B1G! B1G! B1G!
Looking like 7-0 heading into the Michigan game tomorrow.
Bama and Georgia better win or the Playoff committee is going to have egg all over their face. Good news is it might finally force a 6 or 8 team playoff.
Will be interestering to see how ESPN tries to spin it.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:21 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:35 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:50 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:57 AM ^
You lose a lot of credibility for your arguments when you attempt to draw connective tissue between the current staff and the Lloyd Carr era, which was three coaching staffs ago. And the differences go beyond the guy on the headset.
1999 was a year that Carr actually did pretty well. The Illinois game was as flukey as I can remember in my lifetime, with the team winning comfortably enough that Carr sent Anthony Thomas to the locker room for the day with a small injury just to be cautious. 2003 was more of a classic Carr year, undone by special teams in both of those losses. Not really similar to 1999 at all.
December 31st, 2017 at 1:25 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 8:48 AM ^
It pains me to say it, but ... ^^^THIS^^^.
Except for '97 (which had some disturbingly close calls considering the talent level on that team), Michigan in the modern era has had many painful losses at important times of the year.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:22 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 1:08 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 1:41 PM ^
lol. Wisconsin was good but wasn't the best team in the conference in any of 93, 98 or 99 when they went to the Rose Bowl. OSU probably had the best team in 93 and certainly in 98 while we were the best team in the conference in 99. I'm sure a more substantive analysis could be put together to support this but if you were watching B1G football in that era it was pretty clear. Wisconsin got lucky with some of their byes under Alvarez. Though to their credit, they didn't choke against a lame opponent in the way that OSU did against MSU in 98, or against us in 93, or how we coughed it up against IL in 99.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:40 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 1:37 AM ^
You can be a good team without recruiting well but at some point you hit your ceiling. MSU lost 50-3 to OSU this year and 38-0 to Bama. Wisconsin got walloped by Bama a few years ago.
December 31st, 2017 at 1:43 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 1:01 AM ^
I think you're being a bit too sensitive about Wisconsin overall, but your Rose Bowl argument in point three intrigues me. Let's check it out, working backwards:
6. 2012 season. Final record: 8-6. The year they fluked into the B1G championship game. The best team in the B1G was clearly OSU, who was undefeated but ineligible since they are cheaters. Wisconsin also finished behind PSU in their own division, because PSU is corrupt. We weren't all-conquering that year, but we were still second in our division and they didn't play us. Dodged key team? Check. Not the best? Check.
5. 2011 season. Final record: 11-3. The Russell Wilson year. We finished with a better record thanks to our bowl win but were beaten in our division (Legends, I think? I seriously can never rememberr what it was called) by MSU. MSU lost to Wisconsin 42-39 in that game, a rematch of the hail mary game MSU won in EL. Were we better? Hard to say. But we never got a chance to find out. Dodged a key team? Check. Not the best team? Argument is there, check.
4. 2010 season. Final record: 11-2. Very good team, lost a #3 vs #4 Rose Bowl to TCU, a Rose Bowl they attended due to a tiebreaker over OSU whom they beat 31-18 at home. OSU finished 12-1 with that being their only loss a malevolent gang of tattoos Jim Tressel knows nothing about. Notable: They played all of the best teams in the conference. Can you make an argument? I guess, but Wisconsin was clearly the right team there. Dodged a key team? Incorrect. Not the best team? Incorrect.
3. 1999 season. Final Record: 10-2. Good team, dodged Penn State, clearly not the best team in the conference because we were and we beat them in Madison. Beat MSU because MSU always collapsed after the Michigan game, but didn't need to use the tiebreaker against us because of the ultra-flukey 20-point collapse against Illinois. Dodged a key team? Check. Not the best team? Check.
2. 1998 season. Final Record: 11-1. Good team, surprising win over UCLA. Finished in a three-way tie with a dominant OSU, whom they didn't play, and Michigan, to whom they lost 27-10. Dodged a key opponent? Check. Not the best team? Obvious check.
1. 1993 season. Final Record: 10-1-1. The miracle year. They dodged Penn State, who was good. They tied with Ohio State in the standings and on the field in a game in Madison. Can you make an argument that OSU was a better team? A marginal one based upon home field. But they were the deserving team to go. Dodged key team? Check. Not the best? Incorrect.
