Some BCS facts for your SEC friends

[Zurp]

More SEC dominance:
(This time I am not being sarcastic.)

Going back and looking at the BCS Bowls since 1998 (the first year of the BCS), I got all the winners and losers of all of the games. A win in a BCS game counts as 3 points for that team, and a loss counts as 1 point. And if that game happens to be the national championship game, it counts as double.

Tied for first place are USC and Ohio State, with 23 points. Then Florida (22), LSU (18), Oklahoma (17), Miami (14), Texas (14), and Florida State (13), followed by 35 teams who have 8 points or fewer.

SEC teams have a total of 65 points, which is 19 points higher than the Big Ten, with 46. Big 12 has 42. (ACC is in 4th place with 37 points, but that includes Miami, Boston College, and Virginia Tech in the ACC, and some of those points should be counted in the Big East. Since I don't really care enough to separate them, I won't bother.)

Big Ten teams have played in 21 BCS games (maximum of 24, in 12 seasons). SEC teams have played in 19 BCS games. This gives the SEC an average of 3.421 points per BCS game, and the Big Ten 2.190 points per BCS game. This means that Florida's win over Cincinnati in the Sugar Bowl actually lowered the SEC's average score.

Of course, I don't think that a conference's overall quality should be judged solely by their BCS outcomes, but it's hard to ignore these results.

 

[starBUCKS]

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere ,did you realize that Ohio State became the first team in college football history to defeat five 10-win teams in the same season? (Navy, Wisconsin, Penn State, Iowa and Oregon.) Suck it $EC

 

[Gatorubet]

More SEC dominance:
(This time I am not being sarcastic.)

Going back and looking at the BCS Bowls since 1998 (the first year of the BCS), I got all the winners and losers of all of the games. A win in a BCS game counts as 3 points for that team, and a loss counts as 1 point. And if that game happens to be the national championship game, it counts as double.

Tied for first place are USC and Ohio State, with 23 points. Then Florida (22), LSU (18), Oklahoma (17), Miami (14), Texas (14), and Florida State (13), followed by 35 teams who have 8 points or fewer.

SEC teams have a total of 65 points, which is 19 points higher than the Big Ten, with 46. Big 12 has 42. (ACC is in 4th place with 37 points, but that includes Miami, Boston College, and Virginia Tech in the ACC, and some of those points should be counted in the Big East. Since I don't really care enough to separate them, I won't bother.)

Big Ten teams have played in 21 BCS games (maximum of 24, in 12 seasons). SEC teams have played in 19 BCS games. This gives the SEC an average of 3.421 points per BCS game, and the Big Ten 2.190 points per BCS game. This means that Florida's win over Cincinnati in the Sugar Bowl actually lowered the SEC's average score..

If you want to feel truly sick to your stomach, try doing it weighing a win and a loss equally instead of 3 to 1.

Of course, I don't think that a conference's overall quality should be judged solely by their BCS outcomes, but it's hard to ignore these results.

True. The only thing is speaks to is the top of the conference versus the top of the conference match ups.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Wait...wait...who the fuck has "SEC friends", and why?

 

[Gatorubet]

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere ,did you realize that Ohio State became the first team in college football history to defeat five 10-win teams in the same season? (Navy, Wisconsin, Penn State, Iowa and Oregon.) Suck it

Congratulations to tOSU on accomplishing the defeat of five 10-win teams in a single season. Very, very impressive feat. :osu:

 

[t_BuckeyeScott]

If you want to feel truly sick to your stomach,, try doing it weighing a win and a loss equally instead of 3 to 1.



True. The only thing is speaks to is the top of the conference versus the top of the conference match ups.

if wins and losses are weighted equally doesn't the big10 come out ahead???

 

[Gatorubet]

if wins and losses are weighted equally doesn't the big10 come out ahead???

You may be right. I thought he was subtracting one point for a loss. My bad.

Really, the easiest way is to look at BCS winning percentages by Conference:

.737 for SEC

.476 for Big-10.

No need to invent a point system. It is what it is.

 

[jwinslow]

No need to invent a point system. It is what it is.

True, but there's a difference between a #2 team playing Hawaii, Cinci, Utah, ND (both of us), Kansas St and playing an elite USC team, something the B10 #2 enjoyed routinely.

