BCS Conferences - Non-Conference Records
Couldn't find these easily anywhere so I added them up myself. Hopefully I didn't do a bunch of work for nothing. The SEC and ACC still have a significant number of games left to play, so these are by no means final standings, however the Big 10, Big 12 and Pac 12 are more or less set.
Big 10
I think we're all aware how this season is going for the Big 10. 6-6 against BCS conference opponents, which does not include the MSU win over Boise or the three losses to Notre Dame.
Four of our six wins against BCS competition are against Syracuse x 2, Boston College, and Temple; the two respectable ones being NW over Vanderbilt and OSU over Cal.
Pac 12
The overall Pac 12 record is pretty ugly thanks to three non-BCS losses by Colorado, but going 6-3 against BCS teams (3-1 against the Big 10) ain't bad.
Big 12
The Big 12 continues to dominate, mostly by refusing to schedule BCS opponents (lowest % of total non-conf. games), but also by showing well in their few BCS matchups (5-1).
The wins consist of TCU over Virginia, Kansas State over Miami, Iowa State over Iowa, Texas over Ole Miss, and West Virginia over Maryland; the lone loss is Oklahoma State falling to Arizona (way to go RR). The other two non conference losses (not to BCS schools) are Kansas, losing to Rice & Northern Illinois.
SEC
Whether or not SEC domination holds true at the cream of the crop, top to bottom they are not covering themselves in glory. Second highest overall non-conference record (28-7, 80%), but only 4-5 against BCS teams.
These wins are Tennessee over NC State, Missouri over Arizona State, Alabama over Michigan, and LSU over Washington. The BCS losses are Kentucky to Louisville, Vandy to Northwestern, Ole Miss to Texas, Arkansas to Rutgers, and Auburn to Clemson.
ACC
Overall non-conf. just above the Pac 12 and Big 10 (24-9, 73%), but an abysmal BCS record (4-9). This is thanks to being 0-3 against the Big 12 and 2-3 against the Big East.
Big East
Terrible overall record (16-9, 64%), but 2-0 over the SEC (Rutgers over Arkansas, and Louisville over Kentucky) and Pitt upsetting Virginia Tech? Keep trolling Big East.
Chart:
| Non-Conference Record | |||
| W | L | % | |
| Big 12 | 25 | 3 | 89.3% |
| SEC | 28 | 7 | 80.0% |
| ACC | 24 | 9 | 72.7% |
| PAC12 | 23 | 9 | 71.9% |
| Big 10 | 33 | 13 | 71.7% |
| Big East | 16 | 9 | 64.0% |
| Non-Conference Record (Against Other 5 BCS Conferences) | |||
| W | L | % | |
| Big 12 | 5 | 1 | 83.3% |
| PAC12 | 6 | 3 | 66.7% |
| Big 10 | 6 | 6 | 50.0% |
| Big East | 5 | 6 | 45.5% |
| SEC | 4 | 5 | 44.4% |
| ACC | 4 | 9 | 30.8% |
| Non-Conference Record (Against Other Opponents) | |||
| W | L | % | |
| ACC | 20 | 0 | 100.0% |
| Big 12 | 20 | 2 | 90.9% |
| SEC | 24 | 2 | 92.3% |
| Big 10 | 27 | 7 | 79.4% |
| Big East | 11 | 3 | 78.6% |
| PAC12 | 17 | 6 | 73.9% |
| Non-Conference Games Left | |||
| SEC | 21 | ||
| ACC | 15 | ||
| Big East | 7 | ||
| PAC12 | 4 | ||
| Big 12 | 2 | ||
| Big 10 | 2 |
| % of Non-Conference Games Played Against BCS Opponents | |||
| Big East | 11 | 25 | 44.0% |
| ACC | 13 | 33 | 39.4% |
| PAC12 | 9 | 32 | 28.1% |
| Big 10 | 12 | 46 | 26.1% |
| SEC | 9 | 35 | 25.7% |
| Big 12 | 6 | 28 | 21.4% |
| V (W-L) | ACC | Big 10 | PAC12 | SEC | Big 12 | Big East | Total |
| ACC VS… | N/A | 1-1 | 0-1 | 1-1 | 0-3 | 2-3 | 4-9 |
| Big 10 VS… | 1-1 | N/A | 1-3 | 1-1 | 0-1 | 3-0 | 6-6 |
| PAC 12 VS… | 1-0 | 3-1 | N/A | 0-2 | 1-0 | 1-0 | 6-3 |
| SEC VS… | 1-1 | 1-1 | 2-0 | N/A | 0-1 | 0-2 | 4-5 |
| Big 12 VS… | 3-0 | 1-0 | 0-1 | 1-0 | N/A | 0-0 | 5-1 |
| Big East VS… | 3-2 | 0-3 | 0-1 | 2-0 | 0-0 | N/A | 5-6 |
September 25th, 2012 at 7:50 PM ^
...but I wouldn't call a win over them impressive.
September 25th, 2012 at 7:54 PM ^
Not a great win, but then again I might take Vandy over Cal heads up. It seemed okay looking at how tough they played South Carolina (losing 13-17), but Georgia really took the shine off of it (rolling them 48-3).
September 25th, 2012 at 9:33 PM ^
I think Vandy stayed with SC due to it being their first game of the season and having SC at home as well. Once they played a few more games and had current film on them Georgia showed you what you can expect from Vandy. I was a bit surprised NW beat them as badly as they did. Cal looked pretty good in their game against Ohio (though so have all of Ohio's opponents) but I think Cal is the better team. Site would be the tilt. In CA < Cal, in TN < Vandy.
