College Football - Week 7 (Oct. 15th)

[Butterscup1679666578]

[expletive] em all

[SouthSideRyan]

DANNNNY DANN DANNYY

[minnesotacubsfan]

Beebe was never the reason the conference fell apart, he was just really ineffective at his job once it did start falling apart. There aren't many people who would do better than he did. If you're looking for fault, look at Texas for never figuring out what a Nash equilibrium is, Nebraska for voting against equal revenue sharing then bolting for equal revenue sharing when it turns out they aren't the royalty they thought they were, aTm for similarly crying foul when the rules only favored them some instead of lots, and throw Oklahoma in for good measure.

 

which is why I thought he was looking out for Mizzou. What other Big 12 team seems to care about football? I guess Kansas State, I overlooked them

[SouthSideRyan]

And whatever you do, don't blame Missouri

[SouthSideRyan]

So if Michigan beats MSU, and Illinois beats OSU, we become the clear best shot at taking down Wisconsin in the regular season.

And Michigan, at that rate.

 

Heh, didn't even think of that. WE'RE YOUR ONLY HOPE EVERYONE

[bukie]

So if Michigan beats MSU, and Illinois beats OSU, we become the clear best shot at taking down Wisconsin in the regular season.

And Michigan, at that rate.

 

Heh, didn't even think of that. WE'RE YOUR ONLY HOPE EVERYONE

All that's left to figure out is which game they'll Zook: @Purdue, or @Minnesota. Or both.

 

EDIT: I don't consider a loss this week a Zook, because it's at least somewhat reasonable they'd lose.

Edited October 10, 2011 by bukie

[E.J.]

So if Michigan beats MSU, and Illinois beats OSU, we become the clear best shot at taking down Wisconsin in the regular season.

And Michigan, at that rate.

 

I'm terrified of the Illinois game. Michigan will be coming off an emotional win/loss at MSU and a bye week. Teams have something like a 46% win percentage after a bye week. Not looking forward to the Illinois game.

[bukie]

So if Michigan beats MSU, and Illinois beats OSU, we become the clear best shot at taking down Wisconsin in the regular season.

And Michigan, at that rate.

 

I'm terrified of the Illinois game. Michigan will be coming off an emotional win/loss at MSU and a bye week. Teams have something like a 46% win percentage after a bye week. Not looking forward to the Illinois game.

I'm terrified of every game, since Zook is the coach.

 

EDIT: The Illinois-Michigan game is later than you think. Michigan plays Purdue after the bye week. Illinois plays Michigan coming off a bye week (now, why the bye week is week 10, who knows.)

[E.J.]

So if Michigan beats MSU, and Illinois beats OSU, we become the clear best shot at taking down Wisconsin in the regular season.

And Michigan, at that rate.

 

I'm terrified of the Illinois game. Michigan will be coming off an emotional win/loss at MSU and a bye week. Teams have something like a 46% win percentage after a bye week. Not looking forward to the Illinois game.

I'm terrified of every game, since Zook is the coach.

 

EDIT: The Illinois-Michigan game is later than you think. Michigan plays Purdue after the bye week. Illinois plays Michigan coming off a bye week (now, why the bye week is week 10, who knows.)

 

Damn, you're right. Illinois is going down then.

[minnesotacubsfan]

All that's left to figure out is which game they'll Zook:.... @Minnesota.

 

EDIT: I don't consider a loss this week a Zook, because it's at least somewhat reasonable they'd lose.

 

 

by "zook" you must mean suffer a devastating yet predictable loss to a superior team.

 

but seriously, we got blown out by Purdue. which do you honestly think has a chance at beating Illinois??

[bukie]

Apparently they interviewed Zook about why he went for two up 20-13 in the second quarter, and his answer was that he didn't know what the score was and thought the TD put them up 14-13.

[bukie]

All that's left to figure out is which game they'll Zook:.... @Minnesota.

 

EDIT: I don't consider a loss this week a Zook, because it's at least somewhat reasonable they'd lose.

 

 

by "zook" you must mean suffer a devastating yet predictable loss to a superior team.

 

but seriously, we got blown out by Purdue. which do you honestly think has a chance at beating Illinois??

Illinois lost at home to a similar Minny team last year. It's Zook, anything can happen.

[SouthSideRyan]

Apparently they interviewed Zook about why he went for two up 20-13 in the second quarter, and his answer was that he didn't know what the score was and thought the TD put them up 14-13.

 

I don't get why Petrino or Scheelhaase or the waterboy didn't ask him wtf he was doing when he made that decision.

