Big Ten Bowl Record 2000 - 2016

Donate To GopherHole
Iceland12

Iceland12

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,476
Reaction score
2,286
Points
113
With the Big Ten currently at 7-0 with the Outback Bowl tomorrow night the website Eleven Warriors took a look at the Big Ten Bowl record since 2000. It's not very impressive.

2000 2-4 (33%) Citrus Bowl (Michigan)
2001 2-4 (33%) Alamo Bowl (Iowa)
2002 5-2 (71%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2003 3-5 (38%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2004 3-3 (50%) Capital One Bowl (Iowa)
2005 3-4 (43%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State), Orange Bowl (Penn State)
2006 2-5 (29%) Capital One Bowl (Wisconsin)
2007 3-5 (38%) Capital One Bowl (Michigan)
2008 1-6 (14%) Outback Bowl (Iowa)
2009 4-3 (57%) Orange Bowl (Iowa), Rose Bowl (Ohio State)
2010 3-5 (38%) Sugar Bowl (Ohio State, later vacated)
2011 4-6 (40%) Sugar Bowl (Michigan)
2012 2-5 (29%) Gator Bowl (Northwestern)
2013 2-5 (29%) Rose Bowl (Michigan State)
2014 6-5 (55%) Sugar Bowl, CFP Championship (Ohio State)
2015 5-5 (50%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2016 3-7 (30%) Cotton Bowl (Wisconsin)



https://www.elevenwarriors.com/coll...-big-tens-2016-bowl-record-in-perspective?amp
 

Ahhh, no. B1G at 7-0, not 7-1 (unless U of Chicago lost and I missed it).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

GoldenGopherTilTheEnd said:
Ahhh, no. B1G at 7-0, not 7-1 (unless U of Chicago lost and I missed it).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No even though they beat Macalester and Lake Forest to finish the season, the Maroon sadly didn't make it into a Bowl.
 


Iceland12 said:
With the Big Ten currently at 7-0 with the Outback Bowl tomorrow night the website Eleven Warriors took a look at the Big Ten Bowl record since 2000. It's not very impressive.

2000 2-4 (33%) Citrus Bowl (Michigan)
2001 2-4 (33%) Alamo Bowl (Iowa)
2002 5-2 (71%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2003 3-5 (38%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2004 3-3 (50%) Capital One Bowl (Iowa)
2005 3-4 (43%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State), Orange Bowl (Penn State)
2006 2-5 (29%) Capital One Bowl (Wisconsin)
2007 3-5 (38%) Capital One Bowl (Michigan)
2008 1-6 (14%) Outback Bowl (Iowa)
2009 4-3 (57%) Orange Bowl (Iowa), Rose Bowl (Ohio State)
2010 3-5 (38%) Sugar Bowl (Ohio State, later vacated)
2011 4-6 (40%) Sugar Bowl (Michigan)
2012 2-5 (29%) Gator Bowl (Northwestern)
2013 2-5 (29%) Rose Bowl (Michigan State)
2014 6-5 (55%) Sugar Bowl, CFP Championship (Ohio State)
2015 5-5 (50%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2016 3-7 (30%) Cotton Bowl (Wisconsin)



https://www.elevenwarriors.com/coll...-big-tens-2016-bowl-record-in-perspective?amp
Click to expand...

Let me ask you, what do you think was different this year??? I have my own opinion, but I want to know yours.
 



The last time the Big 10 was undefeated in bowl play I believe was 1998-99 season (5-0).

Ohio State, Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State, and Purdue all won.

Nebraska lost their bowl game that year but of course they were not in the Big Ten yet.
 

Iceland12 said:
No, go ahead.
Click to expand...

Well, #1 the B1G was very good this season.

#2, getting left out of the CFP, basically bumped each team down a notch, bowl matchup wise, and for the first time that I can ever remember, B1G teams were the favorites in almost all of the games. At the same time, the SEC, getting two teams into the CFP, means that the rest of their teams are probably not favorites in their games.

#3, well honestly, the Pac-12 was probably overrated all season, and the B1G benefitted from playing several Pac-12 teams.


But my first 2 points were the biggest factor, I don't remember when the B1G has ever been favored in most of its matchups. That basically never happens.
 

KillmeNow said:
Well, #1 the B1G was very good this season.