September 26th, 2012 at 2:24 AM ^
September 26th, 2012 at 3:37 PM ^
or back in 2010 I don't remember?
September 27th, 2012 at 1:04 PM ^
Are you nuts? I find it amazing how so many people on this blog have no respect for anything west of the rockies aside from Oregon (who is only good b/c of the system RR invented) and USC (who is only good because they obviously pay every recruit before getting to campus). You do realize that Cal lost a coinflip to OSU on the road and UCLA beat Nebraska? Many pick these teams to beat Michigan. I disagree, but Michigan is not materially better than them. So by taking Vandy over Cal, you think Vandy could potentially handle Michigan?
September 25th, 2012 at 7:58 PM ^
September 26th, 2012 at 12:56 AM ^
Did I miss something, or has it been the LSU-Alabama show for the past few years as the Big two and little 10 (now maybe up to Big 3 including Georgia or SC and little 11)?
September 26th, 2012 at 1:50 AM ^
Didn't Auburn win the NC two years ago?
September 26th, 2012 at 10:15 AM ^
Wasnt that team pretty much Cam Newton and Nick Fairley? Gene Chizik era: 8-5, 14-0, 8-5, 1-3. Cam Newton era: 14-0!
September 26th, 2012 at 11:33 AM ^
This. This x 10. IMHO, this is the crucial part of all this B1G vs. SEC comparison drama. The fact that Alabama is likely a step above even it's "peers" (LSU, perhaps Georgia) also adds to the point.
September 25th, 2012 at 8:07 PM ^
Interestingly, the MAC is 20-21 in out of conference games. If you remove Eastern Michigan and Umass, the conference is having a pretty decent year at 20-15. Also, Ohio U has a good shot at running the table with their toughest remaining contests being Bowling Green and @ Miami (OH). Unfortunately for them, their quality wins are against Penn St. and Marshall so even if they make it through the season unscathed, they probably will not be awarded a BCS berth.
September 25th, 2012 at 8:52 PM ^
but I think people are getting too excited about them too early. I remember a few years back ECU started 4-0 with wins over WVU and VT and everyone was already chalking them into a BCS game...and then they lost like 3 or 4 CUSA games.
Ohio will probably still lose 2 or 3 games, but it would be nice for the MAC to get some national rep. They haven't really had much going on other than Roethlisberger and Lefevour
September 26th, 2012 at 10:58 AM ^
I am a BGSU grad and hate to say it but they are not very good. Not sure how they played Florida close but only win is against a winless Idaho team.
September 25th, 2012 at 8:33 PM ^
This is pretty intriguing, and thanks for sharing it.
It is interesting that, back in August when the CBS strength of schedule rankings came out, we were looking at the Big Ten averaging 18th on the list, with several teams in the top 15 on the list, and the SEC hovering at 40th or so, and the ACC not far below that, whereas the Pac-12 was at 24th on average, as I recall, with several representatives in the top 20. Overall, looking at the last table, it is intriguing to see conferences with supposedly easier games (for the schedule is but a theory, yes?) against BCS opponents doing markedly worse for the most part.
September 25th, 2012 at 9:35 PM ^
Considering Notre Dame as a BCS conference school paints a slightly grimmer picture for us, leaving us at 4th against non-BCS opponents and knocking us down to 5th against BCS opponents (with the win % ranking).
September 26th, 2012 at 12:30 AM ^
September 26th, 2012 at 12:43 AM ^
even when they're not good, they would probably still finish in the middle of the pack in most BCS conferences. An 8-4 ND team is probably good enough for something between 4-4 and 6-2 in the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Pac-12, and maybe 7-1 or 8-0 in the Big East. That's better than a good deal of BCS teams.
September 25th, 2012 at 9:44 PM ^
that from top to bottom the B1G is fairly "in the middle". The problem seems to be that we really have no one that will likely be ranked in the top 10 at the end of the season.
Not sure that even a 11 - 2 Michigan team would be voted into the top 10. But then again, we would be B1G champs and playing in the Rose Bowl!
Go Blue!
September 26th, 2012 at 1:55 AM ^
It'd be interesting. Alabama's going to steamroll a lot of teams in the SEC so that loss isn't going to look as bad as the season plays out. If ND is 9-3/10-2, then UM's losses don't look that bad.
The key is at this poing there really only appears to be 3 chances for a 'big' win on the schedule - MSU, Nebraska and OSU, and that's assuming those teams end the regular season with decent records.
September 26th, 2012 at 12:03 AM ^
IMHO, this is diary-worthy. Nice work.
September 26th, 2012 at 4:14 PM ^
Needs a diary and a follow up post after all the non-cons are done.
September 26th, 2012 at 10:22 AM ^
September 26th, 2012 at 1:32 PM ^
They are tied for first with 6 wins against the BCS conferences.
September 26th, 2012 at 3:50 PM ^
...and tied for for 2nd to last with 6 losses against BCS conferences.
September 26th, 2012 at 8:04 PM ^
But going .500 against the BCS coference teams is a definite win for the MAC. Plus it's better than losing to teams from the WAC or C-USA.
September 26th, 2012 at 9:08 PM ^
I thought it was strange that Sagarin had the MAC rated last among all FBS conferences...then I remembered that UMass is included. Take Massachusetts out and they're eighth behind the six BCS conferences and the MWC.
Of course, those ratings still include a component carried over from last year, too.