Some BCS facts for your SEC friends

[Ryan36_1]

i think that truth is that there are more mid tier SEC teams on the rise, and more mid tier big 10 teams in decline.

the difference between LSU/Alabama/OSU/etc isn't that much.

arkansas, miss state, and USCe were improved this year. that accounts for the recent decline of georgia/tennesee with +1 to boot. and tennessee has the money and recruits, it won't take them long to get back to persistent top 15 play, just need a couple of years with the new coach to get moving in the right direction.

on the other hand michigan and PSU are in decline and only wisconsin is on the rise from also-ran to contender. MSU and Iowa when they break into that top 10 always seem to get blown out either in their bowl or by their first legit top 15 opponent and knocked back down to reality.

i don't think that'll change with nebraska coming in either. if nebraska is successful they will simply leech players from iowa and knock iowa's inflated value back down to where it should have been. if nebraska gets enough of pelini and fires him after a dozen more media breakdowns, nebraska will fall back into mediocrity, and the big 10(2) will still remain a two team conference.

I'm not following how you are praising Ark, MSU and USCe in one sentence, but casting off Iowa as an also-ran in the next. Are you using any specific criteria for this characterization, or is just based on 'SEC speed'?

 

[BB73]

i think that truth is that there are more mid tier SEC teams on the rise, and more mid tier big 10 teams in decline.

the difference between LSU/Alabama/OSU/etc isn't that much.

arkansas, miss state, and USCe were improved this year. that accounts for the recent decline of georgia/tennesee with +1 to boot. and tennessee has the money and recruits, it won't take them long to get back to persistent top 15 play, just need a couple of years with the new coach to get moving in the right direction.

on the other hand michigan and PSU are in decline and only wisconsin is on the rise from also-ran to contender. MSU and Iowa when they break into that top 10 always seem to get blown out either in their bowl or by their first legit top 15 opponent and knocked back down to reality.

...

Just use BCS bowls as a measuring stick. Iowa hasn't won one in a little over 12 months (it's been a whole year and almost another day!).

As for the BCS bowl records of MSU, Ark, and USCe, the sum total was achieved on Tuesday night, 0-1.

OK, Iowa's BCS win was against GTech, so to be fair, let's look at Iowa in all bowl games against SEC teams during the BCS era.

Iowa has bowl wins over Florida, LSU, and South Carolina in the last 7 years, along with 1 loss to Florida. That's 3-1.

You mention Iowa playing top-15 opponents. They haven't defeated one of those since 2010, but it was a December bowl game, and not part of 0-5 on New Year's Day, so to ESPN it doesn't even exist.

Obviously Iowa will be mediocre forever, or at least they'll "get blown out either in their bowl or by their first legit top 15 opponent and knocked back down to reality".

 

[rnclittlerock]

I'm not following how you are praising Ark, MSU and USCe in one sentence, but casting off Iowa as an also-ran in the next. Are you using any specific criteria for this characterization, or is just based on 'SEC speed'?

iowa's first ranked competition this year gave them a loss. they wind up losing three straight including northwestern and minnesota.

they lost to northwestern at home last year, and struggled to beat arkansas...state (which is our equivalent of miami....ohio).

in the year before that they lost to northwestern, MSU, pitt, and illinois.

all of the above begs the question, why was this team EVER near the top 10?

sorry if i don't put much emphasis on the bowls. seasons are decided in conference play, the bowls are a consolation for all but the national title game (and those who put traditional bowl matchups on a silly pedestal, as second tier big 10 teams do with the rose and as our bad previous AD/coaches used to do with the cotton).

our previous (bad) coach had a habit of getting upset by vanderbilt, and thus we got zero respect from pollsters or other teams in conference if we had lost to them even in the previous year. i don't know why big 10 voters pass over such obvious shortcomings.

 

[Nicknam4]

iowa's first ranked competition this year gave them a loss. they wind up losing three straight including northwestern and minnesota.

they lost to northwestern at home last year, and struggled to beat arkansas...state (which is our equivalent of miami....ohio).

in the year before that they lost to northwestern, MSU, pitt, and illinois.

all of the above begs the question, why was this team EVER near the top 10?

sorry if i don't put much emphasis on the bowls. seasons are decided in conference play, the bowls are a consolation for all but the national title game (and those who put traditional bowl matchups on a silly pedestal, as second tier big 10 teams do with the rose and as our bad previous AD/coaches used to do with the cotton).

our previous (bad) coach had a habit of getting upset by vanderbilt, and thus we got zero respect from pollsters or other teams in conference if we had lost to them even in the previous year. i don't know why big 10 voters pass over such obvious shortcomings.

You still forgot to mention anything about Iowa's Bowl win or anything BB73 said to you, for that matter. I guess if you are blatantly proved wrong you just ignore it. Not a bad strategy on a scUM board maybe.

 

[muffler dragon]

all of the above begs the question, why was this team EVER near the top 10?

A number of reasons:

1) They won their bowl game last winter.
2) Adrian Clayborne.
3) Not much attrition on either side of the bowl.
4) Their schedule was very amenable to them having a successful.