#2, getting left out of the CFP, basically bumped each team down a notch, bowl matchup wise, and for the first time that I can ever remember, B1G teams were the favorites in almost all of the games. At the same time, the SEC, getting two teams into the CFP, means that the rest of their teams are probably not favorites in their games.

#3, well honestly, the Pac-12 was probably overrated all season, and the B1G benefitted from playing several Pac-12 teams.


But my first 2 points were the biggest factor, I don't remember when the B1G has ever been favored in most of its matchups. That basically never happens.
Click to expand...

#1 - 6 very bad teams and a couple of mediocre ones and 5 good ones. Having 5 good teams, maybe even 4 great ones, does seem unusual but so does so many bad ones.

#2 Have heard this a lot and it makes sense. The SEC has been top heavy for awhile now. Their scheduling is all designed to create "super teams" and the NCAA won't punish them for it. Matter of fact, denials aside, they reward them for it.

#3 Probably true. It's also worth noting that the Big Ten has only had to play a single game in somebody's backyard, Wisconsin's victory in the range Bowl against Miami. Maybe NW playing Kentucky in Nashville, though it sounded as if there were more than a few TN fans cheering for NW and Illinois is damn close to Nashville too. That hasn't been the case in the past. Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Music City Bowl, Heart of Dallas Bowl, Outback Bowl, Citrus Bowl even a few Gator Bowls? Often geography has heavily favored their opponents.

Cheering for MI tomorrow night.
 



KillmeNow said:
#2, getting left out of the CFP, basically bumped each team down a notch, bowl matchup wise, and for the first time that I can ever remember, B1G teams were the favorites in almost all of the games. At the same time, the SEC, getting two teams into the CFP, means that the rest of their teams are probably not favorites in their games.
.
Click to expand...

Absolutely #2. Before the conferences had a hand in picking its bowl matchups, the B1G often had, for example, it's 5th choice team against the 3rd or 4th choice from another conference. The fact that no B1G team and 2 SEC teams were in the CFP was huge for favorable matchups this year.
 

Can’t agree more. The fact that a B1G team didn’t make the CFP this year has helped the B1G in match ups against other teams of equal (or close to) records. It would be interesting to look up SOS for each B1G team and it’s opponent this year. Would be good to see how we match up with that.
 

jdoif0304 said:
Can’t agree more. The fact that a B1G team didn’t make the CFP this year has helped the B1G in match ups against other teams of equal (or close to) records. It would be interesting to look up SOS for each B1G team and it’s opponent this year. Would be good to see how we match up with that.
Click to expand...

Here's the strength of Schedule for the New Year's Six bowl games, using Sagarin rankings after games played thru December 30:

Alabama (57) vs Clemson (7)
Oklahoma (25) vs Georgia (34)
Ohio St (8) vs USC (11)
Penn St (36) vs Washington (55)
Wisconsin (44) vs Miami (19)
Auburn (4) vs UCF (83)

Interesting that for all the talk about how weak the Badgers schedule was, it was actually more difficult than 'Bama's. And 'Bama is worse than any team in the New Years Six from the Power Five conferences. (I did check these numbers before the bowl season started, and Wisconsin's schedule was slightly more difficult than Alabama, but I do not remember about Washington, whose schedule improved slightly after playing Penn State.)
 

graydon said:
Absolutely #2. Before the conferences had a hand in picking its bowl matchups, the B1G often had, for example, it's 5th choice team against the 3rd or 4th choice from another conference. The fact that no B1G team and 2 SEC teams were in the CFP was huge for favorable matchups this year.
Click to expand...

Quite true, but maybe slightly overstated. First, all the games listed were in the Championship Game era. The CFP playoffs have been played 3 times. tOSU got in once. The Buckeyes also played in 3 BCS Championship games from '98 to '13-'14.

While again, a valid point has been raised about the CFP. However, in only 6 of the 17 post-2000 Bowl seasons did a Big Ten team get in. Looking at the results of the Bowl games it would be hard to figure out which years those 6 games occurred.

Why? Because the Big Ten only had one year where they won 2 more Bowl games than they lost. Taking another team out of the mix wasn't the only reason
the Big Ten has gone from 3-5, 1-6, 4-3,3-5, 4-6, 2-5, 2-5, 6-5, 5-5 and 3-7 these past 10 years to 7-0 the year.

