Started By
Message
re: BCS Championships not withstanding, is there any other measure of dominance?
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:28 pm to Buckeye06
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:28 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
You look quite butthurt since I was clarifying something else.
It is a FACT that the B1G has more BCS bids and a FACT that they bring in the most money
It is also a FACT they aren't as good in football as the SEC
Butthurt over what exactly? You just tried to make an argument that the Big Ten's financial resources leads to more BCS bids. You have exactly one more bid. That's an asinine argument.
2
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:30 pm to Buckeye06
How was he incorrect?
quote:
The SEC usually has 2 BCS teams so the remaining bowls start with pick 3.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:30 pm to CapstoneGrad06
That robbed us of watching a top notch BSU against the Heisman winner.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:31 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
You look quite butthurt since I was clarifying something else.
It is a FACT that the B1G has more BCS bids and a FACT that they bring in the most money
It is also a FACT they aren't as good in football as the SEC
Butthurt over what exactly? You just tried to make an argument that the Big Ten's financial resources leads to more BCS bids. You have exactly one more bid. That's an asinine argument.
The B1G isn't as good at football as the SEC, yet they have more BCS bowl game appearances....that means $$. That is the reason Michigan got the bid over Boise and the reason why an undeserving OSU team got the bid in the 2008 Fiesta.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:31 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
The fact is the poster was not incorrect. The non-BCS bowls for the SEC often pull the #3 team and lower. The Buckeye was trying to get from point A to point B in his argument, going through point Z.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:32 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
The B1G isn't as good at football as the SEC, yet they have more BCS bowl game appearances....that means $$. That is the reason Michigan got the bid over Boise and the reason why an undeserving OSU team got the bid in the 2008 Fiesta.
Or, it's media bias and voting B1G teams higher than they should.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:32 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
So Cap 1 usually gets #3 SEC team versus Big 10 #2.
It glides down from there.
#4 SEC plays #2 B12 in Cotton
#5 SEC plays #3 B10 in OB
#6 SEC plays #2 ACC in CFB
and so on and so forth.
He was wrong saying the SEC usually plays lower teams, since the B1G usually has the problem too.
Why is this so difficult?
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:33 pm to Buckeye06
Why couldn't you have just said the Big10 fans travel well and is why they get so many bids even when others are more deserving. You weren't being very clear at all.
Big10 in a bowl=Big dollars for businesses and sold out tickets for the bowl.
Big10 in a bowl=Big dollars for businesses and sold out tickets for the bowl.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:34 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
Why is this so difficult?
Because you are terrible at framing the issue you are referring to.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:35 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
The B1G isn't as good at football as the SEC, yet they have more BCS bowl game appearances....that means $$. That is the reason Michigan got the bid over Boise and the reason why an undeserving OSU team got the bid in the 2008 Fiesta.
I'm not even sure what the Hell you're trying to argue now. You've went from an argument about seeding from each conference in non-BCS SEC/Big Ten matchups, to money being the reason you have one more BCS bid than the SEC over a 15 year period, to Michigan getting a bid over Boise State and Baylor for those reasons.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:37 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
He was wrong saying the SEC usually plays lower teams, since the B1G usually has the problem too.
Why is this so difficult?
My point is the bowl matchups are not always 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc.
The B10 and Big 12 play good football.
I just think the SEC usually has 5 really good teams compared to 2 or 3 for the other leagues.
Last year Bama, A&M, LSU, UGA,USC and Fla were all top 10 teams.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:47 pm to scrooster
quote:
we were supposed to have the vastly superior team
quote:
UCF 10, UGA 6 in 2010
I don't think a 6-6 team playing in the liberty bowl would be vastly superior to anybody.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 2:50 pm to scrooster
Let's put it this way...
If the SEC did not send a single team to a BCS game ever again...
The Big 12 would have to win 15 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC's win percentage.
The Big 10 would have to win 18 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC.
The ACC would have to win 25 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC.
The PAC-12 is the only conference even close to the SEC and even they would need to win 4 straight BCS bowls to pass the SEC's record. Keep in mind the PAC-12 has been exclusively a 3-team league (USC, Oregon, and Stanford) for a decade now while the SEC has sent half of its teams to BCS bowls (6 of 12, not counting last year's expansion).
It ain't close, pals.
If the SEC did not send a single team to a BCS game ever again...
The Big 12 would have to win 15 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC's win percentage.
The Big 10 would have to win 18 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC.
The ACC would have to win 25 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC.
The PAC-12 is the only conference even close to the SEC and even they would need to win 4 straight BCS bowls to pass the SEC's record. Keep in mind the PAC-12 has been exclusively a 3-team league (USC, Oregon, and Stanford) for a decade now while the SEC has sent half of its teams to BCS bowls (6 of 12, not counting last year's expansion).
It ain't close, pals.
This post was edited on 5/19/13 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 5/19/13 at 3:25 pm to MrSEC
quote:
Let's put it this way...
If the SEC did not send a single team to a BCS game ever again...
The Big 12 would have to win 15 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC's win percentage.
The Big 10 would have to win 18 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC.
The ACC would have to win 25 straight BCS bowls to surpass the SEC.
The PAC-12 is the only conference even close to the SEC and even they would need to win 4 straight BCS bowls to pass the SEC's record. Keep in mind the PAC-12 has been exclusively a 3-team league (USC, Oregon, and Stanford) for a decade now while the SEC has sent half of its teams to BCS bowls (6 of 12, not counting last year's expansion).
It ain't close, pals.
That's actually pretty incredible, but it only works if the SEC never played in another BCS game. If the SEC did play in another BCS game, and lost some of them, then of course it would not be quite as bleak for the other conferences.
Also, of course, that's not likely to happen. And at best it could be decades, if not centuries, before any other conference catches the SEC in terms of winning percentage.
Posted on 5/19/13 at 5:35 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
1992-Present
If you take out Texas A&M and Mizzou, we are winning against the Big12 for those who care
Posted on 5/19/13 at 7:35 pm to GenesChin
quote:
If you take out Texas A&M and Mizzou, we are winning against the Big12 for those who care
Damn, you're right. We have to stop including aTm and Mizzou in everything and start limiting it to 2012 forward when it comes to those two.
Good catch.
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News