Much like the bizarre drought of rose bowl appearances during Tressel's B10 dominance, the SEC has also managed to miss the Trojans in bowl season. (the results were pretty ugly in OOC play) One of life's qwirks I guess

 

[BUCKYLE]

You may be right. I thought he was subtracting one point for a loss. My bad.

Really, the easiest way is to look at BCS winning percentages by Conference:

.737 for SEC

.476 for Big-10.

No need to invent a point system. It is what it is.

Two of the BCS games are in SEC territory. It is what it is.

 

[Gatorubet]

True, but there's a difference between a #2 team playing Hawaii, Cinci, Utah, ND (both of us), Kansas St and playing an elite USC team, something the B10 #2 enjoyed routinely.

Yeah - but unranked Stanford and UCLA found a way beat an elite USC team. One can choose to look at stats and accept them at face value - or ignore stats completely - or accept stats with asterisks and explanations - which is why it is so enjoyable to go back and forth about this stuff.

 

[Gatorubet]

Two of the BCS games are in SEC territory. It is what it is.

Shut your pie hole!

You have more beards. Two of the BCS games are in SEC territory. They both should offset the other's advantage.

 

[jwinslow]

Of course. I'd just like to see the SEC truly going up against powerhouses, something that has been in short supply in the SEC era of college football: 2007-2010.

I don't think it's tough to argue that Troy Polamalu's 03 team, Leinart/Bush/Tatupu's 04 team, or either of the 05 squads would have provided a tougher challenge than an arrogant and defenseless (see UM) OSU 06 team, a "well everyone else stunk even worse so I guess we'll play" OSU 07 squad, and a MVP-less Texas 09 team. Or that USC's Rose Bowl squads had more talent than the last 4 sugar bowl sec opponents combined (I'm talking about the regular bcs game, not the nc).

What makes the Pete Carroll conversation more interesting to me is that the last USC-SEC matchup occurred in September 06, which is also the tail end of the previous era of football. Carroll hung seventy on the SEC West champs, and was 3-0 in previous SEC matchups.

The B12 bias prevented a suitable challenger for LSU in 03, and USC's lack of consistency (arrogance or otherwise) kept them from getting another shot at the SEC in a title game.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Shut your pie hole!

You have more beards. Two of the BCS games are in SEC territory. They both should offset the other's advantage.

Sure, now we have more beards.

 

[Zurp]

No need to invent a point system. It is what it is.

I made that point system years ago (around 2005) to see how Ohio State compared to other teams. I wasn't intending to compare conferences.

But you're right - I think that the SEC has shown that their top teams have consistently been better than the top teams from other conferences.

 

[martinss01]

You may be right. I thought he was subtracting one point for a loss. My bad.

Really, the easiest way is to look at BCS winning percentages by Conference:

.737 for SEC

.476 for Big-10.

No need to invent a point system. It is what it is.

hardly a fair assessment of conference power. the big 10 regularly has 2 teams in the bcs, and not always because their teams had a season to warrant it.

we as fans often forget that the bcs outside of the nc game is setup 100% to generate revenue. if you wanna argue that tOSU deserved to go to the fiesta bowl to play texas last year more than anyone else. or that the fighting zookers were the most deserving to play in the rose in 07.... feel free. but don't be surprised when i laugh at you.

don't get me wrong, i understand the idea behind using bcs games, or even bowl games as a whole, as an indicator of conference power. unfortunately it just doesn't work.

lets look at last year. if tOSU is passed over for the fiesta, we may have seen something like this:

penn state vrs. usc
tOSU vrs. georgia
michigan state vrs. south carolina
iowa vrs. kansas
minessota vrs. missouri
northwestern vrs. florida state

only possible losses i see there outside of the lions is mighty minny and northwestern. state penn still gets crushed by usc. with the way tOSU played texas, i see us winning this one big. michigan state beats south carolina worse than iowa did. iowa beats kansas imo. minny vrs. missouri and northwestern vrs. florida state would have been very interesting matchups imo. sadly, thats not how the bowl system works. fan bases that travel well and spend lots of money talk, simply earning the spot... not so important.