGE IMHO. It can add years to your life, and life to your years. Ha.
The wife didn't want to walk today because of some dark cloud that passed by, so I went myself for my slow jog. And being able to walk to restaurants, the symphony, the botanical garden, the theater, the grocery store, the dentist, the doctor, it's all fantastic for me.
-
Hotlanta is the hot spot for walking retirees
I've been told
-
Had I not met the wife, I probably would have found 30 acres or so somewhere up in the hills and had a bunch of dogs for friends.
-
Okay, care to discuss the other 99% of matchups that wouldn't immediately sell out? Especially after the novelty has worn off and it's just another bowl game played in freezing temps?
This "yeah, but" crap of citing the most exceptional example possible is garbage and you know it.
I agree with @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) to an extent. For minor bowls the destination HAS TO be a draw. VERY few fans are going to travel to a cold-weather city in December/January to watch their 6-6 team take on somebody else's 7-5 team. However, the CFP games could be played in Antarctica and fans would be clamoring to go.
-
The outcome might surprise the old fogies obsessed with weather and Rust Belt pride.
How about middle aged flamers?It's called home field,and it's nothing new.All things being equal Go play Denver up in the Rockies and find out what elevation is if you're not acclimated.How many years was it before Tampa Bay won in Green Bay?this was when the Pack was very pedestrian for the most part.Travel and temperature matter - whether you agree matters not.Ask Vegas why they assign a 3 pt advantage to those playing at home - ya foggies
-
I'd rather watch my Huskers BTH outta the Gators in Tempe than Denver
but, I'm pretty sure Coach Osborne would see the advantages of playing a Miami, Florida, FSU, Georgia, Auburn, Bama, or USC in Denver
-
The tie was against Auburn in some sort of a post season game, back before they were referred to as "bowl games" (1917).
I think that was a special thing due to WWI. The US declared war on the Central Powers (The German Empire, The Austro-Hungarian Empire, The Ottoman Empire) in April, 1917. That fall Ohio State's last two games were:
- A 0-0 tie with Auburn in Montgomery Alabama on Saturday, November 24, 1917
- A 28-0 home win over Camp Sherman on Thursday, November 29, 1917 (Thanksgiving Day, I think)
Auburn had hosted Fort Sheridan earlier in the season.
-
Even the Cap One bowl is not full, despite the attendance numbers. They struggle to get fans down there. I see a lot of empty seats every year.
Crowd noise is not a factor in an outdoor bowl game that isn't a major, and even then, it often isn't a big deal.
-
Had I not met the wife, I probably would have found 30 acres or so somewhere up in the hills and had a bunch of dogs for friends.
They don't mind if you miss a shower or break wind.Throw a dog and a woman in the trunk of your car take them for a ride and see what one is happy to see you when you pop the lid
-
My daughter's little mutt is my best friend.
I brought him a fresh T-bone last night. It's just what buddies do.
-
She has a very sensative nose.
-
My daughter's little mutt is my best friend.
I brought him a fresh T-bone last night. It's just what buddies do.
Hey Buddy - toss in a Yuengling and friends for life
-
I agree with @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) to an extent. For minor bowls the destination HAS TO be a draw. VERY few fans are going to travel to a cold-weather city in December/January to watch their 6-6 team take on somebody else's 7-5 team. However, the CFP games could be played in Antarctica and fans would be clamoring to go.
Exactly. Here on this very board, many of you are pulling for your school to get into this bowl over that bowl PRECISELY due to the city it will be held in.
And by the way, the Big 8 champion all those years was invited to the Orange Bowl, they didn't have to accept it. Did OU or Nebraska, even once, get offered to play Miami in the Orange Bowl or FSU in the Orange Bowl and say, "nah, we're tired of doing that, we'll play somewhere more fair."???? No.
And on this very board, I've repeatedly been told how the Rose Bowl is held in such high esteem, it's even above the national championship game, or at least rivals it. But was there any clamoring to turn down the offer to play in Pasadena? Or move the game to a more neutral site? Puh-lease!
Bitching about the locations of bowls in warm-weather climates is an after-the-fact excuse losers give. Period.
-
What order do these steps go in?
Be a slave to tradition.
Romanticize the tradition.
Bitch about the tradition.
I'd really like to know.
-
we all know how the tradition started, why it wasn't changed, how the world works
and you know that playing against a worthy opponent on their home field is an advantage and will change the win/loss record over time
have you factored this into the college football board game? You're a stats guy
-
Traditionally, "Tradition" has been a Big Thing for some, less so for others, but as a tradition remains extant over time, it becomes even more of a tradition, among those who like traditions.
-
There are plenty of bowls in the south that draw a sparse crowd.
-
Nobody is arguing why bowl games are in the south / southwest. Midwesterners know exactly why -- when the Midwest is frozen solid, it's *nice* to head to a pleasant climate, throw a pair of shorts on, and cheer on our teams.
The complaint is twofold...
- We understand that playing an SEC team in the South or playing a PAC-12 team (quite often USC because they're the Helmet) in Pasadena kinda puts you at a HFA deficit before the B1G team even shows up, and there's an effect therein.
- We like to poke fun at SEC teams who we think would freeze to death if they had to play a game in B1G conditions in the winter. The SEC doesn't like to leave their footprint, ever, but when they do for OOC it's in September.
-
Bitching about the locations of bowls in warm-weather climates is an after-the-fact excuse losers give. Period.
Because you're such a winner and the envy of the board.Why are you bringing up your period?
-
Because you're such a winner and the envy of the board.Why are you bringing up your period?
Thank you for the personal attack. Please don't ever deny us your contributions to the board.
-
One almost needs a bucket when you post,you sling it then sound like a cat caught in a fan belt when it splashes back
-
I'm beginning to think you don't like me.
-
it's an old argument, a dead horse that's been beaten for decades
playing on your home field is an advantage, playing in your backyard, not on your home field is an advantage, playing with a decided crowd favorite in the stands is an advantage
we all know the reason bowl games are played in the south
Right, climate.
-
I believe that we have stumbled on the root of Fro's fierce objection to a warming climate.
-
It's kind of funny. The issue is having to play USC/UCLA in the RB and playing Miami in the OB, right?
I guess I have 2 questions:
a - which specific games would the outcome have been different without the homefield advantage?
b - aren't you simply complaining that USC and Miami were good enough to even play in these bowls? If Miami, an indepedent, had simply gone 7-4 every year in the 80s, there'd be no complaint, right? If Oregon had happened to be the class of the PAC-8/10/12 for the last 50 years, there'd be no complaint.
Rose Bowls, including USC/UCLA since....let's say 1963, when it was a 1 vs 2 matchup with a close result. Which of these games (USC/UCLA wins) would have been different if the game was held in Chicago or Denver or Havana:
1963: 1 USC over 2 Wisconsin by 5
1965: 5 UCLA over 1 MSU by 2
1968: 1 USC over UR Indiana by 11
1969: 5 USC over 7 Michigan by 7
1972: 1 USC over 3 OSU by 25
1974: 5 USC over 3 OSU by 1
1975: 11 UCLA over 1 OSU by 13
1976: 3 USC over 2 Michigan by 8
1978: 3 USC over 5 Michigan by 7
1979: 3 USC over 1 OSU by 1
1982: 5 UCLA over 19 Michigan by 10
1983: UR UCLA over 4 Illinois by 36
1984: 18 USC over 6 OSU by 3
1985: 13 UCLA over 4 Iowa by 17
1989: 12 USC over 3 Michigan by 7
1995: 17 USC over 3 N'Western by 9
2003: 1 USC over 4 Michigan by 14
2006: 8 USC over 3 Michigan by 14
2007: 6 USC over 13 Illinois by 32
2008: 5 USC over 6 Penn St by 14
2016: 9 USC over 5 Penn St by 3
I'm really afraid that a couple of mid-70s upsets is the root of this ongoing narrative about fairness.
Let's cross out the non-upsets.
Then let's cross out the not-close upsets (by more than one possession).
What's left?
1965, 1974, 1976, 1979, 1984, 1989, and 2016. Seven games in 57 years. How many of them were due to the location of the game? Half? 2/3? 3/4? This is what we're arguing about here?
-
When it comes to the Orange Bowl problem, we have a much shorter history. No one seemed to mind playing in the warm weather and bikini-rich beaches back when they were beating an upstart FSU team. But once Miami got good and happened to earn their way to the bowl did it start to seem unfair.
Wins by state of FL schools in the OB since it became southern-centric, around 1979 and until it ceased to be, around 2004:
1983: 5 Miami over 1 Nebraska by 1
1987: 2 Miami over 1 Oklahoma by 6
1988: 2 Miami over 6 Nebraska by 20
1991: 1 Miami over 11 Nebraska by 22
1992: 3 FSU over 11 Nebraska by 13
1993: 1 FSU over 2 Nebraska by 2
1995: 8 FSU over 6 Notre Dame by 5
1998: 7 Florida over 18 Syracuse by 21
2001: 5 Florida over 6 Maryland by 33
Okay, same drill. Cross out the non-upsets. Then the not-close upsets.
We're left with 3 games. 3 outcomes where the location of the game may have had a hand in the outcome.
I doubt any of you care about the ND game in 1995. The 1986 game was just more of the same, where OU beat everyone else on their schedule, but was 0-3 vs Miami, including regular season games, 1 home/1 road.
And a crazy, all-time upset in '83.
Is this really a whole big thing? The location of the bowl?
-
SEC teams that venture north do so in September because that is when B1G teams have OOC games.
It also is true that SEC teams like having a muffin just before their year ending rivalry game. B1G teams usually don't quality.
A cherry muffin with chocolate icing.
-
A cherry muffin
Hey now this isn't the Hotties thread
-
In my dreams I see home field advantage in the playoffs.
-
The stats on home field advantage are less than I would have thought it would be. Ftbobs did a great study on point differential in conference games home and away, and the HFA was 3-6 points, least in the SEC which was a surprise.
Obviously, that is diluted further in ANY bowl game.
But HFA in a playoff game say between 8 and 1 would be on the high end, usually, in addition to the "normal" spread. An 8th ranked team playing at Alabama or Clemson or LSU or Ohio State would obviously not win very often, maybe 10% of the time?
-
It's kind of funny. The issue is having to play USC/UCLA in the RB and playing Miami in the OB, right?
I guess I have 2 questions:
a - which specific games would the outcome have been different without the homefield advantage?
b - aren't you simply complaining that USC and Miami were good enough to even play in these bowls? If Miami, an indepedent, had simply gone 7-4 every year in the 80s, there'd be no complaint, right? If Oregon had happened to be the class of the PAC-8/10/12 for the last 50 years, there'd be no complaint.
That's exactly the point teams travel west when UCLA/USC where in fact staying on Campus.Years ago when I was still gambling travel and temperature was factored into out come.When you are acclimated to the weather all year in one place and then leave for a week into a climate with at least a 40 degree swing it has an effect.Hell one columnist for one of the Vegas wagering rags wrote a great article on just this.He pointed out when I believe it was S.Alabama played UW-Green Bay - in college basketball no less was favored and came up to Wisc it was in the low teens.Even though the game is inside getting off a plane and getting blasted by winds coming down out of canada evidently wasn't to their liking.UW-GB won and covered the spread
Anyway,The USC campus is 20 miles from Pasadena,UCLA 27 - who-boy real inconvenience packing all your shit and heading out - NO?When Cindy's family comes up from S.Car. or Florida - Jax & G'Ville we give them our winter coats....in October.It's just the way it is,you're use to cold weather and start sweating your ass off in 80 deg - it has an effect.Do you really believe all those one score contests wouldn't change if the Games were held in january in Chicago/Milwaulkee/Cleveland/Pittsburgh? when the So Cal boys are catching waves one day then playing in an Alberta Clipper the next - no effect right?Again look how many years Tampa bay lost to Green Bay - when the Pack just wasn't any good
-
In my dreams I see home field advantage in the playoffs.
The year OSU lost to LSU in the Suger Bowl (no HFA advantage there),Penn State played T A&M in San Antonio,Michigan played FLA in the Citrus bowl and Illinois played the Trojans in the Rose.According to one of our Board Laureates there is nothing to see here
-
I'd opine there is little to no benefit in lesser bowls.
The crowd noise is simply not a factor.