[minnesotacubsfan]

All that's left to figure out is which game they'll Zook:.... @Minnesota.

 

EDIT: I don't consider a loss this week a Zook, because it's at least somewhat reasonable they'd lose.

 

 

by "zook" you must mean suffer a devastating yet predictable loss to a superior team.

 

but seriously, we got blown out by Purdue. which do you honestly think has a chance at beating Illinois??

Illinois lost at home to a similar Minny team last year. It's Zook, anything can happen.

 

we were older then, we're soo much younger then that now.

 

(I dont think we win a game all season. This Kill-seizure thing is really effecting them)

[Tracer Bullet]

[

 

My point is, it's difficult to look at the bigx records or schedules and conclude that it's a strong conference bc of the lack of quality games. If you claim that the top of the conference is solid, you need to base that on something. The wins those teams have aren't impressive though. So what's the conclusion based on? An undefeated record in games against bad teams isn't enough.

 

When you have 4 non-conference games per year, and nearly every school choose at least 2 cupcakes out of those 4, how can you determine anybody's ever any good?

 

Are you going to argue that we don't know if Wisconsin is good yet?

It's the teams fault for not knowing 3 years in advance if their opponents this year would be terrible.

 

Right. We all thought this was going to be Oregon St's shot at the title. Guess Wisconsin just got unlucky. And of course, PSU had no idea what they were getting when they scheduled Bama. It's cfb, no one, least of all ADs, have any idea if the schools they schedule will be terrible, average, or great just 2-3 years down the road.

 

Come on. You schedule Oregon St or ASU hoping they're ok but not too good. You schedule Bama knowing what you're in for. You schedule Duke or UVA knowing you get a W.

[minnesotacubsfan]

You attend ND knowing you get a degree.

 

fixed. :(

[E.J.]

I wonder what ND thought when they scheduled South Florida to start the season. Did they know what they were getting with S. Florida?

[Tracer Bullet]

The SEC teams usually play at least 1 game against an AQ school (some bigx teams do to, though the quality of opponent varies).

 

If you're not outright saying it, you're certainly implying that SEC schools are loading up on BCS schools while most Big Ten teams play nothing but schools like Buffalo, New Mexico State, and Texas A&M

 

I think you're a touch defensive. I wasn't implying that. I was suggesting that when you schedule 1 mediocre AQ school, 3 cupcake, and 1/3 or more of your conference sucks, it's difficult to support the conclusion that your conference is strong at the top.

 

The SEC doesn't have that issue bc the top teams frequently play 1 decent OOC game, but they also have more quality programs on the conference slate.

 

Wisconsin looks to be good bc they've looked good, they've been good recently, they aren't decimated by self-inflicted suspensions, and they've actually looked good (yes repeating that one). UM, Nebraska, Illinois, OSU, PSU can't say all those things.

[bukie]

[

 

My point is, it's difficult to look at the bigx records or schedules and conclude that it's a strong conference bc of the lack of quality games. If you claim that the top of the conference is solid, you need to base that on something. The wins those teams have aren't impressive though. So what's the conclusion based on? An undefeated record in games against bad teams isn't enough.

 

When you have 4 non-conference games per year, and nearly every school choose at least 2 cupcakes out of those 4, how can you determine anybody's ever any good?

 

Are you going to argue that we don't know if Wisconsin is good yet?

It's the teams fault for not knowing 3 years in advance if their opponents this year would be terrible.

 

Right. We all thought this was going to be Oregon St's shot at the title. Guess Wisconsin just got unlucky. And of course, PSU had no idea what they were getting when they scheduled Bama. It's cfb, no one, least of all ADs, have any idea if the schools they schedule will be terrible, average, or great just 2-3 years down the road.

 

Come on. You schedule Oregon St or ASU hoping they're ok but not too good. You schedule Bama knowing what you're in for. You schedule Duke or UVA knowing you get a W.

And you schedule Pitt thinking they'll be a quality team 3 years down the road. Oregon State finished 2nd in the Pac-10 three years back, and now they're awful. Arizona State was awful three years back, and now they're going to win their division and finish in the top 15 (are you still arguing that it isn't a quality win?).

 

Sure, you schedule Alabama, and you can pretty well assume that CNS is staying around another 3 years to keep the program going, because that's the kind of guy he is. But a lot of teams are more volatile than you think over a three year period. I imagine both Miami and OSU thought that game would be more significant than it was this year.

