- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Big Ten Network: 1997 Nebraska would have lost three games playing in the Big 10
Posted on 8/13/11 at 8:54 pm
Posted on 8/13/11 at 8:54 pm
quote:
CHICAGO – What if Nebraska had joined the Big Ten 15 years ago? What if the Leaders and Legends Divisions were established in 1996? Who would have won the most Big Ten championship games? Would Nebraska or Michigan have won the 1997 national title (hint: the simulation says “maybe Ohio State”)?
BTN is teaming up with WhatIfSports.com for the simulation project, “Big Ten Legends & Leaders: 1996-2010,” to find out the answers to those questions and more.
WhatIfSports.com split the 12 current Big Ten teams into their respective divisions and used the actual team rosters and statistics to simulate the Big Ten regular-season schedules from the 1996-2010 seasons.
Every day through August 26, a simulated season in Big Ten history will be highlighted on www.BTN.com, including box scores and play-by-plays for every mythical Big Ten Championship Game.
For example, in real life, Michigan and Nebraska shared the 1997 National Championship. In the WhatIfSports.com simulation, however, Nebraska was out of the picture with three conference losses and Michigan represented the Legends Division in the Big Ten Championship Game against Leaders Division champion Ohio State. In the simulation of the championship game, the Buckeyes avenged their only regular-season loss and used a 29-yard field goal by Dan Stultz on the game’s final play to defeat Michigan, 37-34. That left the Buckeyes and the Wolverines with one conference loss, to each other, heading into bowl season. In reality, Ohio State lost to Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. Through this simulation, however, the Buckeyes would have presumably gone to the Rose Bowl to play Washington State, while Michigan could have played Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. If both Big Ten teams had won, Ohio State and Michigan might have shared the national championship that season.
Other interesting tidbits from the 1996-2010 WhatIfSports.com simulation:
The Leaders Division won 10 of the 15 mythical Big Ten Championship Games.
Nine different Big Ten teams captured division titles and appeared in the Big Ten Championship Game.
Ohio State won the Leaders Division nine times in 15 seasons and went 7-2 in Big Ten Championship Games.
Nebraska and Iowa tied for the most Legends Division titles with five each.
Nebraska, Iowa and Penn State each won two Big Ten Championship Games. Michigan and Wisconsin won one.
The most frequent Big Ten Championship Game matchups were Ohio State vs. Nebraska (3 times), Ohio State vs. Iowa (3 times), Ohio State vs. Michigan (twice) and Penn State vs. Iowa (twice).
LINK
3
Posted on 8/13/11 at 8:59 pm to Bench McElroy
quote:
Nebraska was out of the picture with three conference losses
Posted on 8/13/11 at 9:16 pm to SPEEDY
This simulation system sounds like shite.
Posted on 8/13/11 at 10:03 pm to SandStorm
Hanging on by a freakin thread!
Posted on 8/13/11 at 10:37 pm to NOLACOP
1997 Nebraska wasn't very good. Their big conference championship game was against dog-crap #14 A&M. Only 1 team besides Nebraska in the Big 12 was ranked in the top 20 of the Final AP poll and 0 (besides Nebraska) in the Coaches Poll. While Michigan blew away Nebraska in the AP; Nebraska squeaked by with 2 extra coaches votes to grab that gift to Dr. Tom.
So yeah, they probably do lose 3 - considering they beat Colorado by 3 points and Michigan beat them by 24.
So yeah, they probably do lose 3 - considering they beat Colorado by 3 points and Michigan beat them by 24.
Posted on 8/13/11 at 10:49 pm to Bench McElroy
quote:
In reality, Ohio State lost to Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. Through this simulation, however, the Buckeyes would have presumably gone to the Rose Bowl to play Washington State, while Michigan could have played Florida State in the Sugar Bowl. If both Big Ten teams had won, Ohio State and Michigan might have shared the national championship that season.
Ohio State didn't just "lose" to Florida State in that Sugar Bowl. They were thrashed, and the game was over by halftime.