In domes with major bowls, it is a factor.
-
As an ex-Big 8, ex-Big12 and now Big10 fan... the bowl games/locations for the BIG bowls cost more money than where UNL used to travel. And Nebraskan's retire south into Texas or go to Arizona. UNL fans still travel, but if the economy stalls for several years, will that still be the case?
-
I presume most fans who travel 200+ miles to bowls shape a vacation around that event, right? They stay 2-3 days? The Peach Bowl could be an exception.
-
As an ex-Big 8, ex-Big12 and now Big10 fan... the bowl games/locations for the BIG bowls cost more money than where UNL used to travel. And Nebraskan's retire south into Texas or go to Arizona. UNL fans still travel, but if the economy stalls for several years, will that still be the case?
Your post brings up another good reason why they are nuts if the expand the playoffs.People just don't have the coin to keep traveling to different,far away venues - buying tickets for the game and a plane ride to/fro and perhaps rent a car.The wonks just don't get it
-
Yup, a lot of fans will hold off on the first round hoping to make the second round where they will spend money.
We could also on occasion have playoff games at places like Duke.
"We" envision games like Alabama playing at Wisconsin in January ....
-
The stats on home field advantage are less than I would have thought it would be. Ftbobs did a great study on point differential in conference games home and away, and the HFA was 3-6 points, least in the SEC which was a surprise.
Obviously, that is diluted further in ANY bowl game.
But HFA in a playoff game say between 8 and 1 would be on the high end, usually, in addition to the "normal" spread. An 8th ranked team playing at Alabama or Clemson or LSU or Ohio State would obviously not win very often, maybe 10% of the time?
i'd venture to say an 8th ranked team is going to struggle vs a #1 ranked team more often than not, regardless of location. perhaps @ftbobs (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54) can provide those stats? say 8v1 anywhere, 8v1 with each at home, and 8v1 neutral.
-
Your post brings up another good reason why they are nuts if the expand the playoffs.People just don't have the coin to keep traveling to different,far away venues - buying tickets for the game and a plane ride to/fro and perhaps rent a car.The wonks just don't get it
all these appearances for bama in last decade, i've made 2 trips for post season games.
first was pasadena, cause it was first time in my adult life bama had a chance to win title, no one had a clue we'd go on this run, and so i thought might be my only chance for at least a long time to go to a game like that. plus i'd never been to cali and it's the rose bowl. put a big dent in knocking off bucket list things for me that trip. good times.
second one was vs clemson in sugar a couple years ago. and only reason i went then was i have a brother living in nola and free place to stay, and we got tickets relatively cheap.
having said that, if some of those games were in tuscaloosa, i'd have definitely gone to more of them.
my point is it's a double edge sword. there's going to be people that can't/wont go to the traveling games, no denying that. but you'll pick up a lot of people that don't go to those anyway. stadiums will still be packed, so schools won't be losing money. the cities, on the other hand, might suffer a little. but not really, cause right now, after november, very very few college towns have vacationers anyway.
-
i'd venture to say an 8th ranked team is going to struggle vs a #1 ranked team more often than not, regardless of location. perhaps @ftbobs (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54) can provide those stats? say 8v1 anywhere, 8v1 with each at home, and 8v1 neutral.
Yeah, probably, but we tend to forget that upsets happen, and more often when you have a top ten pairing. That 8th place team even if correctly seeded is still a very good team in most cases, probably the 3rd best opponent the 1st place team has faced.
-
I presume most fans who travel 200+ miles to bowls shape a vacation around that event, right? They stay 2-3 days? The Peach Bowl could be an exception.
I think it depends a lot on your status and what the trip is.
When I was single with no kids bowl trips were either solo or with my brother and/or some friends so it was a "boys trip" for the game. Anything other than the game was basically irrelevant. Still, we (the boys) got to NOLA early for the 2008 Sugar Bowl so that we could visit the casinos and get a bunch of NOLA food and we (the boys again) had a few days in Tempe around the 2003 Fiesta Bowl.
Now that I'm married with a kid (and another on the way) things are different. My wife wouldn't agree to a "boys trip" because she'd want to go but she wouldn't want to go to Minneapolis in January so @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) has a point. Realistically, I'm not going to a January Bowl game in Minneapolis. She *MIGHT* agree to Chicago in January and she would definitely agree to NYC so if the Buckeyes ever go to that Gotham Bowl or whatever it is called I'll probably be there. Otherwise it is going to have to be a place she would enjoy visiting so LA (Rose), NOLA (Sugar), Miami (Orange), Tucson (Fiesta), ATL (Peach) and maybe a few others are about it.
-
These bowls trips get expensive when you take your family.
-
Some Buckeye fans would be less likely to go, since it is cold.
Others might be more likely to go, since they can drive instead of fly.
Some of the northern stadia are of course domed. So the weather wouldn't really play a factor other than limiting outdoor recreation during the trip.
A lot of Ohio FB fans are accustomed to attending games at Cleveland Browns Stadium in the winter, with the bone-chilling wind blowing in off the lake. If you layer up properly, it really isn't that bad. Particularly if you have a libation or three. Long johns as a base layer, a union suit over that, and then regular clothes over that. A ski suit, if it is really, really cold.
The Southern fans would hate it, which doesn't particularly bother me.
-
They are north of me, and in the Big something conference, I can't keep them straight anyway.
I don't think playing in the south is a particular advantage for southern teams. The lesser bowls don't sell out, the crowd noise is generally pretty tame, and playing in better weather is better. I bet Ohio State would rather play in Orlando than Chicago.
Would you think that playing bowl games in northern cities would be no particular advantage for northern teams?
-
Would you think that playing bowl games in northern cities would be no particular advantage for northern teams?
As I've said before, playing outdoors in the north in January would be a significant disadvantage for Southern teams.
That does not mean that playing outdoors in the south is some significant disadvantage for northern teams obviously.
I recall Georgia playing at Kentucky when it was below freezing, it didn't seem to matter, no one made any deal about it, but it was not snowing or raining and was 28°F or so, not a big deal really. But move that to Wisconsin in January when it might be 10°F with wind and that changes the game.
Move it to Orlando where it is 65°F and sunny, meh.
Playing in the rain at any temperature obviously is a factor.
-
I enjoy his writing style, and I guess I'm supposed to read one of his other books.
The only long work of Wolfe's I've read is The Right Stuff. I enjoyed it immensely.
-
Would you think that playing bowl games in northern cities would be no particular advantage for northern teams?
imo, it'd be marginal.
lets not pretend these teams are playing regularly in 10 degree, driving snow weather all that often. once every few seasons. those games are memorable because they are rare.
these aren't nfl teams that play into the depths of december/january every year, they're done in november. temps are still relatively mild then. they wouldn't have some magical advantage, and they wouldn't have much of an experience advantage either.
-
Wolf's book is starting to get interesting now. I'm glad I stuck with it. Half the book was about three unrelated individuals off doing whatever and now they are on a collision course.
The book contains a number of mentions of the Piedmont Driving Club, which is the old elite invitation only club up the street from me about half a block. The name derives from the 1890s when men would "drive" their buggies in the park, and race them, on the same course I use for my jogging.
Apparently the city PTBs opened their doors to him and were not amused at the result so now he is persona non grata. I think he did a pretty good job capturing the essentials of the city myself.
I'm going up to sit on the deck and read it some more.
-
Then who's to blame? Why weren't there any bowls played for 60 years in Milwaukee or Cleveland or Buffalo? BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS TO GO THERE ON JANUARY 1st! Bowls were meant to be a reward for a good season, back before they really counted. Detroit in January isn't a reward for anyone.
If B10 people don't like it, they should take measures to change it. They haven't, so they can't cite it as being unfair.
And FYI: Florida played Alabama in the first 2 SECCGs in Birmingham and the better team won each game (1-1).
And FYI2: The SEC Champion traditionally went to the Sugar Bowl, played in the Superdome since 1975 and I'm pretty sure the weather is comfortable for everyone involved.
Nobody's "to blame." I didn't suggest that there was. I reasonably (and correctly, IMO) said that SEC teams have an advantage come bowl season because the bowl sites are nearer and the weather is more in their comfort zone.
I agree that few people would like go attend bowl games in the snow and ice. But that doesn't change the situation that SEC teams mostly play bowl games close to home.
I don't understand your attack on "B10 people." I'm the one making this point, and I'm not a fan of a Big Ten team.
-
I'm attack all fans of teams in the "Big Whatever" conference. If you have Big in your name, your toast.
I'm after all from a directional conference ....
-
There are fans who can't travel for bowl games today that would drive to games in the north. But as others stated, you'd also lose fans who view bowl games as a vacation.
-
I also believe bowl games lost their prestige with the playoffs. It has become just another game...
-
I don't understand your attack on "B10 people." I'm the one making this point, and I'm not a fan of a Big Ten team.
if you look like a duck and sound like a duck...
and you, sir, certainly sound like a quack:)
-
Yes, let's have the players vote.
The outcome might surprise the old fogies obsessed with weather and Rust Belt pride.
You know what you are doing? You are deflecting the issue, just like you accuse virtually everyone on the board of doing when discussing racial unrest.
Nobody's talking about Rust Belt pride. Nobody's "blaming" anyone.
I'm making the reasonable point that southern teams (specifically, SEC teams) have a near-home-field advantage come bowl season. Try attacking that idea instead of all the straw men you have created.
-
We could start by agreeing on the home field advantage, the true one, when competitive teams play a game. Let's say 6 points?
-
Exactly. Here on this very board, many of you are pulling for your school to get into this bowl over that bowl PRECISELY due to the city it will be held in.
And by the way, the Big 8 champion all those years was invited to the Orange Bowl, they didn't have to accept it. Did OU or Nebraska, even once, get offered to play Miami in the Orange Bowl or FSU in the Orange Bowl and say, "nah, we're tired of doing that, we'll play somewhere more fair."???? No.
And on this very board, I've repeatedly been told how the Rose Bowl is held in such high esteem, it's even above the national championship game, or at least rivals it. But was there any clamoring to turn down the offer to play in Pasadena? Or move the game to a more neutral site? Puh-lease!
Bitching about the locations of bowls in warm-weather climates is an after-the-fact excuse losers give. Period.
Deflection, deflection, deflection.
Try dealing with the actual issue--that SEC teams have a bit of a home-field-advantage come bowl season.
If you weren't an SEC fan, I suspect that this would be as clear as crystal to you.
-
Yes, I like how fro is all about preserving tradition all of a sudden, when he normally advocates the complete and total dismantling thereof.
"Bowls were meant to be a reward for a good season, back before they really counted!"
Yes, and now they do count. So it isn't the same situation as it was before. At all. Not even a little bit.
-
What order do these steps go in?
Be a slave to tradition.
Romanticize the tradition.
Bitch about the tradition.
I'd really like to know.
1. Deflection.
2. Deflection.
3. Deflection.
4. Deflection.
Do SEC teams have a home-field-advantage during bowl season or do they not? If not, please explain why not rather than attacking people for things that they have not said or done.
-
does sec teams have an inordinate bowl record compared to their overall record? do bigten have the opposite?
i don't know, genuinely curious.
alabama's bowl record is quite good, but it should be considering their overall record.
-
I'm attack all fans of teams in the "Big Whatever" conference. If you have Big in your name, your toast.
I'm after all from a directional conference ....
Ya we know what direction your conf is headed >:(
-
I'm still surprised that the SEC hasn't changed its name.
It should be the SWxSE conference.
-
If anyone thinks playing in your home state or within driving distance for a bowl game is not an advantage, they're not being honest. Doesn't mean fans don't prefer to travel to Miami over Chicago in Dec. Those are two different statements.
-
TO learned that taking his team to the bowl site a few days earlier relative to the "standard" really helped bowl performance. The players went from dry cold air to many times much more humidity in addition to warmer temperatures. The players bodies took a few extra days to adjust and UNL spending more money to cover this additional time away from Lincoln paid off. It was an expense UNL had that FSU or Miami would not when playing in the orange bowl.
-
As stated nobody is going to go to three playoff games at neutral sites.
Having the higher seeded team host game 1 would result in a sellout for round one instead of an empty stadium.