The final tally:
In their six modern-era Rose Bowl appearances, Wisconsin was the best / most deserving team to attend in only two of them. In only one season did they not miss one of the best teams in the conference, and most of those situations predate the divisional system.
In only one season did Wisconsin both play every significant team and finish the season as the deserving entrant in the Rose Bowl: 2010.
So your point about their luck WRT Rose Bowls is 100% correct.
December 31st, 2017 at 8:51 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 9:11 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 10:55 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 1:01 AM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:47 PM ^
They just played a pretty solid football game. It was on TV.
December 30th, 2017 at 11:48 PM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:51 PM ^
It's a joke, people.
OR
I guess not. He's doubled down. I didn't think anyone would write something so obviously false.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:00 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 9:05 AM ^
They also say Harbaugh hasn't beaten a top 10 team, didn't we beat PSU, Colorado and Wisconsin last year. Bottom line is Wisconsin is good and we had a shot at beating them this year, OSU is good and we outplayed them for most of the game and had the ball with a chance to win at the end and MSU is decent and we could have won that game how did WSU fare against them or 11-2 USC fare against OSU OR 10-2 Miami fare against Wisky at home
December 31st, 2017 at 12:02 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:07 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:11 AM ^
The only good team they played all year long was Michigan... at home... where the refs waved off a TD and replay confirmed it despite the replay showing he was in... and they were losing until Michigan was forced to play their 3rd string QB.
They just get everything handed to them.
December 31st, 2017 at 1:03 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:52 PM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 5:13 PM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 1:03 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:10 AM ^
That still doesn't make 25 years of pretty good football "all luck". Face it, your stoopid statement makes you look like a butthurt asshat.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:17 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:21 AM ^
So 1 year they got lucky means they've been lucky for 25 years? No, they're a damn good program. Hell, one could argue they've been the most consistent program in the conference over that 25 year span.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:54 AM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:58 AM ^
tl:dr 2010
December 31st, 2017 at 9:02 AM ^
I'm getting it is tough for you living in Wisconsin like it is for us here putting up with Spartys but I still respect them more than MSU
December 31st, 2017 at 9:03 AM ^
Hang in there better days to come
December 31st, 2017 at 5:16 PM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 12:11 AM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:35 PM ^
December 31st, 2017 at 10:43 AM ^
A loss means being the laughing stock of the conference again.
December 30th, 2017 at 11:36 PM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:37 PM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:40 PM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:50 PM ^
December 30th, 2017 at 11:53 PM ^
It will matter this year if Michigan blows the shot at perfect in the last game. At least within the Big Ten, at least as long as the off-season.
The easy solution here is to win.
December 31st, 2017 at 12:51 AM ^
As long as there are five P5 conferences and Notre Dame, and only 4 Playoff spots. . . the perception of conference strength will matter.
December 31st, 2017 at 1:32 AM ^
I feel like if we go undefeated or lose one game, we'd be in the playoff no matter what. I mean the Outback Bowl took us because we sell tickets and put eyes on the tv. I don't think anyone really cares that the Big Ten is 7-0 in random bowl matchups. The teams will be different next year: Wisconsin, PSU, and OSU lose a lot of players off of their teams. We just need to win those games.
December 31st, 2017 at 1:48 AM ^
Winning the conference seems like a pretty sure berth, unless things are totally haywire. Even two losses might not be too many if the conference is as strong as we think (OSU's real sin was getting totally blown out by Iowa, so let's avoid doing that).
The daunting nature of the schedule becomes a plus if Michigan wins the games. Big wins matter; Michigan has a chance to get a few of them.
December 31st, 2017 at 3:05 PM ^
should have been just as important of a factor.
With very little top-tier interleague play, the honest answer to "which league is best at the top" is "nobody knows".
In 2014/2015, Ohio State was a 10 point dog to Bama and a 7 point dog to Oregon. Wrong. For this reason, all other things being equal, I think it's a bad idea to give two playoff spots to one conference.
But all other things were not equal this year. The Buckeyes lost by 15 at home to playoff bound Oklahoma.
Were the Buckeyes better than playoff participant Oklahome this year? Nope. Is Alabama? Nobody knows.
I think rejecting conference champion Ohio State in favor of Alabama was reasonable not because of OSU's worst day (a trap game vs Iowa), but because they were clearly outclassed by the Big 12 representative in a marquee matchup at home.