Let's glance at the stellar Big 10 bowl record that season:
Michigan 21, Washington St. 16
Florida 21, Penn St. 6
Georgia 33, Wisconsin 6
Florida St. 31, Ohio St. 14
Arizona St. 17, Iowa 7
Purdue 33, Oklahoma St. 21
Washington 51, Michigan St. 23
Something tells me that the simulation needs debugging.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:14 am to MikeyFL
at least the Big 10 had 7 teams eligible for bowl games against quality opponents compared to the Big 12 which went 2-3.
#2 Nebraska beat UT
#10 Kansas St. beat Syracuse
#20 Texas A&M lost to UCLA
#24 Okie State lost to Purdue
Missouri lost to Colorado State
This wasn't 1995 Nebraska we're talking about here. Michigan was better and they struggled in 3 games in the Big 10 - Nebraska could very well have lost those games.
#2 Nebraska beat UT
#10 Kansas St. beat Syracuse
#20 Texas A&M lost to UCLA
#24 Okie State lost to Purdue
Missouri lost to Colorado State
This wasn't 1995 Nebraska we're talking about here. Michigan was better and they struggled in 3 games in the Big 10 - Nebraska could very well have lost those games.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:25 am to Zamoro10
quote:
Their big conference championship game was against dog-crap #14 A&M. Only 1 team besides Nebraska in the Big 12 was ranked in the top 20 of the Final AP poll and 0 (besides Nebraska) in the Coaches Poll.
Unless this what if world is assuming Texas A&M was in the SEC, there were in fact 3 Big 12 teams (#2 Nebraska, #8 KSU and #20 Texas A&M) in the top 20. I'm assuming you stopped at 20, even though the poll goes to 25 to booster your disingenuous argument since there were a total of 5 Big 12 teams in the top 25, while there were only 4 Big 10 teams in the top 25.
LINK
ETA: I like how the simulation has tOSU only losing to UM, when in reality they also lost to PSU.
This post was edited on 8/14/11 at 12:28 am
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:27 am to MikeyFL
quote:
Ohio State didn't just "lose" to Florida State in that Sugar Bowl. They were thrashed, and the game was over by halftime. Let's glance at the stellar Big 10 bowl record that season: Michigan 21, Washington St. 16 Florida 21, Penn St. 6 Georgia 33, Wisconsin 6 Florida St. 31, Ohio St. 14 Arizona St. 17, Iowa 7 Purdue 33, Oklahoma St. 21 Washington 51, Michigan St. 23 Something tells me that the simulation needs debugging.
Bowl games are not always the best way to base a team on. They are played well after the rest of the season, so many teams react very differently to not playing games for roughly a month. Although the northern teams are at a disadvantage in bowl games because of the location and weather of the bowl games.
Imagine playing the second half of your season in sub 40 degree weather with wind and possibly rain or snow and this would lead to more of a rushing-based offense, and then you go down play one game against a passing offense in 65 degrees and minimal wind. They are simply not prepared enough to go from a "Big 10" style of play to an "SEC" style of play.
Plus, bowl games are a one-game sample size. It almost always results in a shallow argument, but how do we not know this game was very deviant from the expected course of action by merely luck, poor luck for that matter.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:44 am to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
Bowl games are not always the best way to base a team on
completely agree
quote:
Although the northern teams are at a disadvantage in bowl games because of the location and weather of the bowl games.
Why are the long lay off and weather good excuses when Big 10 teams lose bowl games? Didn't seem to affect tOSU vs Miami in 02. Maybe, just Maybe Florida State was a lot better than tOSU that year? FSU's only loss was by 3 to UF, who was 10-2. IIRC, UF won in the last minutes when Fred Taylor peeled off a long run. Ohio State lost 3 games, oddly to the 3 best teams they played.
quote:
Imagine playing the second half of your season in sub 40 degree weather with wind and possibly rain or snow and this would lead to more of a rushing-based offense, and then you go down play one game against a passing offense in 65 degrees and minimal wind. They are simply not prepared enough to go from a "Big 10" style of play to an "SEC" style of play.
we have to imagine this, because it doesn't exist. It is not below 40 and snowy by Columbus day in the MW, which is the half way point of the season more or less. Up until a year or 2 ago, the Big 10 finished before Thanksgiving, so at most they had 1, maybe 2 games in "bad weather".
