Mock BCS talk between Fla, Bama, Tex, Iowa
by Go Bevo on Nov 6, 2009 11:23 AM CST
23 comments
A friend (and graduate of Iowa) sent me this link....
http://isportsweb.com/2009/10/28/behind-the-hallowed-walls-of-the-bcs/
While this is a satirical view from a Hawkeye's point of view, it does have some truth in pointing out yet another flaw of the BCS.
I also want to point out something about Bama's schedule and Iowa's schedule.... (as of Friday 11/6)
The overall record of Bama's opponents is 33 and 33. The overall record of Iowa's opponents is 44 and 31.
Bama has had 6 home games and 2 road games (Kentucky & Ole Miss). Iowa has had 6 home games and 3 road games (Penn St, Wisconsin, Mich St).
I'm not trying to start a debate and I'm sure there are a ton of statistics that would point to a favorable view for any team to make the championship game. I'm just saying the media and so-called "experts" assume Bama and/or Florida is/are the better team(s) just because it's the SEC. And that Iowa is "weaker" because they win ugly and the past failures of the Big 10.
I think we should stop making assumptions and I wish some changes would be made to the overall system. Would Iowa be ranked higher than Bama if they were ranked higher to start the season?? Would Iowa be ranked higher if the Coaches hadn't dropped them out of the rankings after they beat Arizona??
Just sayin'.........
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
0 recs |
23 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
Statistics, How I Love Thee
Sucks a lot for Iowa (and Cincinatti), but they need all of the following to happen:
1) Schedule more marquee games against legit nonconference opponents
2) Have their conference suck less on a consistent, year over year basis, especially in BCS games.
3) Quit scheduled FCS.
4) Quit winning against lame opponents by razor thin margins.
5) Get their conference to play a championship game.
Or, alternately, lobby the government to force the BCS to implement a more inclusive system.
Congrats to Iowa for being 9-0, if they get to 12-0, then more congrats…. But they have no legitimate argument to being in the top two between an undefeated SEC Champion, Texas, and Iowa…. Even a one loss SEC champ at 12-1 might beat them out.
by Tackchevy on Nov 6, 2009 12:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Especially number four for Iowa.
4) Quit winning against lame opponents by razor thin margins.
They’ve trailed in every game except for their (very, very close) win over Arkansas State.
by ajax77777 on Nov 6, 2009 3:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Who did we schedule this year OOC?
And why should Iowa be paying the price for tOSU and their inability to win the big one? We could pay the same for OU’s inability to win the big one…but we do not as OU is loved by the media, along with the SEC and USC.
We did not light it up against CO…the final score was misleading.
No conferences should play CG’s…pointless.
Outside of UT, the Big XII is not ripping it up in bowl games…just sayin.
All of this said, we both love the horns…we are in desperation of an 8 team playoff…it is becoming more evident annually.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
by Mulliganville on Nov 6, 2009 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What's wrong with CGs?
In the Big 10 you could end up with 2 undefeated teams. FROM THE SAME CONFERENCE! That’s not a legitimate conference system.
If every conference played a round robin system like the Pac-10 then I would agree. But if it’s possible for 2 undefeated teams to come out of the same conference, I think there needs to be a championship game.
Tack specifically mentioned the BCS where the Big 10 (8-11) isn’t that much worse than the Big 12 (7-9) so you’ve got a point there. However I think Iowa is more paying the price for not being very good the last couple years and their conference being down than tOSU’s BCS performances. Iowa didn’t even go bowling in 07 and only ended last year at #20.
How was the final score against CU misleading? Did CU almost score in the second half? No. Did UT have to kick off more often because of non-offensive touchdowns? Yes. It’s not like it was goal line stands or a last second incompletion that made the score what it was. It was good defense and great special teams. It’s certainly nothing that could be called a razor thin margin.
by ajax77777 on Nov 6, 2009 3:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Would you say that Indiana's game against Iowa was closer
than the final score indicated? That is just how I feel about the CO game. I see you point about CG’s…but I do not like them as idle teams sit, and are either rewarded or penalized by what only 50% of the BCS conferences have to endure…it is a cheap money ploy by the conferences. Nothing more.
8 Teamer…needed badly.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
by Mulliganville on Nov 6, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Conference Championship games
NCAA won’t allow a Conf. CG unless a conference has at least 12 teams.