-
If anyone thinks playing in your home state or within driving distance for a bowl game is not an advantage, they're not being honest. Doesn't mean fans don't prefer to travel to Miami over Chicago in Dec. Those are two different statements.
what do you consider driving distance? i've driven 12+ hours for some games and i've flow to some that would have taken 6-8 to drive. i didn't consider any of them advantageous.
if we're talking team travel, i don't think bowl travel has much effect on teams, except maybe the hawaii bowl. both teams get to their destination several days if not a week in advance. travel has limited, if any, effect at that point.
if you're talking fans, meh, possible, but not always as intuitive as you'd expect. bama vs clemson in the sugar was fairly heavy in clemson's favor, despite them having to travel at or near twice as far. which might surprise some around here. and at that point, clemson had been to 2 title games, so their fans weren't immune to the travel fatigue effect either.
but that's anecdotal and is certainly not a good sample size. but suffice it to say, it's not as simple as team "a" is closer and within driving distance while team "b" has to fly, so team "a" have an advantage.
-
I haven't been deflecting, I've been including pertinent aspects of this topic.
The question, "Do SEC teams benefit from home-field advantage in bowls?" isn't a yes/no answer. If Florida has an advantage in the Sugar Bowl, would you then argue its advantage is the equal of LSU's? If a season hasn't lived up to expectations and you wind up in the Gator Bowl vs an unsexy team like Indiana, I'd argue there's no home-field advantage.
Even the Big 8 champs going down to Miami to play Miami was probably more about climate than home-field advantage. If you're incorporating climate INTO home-field advantage....ehhh. These aren't bowl games being played in 95 degree weather, guys. It's usually about 75 and cooler at night.
I'm not railing against having important bowls up north, I just don't think it would take. Beyond the freezing fans in the non-domes (hmm, I wonder why domes are a thing?!?), you'd honestly just get worse football. I don't care if you were raised in Duluth, MN, you're not going to be at your best in 2 degree weather compared to 65 degree weather.
-
The question, "Do SEC teams benefit from home-field advantage in bowls?" isn't a yes/no answer. If Florida has an advantage in the Sugar Bowl, would you then argue its advantage is the equal of LSU's? If a season hasn't lived up to expectations and you wind up in the Gator Bowl vs an unsexy team like Indiana, I'd argue there's no home-field advantage.
Even the Big 8 champs going down to Miami to play Miami was probably more about climate than home-field advantage. If you're incorporating climate INTO home-field advantage....ehhh. These aren't bowl games being played in 95 degree weather, guys. It's usually about 75 and cooler at night.
I'm not railing against having important bowls up north, I just don't think it would take. Beyond the freezing fans in the non-domes (hmm, I wonder why domes are a thing?!?), you'd honestly just get worse football. I don't care if you were raised in Duluth, MN, you're not going to be at your best in 2 degree weather compared to 65 degree weather.
no, LSU's advantage would be more advantageous
yes, home climate is a large part of home field advantage - duh
-
no, LSU's advantage would be more advantageous
yes, home climate is a large part of home field advantage - duh
Tell us about the climate in the Sugar Bowl.
-
They have domes in Arizona and Texas.
-
Tell us about the climate in the Sugar Bowl.
Fine play the games in Detroit/Indy then problem solved
-
Tell us about the climate in the Sugar Bowl.
Sorry, I haven't been to the Sugar bowl
I have been to the Orange bowl and the Fiesta bowl
-
If anyone thinks playing in your home state or within driving distance for a bowl game is not an advantage, they're not being honest. Doesn't mean fans don't prefer to travel to Miami over Chicago in Dec. Those are two different statements.
I simply disagree. If it is an advantage, I believe it is very slight for reasons I have posted, maybe a point, probably not even that.
-
I agree with Entropy
of course, many Husker fans drove from Nebraska to the Rose Bowl
-
does sec teams have an inordinate bowl record compared to their overall record? do bigten have the opposite?
i don't know, genuinely curious.
alabama's bowl record is quite good, but it should be considering their overall record.
OOC records would be the indicator. Unfortunately, the paucity of power-on-power OOC games being played over the past two decades makes this hard to judge.
-
I haven't been deflecting, I've been including pertinent aspects of this topic.
The question, "Do SEC teams benefit from home-field advantage in bowls?" isn't a yes/no answer. If Florida has an advantage in the Sugar Bowl, would you then argue its advantage is the equal of LSU's? If a season hasn't lived up to expectations and you wind up in the Gator Bowl vs an unsexy team like Indiana, I'd argue there's no home-field advantage.
Even the Big 8 champs going down to Miami to play Miami was probably more about climate than home-field advantage. If you're incorporating climate INTO home-field advantage....ehhh. These aren't bowl games being played in 95 degree weather, guys. It's usually about 75 and cooler at night.
I'm not railing against having important bowls up north, I just don't think it would take. Beyond the freezing fans in the non-domes (hmm, I wonder why domes are a thing?!?), you'd honestly just get worse football. I don't care if you were raised in Duluth, MN, you're not going to be at your best in 2 degree weather compared to 65 degree weather.
You're deflecting again in bringing up the notion that fewer fans would go to northern bowls. That is not the issue. The issue is: does Florida have an advantage playing Michigan in the Orange Bowl? Does LSU have an advantage playing Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl?
Not every SEC bowl team has such clear-cut advantages. But to say that Kentucky has no significant advantage over Indiana when they play in a bowl game in Florida doesn't negate the other examples.
In general, on average do SEC teams have an advantage come bowl season? That's the question. Everything else you keep bringing up is just a deflection from answering that question.
-
One can agree there could be a slight advantage in some cases. As I have noted, most bowl games are rather sparsely attended and crowd noise and enthusiasm are not factors.
-
i'd venture to say an 8th ranked team is going to struggle vs a #1 ranked team more often than not, regardless of location. perhaps @ftbobs (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54) can provide those stats? say 8v1 anywhere, 8v1 with each at home, and 8v1 neutral.
AP #8 vs AP (100 being completely out of the poll):
(https://i.imgur.com/cX7E9Nk.png)
-
If you're #8 you want to play #1 on the road.
-
When were bowls meant to be "rewards for a good season"? My understanding was that bowls were created to bring people to events and bring in ticket money. I understood some teams took it as a reward for a good season, but I'm not sure they were ever meant to be that.
-
I think they were back in the day as there weren't as many and they weren't handed out like participation trophies
-
When were bowls meant to be "rewards for a good season"? My understanding was that bowls were created to bring people to events and bring in ticket money. I understood some teams took it as a reward for a good season, but I'm not sure they were ever meant to be that.
I think mid-60s that is a significant aspect of what they were. Teams that had large followings were obvious preferred over others. I think even today making a minor bowl is a reward for having a half decent season.
-
In general, on average do SEC teams have an advantage come bowl season? That's the question. Everything else you keep bringing up is just a deflection from answering that question.
It's all part of the discussion. You're literally forbidding a conversation about a multi-faceted topic, by labeling it deflection. I don't know if Florida has an advantage over Michigan in the Orange Bowl. It depends on the context.
Stop pretending this is an addition problem with one plain, quick answer.
-
When were bowls meant to be "rewards for a good season"? My understanding was that bowls were created to bring people to events and bring in ticket money. I understood some teams took it as a reward for a good season, but I'm not sure they were ever meant to be that.
It has to do with when the final rankings/mythical national champion was selected.
No, that wasn't as big a deal back in the day as it has become, BUT among the top few teams who knew they were ranked in the top few, yes, they'd like to be determined as "the best," yet it was voted on, THEN they'd play their bowl. No chance to impress or move up.
Once the vote started being taken after the bowls, that last game became an opportunity. That's all.
-
when bowls started being viewed as real games to be considered in the MNC discussion..............
then home field advantage became a thing
-
I think they were back in the day as there weren't as many and they weren't handed out like participation trophies
That may be what they were, or how they were viewed by some, but that's not what they were "meant" for. To me, the difference matters because different schools viewed bowls differently and their motivations came from what the bowls were, which were money making ventures. Therefore, some viewed it as insignificant.
-
I guess that's depend on the years,teams,bowls.Into the '70s the Big Ten had 1 team go bowling,So from prestige to exposure to pay day to recruiting it was all that.Imagine it was much the same for say Sugar,Orange,Cotton and maybe Fiesta also
-
Yeah, depended on what the HC wanted to use it for. Extra practices for young players? Win the game? More playing time for the young players? Trying out new plays/systems?
The main point is that for the longest time, it didn't help them in the rankings. A truth, even as we've previously said that winning the conference was the #1 goal for most.
-
It's a shame, I think, that making a "major bowl" these days isn't much of a thing really. Playoffs or bust.
Used to be 11-1 and a Sugar Bowl win was a great year, memorable. 9-2 with a Gator Bowl win was a pretty good year for most.
-
It's a shame, I think, that making a "major bowl" these days isn't much of a thing really. Playoffs or bust.
Used to be 11-1 and a Sugar Bowl win was a great year, memorable. 9-2 with a Gator Bowl win was a pretty good year for most.
Yeah, spoken as a fan of a helmet team...
I've said it before that Purdue is unlikely to EVER make it to the CFP in the current format. It's not even on my radar.
So even a semi-major bowl would be a memorable year.
-
I used to think being a Kansas State fan would be the most fun. You had Snyder as coach for one thing, and a 9-4 season was memorable, and even 5-7 was still fun, wait til next year.
-
It's a shame, I think, that making a "major bowl" these days isn't much of a thing really. Playoffs or bust.
Used to be 11-1 and a Sugar Bowl win was a great year, memorable. 9-2 with a Gator Bowl win was a pretty good year for most.
This strikes me as a problem for like six schools.
-
As a Florida fan, the 10-3 Peach Bowl-winning season followed by the 11-2 Orange Bowl-winning 2019 season has been good......but I think as a group, our thought is, "okay, good start, Mullen, now let's get there."
We expect to get to the next level. Not hope, expect. If we don't, then we'll go HC shopping again in 5-6 years.
11-2, Orange Bowl win = a good start
Yeah, kind of crazy, but it's the reality.
-
I'll also mention here, the Peach Bowl has done a good job navigating things and elevating itself. It's not among the big 4, but it's higher than it used to be. The Cotton has fallen way off. And the Citrus needs to be the Citrus and stay the Citrus, lol.
-
The Peach Bowl early on was often on the verge of going out of business, as was typical of lesser bowls. It then hit on taking the top ACC team after the major bowls and a solid SEC team and it sold out year after year, and CFA brought in bags of chicken.
I'd consider it a "major bowl" today.
-
Yeah, spoken as a fan of a helmet team...
I've said it before that Purdue is unlikely to EVER make it to the CFP in the current format. It's not even on my radar.
So even a semi-major bowl would be a memorable year.
Try being a Browns/Indians fan and they're getting paid
-
The Peach Bowl early on was often on the verge of going out of business, as was typical of lesser bowls. It then hit on taking the top ACC team after the major bowls and a solid SEC team and it sold out year after year, and CFA brought in bags of chicken.
I'd consider it a "major bowl" today.
I attended a Peach Bowl In Fulton County Stadium. Multipurpose stadiums suck. We could not even hear the bands play as we were too far away for the sound to carry to us.
It was a great game to watch, even from a distance. But, we traveled far to watch from a distance. I have not attended a Peach Bowl at the present venue, but the venue makes a difference, too. I would guess the traffic flows no better now than it did in the 1980s. Atlanta traffic is some of the worst. It is an example of a city in need of better mass transit, or mass transit more readily acceptable to the masses.
-
I went to an SEC CG in the MB Dome a couple years back. The Dome is decent for watching a game, I had nosebleed seats (for $280). There is a very large circular screen up where the roof opens where you can watch replays etc. It's certainly fancier by far than FC Stadium. I used MARTA to get there, the trains were packed with people especially coming home. The old stadium was a fair walk from the nearest MARTA station which was one criticism.
Of course, the Braves built their new stadium far away from any MARTA anything in what is the worst traffic area of the city.
Atlantans in the suburbs generally don't like MARTA and there is a racial component to that.
-
I would steer clear of MARTA or other mass transit systems during a virus break-out
-
I would steer clear of MARTA or other mass transit systems during a virus break-out
No question about that. And we do. They cut way back on service because few people are riding. They are in bad financial shape.
In normal times, we use them to get to the airport (usually). As a senior, one way costs me 70 cents. Uber is about $25. The international terminal is on the other side of the airport so we usually Lyft when flying to Europe.
