Conference Bowl Records

mushroomgod_1

All-Big Ten
Apr 9, 2012
4,484
3,999
113
I thought it might be interesting to consider how the conferences fared during the bowl season, not just on W-L records but also expectations v. reality.....Here's my take on things for the P5 conferences other than the SEC, which is so dominant it has separated itself from comparison....

In looking at this I use the following point system:

+1 Win
+2 Impressive Win
-1 Loss
-2 Bad Loss

I'm treating each bowl game equally. I also realize I could factor in 'bad wins' (Pitt over E. Michigan) and 'good losses' (IU v. Tenn), but i want to keep it simple.

I. Big 10.......4-5 overall

--MSU W v. Wake 27-21.....+1
--Iowa W v. USC 49-24.......+2
--PSU W v. Memphis 53-39....+2
--OSU L v. Clemson.....-1
--ILL L v. CAL 35-20....-2
--MICH L v. Bama 35-16....-2
--MINN W v. Auburn 31-24....+2
--WIS L v. Oregon 28-27.....-1
--IU L v. TENN 23-22....-1

Big 10 points.....0

One thing Delany has done in setting up the BIG 10 Bowl schedule is to have Big 10 teams "play up" in nearly every game.....thus you have games like Michigan-Bama and IU-Tennessee, where lesser talented teams are playing better teams AND playing them in hostile stadiums. Makes things interesting but tough for Big 10 teams.....I think this year BT teams fared fairly well on the field if not on the SB, and very easily could have been 7-2 (IU, WIS, OSU), which would have been an outstanding outcome.

II. ACC.......4-7 overall

--Miami L v. L. Tech 14-0.....-2
--Pitt W v. E. Michigan....+1
--NC W v. Temple 55-13....+2
--Wake L v. MSU 27-21....-1
--Clemson W v. OSU 29-23....+1
--Clemson L v. LSU 42-25.....-2
--Virginia L v. Florida 36-28....-1
--VT L v. UK 37-30.....-1
--FSU L v. ASU 20 -14...-1
--BC L. v. Cincy 38-6....-2

ACC points.....-6

In contrast to the BT, the ACC teams generally schedule even or down in their bowl games. NC's win over Temple and Miami's loss v. L. Tech were the extremes. The ACC was really bad this year and did not surprise in the bowls.

III. PAC 12.......4-3 overall

--WASH W v. Boise St. 38-7....+2
--USC L v. Iowa 49-24......-2
--WSU L v. AF 31-21....-1
--CAL W v. ILL 35-20.....+2
--ASU W v. FSU 20-14....+1
--Utah L v. Texas 38-10....-2
--Oregon W. v. WIS 28-27....+1

Pac 12 points.....+1

Overall a good showing....big win v. BSU.....huge loss to Texas

IV. Big 12.....1-5 overall

--OK ST L 24-21 v. A&M.....-1
--Iowa St. L 33-9 v. ND...-2
--OK L 63-28 v. LSU....-2
--KSU L 20-17 v. Navy....-1
--Texas W v. Utah 38-10.....+2
--Baylor L v. GA 26-14.....-1

Big 12 points.....-7

Overall a disaster, but no shockers except the size of Texas' win v. Utah.


Overall conclusions....BT appears to have separated itself from the ACC and the Big 12, but the Pac 12 remains competitive overall despite having fewer fans and less $....and that's with USC & UCLA being down..........the gulf between the SEC and BT is probably wider than that between the BT and the ACC & Big 12. One thing that must be emphasized in comparing bowl results is that the SEC almost always have the home field advantage v. the BT......I believe the BT would reverse its fortunes with SEC teams if the bowls were played outside in the cold NFL-style......

Thoughts?
 

turney333

All-Big Ten
Sep 20, 2006
3,661
2,285
113
The PAC is a good top to bottom conference, and really the only thing that separates the BT is OSU - a legitimate national title contender compared to teams just capable of sneaking into the last playoff spot if everything falls into place (Oregon/Utah)
 
  • Like
Reactions: red hornet

mushroomgod_1

All-Big Ten
Apr 9, 2012
4,484
3,999
113
The PAC is a good top to bottom conference, and really the only thing that separates the BT is OSU - a legitimate national title contender compared to teams just capable of sneaking into the last playoff spot if everything falls into place (Oregon/Utah)

I agree.......I think Oregon, Washington and Utah are 3 really good, solid programs right now, but are not NC contenders......teams like ASU, Colorado, and WSU are decent.

Stanford seems to be imploding though, with something like 12 grad transfers this year. They may be down for a few years. Same for USC. Not sure where Chip K. is with UCLA, but at a minimum it's slower than expected.
 

mushroomgod_1

All-Big Ten
Apr 9, 2012
4,484
3,999
113
I think we "played up" b/c O$U was in the NCP. If O$U doesn't make the playoffs you can move every Big Ten team down one game and we may sweep the competition. After all, PU wasn't in. :p

Wow...interesting point....So would it have been:

OSU v. Oregon
Wisky v. Bama
Michigan v. Auburn,
Minnesota v. Tennessee, and
IU v. Wake?

It seems like PSU & Iowa would have kept their opponents, but I'm just guessing.

If above happened, I think Michigan still losses.

Wisky probably losses, but shows up better than Michigan. OSU, Minnesota & IU win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: midwolfe

red hornet

Sophomore
Gold Member
Dec 17, 2019
759
2,091
93
I agree.......I think Oregon, Washington and Utah are 3 really good, solid programs right now, but are not NC contenders......teams like ASU, Colorado, and WSU are decent.

Stanford seems to be imploding though, with something like 12 grad transfers this year. They may be down for a few years. Same for USC. Not sure where Chip K. is with UCLA, but at a minimum it's slower than expected.
Last count on Stanford's transfers was 15!
 

turney333

All-Big Ten
Sep 20, 2006
3,661
2,285
113
I hope we're looking at those guys.

I'm not sure what's going on with that program, but things seems to have gone to hell in a hand basket pretty quick..........
At least regarding the transfers, I wonder if Stanford has changed their enrollment requirements for athletes getting into grad programs making it harder to get a 5th year (ie no special consideration for being an athlete). Thus, maybe a lot of guys were redshirted their freshman year with the expectation that they would get a 5th year, but no longer can.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: red hornet

red hornet

Sophomore
Gold Member
Dec 17, 2019
759
2,091
93
At least regarding the transfers, I wonder if Stanford has changed their enrollment requirements for athletes getting into grad programs making it harder to get a 5th year (ie no special consideration for being an athlete). Thus, maybe a lot of guys were redshirted their freshman with the expectation that they would get a 5th year, but no longer can.
Good point. The article I saw on Stanford's flood of transfers said there was not one reason that fit all.
 

Latest posts