Will the B1G ever recover and be considered great again?

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Maize i was pretty nice to you and most people had no idea what it was of. I would have chose a pic from 1998 but most wouldn't get it and there wasn't much to choose from. Ugly pics hurt everyone, see when i had the miley chicken avy.

Your miley chicken was one of the worst images I've ever seen.

 

[Tharvot]

Your miley chicken was one of the worst images I've ever seen.

Agreed.

 

[rmilia1]

I love how, during the season, the argument from SEC fans is always how deep and talented the conference is. How they have SO MANY ranked teams and how its SO TOUGH to make it through unbeaten yet come bowl season when B10 folks say their bowl schedule is tougher because they play more SEC teams than any other conference all of the sudden the SEC isnt that great ( according to its own fans... LOL). Auburns schedule was ballyhooed for playing UGA, LSU, etc but when Nebraska and Iowa play those same teams its " Oh the B10 team finished higher in the standings than those teams..". WTF.

 

[Smart]

I view the discussion as who has gotten a tougher draw in bowl season. If you face better competition but are sending superior teams, how is that a harder draw than facing somewhat weaker opponents if your avg team is weaker than your opponent?

Are you serious? So a 5-4 high school football team that draws a 9-0 team in the first round of the playoffs has a tougher schedule than the Chicago Bears? Is that really your argument?

The debate is about which conference has the tougher schedule. That has absolutely nothing to do with the strength of each individual B1G team.

 

[Papalou]

I love how, during the season, the argument from SEC fans is always how deep and talented the conference is. How they have SO MANY ranked teams and how its SO TOUGH to make it through unbeaten yet come bowl season when B10 folks say their bowl schedule is tougher because they play more SEC teams than any other conference all of the sudden the SEC isnt that great ( according to its own fans... LOL). Auburns schedule was ballyhooed for playing UGA, LSU, etc but when Nebraska and Iowa play those same teams its " Oh the B10 team finished higher in the standings than those teams..". WTF.

Typical" we arent afraid of sharks until our feet are wet" shit

 

[Ironbreaker]

Are you serious? So a 5-4 high school football team that draws a 9-0 team in the first round of the playoffs has a tougher schedule than the Chicago Bears? Is that really your argument?

The debate is about which conference has the tougher schedule. That has absolutely nothing to do with the strength of each individual B1G team.

wtf are you babbling about? High school, nfl? Are you fucking stupid?

Theres a difference if you are the #10 team in the country facing the #15 vs a #26 facing a #16. Its obvious to me in that scenario the #26 team got a tougher draw than the #10 team even though they are facing a higher ranked opponent.

So saying we face tougher teams because they are higher ranked doesnt necessarily mean you got a tougher draw.


Why am I trying to explain anything to you?

 

[Sox33OSU]

wtf are you babbling about? High school, nfl? Are you fucking stupid?

Theres a difference if you are the #10 team in the country facing the #15 vs a #26 facing a #16. Its obvious to me in that scenario the #26 team got a tougher draw than the #10 team even though they are facing a higher ranked opponent.

So saying we face tougher teams because they are higher ranked doesnt necessarily mean you got a tougher draw.


Why am I trying to explain anything to you?

I completely get what you're saying, but it's completely incidental. How our teams perform during the year don't affect the teams they draw one way or another. Fact still is, the teams we face are better (except this year, it looks like the Big 12 drew the tougher opponents).

 

[7Samurai13]

Your miley chicken was one of the worst images I've ever seen.

That was doctor Kreiger's choice.

And I think that this and red alert's avys were two very well received ones.

 

[Ironbreaker]

I completely get what you're saying, but it's completely incidental. How our teams perform during the year don't affect the teams they draw one way or another. Fact still is, the teams we face are better (except this year, it looks like the Big 12 drew the tougher opponents).

I get that you get it.

But remember I'm not arguing for the B12. The poster threw out some numbers covering a ten year period. Those numbers can be played a lot of ways if one was so inclined, thats really my only pt.


But it still has nothing to do with the nfl or high school football.

 

[Smart]

wtf are you babbling about? High school, nfl? Are you fucking stupid?

Theres a difference if you are the #10 team in the country facing the #15 vs a #26 facing a #16. Its obvious to me in that scenario the #26 team got a tougher draw than the #10 team even though they are facing a higher ranked opponent.

So saying we face tougher teams because they are higher ranked doesnt necessarily mean you got a tougher draw.


Why am I trying to explain anything to you?

No, they didn't. Is your IQ, like, 27?

The relative "toughness" of a draw is based entirely off of the teams they played if the debate is "what is the strongest conference."

Your "obvious" thought would be marked blatantly incorrect on the LSAT.

 

[Smart]

But it still has nothing to do with the nfl or high school football.