-
wondering if mass transit systems in cities such as Houston might be part of the reason for the uptick in cases?
-
I'd guess not. Fulton county where I live and where most of the subway exists has a lower rate of infection than Gwinnett and several rural counties here.
I didn't think Houston had much of a subway system.
-
As a Florida fan, the 10-3 Peach Bowl-winning season followed by the 11-2 Orange Bowl-winning 2019 season has been good......but I think as a group, our thought is, "okay, good start, Mullen, now let's get there."
We expect to get to the next level. Not hope, expect. If we don't, then we'll go HC shopping again in 5-6 years.
11-2, Orange Bowl win = a good start
Yeah, kind of crazy, but it's the reality.
There is winning the East some, and very occasionally going to the playoff?
(This gets me to my expectations are like goldfish theory, but that’s for later on)
-
Yeah, probably, but we tend to forget that upsets happen, and more often when you have a top ten pairing. That 8th place team even if correctly seeded is still a very good team in most cases, probably the 3rd best opponent the 1st place team has faced.
I think this is doubtful because I think that when we go to an 8-team playoff the highest ranked G5 Champion is almost guaranteed to get a slot. Additionally, all P5 Champions will probably get slots as well. Thus, the #1 seed vs #8 seed CFP game is NOT going to be #1 vs #8.
Since the CFP started in 2014 this is the lowest ranked (CFP) team that would have been included in an 8-team playoff with auto-bids for the P5 Champions and the highest ranked G5 Champion:
- 2014: #20 Boise St would have played at #1 Bama
- 2015: #18 Houston would have played at #1 Clemson
- 2016: #15 WMU would have played at #1 Bama
- 2017: #12 UCF would have played at #1 Clemson
- 2018: #8 UCF would have played at #1 Bama
- 2019: #17 Memphis would have played at #1 LSU
So with those assumptions the #8 seed would have been top-10 only once (UCF in 2018).
FWIW, the seeds for 2014-2019 would have been (I'm assuming because I prefer it that the top-4 have to be league Champions):
2014:
- 12-1 #1 Bama (SEC Champ)
- 12-1 #2 Oregon (PAC Champ)
- 13-0 #3 FSU (ACC Champ)
- 12-1 #4 tOSU (B1G Champ)
- 11-1 #5 Baylor (B12 Champ)
- 11-1 #6 TCU
- 10-2 #7 MissSt
- 11-2 #20 Boise St (MWC Champion)
2015:
- 13-0 #1 Clemson (ACC Champ)
- 12-1 #2 Bama (SEC Champ)
- 12-1 #3 MSU (B1G Champ)
- 11-1 #4 Oklahoma (B12 Champ)
- 12-1 #5 Iowa
- 11-2 #6 Stanford (PAC Champ)
- 11-1 #7 tOSU
- 12-1 #18 Houston (AAC Champ)
2016:
- 13-0 #1 Bama (SEC Champ)
- 12-1 #2 Clemson (ACC Champ)
- 12-1 #4 Washington (PAC Champ)
- 11-2 #5 PSU (B1G Champ)
- 11-1 #3 tOSU
- 10-2 #6 Michigan
- 10-2 #7 Oklahoma (B12 Champ)
- 13-0 #15 Western Michigan (MAC Champ)
2017:
- 12-1 #1 Clemson (ACC Champ)
- 12-1 #2 Oklahoma (B12 Champ)
- 12-1 #3 UGA (SEC Champ)
- 11-2 #5 tOSU (B1G Champ)
- 11-1 #4 Bama
- 12-1 #6 Wisconsin
- 11-2 #8 USC (Pac Champ)
- 12-0 #12 UCF (AAC Champ)
2018:
- 13-0 #1 Bama (SEC Champ)
- 13-0 #2 Clemson (ACC Champ)
- 12-1 #4 Oklahoma (B12 Champ)
- 12-1 #6 tOSU (B1G Champ)
- 12-0 #3 Notre Dame
- 11-2 #5 UGA
- 10-3 #9 Washington
- 12-0 #8 UCF (AAC Champ)
2019:
- 13-0 #1 LSU (SEC Champ)
- 13-0 #2 tOSU (B1G Champ)
- 13-0 #3 Clemson (ACC Champ)
- 12-1 #4 Oklahoma (B12 Champ)
- 11-2 #5 UGA
- 11-2 #6 Oregon (PAC Champ)
- 11-2 #7 Baylor
- 12-1 #17 Memphis (AAC Champ)
-
Good point, but upsets would happen, just more rarely than I thought.
-
I would guess upsets happen more often on the underdog's home field
-
I would guess upsets happen more often on the underdog's home field
I would guess that, but it depends on how you define an upset. I don't tend to think a 3 point dog winning a game is an upset, and that 3 points would be shaded for HFA. It would be interesting to see the home-vs-away pedigree for 10+ point upsets.
@ftbobs (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54)
-
We could start by agreeing on the home field advantage, the true one, when competitive teams play a game. Let's say 6 points?
The wiseguys usually say 3-4 but remember that means a 6-8 point swing.
Ie, assuming that my Buckeyes and your Bulldogs are exactly equal then theoretically UGA would win by 3-4 points in Athens while tOSU would win by 3-4 points in Columbus.
Example:
- UGA wins 17-14 in Athens
- tOSU wins 14-10 in Columbus
(or vice-versa).
-
Yeah, 3-4 points is probably about right, and most of that is crowd noise in key situations, right?
Some can be due to time zone changes and travel and unfamiliar surroundings.
-
alabama's bowl record is quite good, but it should be considering their overall record.
I do not think that this is necessarily correct because bowl opponents vary based on record.
Ie, in years when Bama barely squeaks into a bowl at 6-6 they usually face a comparable team that also barely squeaked into that bowl at 6-6 or maybe 7-5. Conversely, when Bama is 13-0 and #1 they typically face a comparable team that is 12-1 or so.
I remember, years ago, having this discussion with a USC fan. USC is 25-9 in Rose Bowls and 9-11 in other bowls. The USC fan made the statement that "of course USC didn't do as well when they weren't in the RoseBowl because those USC teams weren't very good. I pointed out that of course they weren't, but their opponents weren't very good either.
USC has 55 Bowl appearances with:
- 34 wins
- 20 losses
- 1 win that got vacated (2005 Orange Bowl win over Oklahoma)
-
Back in the day, UGA would get into lesser bowls because of the fan base. I'm sure this was common, especially when B1G teams could not be in the mix. So, they could end up playing a better team in a given bowl game. They are 31-21-3 in bowls, I don't think that means anything other than they went to a lot of bowl games, many of course "minor".
If the played say Ohio State in Orlando, how much HFA do they have? From what I have seen, the crowd noise there is rather sparse. A dome would change that calculus, especially considering domes are usually major bowl games today.
-
There is winning the East some, and very occasionally going to the playoff?
(This gets me to my expectations are like goldfish theory, but that’s for later on)
Yeah, we need some playoff appearances.
Winning the East isn't enough. That should be the default. We won the East twice under McElwain, but it didn't matter, because it was just an invitation to get beat up by Bama.
Florida should win the East more than half the time and should win in Atlanta more than half the time we get there.
That's how you keep your job in Gainesville. If both of those happen, we'll be in the playoff plenty.
-
The wiseguys usually say 3-4 but remember that means a 6-8 point swing.
This part bothered me and didn't seem right, but I couldn't put my finger on it. But then I figured why:
what you're saying here isn't wrong, but here's why it feels odd - even when teams play twice in a season, they very nearly almost NEVER play at each other's home fields. They play at one team's home field and then at a neutral site: CCG or bowl game.
So within a season, at least, there isn't a 6-8 point swing.
-
This part bothered me and didn't seem right, but I couldn't put my finger on it. But then I figured why:
what you're saying here isn't wrong, but here's why it feels odd - even when teams play twice in a season, they very nearly almost NEVER play at each other's home fields. They play at one team's home field and then at a neutral site: CCG or bowl game.
So within a season, at least, there isn't a 6-8 point swing.
I meant in terms of the difference between my place and your place. Ie, if my Buckeyes and your Gators are considered "exactly equal" then, in theory, UF would be favored by about 3-4 points in the Swamp while tOSU would be favored by about 3-4 points in the Shoe. Thus, the 6-8 point swing.
But you are right, in almost all cases when teams play twice in a season the second game is at a neutral site so it is only a 3-4 point swing. However, if we get home field for the first round of the expanded 8-team playoff then I think we'll see some two game sets at each other's fields and/or at the same team's field twice.
Using the examples I posted above for 8-team CFP fields:
2014: No rematches in the first round. There are two potential rematches. #1 seed Bama beat #7 seed MissSt in Tuscaloosa and could meet them again if both made the CG. #5 seed Baylor beat #6 seed TCU in Baylor and could meet them again if both made the CG.
2015: #3 seed MSU played both #5 seed Iowa (B1GCG) and #7 seed tOSU (in Columbus) and could meet tOSU in the second round and/or Iowa in the CG.
2016: #4 seed PSU beat #5 seed tOSU in Happy Valley and the rematch would be in Happy Valley in the first round of the playoffs. Both of them already played #6 seed Michigan so the winner could also have a rematch in the CG.
2017: #4 seed tOSU and #6 seed UW played in the B1GCG and would rematch if both made the CG.
2018: No potential rematches.
2019: #1 seed LSU and #5 seed UGA played in the SECCG and could rematch in the second round.
-
Had UGA played LSU a second time, well, it would not have been pretty.
-
there's much more to HFA than crowd noise
-
Yeah, 3-4 points is probably about right, and most of that is crowd noise in key situations, right?
Some can be due to time zone changes and travel and unfamiliar surroundings.
I posted that most of it is due to crowd noise. Do you disagree?
-
I would guess that, but it depends on how you define an upset. I don't tend to think a 3 point dog winning a game is an upset, and that 3 points would be shaded for HFA. It would be interesting to see the home-vs-away pedigree for 10+ point upsets.
@ftbobs (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54)
What defines an "upset". I only have limited spread information (1998-2016).
-
I would say where a 10+ point dog won. One could argue for 7 points. I think more recent results would be most enlightening anyway.
-
10 point spread seems reasonable
-
I do not think that this is necessarily correct because bowl opponents vary based on record.
Ie, in years when Bama barely squeaks into a bowl at 6-6 they usually face a comparable team that also barely squeaked into that bowl at 6-6 or maybe 7-5. Conversely, when Bama is 13-0 and #1 they typically face a comparable team that is 12-1 or so.
I remember, years ago, having this discussion with a USC fan. USC is 25-9 in Rose Bowls and 9-11 in other bowls. The USC fan made the statement that "of course USC didn't do as well when they weren't in the RoseBowl because those USC teams weren't very good. I pointed out that of course they weren't, but their opponents weren't very good either.
USC has 55 Bowl appearances with:
- 34 wins
- 20 losses
- 1 win that got vacated (2005 Orange Bowl win over Oklahoma)
USC has one vacated loss as well, and officially 53 appearances because of those vacated games.
35-20 on the field, 34-19 officially.
Rose bowl opponents total record: (308-32-8)--0.897
Non-Rose bowl opponents total record: (178-62-2)--0.740
-
I would say where a 10+ point dog won. One could argue for 7 points. I think more recent results would be most enlightening anyway.
I'll see what I can do.
-
Records of teams favored by 10 or more (00-16):
(https://i.imgur.com/U0NoUbg.png)
-
Yeah, we need some playoff appearances.
Winning the East isn't enough. That should be the default. We won the East twice under McElwain, but it didn't matter, because it was just an invitation to get beat up by Bama.
Florida should win the East more than half the time and should win in Atlanta more than half the time we get there.
That's how you keep your job in Gainesville. If both of those happen, we'll be in the playoff plenty.
Dan probably won’t do that.
I’ll be interested who will. Probably won’t happen until the top end of the West and UGA all slip some.
Ahh well. CFB is all about expectations rising wild. Such is life.
-
I'm not saying it will happen, but that's what would placate the Gator Nation.
-
Records of teams favored by 10 or more (00-16):
(https://i.imgur.com/U0NoUbg.png)
Closer than I would have thought, and a 12.3% chance of an upset by a significant underdog at home is interesting with a 10+ point spread, as this includes teams that were 15 point dogs, etc.
