Rose Bowl Open Thread
5 PM on ESPN.
Well, here it is - the Rose Bowl Presented By Vizio.
This is the battle of conference champions, of the 11-2 teams. Wiscosin versus LaMichael's Legs, or Oregon, if you prefer.
I don't have much in the way of sarcasm directed towards this game - it actually seems like it should be a good game, although I have to wonder if Wisconsin will be able to keep up with Oregon for the entire game.
Can Monte Ball break the record for TDs in a single season of FBS play? We shall see.
Will Bret Bielema find an innovative way to be a d-bag? Very likely.
I took Oregon. Call me nuts.
January 2nd, 2012 at 8:54 PM ^
Let's look at the games:
1. Wisconsin was very competitive with Oregon and a "typical" mistake cost them the game - the error in not knowing what can be challenged or not and cost them a time out, the fumble after a great long pass and arguably having to go for a FG taking them to 31 was largely due to Ball slipping on the 2nd down play when they were in deep.
2. MSU showed great heart and came back to beat Georgia when it would have been easy for them to cave. Yes, Georgia made mistakes but these were not flukes.
3. OSU lost to Florida, but they were also in that game and frankly playing for an outgoing coach with all of the distractions they did OK. Strange play calling - when early on they were running the ball well and essentially kept Florida off the field for most of the 2nd quarter.
4. Nebraska - looked like Nebraska we played. They had their moments, but are a one dimensional team. When forced to do more and do it consistently they couldn't do it.
5. PSU - seriously distracted and messed up due to the worst college sports scandal of all time. Worse than the worst gambling scandal. Worse than the worst alcohol or adult sex scandal. And they played that way.
It seemed to be the talking point of so many of the commentators that the "B10 is weak". Yet after looking at the games, Three of the games were winnable and MSU did win. OSU and Wisconsin were within one or two plays from being the victors. Nebraska and PSU were the only ways which look out of sorts but frankly they looked that way all season against the better B10 teams.
January 2nd, 2012 at 9:02 PM ^
There's a threshold issue IMHE, before one even gets to this step.
And that is that the B1G does not need to justify itself in performances against other conferences in bowl games.
Our conference is the best in the country (IMHE); our kids are the toughest kids in the country; they're blue collar, hard working kids who generally will lose in one-off situations to teams that oversign and/or teams from warm weather states that get to play bowl games in their own climate and often in or near their home states.
The day that these teams have to abide by scholarship rules and/or travel to play us in places like Soldier Field or Lambeau, and still blast us is the day I might seek a justification as a graduate of a B1G school. Even then I'm not sure I'd see it as necessary.
Until then (and probably even after then), I'll take the B1G every day of the week, and I don't need a justification for it.
January 2nd, 2012 at 9:02 PM ^
The conference looks average, which is fine with me. Nobody so far this bowl season has looked particularly good. Big 12 looks like a conference with oodles of offense and no defense. The Pac-12 the same. Big 10 looks like a bunch of 8-4, 9-3 teams that can beat anyone but don't have an immense number of playmakers. The SEC looks the best, but that also feels a little like a mirage given some of the match-ups, and frankly we all know about the oversigning. I find it funny that of the SEC/B1G games today, the two involving SEC teams that don't oversign - FLA and UGA - were pretty competitive and actually featured teams with offensive and defensive holes.
I'm sure we'll hear about how down the B1G is this year and going forward, but they look average. I'm okay with that.
January 2nd, 2012 at 9:36 PM ^
1) Wisconsin gave up 621 yards of offense on 64 plays. I know their defense isn't very good, but those are Alamo Bowl numbers right there. And they are the best team in the conference.
2) Congratulations to Michigan State. Could have gone either way and they made the plays to win it.
3) OSU outplayed Florida in the 2nd quarter. Once up 11, they essentially ran the clock out. Neither team is great, but it's hard to win when you give up 2 TDs on special teams.
4) Nebraska had the nice first half and then got their ass handed to them after that. It was somewhat similar to OSU-UF. A quality 1st half followed up by one team making adjustments and getting better and the other well . . not.
5) Houston had distractions as well. First, they lost the Sugar Bowl and second their coach is also leaving. And is their a great indictment of your defensive scheme than running the ball a grand total of THREE TIMES in the 1st half.
If the conference wants some respect in football it needs to WIN FOOTBALL GAMES!
January 2nd, 2012 at 10:57 PM ^
...but the matchups also matter. In the 7 B1G games played thusfar, a B1G underdog lost to a higher ranked/favored opponent in five of them. Michigan State was ranked lower and getting points but won.
It is conventional on ESPN to look at conference bowl records as an indication of conference strength, but this doesn't seem to indicate much when every team in a conference is drawing higher ranked and favored opponents.
January 3rd, 2012 at 12:39 AM ^
against the spread as well I believe. So not only do bettors not think much of the conference, the teams can't even cover given the benefit of points.
Its about winning big-time games. Simple as that. Until the conference can do that with any consistency, it's going to be looked down upon.
January 3rd, 2012 at 1:27 AM ^
...but the point I'm trying to make is that the normal "SEC>B1G" analysis is misleadingly simplistic when factors like match-ups are excluded. Even a metric like Big Ten performance agains the spread is a red herring at this time of the year when irrational/recreational fan gamblers push the lines away from the more clinical (and predictive) "open" numbers.
January 2nd, 2012 at 10:08 PM ^
The first half of that Nebraska game was dominated by Nebraska. South Carolina had 4 good plays the entire first half and I figured Nebraska would continue running the ball all ove South Carolinas defense. They apparently chose to quit.
Penn state was the same Penns state team they where all year. The best team they beat was what ... Temple? Their team strength was their d line and linebackers , but Houston was getting the ball out quick to wide open receivers all day. Pretty much guarenteed their interm head coach won't be getting that job.
Ohio State was inconsistant all year so no real surprise there. Beat Wisconsin one week and lose to purdue the next.
I just hope Michigan is ready for a war
January 2nd, 2012 at 8:57 PM ^
Amazed that Wiscy didn't have a better plan there. You are close enough to just have all the WRs run around to the endzone, throw the ball. The refs even gave them a couple extra seconds by fumbling around with the ball before placing it. Just signal the same call and give it a heave.
I hate that Wiscy represents B1G football, because they ALWAYS do dumb stuff like this. The two games they lost this year, last year against TCU, eons under Alvarez.
January 2nd, 2012 at 8:59 PM ^
i feel gross afer watching how that game ended
January 2nd, 2012 at 9:01 PM ^
Rogel Goodell just threw a flag, DON'T HURT THE OFFENSE!
January 2nd, 2012 at 9:14 PM ^
With exception of the PSU game, I feel like the B1G did a lot of big time choking today. Nebraska wasn't the same after the fumble inside the ten. ohio was screwed after the Posey fumble and Wisky was moving right along before the fumble with 4:00 to go. Today was embarrassing.
January 2nd, 2012 at 11:07 PM ^
Congrats phill knight your professional team of bought players finaly one a big game