Big 10 is kind of stuck because 11 teams is probably too many to do the round robin like the Pac-10 and they don’t have the requisite number for a Conf. CG. Good reasons to either drop or add a team.
by Horncasting on Nov 6, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Iowa has a problem tell them to blame their own conference
The Big 10 is one of the leagues against adding the “Plus 1” playoff model to the BCS. The ACC and the SEC are in favor of it. So, if they have a problem with the system, time for Kirk Ferentz to shed some light on the Big 10’s ridiculous anti-playoff stance.
by the1austin on Nov 6, 2009 1:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You gave the main reason
Bama and/or Florida is/are the better team(s) just because it’s the SEC. And that Iowa is “weaker” because they win ugly and the past failures of the Big 10.
In the spirit of resumes, Iowa has beaten weaker opponents, with less dominance, in a pretty crappy conference this year. While the rankings never reflected this, there were a couple of weeks when Bama was considered by some as #1, but many gawk at that now after that Tenn game. Iowa has done nothing (resume-wise) to constitute anything higher than #4.
by Infield Elephant on Nov 6, 2009 2:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Current resumes
In the spirit of resumes, Iowa has beaten weaker opponents, with less dominance, in a pretty crappy conference this year.
Iowa has done nothing (resume-wise) to constitute anything higher than #4.
Actually Iowa has beaten 3 teams that are currently ranked (#11 Penn State, #18 Arizona and #21 Wisconsin). Texas has beaten 2 (#19 Oklahoma State and #24 Oklahoma), Florida has beaten 1 (#7 LSU) and Bama has beaten 1 (#23 VT).
In reality about the only things on the UT/UF/Bama resumes above Iowa are how they performed last year and the resulting preconceived notions about how good they’d be this year.
by Horncasting on Nov 6, 2009 2:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's fair
In terms of rankings, you are absolutely right.
I do not agree with this:
How about how they have performed this year? Not that any team has shown complete dominance, but Iowa has certainly not outperformed any of the top three as of now.
If they manage a W in Columbus (even if it’s another ugly win), I will shut my face about Iowa.
by Infield Elephant on Nov 6, 2009 2:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
not sure what happened with the quotes there:
In reality about the only things on the UT/UF/Bama resumes above Iowa are how they performed last year and the resulting preconceived notions about how good they’d be this year.
by Infield Elephant on Nov 6, 2009 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
+1...total beneficiaries of year's past...i will take it...but it is wrong.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
by Mulliganville on Nov 6, 2009 3:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree with this
Not that any team has shown complete dominance, but Iowa has certainly not outperformed any of the top three as of now.
But as of right now, based solely on wins against good teams, I think it is unfair to keep Iowa out of the discussion with the other top 3. Not saying they should be higher than #4, but just don’t think they should get dismissed as quickly as they do.
Let’s face it, a big part of this is a beauty contest and right now there are 3 blonde coeds with big tits and 1 chick from, well, Iowa.
The one thing you really have to say about them is that while they currently have more good wins (ie against current ranked teams), they also have just as many more bad wins. I didn’t realize just how bad some of their wins were until I just looked it up:
-1 point win over Northern Iowa
-3 point win over Arkansas State
-2 point win over Michigan State
by Horncasting on Nov 6, 2009 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You’re right, they should not be dismissed, and until they lose, should be given ample consideration.
And if you watched those “bad” wins along with some others they escaped with (Michigan, Indiana), there’s not a lot of impressive play to be seen. This is where there is a small place for some subjectivity in polling. Many voters just saw the scores and said, “wow, they keep on winning”. But again, that’s not to say they shouldn’t be #4 while they are in fact undefeated and hey, we barely escaped that OU game and I’m damn happy with that.
by Infield Elephant on Nov 6, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow!
I had not realized that point of view about what ranked teams the top 4 teams have beaten. IF, and I say IF, Iowa stays unbeaten and has yet another win …this time against a ranked Ohio State team on the road……………this stat will be the main selling point by those trying to advance Iowa to the MNC. But I’d have to believe this is why Iowa is getting so much affection from the computers and will continue to.
What will be interesting is what happens if an undefeated Iowa is matched up against a 1-loss SEC team that wins the SEC conference championship (say a 1 loss Bama or 1 loss LSU upends Florida).
by silky51 on Nov 6, 2009 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
by matched up I mean...
who would get the nod to go to the MNC??
by silky51 on Nov 6, 2009 3:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Those computers just love....