-
So, in an 8 team playoff where the 1-8 contest is played in 1's home stadium, we might expect an upset one time in eight games played. If that #8 team often is the leading G5 team, one might expect them to have say a 1 in 6 chance of winning the second round at a "neutral" site, and perhaps the same shot in the NC game. That is pretty low odds of course, which suggests one reality that they shouldn't play in the playoff in the first place.
Or you might accept those odds, a one chance in 8 x 6 x 6, which would happen eventually of course.
That is 0.35%, one shat in 300. Do you think a team with one chance in 300 merits that chance?
-
no, but the extra games provide good revenue
-
If the motivation is simply more revenue, then why not 16 or 32 or 64?
-
that's always the motivation
basketball is now more than 64
-
There must then be countering reasons we have not gone to a larger playoff scheme.
-
players and coaching staffs don't want more games, they influence ADs, which talk to the conference commish
it's the only reason the NFL doesn't play 24 games in a season
-
Records of teams favored by 10 or more (00-16):
(https://i.imgur.com/U0NoUbg.png)
That is a not insignificant difference. I get once in seven tries on the road and once in a little better than eight at home.
Put another way:
- In 56 games your team plays at home as a 10+ point favorite they will lose roughly 7 so they'll go 49-7.
- In 56 games your team plays on the road as a 10+ point favorite they will lose roughly 8 so they'll go 48-8.
-
well, that sucks
-
So, in an 8 team playoff where the 1-8 contest is played in 1's home stadium, we might expect an upset one time in eight games played. If that #8 team often is the leading G5 team, one might expect them to have say a 1 in 6 chance of winning the second round at a "neutral" site, and perhaps the same shot in the NC game. That is pretty low odds of course, which suggests one reality that they shouldn't play in the playoff in the first place.
Or you might accept those odds, a one chance in 8 x 6 x 6, which would happen eventually of course.
That is 0.35%, one shat in 300. Do you think a team with one chance in 300 merits that chance?
I think 1-in-8 is extremely generous for the top G5 Champ against the #1 seed.
For a comparison, look at 2019. The top G5 Champ was Memphis. Memphis played Cincinnati twice, both at home and won by 10 and five points. Backing out HFA, the Tigers were slightly better than the Bearcats. Neither the Bearcats nor the Tigers played #1 LSU but the Bearcats did play #2 tOSU. The Bearcats lost 42-0. They got outgained 508-273 and had 13 first downs compared to tOSU's 31. It wasn't even that close. Cincinnati's drives (sequentially):
- 3 and out for 2 yards when tied 0-0.
- 4 plays, 15 yards when down 7-0.
- 12 plays, 66 yards, missed FG when down 7-0. Drive started at the UC 20 and included a 4th and 1 conversion at the 49. The FG from the 14 was blocked.
- 3 and out for 2 yards when down 14-0.
- 4 plays, 19 yards when down 21-0.
- 4 plays, 19 yards when down 28-0.
- 6 plays, 20 yards when down 28-0.
- 3 and out for 2 yards when down 28-0.
- 5 plays for 53 yards then an INT when down 35-0.
- 3 and out for 0 yards when down 42-0.
- 11 plays for 79 yards then a fumble when down 42-0.
Note that almost half of UC's yardage (132 of 273 yards) came starting late in the 3rd quarter trailing by five TD's (then later six) and against tOSU's backups.
My point is that even the best G5 teams are the kinds of opponents that the top P5 teams schedule for an "off week". Cincinnati was roughly comparable to Memphis and they looked like a JV squad when they went up against Ohio State. I'd be shocked if the G5 Champ won one out of eight.
-
If the motivation is simply more revenue, then why not 16 or 32 or 64?
I keep thinking that eventually the powers that be will figure out that while adding to the playoff pool obviously increases playoff revenue it decreases regular season revenue because it converts regular season CFB games which most fans view as "can't miss, must see" events into something more like regular season CBB games which are more of a "if I am not too busy" viewing item.
-
A G5 playoff team might well be a 15 point dog on average, we just took ten plus as the dividing line. One of 8 is based on ten plus of course.
Then the other question surfaces, why even include them?
-
Back to @CWSooner (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1544) 's original question:
For me, as a fan of Ohio State, I have zero interest in a 10-year OOC series for two reasons:
First, I really like playing a variety of OOC opponents. If we locked in with one for a decade we'd lose that variety. I'd rather play five "helmet" teams twice each than one 10 times.
Second, there really aren't any good "natural" OOC rivalries for Ohio State. Some people suggest Cincy but they are nowhere near on Ohio State's level. If I were tOSU's AD I'd be willing to sign them so something like a 3-and-1 where we play three times in Columbus and once in Cincinnati. Even there, I'm not really willing to give them a home game, I'd demand that the Cincy game be played at Paul Brown and that tOSU get half of the tickets.
Most of the border-state teams are in the B1G (Michigan, PSU). There are three potential logical annual OOC rivals for Ohio State:
- Notre Dame: They are in a border state and they are a fellow "helmet" so it would make some sense. That said, I wouldn't want to support ND's continued quasi non-conference stance by playing them annually and even if I didn't care about that, as I referenced above, I'd rather see the Buckeyes travel to Norman, Austin, Tuscaloosa, Athens, and LA in a ten year period than see them travel to South Bend five times.
- West Virginia: They are P5 (B12 now oddly). However, they are nowhere near the "Helmet" that Ohio State is.
- Kentucky: They are P5 (SEC). However, like WVU, they are nowhere near the "Helmet" that Ohio State is.
-
A G5 playoff team might well be a 15 point dog on average, we just took ten plus as the dividing line. One of 8 is based on ten plus of course.
Then the other question surfaces, why even include them?
To continue living the lie that they have a chance.
-
what, G5 teams don't play defense?
-
Putting a G5 team between a big-boy team and the national championship trophy is a poor choice. It's not the same as the Cinderella G5 champ playing a disappointed Auburn or Baylor in a consolation-prize bowl. It will mimic the 42-0 OSU-Cinci game in September.
-
A G5 playoff team might well be a 15 point dog on average, we just took ten plus as the dividing line. One of 8 is based on ten plus of course.
Then the other question surfaces, why even include them?
I already know @OrangeAfroMan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=58) 's answer and to an extent I agree with him.
His answer will be that any playoff should necessarily consist of the Best _ teams where the _ is replaced by the number of teams. I get it and I don't totally disagree.
That said, there are also people who will argue for the "most deserving" as opposed to "best" and there is a strong case for that as well. One argument that I've heard a lot is that if you aren't the best team in your conference then you can't be the best team in the country. Same there, I get that argument but I also get that with unbalanced league schedules and HFA the "best" team doesn't always win the conference.
Going to eight teams with auto-bids for the five P5 Champs and the highest ranked G5 Champ is a hybrid/compromise between "best" and "most deserving". There are two at-large spots so if Bama loses to Auburn on a weird kick-six they still have a chance (same if Ohio State loses to PSU or MSU). I would give the HFA to the top-4 league champions so that there was a not insignificant advantage to winning your league.
More specifically, why include the top G5 Champ when, as I just argued above, they are probably cannon-fodder for the #1 seed. The major reason is political/legal. The G5 teams consist of a LOT of schools in a LOT of states and Congress threatened the BCS due to non-inclusion of the G5 teams. There was potential for a monopoly lawsuit or Congressional intervention. Throwing the G5 a bone by letting their best team get pasted by the #1 seed every year is better than losing in Court or having Congress after you.
Another reason is simply to reward the #1 seed. Hey, if you go undefeated you probably get what is basically a bye in the first round of the CFP.
I'm not a huge fan of the expanded playoff nor of expanding it again to eight teams but I really like the set-up that I have proposed for the inevitable expansion to eight teams. For quick review, my proposal is:
- An eight team CFP.
- The 5 P5 Champs and the highest ranked G5 Champ get auto-bids leaving two at-large slots.
- The top-4 league champions get the top-4 seeds and host the first round.
- I'm undecided on a rule to either avoid rematches or to avoid two teams from the same conference (or both) in the first round*.
Things I like about it:
- It preserves as much value in the regular season as possible because there is a HUMONGOUS difference between squeaking in at #7 and being the #1 seed. Ie, the #7 seed has to travel to one of the best teams in the country while #1 hosts a glorified scrimmage.
- Even beyond 1 v 7, there is a significant difference between almost each step. #1 gets the glorified scrimmage. #2 usually gets the weakest P5 Champ. #3 gets either the second weakest P5 Champ or a weaker at-large. #4 is usually going to get an at-large team that most people think is better than they are.
- Winning your conference matters. Last year's B1GCG is a great example. In retrospect Ohio State was playing only for jersey color in the 2/3 game. Had Ohio State lost to Wisconsin they would still have played Clemson in the first round. Ie, the B1GCG was for basically nothing. In this proposal Ohio State would have been playing for a relatively easy home game (against Baylor based on 2019 results) instead of a MUCH tougher road game (at Oklahoma based on 2019 results). Plus, Wisconsin would have had something to play for as well. With a loss the Badgers would have obviously been out as a 10-3 non-Champion but with a win they'd have had an auto-bid as an 11-2 B1G Champion and they'd have hosted a first round game. Based on 2019 results the fourth host spot would have been between 11-2 Wisconsin and 11-2 Oregon.
- Lots and LOTS of games in the final weeks matter. All five P5 CG's obviously matter because even in a situation like the B1G, SEC, or ACC in 2019 where tOSU/LSU/Clemson are in either way, the other team is still playing for a spot and tOSU/LSU/Clemson are playing for a first-round home game. Then, a slew of G5 CG's are potentially relevant. In 2019 it would have been pretty much just the AAC game with the winner getting the #8 slot but in other years there would be situations where two, three, four, or all five G5 CG's are potentially relevant. Ie, the 5th highest ranked G5 CG participant needs to win and have all four underdogs win the other G5 CG's. It isn't much of a chance but it is a chance.
*I'm curious what others think about a no-rematch or no two teams from the same conference rule for first round games. If you look at 2019, had Wisconsin upset Ohio State in the B1GCG they would have entered the CFP as the fourth highest ranked P5 Champion behind LSU, Clemson, and Oklahoma. Thus, they would have hosted the #5 seed which would likely have been the same Ohio State team that they already lost to in Columbus and beat in Indianapolis. It seems ridiculous to me to have tOSU/UW play a third time. OTOH, it is somewhat unfair to #3 Oklahoma to say "well, you are supposed to host the #6 seed Oregon Ducks where you'll be a favorite but instead you get to host the Buckeyes and be an underdog.
Your thoughts?
- Would you prohibit first-round rematches?
- Would you prohibit first-round games between two teams from the same league (even if they didn't play in the Regular Season)?
- Would you prohibit first-round rematches between teams from the same conference?
-
I would give the HFA to the top-4 league champions so that there was a not insignificant advantage to winning your league.
Here's where I disagree... I agree with basically all the rest of that.
I say the committee should seed the teams based on strength, and that there is no advantage to winning your league.
Winning your conference gets you a seat at the table. It shouldn't automatically grant you a preferential seat.
-
why would not winning your conference merit a preferential seat?
I'm guessing most times, 2 or 3 of the conference champs are going to be in the top 4 anyway
-
why would not winning your conference merit a preferential seat?
I'm guessing most times, 2 or 3 of the conference champs are going to be in the top 4 anyway
Okay, let's say you have a year where the weak P12 champion is 10-3 Oregon, with an OOC loss and two conference losses but gets into the CCG based on a tiebreaker. They beat a 10-2 USC team (10-3 after CCG) on a down year.
Then you have the ACC. Blondie breaks his tibia mid-season and Clemson falls therein and one of the ACC detritus manages to snag the conference championship.
Those teams get a reward. That reward is that they're in the CFP. Neither of them deserve to get a top-4 seed over an 11-1 Alabama team that steamrolled teams 11 weeks out of the year and narrowly lost to 13-0 LSU.
Winning your conference deserves a reward. That reward is that no matter how mediocre you are, you get a CFP berth. It doesn't mean that you should get any preferential treatment beyond that.
Maybe in my example above, Oregon and the ACC champ are even knocked as far as being the 7th and 8th seeds behind an undefeated UCF at 6th. I'm fine with that.
