SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by stephen » Tue, 25 May 2010 23:09:38


Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
has performed better in the BCS era:

As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
the SEC.

The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
than the SEC 3 times.

Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
had a better bowl win %.

So adding it all up, we know that:

1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
overall performance of all conference teams.

Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
been far better.

Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

--
"no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

- Edith Wharton

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by Pauli » Tue, 25 May 2010 23:28:17


Quote:
> Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> has performed better in the BCS era:

> As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> the SEC.

> The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> than the SEC 3 times.

> Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
> had a better bowl win %.

> So adding it all up, we know that:

> 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
> 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
> 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
> overall performance of all conference teams.

> Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
> bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
> entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
> been far better.

> Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
> much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

> --
> "no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
> that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

> - Edith Wharton

this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by tom_sawye.. » Tue, 25 May 2010 23:31:21


Quote:
> this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.- Hide quoted text -

Not to mention the layoff difference between the end of the seasons
and bowl games, where the Big Ten has traditionally had much longer
periods between games.

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by Pauli » Tue, 25 May 2010 23:32:30



Quote:

> > this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> > that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> > end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.- Hide quoted text -

> Not to mention the layoff difference between the end of the seasons
> and bowl games, where the Big Ten has traditionally had much longer
> periods between games.

yes, the Big10 is a bit rusty due to long layoffs, which is another
unfair advantage of the sec that is not considered in the statistics.
 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by J. Hugh Sulliv » Tue, 25 May 2010 23:41:13

Quote:

>Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
>has performed better in the BCS era:

>As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
>the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

>2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
>2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
>2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
>2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
>2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
>2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
>2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
>2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
>2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
>2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
>1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
>1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

>Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

>We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
>a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
>the SEC.

>The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
>than the SEC 3 times.

>Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
>had a better bowl win %.

>So adding it all up, we know that:

>1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
>2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
>3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
>overall performance of all conference teams.

>Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
>bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
>entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
>been far better.

>Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
>much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

Well, Michigan does lead Bama 2-1 in the all-time series.

Hugh

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by the_andrew_sm.. » Wed, 26 May 2010 00:23:30


Quote:

> > Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> > has performed better in the BCS era:

> > As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> > the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> > 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> > 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> > 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> > 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> > 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> > 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> > 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> > 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> > 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> > 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> > 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> > 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> > Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> > We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> > a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> > the SEC.

> > The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> > than the SEC 3 times.

> > Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
> > had a better bowl win %.

> > So adding it all up, we know that:

> > 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
> > 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
> > 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
> > overall performance of all conference teams.

> > Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
> > bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
> > entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
> > been far better.

> > Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
> > much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

> > --
> > "no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
> > that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

> > - Edith Wharton

> this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.

With every post, this red herring becomes a little more pink.

Whether in-conference or out-of-conference, all teams play everyone
their entire schedule, not some selective little part that might be
different.

For example: BIG TEN SHOULD BE BETTER RESTED EACH YEAR BECAUSE THEY
ALL GET TO PLAY INDIANA - WHO SUCKS.

a.

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by Pauli » Wed, 26 May 2010 00:43:48


Quote:



> > > Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> > > has performed better in the BCS era:

> > > As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> > > the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> > > 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> > > 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> > > 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> > > 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> > > 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> > > 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> > > 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> > > 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> > > 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> > > 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> > > 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> > > 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> > > Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> > > We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> > > a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> > > the SEC.

> > > The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> > > than the SEC 3 times.

> > > Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
> > > had a better bowl win %.

> > > So adding it all up, we know that:

> > > 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
> > > 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
> > > 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
> > > overall performance of all conference teams.

> > > Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
> > > bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
> > > entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
> > > been far better.

> > > Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
> > > much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

> > > --
> > > "no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
> > > that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

> > > - Edith Wharton

> > this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> > that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> > end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.

> With every post, this red herring becomes a little more pink.

> Whether in-conference or out-of-conference, all teams play everyone
> their entire schedule, not some selective little part that might be
> different.

> For example: BIG TEN SHOULD BE BETTER RESTED EACH YEAR BECAUSE THEY
> ALL GET TO PLAY INDIANA - WHO SUCKS.

> a.- Hide quoted text -

> - Show quoted text -

Vandy, Tennesee, Miss State, etc AND a weak OOC = well-rested.
 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by Tonawanda Karde » Wed, 26 May 2010 00:47:40


Quote:
> Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> has performed better in the BCS era:

> As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> the SEC.

> The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> than the SEC 3 times.

> Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
> had a better bowl win %.

> So adding it all up, we know that:

> 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
> 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
> 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
> overall performance of all conference teams.

> Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
> bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
> entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
> been far better.

> Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
> much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

Yep, you're a cherry-picker.
 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by stephen » Wed, 26 May 2010 01:22:45

Quote:


>> Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
>> has performed better in the BCS era:

>> As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
>> the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

>> 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
>> 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
>> 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
>> 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
>> 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
>> 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
>> 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
>> 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
>> 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
>> 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
>> 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
>> 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

>> Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

>> We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
>> a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
>> the SEC.

>> The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
>> than the SEC 3 times.

>> Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
>> had a better bowl win %.

>> So adding it all up, we know that:

>> 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
>> 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
>> 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
>> overall performance of all conference teams.

>> Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
>> bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
>> entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
>> been far better.

>> Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
>> much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

>> --
>> "no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
>> that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

>> - Edith Wharton

> this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.

SEC teams often have high overall SOS ratings (e.g., last year ALA, LSU,
and UF were all in the top 15 in overall SOS while Penn State, Iowa, and
tOSU were all outside the top 40) so i'm not sure that's a real problem,
at least for the SEC?

--
Even if U.S. atom bombs were dropped on China and blasted
a hole in the earth or blew it to pieces, this might be
a big thing for the solar system, but it would still be
an insignificant matter as far as the universe as a whole
is concerned.

- Mao Tse Tung, 1958

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by stephen » Wed, 26 May 2010 01:24:45

Quote:




>>> this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
>>> that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
>>> end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.- Hide quoted text -
>> Not to mention the layoff difference between the end of the seasons
>> and bowl games, where the Big Ten has traditionally had much longer
>> periods between games.

> yes, the Big10 is a bit rusty due to long layoffs, which is another
> unfair advantage of the sec that is not considered in the statistics.

Didn't you just say the SEC has an edge because its teams are 'healthier
and better rested'?

But what leads to being healthier and better rested more than a long
layoff? LOL.

--
for the total eradication of the imperialists, the Chinese
people are willing to endure the first U.S. nuclear
strike. All it is is a big pile of people dying.

- Mao Tse-Tung, 1958

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by deemsb.. » Wed, 26 May 2010 01:57:05


Quote:

> > Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> > has performed better in the BCS era:

> > As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> > the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> > 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> > 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> > 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> > 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> > 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> > 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> > 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> > 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> > 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> > 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> > 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> > 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> > Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> > We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> > a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> > the SEC.

> > The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> > than the SEC 3 times.

> > Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
> > had a better bowl win %.

> > So adding it all up, we know that:

> > 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
> > 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
> > 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
> > overall performance of all conference teams.

> > Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
> > bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
> > entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
> > been far better.

> > Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
> > much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

> > --
> > "no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
> > that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

> > - Edith Wharton

> this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.-

    Jeez...bait answered with bait! Good 'job!
 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by Kyle T. Jone » Wed, 26 May 2010 01:59:13

Quote:

> Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> has performed better in the BCS era:

> As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> the SEC.

> The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> than the SEC 3 times.

Dumbass.  That's because the Big Ten plays most of their other bowls
against real conferences like the Pac10 and Big 12 - while the SEC
feasts on the ACC and Big East.

So, let's actually look at how the two conferences have matched up HTH
during the BCS era.  Since everyone things the Big Ten has been down,
and the SEC has been rockin' - and since 95% of those games are played
*in* the Southeast - one can reasonably expect the SEC to have rocked
out the Big Ten over the last 12 years.

Let's see, I have those stats somewhere - 32 games played, 16-16
overall.  Wow.  Looks like the two conferences are pretty even steven.

(It goes without saying that all it took was pointing out the above stat
to spark a 170+ post thread, and various responses from the ever
insecure Jaros - dewd, what's the deal with y'all southeastern types -
they breed y'all with small peckers or something?)

Cheers!

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by the_andrew_sm.. » Wed, 26 May 2010 02:32:08


Quote:




> > > > Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> > > > has performed better in the BCS era:

> > > > As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> > > > the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> > > > 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> > > > 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> > > > 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> > > > 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> > > > 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> > > > 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> > > > 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> > > > 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> > > > 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> > > > 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> > > > 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> > > > 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> > > > Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> > > > We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> > > > a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> > > > the SEC.

> > > > The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> > > > than the SEC 3 times.

> > > > Eight times the SEC has had a better bowl win %, three times the B10 has
> > > > had a better bowl win %.

