Big Ten football

[sdhusky]

Nothing screams "look at me" quite like picking a fight with another poster.

Its does look pathetic when I do it, doesn't it? Just like it does with your 13,266 attempts to do the same.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Anderson left 3 days after the game. You are right, he was 24/7 on Wisconsin right up to the time he walked out the door.

I'm sure he'll post soon about how the fact that Anderson was planning to leave means that Ohio State's win shouldn't matter.

It's like clockwork. Nelson is always right, even when he's wrong.

 

[Pat125]

Ohio State got into the playoffs because Jim Delaney is playing with a 25" dick. When Bob Bowlsby showed up, the college football power brokers took his tampon and threw it in the garbage.

Delany may well have a lot of influence with the CFP committee for all we know. But Dooley gave an excellent analysis showing that any influence was not needed. If anything, if one of the "One" "True" "Champion" of the Big 12 deserved to get in, it should have been at the expense of FSU.

 

[whaler11]

Now the committee needs to judge just how hard the coach is trying.

 

[pepband99]

And Randy Edsall was coach of UConn against Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl except he was looking for a job somewhere else.

Anderson left 3 days after the game. You are right, he was 24/7 on Wisconsin right up to the time he walked out the door.

Yeah, I'm sure the selection committee was well aware (remember, the actual point of your line? Oh, wait, that would make you look (more) stupid - guess we'll leave that out).

Pathetic.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Delany may well have a lot of influence with the CFP committee for all we know. But Dooley gave an excellent analysis showing that any influence was not needed. If anything, if one of the "One" "True" "Champion" of the Big 12 deserved to get in, it should have been at the expense of FSU.

We will never know, but I think that if TCU beat Baylor in the Big 12 CCG, Ohio State was still going to the playoffs.

I won't defend FSU. They looked primed for a curb stomping in the playoffs.

I have a problem with a conference game deciding whether a conference team goes to the playoffs. Everyone in the stadium for the Big 10 Championship Game, including Wisconsin, knew that the best thing for the league would be for Wisconsin to be blown out. Did Wisconsin throw the game? Probably not. Did Anderson? Probably not. Is it warped to have that game be decisive? Absolutely.

I would like to see more games between teams that benefit from winning rather than benefit from losing. Conference schedules should be 6 games, and the P5 teams should play 3 or 4 games against other P5 opponents. 9 game schedules are a bad idea, because it just makes the incentive problem worse. This is like asking someone to beat their boss in a 3 on 3 game at the company picnic.

Basketball avoids this problem because so many teams make the tournament, and there are so many bubble teams, that there is a bigger incentive to win in intraconference games than in football. That said, the selection committee has made a mockery of the regular season and the process the last two years with some of its bid/no bid decisions.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Yeah, I'm sure the selection committee was well aware (remember, the actual point of your line? Oh, wait, that would make you look (more) stupid - guess we'll leave that out).

Pathetic.

No one grabs onto a tangential component of an argument and holds on for dear life quite like you do. Nice work.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Now the committee needs to judge just how hard the coach is trying.

The committee should have enough sense to not make a single game the deciding factor when several aspects of that game raised questions.

 

[CallMeBruce]

We will never know, but I think that if TCU beat Baylor in the Big 12 CCG, Ohio State was still going to the playoffs.

I won't defend FSU. They looked primed for a curb stomping in the playoffs.

I have a problem with a conference game deciding whether a conference team goes to the playoffs. Everyone in the stadium for the Big 10 Championship Game, including Wisconsin, knew that the best thing for the league would be for Wisconsin to be blown out. Did Wisconsin throw the game? Probably not. Did Anderson? Probably not. Is it warped to have that game be decisive? Absolutely.

I would like to see more games between teams that benefit from winning rather than benefit from losing. Conference schedules should be 6 games, and the P5 teams should play 3 or 4 games against other P5 opponents. 9 game schedules are a bad idea, because it just makes the incentive problem worse. This is like asking someone to beat their boss in a 3 on 3 game at the company picnic.

