OREGON arriving in the B1G will create changes

Across The Field said:
Going back to 2015, Oregon trails OSU, PSU, Wisconsin, michigan, Iowa, and Washington in winning % and they're barely ahead of USC, Michigan State and Minnesota.
Click to expand...

While we're cherry picking years, let's try again from 2001.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
In the new system it will be interesting to see how the head to head records play out in terms of playing in the B10 title game. I can see two teams, not Michigan or Ohio State, sneaking into the title game because of weird tiebreakers. Especially in a system where you're not going to play half the league on any given year.
Click to expand...

Pick the two highest ranked teams in CFP rankings. If #3 is within a few spots of #2 (and beat #2), they get the spot.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
While we're cherry picking years, let's try again from 2001.
Click to expand...
Cherry picking would imply I did it for a reason. But here, I'll do 2014 since that was the official start of the CFP era. They still trail Ohio State, michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa, and they're 1 game better than PSU while playing in a weaker conference.
 
osubuckeye89 said:
Highest CFP ranking would be the logical tie breaker. But the B1G doesn't seem to like to do things logically.
Click to expand...
michaeljordan_fan said:
Pick the two highest ranked teams in CFP rankings. If #3 is within a few spots of #2 (and beat #2), they get the spot.
Click to expand...
Boy...could I see some huge problems with that. Two teams who never faced off, just being judged entirely by looks for a B10 title...yikes.
 
MAIZEandBLUE09 said:
Boy...could I see some huge problems with that. Two teams who never faced off, just being judged entirely by looks for a B10 title...yikes.
Click to expand...

I mean is there a better way to judge two teams who have not played?

If it's fucking like Illinois vs Michigan for that spot both with 1 loss and Michigan is 5th in the CFP rankings and Illinois is like 10th do you really think they should take Illinois because "they can't be unfair"? lol.
 
osubuckeye89 said:
Highest CFP ranking would be the logical tie breaker. But the B1G doesn't seem to like to do things logically.
Click to expand...
It sounds logical but it would open the possibility of the same 2 teams playing each other 3 times in one season.
 
Red_Alert said:
I'll take that.

3 months avatar bet?
Click to expand...
Nah, I was just talking shit.

I honestly don't see how this works out for UW, or any of the old Pac members. I just don't think they fit in, I mean, the PAC was a piece of shit ever since Larry Scott, so we were pretty much rats on a sinking ship, no real options.
 
osubuckeye89 said:
I mean is there a better way to judge two teams who have not played?

If it's fucking like Illinois vs Michigan for that spot both with 1 loss and Michigan is 5th in the CFP rankings and Illinois is like 10th do you really think they should take Illinois because "they can't be unfair"? lol.
Click to expand...
I'm concerned it's more like -- Michigan, Ohio State, USC, Oregon and Penn State...all in the top 10-15, and hypothetically, let's say all have 1 loss, only some of the teams played. Boy would it be a shitty system to just have the top ranked teams face off for the title, when there's just opinions separating them in the top 15.
 
Across The Field said:
Well USC with their Heisman trophy winning QB just lost to Tulane the last time we saw them. Meanwhile Oregon got destroyed by UGA last year while also losing to Washington and Oregon State and barely surviving a mediocre UNC team in the final seconds. I think a good barometer for both teams is Utah, who is built much more like a B1G team than anyone else in the PAC, who is a combined 5-1 vs those two teams the past couple years. They might get there eventually, but neither of them are very close to being on OSU or michigan's level right now.
Click to expand...

lol

It was Lincoln Rileys first season after the Helton disaster, not to mention they had a lot of injuries, including to Williams.

Go check the B1G's record vs. USC under Pete Carroll.
 
Across The Field said:
Saying they'll perform about the same is right, I don't see any of the P12 transplants winning the B1G in the coming years.
Click to expand...
They didn’t win the PAC the last couple of years either. And they won’t finish at the bottom of the B1G either…just like they haven’t in the PAC 12.
 
Deep Creek said:
They didn’t win the PAC the last couple of years either. And they won’t finish at the bottom of the B1G either…just like they haven’t in the PAC 12.
Click to expand...
Oh for sure, I don't think any of them will be bottom dwellers. I'm very excited for the competitive improvement they'll bring.
 
Across The Field said:
Well USC with their Heisman trophy winning QB just lost to Tulane the last time we saw them. Meanwhile Oregon got destroyed by UGA last year while also losing to Washington and Oregon State and barely surviving a mediocre UNC team in the final seconds. I think a good barometer for both teams is Utah, who is built much more like a B1G team than anyone else in the PAC, who is a combined 5-1 vs those two teams the past couple years. They might get there eventually, but neither of them are very close to being on OSU or michigan's level right now.
Click to expand...
Sooooo, the Big 12 got the best PAC 12 team in Utah?
 
trojanfan12 said:
lol

It was Lincoln Rileys first season after the Helton disaster, not to mention they had a lot of injuries, including to Williams.

Go check the B1G's record vs. USC under Pete Carroll.
Click to expand...
The HC who hasn't been there since 2009? How about their record vs. the B1G in the CFP era since that's more relevant?
 
trojanfan12 said:
lol

It was Lincoln Rileys first season after the Helton disaster, not to mention they had a lot of injuries, including to Williams.

Go check the B1G's record vs. USC under Pete Carroll.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the part about Tulane?
 
Across The Field said:
Oh for sure, I don't think any of them will be bottom dwellers. I'm very excited for the competitive improvement they'll bring.
Click to expand...
I think those four will bring some of that parity they had in the PAC to the B1G. And that should make for more wide open conference races…at least that’s what I’m hoping for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top