….. those road victories and two of their victories over ranked opponents, #11 Penn State & #21 Wisconsin, were won on the road. Then there were road victories over 5-4 Iowa State and Michigan State. If they add to that list by pulling out a vicory over Ohio State at The Shoe, then their resume will stack up with anybody.
If Cincinnati loses to Pitt, then they will extremely close in the human polls and have a substantial lead in the computer polls. If they finish undefeated and Cincinnati loses, then it will be teeny weenie, fine hairs close.
--- All roads to the Big-XII Championship lead through OU/RRS. It's not just another game! We're all about championships here. ---
by HornChamps on Nov 7, 2009 11:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Statistics, How I Love Thee Sucks a lot for Iowa (and Cincinatti), but they need all of the following to happen:
1) Schedule more marquee games against legit nonconference opponents
2) Have their conference suck less on a consistent, year over year basis, especially in BCS games.
3) Quit scheduled FCS.
4) Quit winning against lame opponents by razor thin margins.
5) Get their conference to play a championship game.
Or, alternately, lobby the government to force the BCS to implement a more inclusive system.
Congrats to Iowa for being 9-0, if they get to 12-0, then more congrats…. But they have no legitimate argument to being in the top two between an undefeated SEC Champion, Texas, and Iowa…. Even a one loss SEC champ at 12-1 might beat them out."
1) You mean like VaTech (looked really good last night schooling ECU 16-3), FSU, or Wyoming?
2) How good ar e the teams after us? OSU and Tech both lost to UH. OU has 2 non con losses. The North is a cluster fuck of mediocrity. Then there is the SEC. Tenn loses to a bad UCLA team at home. Ga loses to OSU (and will lose to Gatech), Auburn plays no one, and Ole Miss and LSU escape mighty Tulsa (or was it Tulane?..) and UW. Then they all get together, beat each other up, and some how we conclude that UF and Bama are great teams (I will not argue against that), and that the rest of the conference is full of really good teams that would be number 1 or 2 in any other conference. Please. Their shit stinks as much as any in any other conference.
3) OU schedule one. If they were undefeated they would be in the top 2 right now and no one would give a shit. Florida started the season with a d2 school. Why aren’t you bitching about that?
4) Tenn is a BAD team that almost beat Bama. Arkansas will just barely go bowling this year, and they should have beaten UF. Why doesn’t the same argument apply to them?
That is why this system is so bad. Winning ugly isstill winning. The SEC has been winning ugly for years, and no one has cared. Personally, I think the Horns are the best team in the nation, but that is just an opinion. If Iowa and Cinn both go undefeated and get left out, they should sue the shit out of someone. They did all they could do (beating teams with better records and higher rankings), played by the rules, and will lose MILLIONS of dollars because someone decided that it is much harder to go undefeated against the likes Ark, Ga, Tenn, ect.
by UT_BKC on Nov 6, 2009 3:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I would reiterate what the1austin said above...
Iowa really doesn’t have much of a tort leg to stand on considering they and the Big 10 are a prime reason we can’t get a playoff. They really have their own conference to blame if they miss the MNC.
by Rickyspub on Nov 6, 2009 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Just so everyone knows....
Northern Iowa is a 1-AA, er…FCS, school. They have been in the FCS playoffs I think 8 of the last 9 years (making the semifinals I think like 5 times) and made it to the FCS championship game back in 2005.
A one point win over them…and needing two blocked FG’s to do it…..is not good. But don’t discount Northern Iowa as if they were a laughing stock either.
Northern Iowa has something like 8-9 guys currently on NFL rosters. They are a decent program.
And Iowa winning ugly is better than losing pretty. I think there are a number of programs that would gladly switch their 3-4 losses with Iowa’s ugly, but undfeated record.
At the very least, can’t we all agree that the system is flawed and that it’s nice to see a different face on top of the Big 10 besides Mich, Penn St, and Ohio St?!?!
by Go Bevo on Nov 6, 2009 4:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
yep
it is refreshing to see a new Big 10 leader and maybe, just maybe, the Big 10 will help us get this much closer to a system fix.
by Infield Elephant on Nov 6, 2009 5:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
8 Teamer please...
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
"Somebody will always break your records. It is how you live that counts." - Earl Campbell
by Mulliganville on Nov 6, 2009 5:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