Basketball avoids this problem because so many teams make the tournament, and there are so many bubble teams, that there is a bigger incentive to win in intraconference games than in football. That said, the selection committee has made a mockery of the regular season and the process the last two years with some of its bid/no bid decisions.

And now we're implying that Wisconsin deliberately got blown out for the good of the B1G. Right. You're a lunatic.

 

[pepband99]

No one grabs onto a tangential component of an argument and holds on for dear life quite like you do. Nice work.

...says the guy who started the nonsensical, since proven wrong, tangent?

The 13th game argument strikes me as particularly silly. The Big 10 had so few quality wins out of conference last year that I do not get the argument for why another game against a Big 10 team made Ohio State's claim stronger. The fact that Wisconsin had just lost its coach put an even bigger asterisk next to the win.

...and now goes on another one with Wisconsin throwing the game?

Yes, let's completely disregard a game that ends up being a statistically significant datapoint in a season with far too few valid comparitive ones, just because it happens to be the 13th game. Why not hand the playoff selection to the East German judge, and call it a day?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

And now we're implying that Wisconsin deliberately got blown out for the good of the B1G. Right. You're a lunatic.

I am definitely implying that Wisconsin knew that the best thing for the league was for Wisconsin to lose.

But rather than waste my energy on this, why don't you explain to me why Wisconsin was going to try extra hard to beat Ohio State when a victory by the Badgers would literally cost the school millions of dollars? Are they throwing the game? Probably not. But like the 3 on 3 game at the company picnic, Wisconsin knew what the best outcome was for the school going into that game.

Look at the outcome. They got destroyed. Is Wisconsin 0-59 worse than Ohio State? The same Wisconsin team that went out and beat Auburn in a bowl game? Is Ohio State that much better than Wisconsin? The same Ohio State team that got beat by 2 TDs by VTech? Who knows what happens in a game like that? I do think it was a bad idea to make that game decisive, and I don't think it was.

 

[CallMeBruce]

I am definitely implying that Wisconsin knew that the best thing for the league was for Wisconsin to lose.

But rather than waste my energy on this, why don't you explain to me why Wisconsin was going to try extra hard to beat Ohio State when a victory by the Badgers would literally cost the school millions of dollars? Are they throwing the game? Probably not. But like the 3 on 3 game at the company picnic, Wisconsin knew what the best outcome was for the school going into that game.

Look at the outcome. They got destroyed. Is Wisconsin 0-59 worse than Ohio State? The same Wisconsin team that went out and beat Auburn in a bowl game? Is Ohio State that much better than Wisconsin? The same Ohio State team that got beat by 2 TDs by VTech? Who knows what happens in a game like that? I do think it was a bad idea to make that game decisive, and I don't think it was.

The people who decide how hard to play - the players - don't see a dime of that money, so why the hell do they care? I'm honestly not sure if you're trolling me with this nonsense. That's how ridiculous you are.

Is your argument now that the committee should have discounted the Wisconsin win because Wisconsin didn't have proper motivation to win the game?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

...says the guy who started the nonsensical, since proven wrong, tangent?



...and now goes on another one with Wisconsin throwing the game?

Yes, let's completely disregard a game that ends up being a statistically significant datapoint in a season with far too few valid comparitive ones, just because it happens to be the 13th game. Why not hand the playoff selection to the East German judge, and call it a day?

You couldn't take any of your arguments and turn them the other way. TCU played 9 conference games and Ohio State played 9 conference games, but TCU's conference was better last year. Should we just ignore all TCU's wins last year? That is what you are saying.

The Big 12 was 3-0 against the Big 10 last year. Overall the Big 10 was 6-11 against P5 schools and had 3 losses to the MAC. Should we ignore those games and just focus on a game where the losing team clearly gave up and the coach had 1 foot out the door?