I've been arguing for years that P5 champs deserve CFP bids. I'm not pushing my luck and saying we should screw with tournament seeding to give them any special treatment after that. Many years the 1-4 seeds WILL be P5 champs. I don't think it needs to be a rule.
-
I agree with all of that as far as seeding and giving the best teams the best opportunity to play in the final, but........ it just goes back to ranking and seeding teams with the fewest losses
I really don't have a problem with that and I assume this is how it will work out if we go to 8 teams
I'd like to have more fun with the matchups and penalize teams for not winning their conference
the top 4 conference champs are #1-#4
Undefeated LSU #1, undefeated Ohio St. #2, 1-loss Oklahoma #3, 1 or 2 loss North Carolina and Mack Brown #4
Bama #5, undefeated UCF #6, 1 loss Wisconsin #7, and PAC champ with 3 losses #8
LSU gets an easier path, Bama gets an easier path anyway. Being a 5 seed isn't a bad thing here.
we could assume the committee might drop undefeated UCF behind Wisconsin to avoid a rematch or conference mates meeting in the first round
-
A G5 playoff team might well be a 15 point dog on average, we just took ten plus as the dividing line. One of 8 is based on ten plus of course.
Then the other question surfaces, why even include them?
Mostly because CFB was too dumb to create an arbitrary line at some point.
I think it would make sense to give them whatever the cut is now to go away and starting a G5 playoff.
-
To continue living the lie that they have a chance.
And to keep from being sued.
-
Okay, let's say you have a year where the weak P12 champion is 10-3 Oregon, with an OOC loss and two conference losses but gets into the CCG based on a tiebreaker. They beat a 10-2 USC team (10-3 after CCG) on a down year.
Then you have the ACC. Blondie breaks his tibia mid-season and Clemson falls therein and one of the ACC detritus manages to snag the conference championship.
Those teams get a reward. That reward is that they're in the CFP. Neither of them deserve to get a top-4 seed over an 11-1 Alabama team that steamrolled teams 11 weeks out of the year and narrowly lost to 13-0 LSU.
Winning your conference deserves a reward. That reward is that no matter how mediocre you are, you get a CFP berth. It doesn't mean that you should get any preferential treatment beyond that.
Maybe in my example above, Oregon and the ACC champ are even knocked as far as being the 7th and 8th seeds behind an undefeated UCF at 6th. I'm fine with that.
I've been arguing for years that P5 champs deserve CFP bids. I'm not pushing my luck and saying we should screw with tournament seeding to give them any special treatment after that. Many years the 1-4 seeds WILL be P5 champs. I don't think it needs to be a rule.
I'm advocating that we give HFA to the top-4 seeds in the 8-team playoff and we stipulate that the top-4 League Champions get the top-4 seeds. That way there is a further reward for winning your conference provided that you aren't the fifth best league Champion. My underlying goal here is to preserve the "every game matters" feeling as much as possible and I think this does because in a situation like last year's B1GCG where Ohio State was in either way they'd still be playing for HFA. At 13-0 and B1G Champions they would obviously get a home game in round one. At 12-1 and B1GCG losers they'd still be in but they'd be travelling to their first round game.
-
I'm advocating that we give HFA to the top-4 seeds in the 8-team playoff and we stipulate that the top-4 League Champions get the top-4 seeds. That way there is a further reward for winning your conference provided that you aren't the fifth best league Champion. My underlying goal here is to preserve the "every game matters" feeling as much as possible and I think this does because in a situation like last year's B1GCG where Ohio State was in either way they'd still be playing for HFA. At 13-0 and B1G Champions they would obviously get a home game in round one. At 12-1 and B1GCG losers they'd still be in but they'd be travelling to their first round game.
So, two questions:
- What do you do with Notre Dame (or other worthy independents, should they exist). If Notre Dame goes 12-0 and just rips right through their schedule, are you going to stop them from getting HFA in the first round?
- What do you do if not only the fifth best league champ is substandard, but the fourth is as well?
In your scenario, a 12-1 OSU who lost the B1GCG might still be in the top 4 seeds over a team they lost to. Let's say that they lost in a fluke to 10-3 Purdue? Do you think even if the PAC12 champ is 9-4 Oregon, that 10-3 Purdue should be given HFA over 12-1 OSU?
-
So, two questions:
- What do you do with Notre Dame (or other worthy independents, should they exist). If Notre Dame goes 12-0 and just rips right through their schedule, are you going to stop them from getting HFA in the first round?
- What do you do if not only the fifth best league champ is substandard, but the fourth is as well?
In your scenario, a 12-1 OSU who lost the B1GCG might still be in the top 4 seeds over a team they lost to. Let's say that they lost in a fluke to 10-3 Purdue? Do you think even if the PAC12 champ is 9-4 Oregon, that 10-3 Purdue should be given HFA over 12-1 OSU?
Yes. What I'm advocating is that HFA should be a reward for winning your conference. If you aren't in a conference (your question #1) or you just have a bad day in your CG or whatever and you don't win your conference (your question #2) then you don't get HFA because it is a reward for winning your conference and you didn't.
I'd tell Notre Dame:
- If you want HFA in a CFP game then you are going to have to join and win a conference. Tough.
I'd tell tOSU (in your example):
- You didn't win your conference. Purdue and Oregon did win theirs, tough.
Part of this, for me, is to create significant seeding advantages at every level possible.
If you think about it, most years the #4 League Champion is going to be an underdog in the first-round CFP game even though they do get HFA because #5 is usually going to be a REALLY good team that didn't get HFA only because they either weren't in a conference or didn't win it based on some fluke or tiebreaker. For example, over the six years of the CFP both 2015 Ohio State and 2017 Alabama were arguably the best team in the country that year but each lost a single game that caused them to tie for their Division Championship and lose the tie thus depriving them of a CCG appearance. A lot of times the #4 league Champion is going to end up playing a team that that is loaded and mad. Good luck!
I think that is great. The seeds:
- There is a humongous advantage to being #1 because your first round CFP game is going to be basically a tune-up against a G5 team at home.
- It isn't as good as #1 but most years you are going to get the weakest P5 Champion. A lot of times this is going to be some 9-4 team that happened to catch lightning in a bottle and pull off a CG upset.
- This isn't as good as #2 but at least you duck the #5 seed which could be the best team in the Country.
- This isn't good but at least you get HFA against Goliath.
- This will almost always be the best non-Champion. It isn't as good as #1 but still has advantages.
- Avoiding the top-2 will frequently be important and at least this team doesn't have to play a road game against a top-2 team. Granted, road games against #3 aren't a LOT easier, but they are easier.
- Avoiding #1 will frequently be important and at least this team doesn't have to play a road game against #1.
- This is a humongous advantage over #9 because #8 is in!
IMHO, this would help to keep the games meaningful even after a team had "clinched". Example, last year's B1GCG as it was:
- Wisconsin was 10-2 and playing only for pride. As a practical matter they had no chance at the CFP even with a win so they were going to the Rose Bowl either way it was just a question of whether they were going as B1G Champs or not.
- Ohio State was 12-0 and, as it turned out, playing for basically nothing. As it turned out, had the Buckeyes lost they'd still have played Clemson in the Fiesta Bowl the only difference would have been that Clemson would have been wearing home jerseys.
Last year's B1GCG with an 8-team CFP as I advocate:
- Wisconsin was 10-2 and would have been playing for not only a CFP spot but also a first-round home game. At 10-3 with a loss they'd have been out but at 11-2 with a B1GCG they'd have been a top-4 league Champion and hosted a CFP game.
- Ohio State would have been in either way but they'd have been playing for a home CFP game in round #1.
-
This, admittedly by you, penalizes the 1-seed in the semi-finals. They're playing the 4/5 winner, who will often be a 1-loss, non-champ "Goliath".
-
Yes. What I'm advocating is that HFA should be a reward for winning your conference.
Fair 'nuff. I see where you're going, but still disagree.
I feel like a CFP berth is enough of a reward for your conference, and we don't need to kick it up.
It sounds like you're more concerned about making this a punishment for great teams that fail to win their conference than necessarily a reward for those who do...
-
This, admittedly by you, penalizes the 1-seed in the semi-finals. They're playing the 4/5 winner, who will often be a 1-loss, non-champ "Goliath".
That is true and not really something I had thought about but I don't think it is terribly important because by the time you get to the second round of the 8-team playoff, all opponents are tough. They were all pretty good to begin with and we already had one round to weed out the weaklings so no matter who you play in round #2, they are really strong.
-
Fair 'nuff. I see where you're going, but still disagree.
I feel like a CFP berth is enough of a reward for your conference, and we don't need to kick it up.
It sounds like you're more concerned about making this a punishment for great teams that fail to win their conference than necessarily a reward for those who do...
I think the thing I am most trying to avoid is having "meaningless" games at the end of the season like we see in the NFL where teams that clinch early start resting their starters.
Example:
Suppose that Florida and Alabama both went into the SECCG at 12-0. If we had an 8-team playoff both would be locks for it regardless of who won the SECCG. Additionally, if the top-4 seeds hosted first round games then both would *PROBABLY* be locks to host in the first round which basically makes the SECCG meaningless. However, if you limit hosting to the top-4 league champions then you have a situation where:
- The SECCG winner gets a first round home tune-up game against some G5 pretender while
- The SECCG loser has to travel to Columbus, OH or Madison, WI or Eugene, OR or some such far-distant place to play a road game in cold weather against a formidable opponent.
In that scenario the SECCG isn't meaningless. Even if both Bama and Florida win their first round game there might still be a vast difference between one of them coasting through a home tune-up and the other getting beat up in a physical road game. That has an impact on the second round.
-
Yeah, I read that and simply think it's a good explanation to not have an 8-team playoff, lol.
-
I think the thing I am most trying to avoid is having "meaningless" games at the end of the season like we see in the NFL where teams that clinch early start resting their starters.
Example:
Suppose that Florida and Alabama both went into the SECCG at 12-0. If we had an 8-team playoff both would be locks for it regardless of who won the SECCG. Additionally, if the top-4 seeds hosted first round games then both would *PROBABLY* be locks to host in the first round which basically makes the SECCG meaningless. However, if you limit hosting to the top-4 league champions then you have a situation where:
- The SECCG winner gets a first round home tune-up game against some G5 pretender while
- The SECCG loser has to travel to Columbus, OH or Madison, WI or Eugene, OR or some such far-distant place to play a road game in cold weather against a formidable opponent.
In that scenario the SECCG isn't meaningless. Even if both Bama and Florida win their first round game there might still be a vast difference between one of them coasting through a home tune-up and the other getting beat up in a physical road game. That has an impact on the second round.
That CCG winner is probably the 1 seed. That CCG loser is probably not the 2 seed.
If the loss drops them down to the 3 or 4 seed, they still have a much more difficult opponent than that 1 seed has. There's still something to play for.
-
IMHO, this would help to keep the games meaningful even after a team had "clinched". Example, last year's B1GCG as it was:
- Wisconsin was 10-2 and playing only for pride. As a practical matter they had no chance at the CFP even with a win so they were going to the Rose Bowl either way it was just a question of whether they were going as B1G Champs or not.
- Ohio State was 12-0 and, as it turned out, playing for basically nothing. As it turned out, had the Buckeyes lost they'd still have played Clemson in the Fiesta Bowl the only difference would have been that Clemson would have been wearing home jerseys.
I find the thought of this interesting.
Winning anything is only worth the weight you put on it. If you care about winning the Outback Bowl, it matters. If you don't, it doesn't.
Perhaps we can argue that winning the conference is an illusory sort of pride, and perhaps down the road, the idea of that dissipates. But I'd assume that measure of pride carries more weight than the particular bowl teams end up in.
-
I find the thought of this interesting.
Winning anything is only worth the weight you put on it. If you care about winning the Outback Bowl, it matters. If you don't, it doesn't.
Perhaps we can argue that winning the conference is an illusory sort of pride, and perhaps down the road, the idea of that dissipates. But I'd assume that measure of pride carries more weight than the particular bowl teams end up in.
I just think that Wisconsin was in a particularly odd position last year. Heading into the B1GCG:
- 12-0 Ohio State was ranked #1CFP, #2AP
- 10-2 Wisconsin was ranked #10CFP, #8AP
- 10-2 Penn State was ranked #12CFP, #10AP
- 9-3 Michigan was ranked #17CFP, #14AP
If Wisconsin had been 9-3 or 8-4 then a B1GCG loss would have knocked them out of the RoseBowl (in favor of Penn State) so they'd have had the RoseBowl to play for.