It's amazing how you fail to understand even elementary analogies. If SOS is decided by relative strength (which was your entire point), then a bad high school team plays a harder schedule than a great NFL team.

This is clearly an absurd and incorrect conclusion, and should tell you that your logic is flawed.

Using analogies to show absurdities is a popular logical argument.

 

[Ironbreaker]

It's amazing how you fail to understand even elementary analogies. If SOS is decided by relative strength (which was your entire point), then a bad high school team plays a harder schedule than a great NFL team.

This is clearly an absurd and incorrect conclusion, and should tell you that your logic is flawed.

Using analogies to show absurdities is a popular logical argument.

There is 0 correlation between a high school team, a college team and an NFL team, 0.


Your analogy is worthless.

 

[Smart]

There is 0 correlation between a high school team, a college team and an NFL team, 0.


Your analogy is worthless.

I'm literally speechless how stupid you are.

YOU are the one who insisted that we care about RELATIVE strength (ie that how a good a team is compared to their opponent). I argued that it is now about ABSOLUTE strength (how good a team's opponent is).

So when I show the absurd results of YOUR argument, you rely on ABSOLUTE strength to say that analysis of your argument is stupid.

You literally just called your own argument stupid by adopting my argument.

And the funniest part is you can't even see how you completely proved my point.

 

[Ironbreaker]

Explain to me how a B1G #10 team facing a #15 team is more challenging than a B12 #26 facing a #16.

You can't.

If the argument is we faced more ranked teams over a 10 year period in our bowls so that means we got a tougher draw, my counterpoint is not necessarily.

If the argument is simply we faced more ranked opponents, then sure. But following the conversation it looks to be about who has had the tougher draw in bowls.

 

[Smart]

"Smart just posted an absurd conclusion of my argument. It looks stupid. Therefore, Smart must be stupid."

It's amazing that someone can actually think like this. I thought Carl Pilkington was an act, but i'm not so sure anymore.

 

[Ironbreaker]

Explain to me how a B1G #10 team facing a #15 team is more challenging than a B12 #26 facing a #16.

Waiting.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Explain to me how a B1G #10 team facing a #15 team is more challenging than a B12 #26 facing a #16.

You can't.

If the argument is we faced more ranked teams over a 10 year period in our bowls so that means we got a tougher draw, my counterpoint is not necessarily.

If the argument is simply we faced more ranked opponents, then sure. But following the conversation it looks to be about who has had the tougher draw in bowls.

I think here is where the disconnect is. It has been pretty rare for the ranked B1G team to be ranked higher than the ranked bowl opponent. Nobody is saying it's a tougher *matchup*, but we're still drawing tougher overall *teams*.

 

[rmilia1]

Paying the number 15 team is always tougher than playing the number 16 team regardless of the other team. Ill analogize. Say there is a one on one basketball game and Kevin Durant is playing Lebron James. On another court Carmelo Anthony is playing Paul George. So we have the #2 player in the NBA playing the number 1 player and the number 8/9 guy playing the number 3 guy. Who drew the tougher matchup??? Of course Durant did right??? For sure. Same thing in CFB. Playing the number 15 team is always tougher than playing the number 16 team.

 

[Ironbreaker]

I think here is where the disconnect is. It has been pretty rare for the ranked B1G team to be ranked higher than the ranked bowl opponent. Nobody is saying it's a tougher *matchup*, but we're still drawing tougher overall *teams*.

Right. I simply don't know all the numbers. The poster merely threw out a 10 year period and said the B1G had faced more ranked teams.

Thats not really detailed enogh to draw that conclusion without more data. Even the poster himself admitted as much.

I'm not saying the B1G hasn't faced the tougher draw... just that the numbers used to illustrate they have, were incomplete...

 

[Smart]

Explain to me how a B1G #10 team facing a #15 team is more challenging than a B12 #26 facing a #16.

You can't.

If the argument is simply we faced more ranked opponents, then sure. But following the conversation it looks to be about who has had the tougher draw in bowls.

Seriously?

If the B1G's best team is playing a better team than the opponent of the Big 12's best team, then the B1G got a tougher draw. Period.

You are trying to make this about relative strength, which doesn't mean anything about the overall strength of a conference. That's the question here. The thread isn't titled "Will the B1G ever play up to their rankings?" The question is of overall conference strength. And relative conference strength is a completely separate inquiry.

I thought the NFL-High School analogy would make that clear. Because if you think the two are somehow linked, the only possible conclusion is to think that the best high school conference in your state is better than the NFC. And that's incorrect. You know its incorrect because you thought I was stupid to even make the analogy.

It shows a gaping hole in your logic of using relative strength to justify overall perception. Even you can't accept the implications of your argument.