 

[Adios]

You couldn't take any of your arguments and turn them the other way. TCU played 9 conference games and Ohio State played 9 conference games, but TCU's conference was better last year. Should we just ignore all TCU's wins last year? That is what you are saying.

The Big 12 was 3-0 against the Big 10 last year. Overall the Big 10 was 6-11 against P5 schools and had 3 losses to the MAC. Should we ignore those games and just focus on a game where the losing team clearly gave up and the coach had 1 foot out the door?

You going to propose we aim for the Big 12 now?

 

[whaler11]

The committee should have enough sense to not make a single game the deciding factor when several aspects of that game raised questions.

There are no aspects of the game that raise questions.

Also, they didn't decide of one game. They studied the resumes and correctly landed on the team with the best one. If you would stop firing off hot takes long enough to finally look at the data you might finally get it.

But since you've doubled down on the Wisconsin nonsense somehow I don't see it.

 

[whaler11]

You couldn't take any of your arguments and turn them the other way. TCU played 9 conference games and Ohio State played 9 conference games, but TCU's conference was better last year. Should we just ignore all TCU's wins last year? That is what you are saying.

The Big 12 was 3-0 against the Big 10 last year. Overall the Big 10 was 6-11 against P5 schools and had 3 losses to the MAC. Should we ignore those games and just focus on a game where the losing team clearly gave up and the coach had 1 foot out the door?

At some point hopefully you realize they are picking 4 teams. Not the a team from the four best conferences.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

There are no aspects of the game that raise questions.

Also, they didn't decide of one game. They studied the resumes and correctly landed on the team with the best one. If you would stop firing off hot takes long enough to finally look at the data you might finally get it.

But since you've doubled down on the Wisconsin nonsense somehow I don't see it.

They studied resumes and ratings and asked ESPN who they wanted, and landed on Ohio State.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

At some point hopefully you realize they are picking 4 teams. Not the a team from the four best conferences.

At some point you realize that the only way to compare conference schedules is to figure out which conference is better. Or maybe we can go by tradition and fan base and DMA.

 

[whaler11]

Can you even imagine asking an FBS coach to lose a conference championship game for the good of the conference.

This is lunacy even for you.

 

[whaler11]

They studied resumes and ratings and asked ESPN who they wanted, and landed on Ohio State.

Well I guess they got lucky because they all picked correctly.

Why do you even follow a sport you believe is rigged?

 

[whaler11]

At some point you realize that the only way to compare conference schedules is to figure out which conference is better. Or maybe we can go by tradition and fan base and DMA.

Or maybe the season is 12-13 games long and not 9?

 

[Adios]

They studied resumes and ratings and asked ESPN who they wanted, and landed on Ohio State.

.....and guess who won?? You're better served offering tricks on the roadside. At least you'd get paid.

 

[The Funster]

Yikes! Is someone actually suggesting that Wisconsin threw that game?

Completely, totally bizarre.

 

[dayooper]

You couldn't take any of your arguments and turn them the other way. TCU played 9 conference games and Ohio State played 9 conference games, but TCU's conference was better last year. Should we just ignore all TCU's wins last year? That is what you are saying.

The Big 12 was 3-0 against the Big 10 last year. Overall the Big 10 was 6-11 against P5 schools and had 3 losses to the MAC. Should we ignore those games and just focus on a game where the losing team clearly gave up and the coach had 1 foot out the door?

I like your style. Two of the three games you cite were decided by a field goal, but why leave that out. It may make a difference. The third was TCU vs Minny freaking sota. Not MSU, Not OSU, not Wisconsin, but Minnesota. Funny, when two of the better ranked teams played (MSU vs. Baylor), the Big10 team won. MSU beat a team you are complaining about being left out. That same MSU team lost to OSU by 12 points at home.

I could see your point until you insinuated that Wisconsin threw the game to help the Big10. That might be the dumbest thing I have ever seen you write.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Does any other sport in the world regularly have situations where both teams in a contest are better off if one of the teams wins?