> > > > So adding it all up, we know that:

> > > > 1) The SEC has been far better than the B10 in BCS bowls
> > > > 2) Has been far better than the Big 10 in all bowls
> > > > 3) Sagarin says that the SEC has been far better than the B10 in the
> > > > overall performance of all conference teams.

> > > > Seems like whether we're talking about the cream of each conference (BCS
> > > > bowl record), the cream-to-middle (overall bowl record), and the
> > > > entirety of each conference (overall Sagarin rankings), the SEC has just
> > > > been far better.

> > > > Of course everyone outside of B10 homers on RSFC knows this. Sad that so
> > > > much ink had to be spilled proving the obvious ...

> > > > --
> > > > "no insect hangs it nest on threads as frail as those
> > > > that will sustain the weight of human vanity".

> > > > - Edith Wharton

> > > this is interesting, but it leaves out several considerations, mainly
> > > that due to a weak OOC the sec is better rested and healthier at the
> > > end of a season, which translates into better records in the bowls.

> > With every post, this red herring becomes a little more pink.

> > Whether in-conference or out-of-conference, all teams play everyone
> > their entire schedule, not some selective little part that might be
> > different.

> > For example: BIG TEN SHOULD BE BETTER RESTED EACH YEAR BECAUSE THEY
> > ALL GET TO PLAY INDIANA - WHO SUCKS.

> > a.- Hide quoted text -

> > - Show quoted text -

> Vandy, Tennesee, Miss State, etc AND a weak OOC = well-rested.

Michigan State (6-7), Purdue (5-7), Minnesota (6-7), Illinois (3-9),
Michigan (5-7), Indiana (4-8), AND a weak OOC =

VERY well-rested.

a.

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by the_andrew_sm.. » Wed, 26 May 2010 02:48:46


Quote:

> > Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
> > has performed better in the BCS era:

> > As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
> > the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.

> > 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
> > 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
> > 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
> > 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
> > 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
> > 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
> > 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
> > 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
> > 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
> > 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
> > 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
> > 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4

> > Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39

> > We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
> > a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
> > the SEC.

> > The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
> > than the SEC 3 times.

> Dumbass. ?That's because the Big Ten plays most of their other bowls
> against real conferences like the Pac10 and Big 12 - while the SEC
> feasts on the ACC and Big East.

> So, let's actually look at how the two conferences have matched up HTH
> during the BCS era. ?Since everyone things the Big Ten has been down,
> and the SEC has been rockin' - and since 95% of those games are played
> *in* the Southeast - one can reasonably expect the SEC to have rocked
> out the Big Ten over the last 12 years.

SO GET SOME MORE BOWL GAMES IN DETROIT!

a.

 
 
 

SEC and B10, all bowl games, BCS era

Post by stephen » Wed, 26 May 2010 04:53:29

Quote:



>>> Much more relevant than h2h bowl games in determining which conference
>>> has performed better in the BCS era:
>>> As for bowl records, this past year, a very good one for the B10 btw,
>>> the B10 was 4-3, the SEC was 6-4.
>>> 2009: B10 4-3, SEC 6-4
>>> 2008: B10 1-6, SEC 6-2
>>> 2007: B10 3-5, SEC 7-2
>>> 2006: B10 2-5, SEC 6-3
>>> 2005: B10 3-4, SEC 3-3
>>> 2004: B10 3-3, SEC 3-3
>>> 2003: B10 3-5, SEC 5-2
>>> 2002: B10 5-2, SEC 3-4
>>> 2001: B10 2-4, SEC 5-3
>>> 2000: B10 2-4, SEC 4-5
>>> 1999: B10 5-2, SEC 4-4
>>> 1998: B10 5-0, SEC 4-4
>>> Overall bowl records: B10 38-43, SEC 56-39
>>> We have to go back to 2002 before we find the last time that the B10 had
>>> a better bowl record, %-wise, than the SEC or won more bowl games than
>>> the SEC.
>>> The SEC has won more bowl games than the B10 seven times, the B10 more
>>> than the SEC 3 times.
>> Dumbass.  That's because the Big Ten plays

38-43 compared to 56-39.
-5 compared to +17.

That's embarrassing. It's awful really. Terrible for the B10.

--
Even if U.S. atom bombs were dropped on China and blasted
a hole in the earth or blew it to pieces, this might be
a big thing for the solar system, but it would still be
an insignificant matter as far as the universe as a whole
is concerned.

- Mao Tse Tung, 1958