 

[buck1973]

LSU is different from PSU in that one is over achieving when they win that game and the other is under achieving. LSU has the players, a ton of NFL talent comes out of LA high schools, they just have a love affair with incompetent coaches. PSU is not in a high school talent hotbed like LSU is.

I'm sorry, but this is not correct. As much as I don't like them, PSU is a sleeping giant.

Here is an article from September listing the number of NFL players from each state:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Friday-night-stars-California-and-Texas-produce?urn=nfl-272416

6. Louisiana: 68
7. Pennsylvania: 56

Not much of a difference. However, if you add in New Jersey which is traditional recruiting territory for PSU, it swings toward PSU.

8. New Jersey: 55

 

[Nutriaitch]

Maybe longer if you look at regular season games in 2001.

Indiana beat Kentucky ni the '01 regular season

6. Louisiana: 68
7. Pennsylvania: 56

i know total numbers is all that matters in recruiting, but i think it's impressive that Louisiana has more NFL players than Pennsylvania when you look at the Population #'s.

Pennsylvania - 12 mil
Louisiana - 4 mil

 

[MightbeaBuck]

Iowa...all of the above begs the question, why was this team EVER near the top 10?
...i don't know why big 10 voters pass over such obvious shortcomings.

Er, maybe, as was said previously, just in the last seven years, they beat vaunted Steve Spurrier's SEC team SC, and Florida (a National Champion SEC team), and LSU (a National Champion SEC team).

maybe, as was said previously, Iowa has won a bowl game in each of the last three seasons. It is the current longest winning streak. Alabama is the only SEC school with two, everyone else is even worse. You say Iowa gets "blown out in their bowl". hmmm. Ever watch any college football?

 

[Gatorubet]

[quote='BusNative;185117;9]On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.[/quote]
The first rule about survival rates? You do not talk about survival rates.

 

[cjmik_75]

iowa's first ranked competition this year gave them a loss. they wind up losing three straight including northwestern and minnesota.

they lost to northwestern at home last year, and struggled to beat arkansas...state (which is our equivalent of miami....ohio).

in the year before that they lost to northwestern, MSU, pitt, and illinois.

all of the above begs the question, why was this team EVER near the top 10?

sorry if i don't put much emphasis on the bowls. seasons are decided in conference play, the bowls are a consolation for all but the national title game (and those who put traditional bowl matchups on a silly pedestal, as second tier big 10 teams do with the rose and as our bad previous AD/coaches used to do with the cotton).

our previous (bad) coach had a habit of getting upset by vanderbilt, and thus we got zero respect from pollsters or other teams in conference if we had lost to them even in the previous year. i don't know why big 10 voters pass over such obvious shortcomings.

Last season the same Northwestern was a 2-point conversion away from beating Auburn (-scam newton) in a bowl game too. Funny how you dismiss Iowa's 3-1 record vs sec the last 7 years.

By the way what's Arkansas' record vs Big Ten in bowl games? Because sEcSPN never puts that list up for the world to see...

 

[Zurp]

By the way what's Arkansas' record vs Big Ten in bowl games? Because sEcSPN never puts that list up for the world to see...

I'm guessing you're asking because you know the answer. But for those who don't know:

Since BCS started
1998-1999 Capital One (Citrus) - Lost 45-31 to Michigan
2002-2003 Music City - Lost 29-14 to Minnesota
2006-2007 Capital One - Lost 17-14 to Wisconsin
2010-2011 Sugar - Lost 31-26 to Ohio State

I bet if I look up the Arkansas website they'll have overall bowl games (for before 1998)...

Edit: According to http://www.hogville.net/football/bowl.php they didn't play a Big Ten team in a bowl game before 1998.

 

[Muck]

i know total numbers is all that matters in recruiting, but i think it's impressive that Louisiana has more NFL players than Pennsylvania when you look at the Population #'s.

Pennsylvania - 12 mil
Louisiana - 4 mil

Per capita Louisiana (and Mississippi for that matter) are near the top in putting players in the NFL and it is definitely impressive BUT for this specific comparison it isn't really that relevant.

Penn State is situated where it has access to those 12 Mil+ Keystoners as well as the 8 Mil or so Jerseyites. It's also to the rest of the mid Atlantic (Maryland, Virginia etc) and has traditionally dominated recruiting in those states as well.

As much as Ohio State is THE football destination for kids in Ohio, Penn State has been THE football destination for kids all along the Atlantic seaboard.

 

[GeorgiaBuck2]

Tell that to Conner Crowell.

 

[BrutusBobcat]

The Big Ten has the programs but not the coaches at the moment.

This is one of the better comments in this thread. In a discussion two days ago, I was recounting the B10 coaching legends that John Cooper had to face - Schembechler, Hayden Fry, Alvarez, Paterno in his prime, and for the "lesser" programs, some of their more successful coaches like Joe Tiller and Gary Barnett, Glen Mason and even Nick Saban's brief tenure at MSU.

By contrast, has there been a single year during Tressel's run that we could look across at the opposite sideline in envy? It's not even been close. There's no doubt that the coaching talent in the conference has been lacking in the past decade when compared to the 1990's.

 

[GeorgiaBuck2]

Biellema and Fitzgerald are two fine coaches in my opinion. Their teams play hard and don't give up. Northwestern was out matched in their bowl game but they fought till the end and almost made the comeback.