Its also hogwash that northern locations dictate more of a rushing attack. New England and Tom Brady had a record setting passing offense in 2007. The Buffalo Bills of the early 90's ran a pass happy offense as did GB with Favre and now with Rodgers. None of those teams play in bowls.
In college, you won't find a more proto type 3 yds and a cloud of dust type offense than the 2009 Alabama Crimson Tide.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:50 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Didn't seem to affect tOSU vs Miami in 02.
One game. Hell of a game to watch, but it is insignificant in the grand scheme of the trends.
I just feel like the Big 10 schools can compete with big time OOC opponents better during the regular season than in the Bowls. Maybe my claim is not based, but I really feel like the Big 10 is underachieving a little or they are facing some inherent disadvantage.*
*Before some jackass comes in to tell about the superiority of the SEC, I am not saying the Big 10 is better. I just think they are arbitarily underachieved in the postseason.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:52 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
there were a total of 5 Big 12 teams in the top 25
Yeah and 3 were clustered in the bottom 5 of the poll. That was the point. I didn't want to list all the rankings and if I wrote it like you it sounds like the Big 12 dominated the Top 25...when in reality they had 3 teams that were part of the poll that is interchanged weekly. And you should know that. The bottom 5 is never a solid ranking; so I don't hold it in esteem.
LINK
...and Ohio State beat Mizzou 31-10.
What's disingenuous is to suggest that Nebraska losing 3 games to the Big 10 is preposterous. The Big 10 was stronger that year than the Big 12. And there is two common opponents to back that up. Missouri and Colorado. It's amazing, every Nebraska team gains in stature every year.
This post was edited on 8/14/11 at 12:53 am
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:52 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Its also hogwash that northern locations dictate more of a rushing attack. New England and Tom Brady had a record setting passing offense in 2007. The Buffalo Bills of the early 90's ran a pass happy offense as did GB with Favre and now with Rodgers. None of those teams play in bowls.
I would not compare pros with college. No one in college, save for possibly Andrew Luck, can have a QB even in the same stratosphere as those NFL studs.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 12:57 am to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
Imagine playing the second half of your season in sub 40 degree weather with wind and possibly rain or snow and this would lead to more of a rushing-based offense, and then you go down play one game against a passing offense in 65 degrees and minimal wind. They are simply not prepared enough to go from a "Big 10" style of play to an "SEC" style of play.
Except that Ohio State's offensive and defensive lines were completely outclassed in that Sugar Bowl... Lukewarm weather isn't the reason that Big 10 teams were humiliated in multiple bowl games that particular year. The FSU/OSU game was similar to the 2008 Georgia/Hawaii Sugar Bowl.
More to the point, though, I simply find the premise of this simulation ridiculous and arrogant. Nebraska might have had a great, competitive game against Michigan. That's a debate I'm willing to entertain. But there is absolutely no tangible evidence to conclude that the Big 10, as a whole, was strong that particular year. The whole thing smacks of intellectually dishonest propaganda.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 1:04 am to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
One game. Hell of a game to watch, but it is insignificant in the grand scheme of the trends
Ohio State is 5-3 in BCS bowls, counting last years now forfeited game over Arkansas as a win. Tressel's bowl record overall was very good. The perception is distorted by the 2 losses to LSU and Florida. Even the much maligned John Cooper was 2-1 in what are now BCS bowls.
As for the Big 10 overall, as of a couple of years ago, they were right around .500 vs the SEC in bowl games. Your theory is largely based on myth.
quote:
Big 10 is underachieving a little or they are facing some inherent disadvantage.*
The recent disadvantage is that the SEC and Southern teams have gotten better. The biggest factor in favor of SEC/Southern schools imo is more demographic. The population in the south has been growing ra;pidly over the last 30 years, while in the MW its been declining. Throw in the fact that as Southern schools have gotten better, the Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, Nebraksa's are not able to scoop up too players from the South like they did in the past and the balance of power has shifted.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 1:24 am to Zamoro10
quote:
I didn't want to list all the rankings and if I wrote it like you it sounds like the Big 12 dominated the Top 25
BS, I called you out for cutting off the bottom 5 of the poll, I said there were 3 Big 12 teams in the top 20 and 5 in the top 25. I was assuming you'd be able to figure out that if there were only 3 teams in the top 20, the other 2 were in the bottom. How you interpreted that into dominating the top 25 I do not know.
quote:
.when in reality they had 3 teams that were part of the poll that is interchanged weekly
I used the FINAL poll, that was the rankings, no interchanging.
quote:
and Ohio State beat Mizzou 31-10.