If they had been 11-1 or 12-0 then a B1GCG win would have gotten them into the CFP so they'd have had a CFP spot to play for.
At 10-2 they couldn't possibly either make the CFP or miss the RoseBowl so they had about as little as possible for a CCG team to play for. They were playing for the B1G Championship and that is important to us but they were playing for that and that ONLY. Usually the CCG also has at least a potential bearing on the team's bowl destination but I think everybody knew long before kickoff in Indy that for Wisconsin, it didn't.
-
I just think that Wisconsin was in a particularly odd position last year. Heading into the B1GCG:
- 12-0 Ohio State was ranked #1CFP, #2AP
- 10-2 Wisconsin was ranked #10CFP, #8AP
- 10-2 Penn State was ranked #12CFP, #10AP
- 9-3 Michigan was ranked #17CFP, #14AP
If Wisconsin had been 9-3 or 8-4 then a B1GCG loss would have knocked them out of the RoseBowl (in favor of Penn State) so they'd have had the RoseBowl to play for.
If they had been 11-1 or 12-0 then a B1GCG win would have gotten them into the CFP so they'd have had a CFP spot to play for.
At 10-2 they couldn't possibly either make the CFP or miss the RoseBowl so they had about as little as possible for a CCG team to play for. They were playing for the B1G Championship and that is important to us but they were playing for that and that ONLY. Usually the CCG also has at least a potential bearing on the team's bowl destination but I think everybody knew long before kickoff in Indy that for Wisconsin, it didn't.
I don't totally think that was the case.
If I recall correctly, there was a vague sense if UW just got molliwopped, that PSU or maybe even (shudder) Minnesota, might get the nod, owing to either having the same number of wins and one extra loss. I mean like if UW just got smothered. But then the Badgers led by 14 at halftime and everyone knew OSU was probably gonna win and UW was assuredly Ca-bound.
There's some fun not totally analogous UW history in terms of different outcome, same result. In 2005-06 and 2008-09, UW went to the same bowls back to back and did so despite two-win improvements across each pair of years.
The 2005 Badgers were 9-3 with a nice offense and bad defense, but only two teams were better and the rest of the league was 7-4 or worse, so they were off to the Capital One Bowl. The next year, they go 11-1, but lost to Michigan and didn't play OSU, so with the two-teams per conference rule, it was back to Orlando.
Then in 2008, UW limped to 7-5 and found itself in the Champ Sports Bowl, just barely squeaking out avoiding a crappy (better) trip to the Insight Bowl. UW went 9-3 the next year, saved its coaches job, went from 3-5 to 5-3 in conference. BUT they only finished one spot better when factoring tie-breaker, and some blend of that tie-breaker/NW being interesting jumped 8-4 NW over 9-3 UW for the Outback, sending UW to the Champ Sports.
In the moment, it was annoying, but most of the things worked out alright.
-
I skipped 18 of the pages in this, but for Wisconsin I agree with:
1) Georgia or Auburn
2) Washington
3) The Badgers are probably not a big enough ticket, but Texas would be a great one.
4) I wish UCLA still cared about football or Cal could get good at it because either could be a great series. UCLA certainly has the better history, but the parallels between Madison and Berkeley are hard to ignore. Along those same lines, UNC would also be great.
-
UGA's "big" OOC rivalry is with Clemson. This presumes you ignore Tech of course. Clemson was almost always on the slate way back, but has been more sporadically of late. They are proximate, compete against each other for recruits often, and both are having a good run right now.
FSU would be possible but they of course are paired with Florida. Nobody else OOC is close until you get to NC, which is fairly close. Is proximity a need? Not always, ND-USC. Tradition > proximity.
-
UGA's "big" OOC rivalry is with Clemson. This presumes you ignore Tech of course. Clemson was almost always on the slate way back, but has been more sporadically of late. They are proximate, compete against each other for recruits often, and both are having a good run right now.
FSU would be possible but they of course are paired with Florida. Nobody else OOC is close until you get to NC, which is fairly close. Is proximity a need? Not always, ND-USC. Tradition > proximity.
Per Stassen (http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/all-opp.pl?start=1869&end=2019&team=Georgia&sort=g&mingames=0), Georgia's most frequent opponents not currently in the SEC and UGA's record against them:
- GaTech, 109 games, 64-40-5
- Clemson, 59 games, 39-16-4
- Tulane, 25 games, 14-10-1 (NOTE, last game was in 1985)
- UNC, 24 games, 16-6-2
- Furman, 22 games, 20-2 (NOTE, last game was in 1950)
- Mercer, 21 games, 21-0 (NOTE, last game was in 1941)
- Virginia, 18 games, 9-6-3
- Miami, FL, 12 games, 7-4-1
- Yale, 11 games, 6-5 (NOTE, last game was in 1934
- Florida State, 11 games, 6-4-1
From my perspective, the GaTech rivalry is a good series. It is in-state so has proximity going for it. Also, I'm sure that a LOT of UGA grads live and work in the ATL metro area so this is an easy "away" game for them to get to, easier even than going to a home game in Athens.
Clemson would be a good one to get going again. It is just over an hour by car so an easy gameday drive (I drive more than that to get to tOSU home games).
Tulane, Furman, Mercer, and Yale are obviously relics of the distant past.
UNC would make some sense. It is five hours by car so not a terribly long trip and might help UGA to lure more NC recruits.
Virginia, Miami, and Florida State are farther away but would be good for occasional games.
The problem, I think, is that most P5 teams are pretty set on playing one somewhat equal OOC opponent per year and filling the rest of their OOC slots with creampuffs. GaTech isn't really a modern* "equal" for UGA, but that series does rotate H&H like an "equal" series.
UGA and GaTech as "equals"? Overall UGA leads the series 64-40-5. That is pretty equal. If you think about it, it means that in an average decade UGA has roughly won six and lost four. However, that isn't how it happened. Tech dominated the series early (5-1-1 in the first seven meetings) and went 7-5-2 before they became conference mates and 10-6-2 through 1928. Since then (1929-2019) Georgia is 58-30-3 in 91 meetings and it has been trending more lopsided recently with UGA leading 16-3 since 2001.
My personal theory is that even the high-end P5 teams are going to trend toward tougher schedules as it becomes increasingly difficult to sell tickets. It was already becoming more difficult for these teams to sell out their creampuff home games before COVID and my supposition is that the COVID interruption will only make that worse because some former ticket-buyers will not come back once they get used to not attending in person.
From your past posts, I gather that you would like to see UGA drop or reduce the games against Tech and replace them with what you consider to be better OOC games. I think instead that the increasing difficulty of selling tickets will cause UGA, in the long run, to keep Tech (because I assume that selling tickets to that game is considerably easier than a creampuff) AND add more high-end OOC games in addition to that.
Final thought:
I think that Miami might present a unique opportunity for UGA or another P5 school. Miami can't sell tickets at all because they have about four fans so it might make sense from the perspective of the Miami AD to be willing to agree to a 2:1 or 3:2 type A:H ratio. This could be a great deal for both teams. Georgia (or Ohio State or Notre Dame or any other large-fanbase school) would fill up the stadium for the Miami home games while Miami is a marquee opponent that would help the other school sell tickets to their home games. It would be a good deal for Miami because they would get a full stadium and it would be a great deal for UGA/tOSU/ND because they would get more home than away games and a marquee opponent to help sell home game tickets.
-
Tech was in the SEC for many of those games, and Tech was a true national power in the 1950s and 1960s.
UGA has another series scheduled with Clemson, and toward the end of this decade they have scheduled three OOC opponents who are P5s each year.
They play Clemson in NS games in 2021 and 2024, and then have a series in 2029 (when they also play Texas) and 2030 (when they also play Ohio State).
Plus Tech. So, it's a pretty traditional and continuing OOC rivalry.
I see another series 2032-2033 with Clemson on the books.
-
The same analysis for Ohio State:
- Pittsburgh, 25 games, 19-5-1 (NOTE, last game was in 1996 and Pitt's last win was in 1952)
- USC, 24 games, 10-13-1 (NOTE, eight of the 24 meetings were Bowl games, seven Rose Bowls 55, 69, 73, 74, 75, 80, 85 and the recent Cotton Bowl) Another note, the Buckeyes were 8-5-1 in the first 14 meetings (through the 1969 #1 v #2 RoseBowl) then lost eight of nine including seven in a row before the recent Cotton Bowl win.
- Ohio Wesleyan, 15 games, 15-0 (NOTE, last game was in 1932)
- Chicago, 14 games, 10-2-2 (NOTE, former conference member, last game was in 1939 when they were still in the league)
- Mizzou, 12 games, 10-1-1
- Washington, 12 games, 9-3
- Oregon, 9 games, 9-0
- SMU, 9 games, 7-1-1 (NOTE, last game was in 1978)
- UCLA, 9 games, 4-4-1
- tie (WSU, Oberlin, Cal, Cincy, 8 games each, 8-0 against WSU and Cincy, 7-1 against Cal, 5-2-1 against Oberlin last in 1922
Pitt isn't an equal.
USC, Washington, Oregon, UCLA, WSU, and Cal are distant PAC teams where playing occasionally makes sense but not more than that.
Ohio Wesleyan, Chicago, SMU, and Oberlin are relics.
Mizzou isn't an equal and while it might make sense to play them occasionally anything more than that would not be beneficial to Ohio State.
Cincy isn't an equal and playing them frequently would not benefit Ohio State.
-
Pitt is at least a P5 program. Cincy might be played 2 and 1 with 1 being in PB stadium. But I agree neither would be real rivals.
-
WVU might be good for OSU.
Who is an equal to OSU? Bama, Clemson and OU?
-
If you are looking for OOC equals for Ohio St that is a pretty short list. They played one a few years ago in Oklahoma and they have Bama coming up.
-
Pitt is at least a P5 program. Cincy might be played 2 and 1 with 1 being in PB stadium. But I agree neither would be real rivals.
If I were the AD at Ohio State I would be willing to schedule a 2:1 with Cincy roughly every decade or maybe slightly more often with the proviso that, as you stated, their game is in Paul Brown Stadium and Ohio State gets LOTS of tickets to sell. I might do something similar with Pitt and/or WVU.
If you are looking for OOC equals for Ohio St that is a pretty short list. They played one a few years ago in Oklahoma and they have Bama coming up.
Who is an equal to OSU? Bama, Clemson and OU?
When I used the term "equal" I meant something more than just "P5" but I didn't mean "Bama, Clemson, or OU only". I think I meant something more like "helmet" or at least "near-helmet". Basically Stewart Mandel's Kings and Barons (https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/college-football-program-pecking-order-3-0-dividing-all-66-bcs-teams-into-four-tier-hierarchy-052517) (not including B1G teams because they aren't OOC):
- Bama
- Clemson
- Florida
- FSU
- LSU
- Miami, FL
- Notre Dame
- Oklahoma
- Texas
- USC
- Auburn
- Georgia
- Oregon
- Stanford
- Tennessee
- aTm
- UCLA
- VaTech
-
Miami and UCLA? Yuck.
-
Miami and UCLA? Yuck.
They are big enough names to draw in fans and that is the concern for the AD.
-
They are big enough names to draw in fans and that is the concern for the AD.
I was considering the road game aspect - as those are the 2 most talented HS areas in the entire country.
-
Come on down to the Swamp in September, guys. The water's fine (it's in the air)!
-
I was considering the road game aspect - as those are the 2 most talented HS areas in the entire country.
I was considering that as well in addition to large amounts of tOSU alums living in those areas.
I think an AD's schedule priorities should involve all of those things:
- Alumni relations, playing where a lot of your alumni live
- Recruiting, playing where a lot of recruits live
- Filling your own stadium, playing opponents that get your fan's attention
I think that Miami, FL and UCLA both fill all three of those pretty well for Ohio State.
-
UW's top OOC opponents by games played, discounting teams that don't exist anymore or are now FCS.
ND 16 times
NIU 13 times
UCLA 11
UNLV 10
Hawaii/USC/ISU 7
So ND or nothing for UW.