 

If anything, the Big Ten actually learned something from the SEC: if the lower tier of your conference schedules a bunch of cupcakes and inflates their overall record, it makes the whole conference look better when they beat on each other later in the year. It's too bad they can't duplicate the other half of the SEC's success of being located in the south and getting a whole bunch of bowl games at or near home, but them's the breaks.

[Tracer Bullet]

I wonder what ND thought when they scheduled South Florida to start the season. Did they know what they were getting with S. Florida?

Yes. An average AQ team. Turns out, ND was disastrous for 2 weeks. That's what you get when you schedule decent teams. That's my point, you can get burned with those teams. You schedule Duke or UVA or Iowa St or hell, Appalachian St knowing you get an easy W.

[bukie]

And before anyone else mentions it as an "aha!", yes, Minnesota and Indiana are awful. They're probably the worst two teams in any major conference. And it makes the conference look terrible when they scheduled cupcakes and lost to them. Doesn't really take away from the overall point.

[snoodmonger]

Beebe was never the reason the conference fell apart, he was just really ineffective at his job once it did start falling apart. There aren't many people who would do better than he did. If you're looking for fault, look at Texas for never figuring out what a Nash equilibrium is, Nebraska for voting against equal revenue sharing then bolting for equal revenue sharing when it turns out they aren't the royalty they thought they were, aTm for similarly crying foul when the rules only favored them some instead of lots, and throw Oklahoma in for good measure.

 

Does Missouri get any blame for spreading its legs to the Big 10 last year and, after things had apparently stabilized this year, flashing a tatty at the SEC?

 

Does CU get any blame for bolting? Probably not. No one really cared about CU.

Edited October 10, 2011 by snoodmonger

[Tracer Bullet]

[

 

My point is, it's difficult to look at the bigx records or schedules and conclude that it's a strong conference bc of the lack of quality games. If you claim that the top of the conference is solid, you need to base that on something. The wins those teams have aren't impressive though. So what's the conclusion based on? An undefeated record in games against bad teams isn't enough.

 

When you have 4 non-conference games per year, and nearly every school choose at least 2 cupcakes out of those 4, how can you determine anybody's ever any good?

 

Are you going to argue that we don't know if Wisconsin is good yet?

It's the teams fault for not knowing 3 years in advance if their opponents this year would be terrible.

 

Right. We all thought this was going to be Oregon St's shot at the title. Guess Wisconsin just got unlucky. And of course, PSU had no idea what they were getting when they scheduled Bama. It's cfb, no one, least of all ADs, have any idea if the schools they schedule will be terrible, average, or great just 2-3 years down the road.

 

Come on. You schedule Oregon St or ASU hoping they're ok but not too good. You schedule Bama knowing what you're in for. You schedule Duke or UVA knowing you get a W.

And you schedule Pitt thinking they'll be a quality team 3 years down the road. Oregon State finished 2nd in the Pac-10 three years back, and now they're awful. Arizona State was awful three years back, and now they're going to win their division and finish in the top 15 (are you still arguing that it isn't a quality win?).

 

Sure, you schedule Alabama, and you can pretty well assume that CNS is staying around another 3 years to keep the program going, because that's the kind of guy he is. But a lot of teams are more volatile than you think over a three year period. I imagine both Miami and OSU thought that game would be more significant than it was this year.

 

If anything, the Big Ten actually learned something from the SEC: if the lower tier of your conference schedules a bunch of cupcakes and inflates their overall record, it makes the whole conference look better when they beat on each other later in the year. It's too bad they can't duplicate the other half of the SEC's success of being located in the south and getting a whole bunch of bowl games at or near home, but them's the breaks.

 

There are teams at the top and bottom that are safer bets. The vast majority are in the middle and volatile. Of course OSU can happen, but you'd still get pollster credit for playing the Buckeyes even when they suck. Wisconsin did not think Oregon St was going to be great when they scheduled them and that's a really, really safe bet.

 

Does winning the division mean something now? Is that why the bigx wanted 12 teams, so they could say they won a division with 8 wins some year?

 

ASU is fine, but no one is going to mistake them for a great team. The Pac is down this year, other than Stanford. Benefiting from southern cal's down years doesn't make ASU great.

 

Love the bowl game excuse.

[Tracer Bullet]

Also, knock PSU's offense, but they're sitting 5-1 with their only loss being 16 points to the only non-crap team they've played.

 

Fixed

[SouthSideRyan]

I really like GR and Andy's weird Big Ten fixation. I don't get it, but I like it.