Oh, well, that's proves it then, my bad. I forgot about the transitive wins factor. I guess since LSU beat Florida (who beat FSU, who beat Ohio State) LSU could have won the MNC.
quote:
What's disingenuous is to suggest that Nebraska losing 3 games to the Big 10 is preposterous
Feel free to post the quote where I said that. Of course they could have lost 3 games. Then again if we ran computer simulations on every season ever, we could come up with very different results. I do find it interesting that this simulation says Ohio State, who did, in reality lose 2 Big 10 games, would have somehow beaten Penn State if Nebraska was in the Big 10.
quote:
The Big 10 was stronger that year than the Big 12. And there is two common opponents to back that up. Missouri and Colorado.
Yeah, 2 common opponents are PROOF.
quote:
It's amazing, every Nebraska team gains in stature every year.
Oh, now i see, I didn't realize who I was talking to. You are completely biased against Nebraska for what ever reason (a Penn State fan mad about 94?)
Niether I nor anyone said the 97 Nebraska team was some unstoppable monster. I was calling you out for intellectual dishonesty, which I know is all you do when discussing mid 90's Nebraska teams.
Not liking team, or thinking they are over rated is fine. But if you can't argue the facts honestly, then it proves you have an agenda and know you can't support your bias with facts.
This post was edited on 8/14/11 at 1:26 am
Posted on 8/14/11 at 1:28 am to Zamoro10
quote:
So yeah, they probably do lose 3 - considering they beat Colorado by 3 points and Michigan beat them by 24
Well, Michigan did get to play Colorado at home, while Nebraska had to play them on the road
But if you are going to go the comparison route to determine the better team, they both played Baylor that year.
Nebraska @ Baylor = 42-7 at the half
Baylor @ Michigan = 21-3 at the half
Bowl Games:
Nebraska - 42, #3 Tennessee - 17
Michigan - 21, #7 Washington State - 16
Nebraska destroyed a Tennessee team that had the following NFL Pro Bowler players on it:
Peyton Manning
Jamal Lewis
Shaun Ellis
Leonard Little
Al Wilson
Chad Clifton
Peerless Price
quote:
Only 1 team besides Nebraska in the Big 12 was ranked in the top 20 of the Final AP poll
And that was Kansas State, who finished the year ranked 8th.
KSU's only loss that year?
To Nebraska, by the score of 56-26
Posted on 8/14/11 at 1:29 am to H-Town Tiger
I think this discusses the same thing, simulating Nebraska in the Big10
LINK
The problem with simulations lies within:
Simulations will always be seriously flawed. Interesting to talk about in the off season, but nothing to get worked up about.
LINK
The problem with simulations lies within:
quote:
1996: Nebraska wins the Legends division in its first year as a Big Ten member, going 7-1 in league play. But the Huskers fell to Leaders division champ Ohio State 20-10 in the league championship game. Interestingly, a Northwestern team that shared the Big Ten title with Ohio State in 1996 went a disappointing 3-5 in league play in the simulation.
Simulations will always be seriously flawed. Interesting to talk about in the off season, but nothing to get worked up about.
Posted on 8/14/11 at 1:37 am to Zamoro10
quote:
...and Ohio State beat Mizzou 31-10.
Well in that case, Michigan beat Notre Dame 21 to 14, while LSU beat them 27 to 9, therefore:
LSU > Michigan
SEC > Big 10
Posted on 8/14/11 at 1:38 am to Bench McElroy
quote:
What if the Leaders and Legends Divisions were established in 1996?
Easy, it would have been 15 more years where we could laugh at the shitty names of their divisions.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News