-
Come on down to the Swamp in September, guys. The water's fine (it's in the air)!
Florida would honestly be a great OOC series for Ohio State in both Football and Basketball. There is history in both with the NC games and frequently competing with each other and/or helping each other indirectly (ie, tOSU's win over ASU in the 1997 Rose Bowl making UF's first NC possible).
This is getting WAY OT, but I've said before that if I were tOSU's AD I would want to fill in the basketball OOC with mostly schools like Ohio State that are reasonably good at both football and basketball. I think it makes sense because even most tOSU basketball fans are "football first" type fans. They know enough basketball to know that Kansas, UNC, and Kentucky are bluebloods but after that I think they might rather play Bama or Florida than Kansas State or Missouri even if KSU/Mizzou are better at basketball simply because Bama/Florida have a football connection.
-
Florida's OOC opponents, by number of games:
65 FSU
56 Miami
39 GA Tech (former SEC)
21 Tulane (former SEC)
18 Maryland?!?
15 Stetson, of course
14 N.C. State
14 Florida Southern (hey, my mom went there!)
13 Mercer
13 Clemson
-
Tennessee could be another good one for Wisconsin. It's within driving distance (sort of), it's recent history has made it, perhaps, more likely that it would sign up for home-and-homes with Wisconsin. It's got a cool stadium in a great location. And it's a program that should be on the rise back to some semblance of its former self.
I would, of course, love a series with Notre Dame, but it's not all that interesting from an away game perspective. Another trip in the Midwest near Chicago? Meh. It's not as though South Bend is the end-all-be-all of college towns. Notre Dame has a gorgeous campus, but for alumni there isn't much about South Bend that's attractive as a destination (as opposed to Raleigh, Berkeley, Pasadena, Seattle, Austin, Knoxville, or Atlanta/Athens).
-
Wisconsin-Tennessee would be fun, I'd watch.
My make believe matchups (in a single year) of some programs:
Ohio State - USC
Wisconsin - Tennessee
Penn State - Alabama
Michigan - Florida
Rutgers - Georgia
Maryland - Ole Miss
NW - Vandy
Notre Dame - Texas
Clemson - Oklahoma
Seems fair to me.
-
Back on point, I don't know that it is possible to "create" an OOC rivalry where there has been none, even if proximity is not an issue. And I don't know that it would be desirable even if possible.
Imagine Ohio State started playing say Clemson or Alabama almost annually, that would also mean neither would play much of anyone else OOC annually. I'd rather see some diversity myself. I prefer to see UGA play Texas on occasion than Clemson 5 years out of 10.
And of course OSU already plays 9 conference games, so they will tend to reserve two slots for pumpkins and one for a name brand program OOC.
-
Did you know Alabama and Penn State have played 15 times? I am older than most people here and one of my first television football memories was a Liberty Bowl game in Philadelphia between Penn State and Alabama in around 1958. I think Penn won something like 10-3. I don't remember much about the game except it was frigidly cold.
-
Did you know Alabama and Penn State have played 15 times? I am older than most people here and one of my first television football memories was a Liberty Bowl game in Philadelphia between Penn State and Alabama in around 1958. I think Penn won something like 10-3. I don't remember much about the game except it was frigidly cold.
I was curious so I looked it up. That game appears to have been the 1959 Liberty Bowl played on December 19, 1959 in Philly and Penn State won 7-0. Neither team appears to have been all that good in 1959. Bama finished fourth in the SEC at 4-1-2 behind Georgia, Ole Miss, and LSU. Interestingly, the SEC appears not to have been very good in general as the Champion (UGA) got blown out by a mediocre USCe team that lost four games (UNC, Clemson, Miami, FL, and Wake). The SEC's second and third place teams (Ole Miss and LSU) played each other in a rematch in the Sugar Bowl. LSU won the regular season game (in Mississippi) and Ole Miss won the Sugar Bowl so the SEC's top-4 teams went 1-3 in bowls and the only winner beat another SEC team.
The penultimate AP Poll (11/30 before bowls and before some teams had finished the regular season) was:
- 9-0 Syracuse
- 9-1 Ole Miss
- 9-1 LSU
- 9-1 Texas
- 9-1 Georgia
- 7-2 Wisconsin
- 8-2 TCU
- 9-1 Washington
- 8-2 Arkansas
- 8-2 Clemson
- 7-1-2 Bama
- 5-3-1 Illinois
- 8-2 USC
- 8-2 Penn State
Of the top-14 only Syracuse played again before the final poll which was still pre-bowl back then. Syracuse beat #17 UCLA in California. Then in the bowls:
- Syracuse beat #4 Texas in the Cotton Bowl
- Mississippi beat #3 LSU in the Sugar Bowl
- LSU lost to #2 Ole Miss in the Sugar Bowl
- Texas lost to #1 Syracuse in the Cotton Bowl
- Georgia beat #20 Mizzou in the Orange Bowl
- Wisconsin lost to #8 Washington in the Rose Bowl
- TCU lost to #10 Clemson in the Bluebonnet Bowl (Houston)
- Washington beat #6 Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl
- Arkansas beat nr GaTech in the Gator Bowl
- Clemson beat #7 TCU in the Bleubonnet Bowl
- Bama lost to #14 Penn State in the Liberty Bowl
- Illinois did not play
- USC did not play
- Penn State beat #11 Bama in the Liberty Bowl
If there had been a post-bowl AP Poll the top-10 probably would have been:
- 11-0 Syracuse
- 10-1 Ole Miss
- 10-1 Georgia
- 10-1 Washington
- 9-2 Clemson
- 9-2 LSU
- 9-2 Texas
- 9-2 Arkansas
- 9-2 Penn State
- 8-2 USC
Anyway back to Bama/Penn State, here is the entire series:
- #14 Penn State beat #11 Bama 7-0 in the Liberty Bowl in the 1959 season
- #4 Bama beat #8 Penn State 13-6 in the Sugar Bowl in the 1975 season
- #2 Bama beat #1 Penn State 14-7 in the Sugar Bowl in the 1978 season
- #6 Bama beat #5 Penn State 31-16 on November 14, 1981 in Happy Valley
- #4 Bama beat #3 Penn State 42-21 on October 9, 1982 in Birmingham
- nr Penn State beat #3 Bama 34-28 on October 8, 1983 in Happy Valley. This was a particularly bad loss for Bama as they came into the game undefeated and #3 while PSU was 2-3 having already lost to Nebraska, Cincy, and Iowa and only having beaten lowly Temple and Rutgers.
- nr Bama beat #11 Penn State 6-0 on October 13, 1984 in Tuscaloosa
- #8 Penn State beat #10 Bama 19-17 on October 12, 1985 in Happy Valley
- #6 Penn State beat #2 Bama 23-3 on October 25, 1986 in Tuscaloosa
- #19 Bama beat #11 Penn State 24-13 on September 12, 1987 in Happy Valley
- nr Bama beat nr Penn State 8-3 on October 22, 1988 in Birmingham
- #6 Bama beat #14 Penn State 17-16 on October 28, 1989 in Happy Valley
- nr Penn State beat nr Bama 9-0 on October 27, 1990 in Tuscaloosa
- #1 Bama beat #18 Penn State 24-3 on September 11, 2010 in Happy Valley
- #3 Bama beat #23 Penn State 27-11 on September 10, 2011 in Tuscaloosa
-
The Dawg team was led by a QB named Fran Tarkenton.
He passed for 736 yards that season.
Air raid offense.
The allowed 30 points to South Carolina that year, and the next largest total was 14 to Georgia Tech.
-
The same analysis for Ohio State:
- Pittsburgh, 25 games, 19-5-1 (NOTE, last game was in 1996 and Pitt's last win was in 1952)
- USC, 24 games, 10-13-1 (NOTE, eight of the 24 meetings were Bowl games, seven Rose Bowls 55, 69, 73, 74, 75, 80, 85 and the recent Cotton Bowl) Another note, the Buckeyes were 8-5-1 in the first 14 meetings (through the 1969 #1 v #2 RoseBowl) then lost eight of nine including seven in a row before the recent Cotton Bowl win.
- Ohio Wesleyan, 15 games, 15-0 (NOTE, last game was in 1932)
- Chicago, 14 games, 10-2-2 (NOTE, former conference member, last game was in 1939 when they were still in the league)
- Mizzou, 12 games, 10-1-1
- Washington, 12 games, 9-3
- Oregon, 9 games, 9-0
- SMU, 9 games, 7-1-1 (NOTE, last game was in 1978)
- UCLA, 9 games, 4-4-1
- tie (WSU, Oberlin, Cal, Cincy, 8 games each, 8-0 against WSU and Cincy, 7-1 against Cal, 5-2-1 against Oberlin last in 1922
Pitt isn't an equal.
USC, Washington, Oregon, UCLA, WSU, and Cal are distant PAC teams where playing occasionally makes sense but not more than that.
Ohio Wesleyan, Chicago, SMU, and Oberlin are relics.
Mizzou isn't an equal and while it might make sense to play them occasionally anything more than that would not be beneficial to Ohio State.
Cincy isn't an equal and playing them frequently would not benefit Ohio State.
Ohio State is 15-2 against Cincinnati, not 8-0.
http://www.winsipedia.com/games/ohio-state/vs/cincinnati (http://www.winsipedia.com/games/ohio-state/vs/cincinnati)
-
Ohio State is 15-2 against Cincinnati, not 8-0.
http://www.winsipedia.com/games/ohio-state/vs/cincinnati (http://www.winsipedia.com/games/ohio-state/vs/cincinnati)
I used stassen (http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin/records/opp-opp.pl?start=1869&end=2019&team1=OhioState&team2=Cincinnati) which has a shortcoming in that their data only includes teams that they consider "major" at the time. Winsipedia is new to me but the games that they include that stassen excluded are:
- tOSU 45, Cincy 7 on 10/26/1912 in Columbus
- tOSU 11, Cincy 6 on 11/30/1911 in Columbus
- tOSU 23, Cincy 0 on 10/8/1910 in Columbus
- tOSU 29, Cincy 0 on 10/13/1900 in Cincy
- Cincy 24, tOSU 0 on 11/13/1897 in Cincy
- Cincy 8, tOSU 6 on 10/10/1896 in Cincy
- tOSU 4, Cincy 0 on 11/9/1895 in Cincy
- tOSU 6, Cincy 4 on 11/17/1894 in Cincy
- tOSU 32, Cincy 0 on 11/18/1893 in Columbus
I don't think this changes things in a meaningful way as the seven additional games were all at least 108 years ago. I think that in thinking about rivalries that anybody alive today cares about you could probably limit it to ~50 years or less.
-
Would you rather your team had some prominent OOC rivalry played each year, or had a schedule playing prominent OOC programs around the country?
I prefer the latter. Obviously, some schools plays an in state rival, and that can be interesting, but it quickly gets boring if one side gets WAY out in front of the other. Boring. Yay, Clemson massacred USCe again. And I know that could reverse somewhat down the road. We probably expect FSU to get back to some level of competitiveness with Florida some day. Louisville can certainly find a way to compete with UK at some point. (UK has an unheralded coach doing a rather remarkable job I think). UGA simply out recruits Tech by so much Tech barely has a shot.
When OSU plays say Texas or USC or OU or Alabama, it gets much more attention than if somehow they had played WVU every year for the past 50.
Penn State plays Pitt, and I can't say I much care. Yes, sometimes Pitt wins. That usually means PSU is not significant that year.
-
Would you rather your team had some prominent OOC rivalry played each year, or had a schedule playing prominent OOC programs around the country?
I prefer the former
building a rivalry with another program takes time, but it's worth it imo
with 3 or 4 non-con games, you can have that one rival and also schedule other prominent programs
doesn't have to be one of the other
but, it it's one of the other, I'd go with the rival over time
-
If your team plays 9 conference games, they usually only play one more P5 OOC game.
-
usually, but that could change
it won't but it could
if there's only one decent game, I'd rather play the same team more often and develop the relationship as a rival
-
I'd like to establish Ohio State as Wisconsin's OOC rival.
-
Ohio State is 15-2 against Cincinnati, not 8-0.
http://www.winsipedia.com/games/ohio-state/vs/cincinnati (http://www.winsipedia.com/games/ohio-state/vs/cincinnati)
Three of those games were conference games as well. 12-2 non-conference.