Yes, your Badgers had a GREAT year. They would have been in the Playoffs this year in they had beaten the Buckeyes. Consider it karma. A divine retribution for the 7-4 regular season Badgers getting into the 2013 Rose Bowl.

Part of a valid argument on why all Conference Champions shouldn't get into a future College Football Playoff series.
 



KillmeNow said:
Well, #1 the B1G was very good this season.

#2, getting left out of the CFP, basically bumped each team down a notch, bowl matchup wise, and for the first time that I can ever remember, B1G teams were the favorites in almost all of the games. At the same time, the SEC, getting two teams into the CFP, means that the rest of their teams are probably not favorites in their games.

#3, well honestly, the Pac-12 was probably overrated all season, and the B1G benefitted from playing several Pac-12 teams.


But my first 2 points were the biggest factor, I don't remember when the B1G has ever been favored in most of its matchups. That basically never happens.
Click to expand...

#2 is straight up false. Ohio State plays a tougher game if they are in playoff. Penn State plays USC instead of Washington. Everyone else likely plays the same game.
 

Big Ten ended-up at 7-1 and the SEC is now 2-5. Of course the SEC has 2, maybe 3 games left to play.

SEC fans also need to thank Jim Harbaugh. Without his coaching decisions today, the SEC would now be 1-6...
 

As mentioned, normally the Big Ten has our #2 team facing someone else's #1.
Then our #3 is facing someone's #2
Then our #4 is facing a #2 or #3.
Etc.

This year, each one matched, except NW vs Kentucky I believe.
 

Face The Facts said:
As mentioned, normally the Big Ten has our #2 team facing someone else's #1.
Then our #3 is facing someone's #2
Then our #4 is facing a #2 or #3.
Etc.

This year, each one matched, except NW vs Kentucky I believe.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the past numbers don't totally support that, but it's a myth that's hard to kill.
 


KillmeNow said:
Why don't you supply us with the FACTS to refute that myth then???
Click to expand...

You mean in addition to the links that have been posted you'd like me to do all the research that would substantiate the claim. Then post it on free internet board where people ignore anything that doesn't support their own position, is full of trolls, and is just probably going to be ignored anyway?

Yeah, no. But feel free to try it yourself.
 

Iceland12 said:
You mean in addition to the links that have been posted you'd like me to do all the research that would substantiate the claim. Then post it on free internet board where people ignore anything that doesn't support their own position, is full of trolls, and is just probably going to be ignored anyway?

Yeah, no. But feel free to try it yourself.
Click to expand...

Well, Iceland, we have several posters agreeing to the same position, and you individually telling us we are "misremembering" history . . . so yeah, how about coming up with some facts?
 

There is a lot of confusion in this thread. But it isn’t complicated. Everything changed in 2014.

The Big Ten purposely played a grueling bowl schedule up until 2014. They had the most sought-after teams by the bowls. All of the best bowls payed the B1G the most money. Usually it involved pitting weaker B1G teams against a conferences best team in a virtual home game for the opponent. Other conferences HATED how much money the B1G was making from bowls. So they started pointing out how bad the B1G’s “bowl record” was.

Starting in 2014, as “bowl record” became an increasingly significant factor in the subjective barrative around perceived “conference strength”, the B1G made its bowl obligations more like the SEC’s. And now gets to chose where it’s teams will play. Since then, the conference has a winning record in bowls (and still makes the most money). Not surprisingly, fans of other conferences NOW seem to want to claim that “bowl records” don’t really matter afterall.

Looking at the B1G’s conference record prior to 2014 is a worthless exercise at this point. It was so far from an apples-to-apples comparison between the B1G and other conferences it isn’t even worth talking about.
 

Iceland12 said:
Big Ten ended-up at 7-1 and the SEC is now 2-5. Of course the SEC has 2, maybe 3 games left to play.

SEC fans also need to thank Jim Harbaugh. Without his coaching decisions today, the SEC would now be 1-6...
Click to expand...

Harbaugh certainly made some odd decisions but some of the blame should probably also go to the 5 turnovers. Amazing that they turned it over 5 times and only lost by 7.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Harbaugh certainly made some odd decisions but some of the blame should probably also go to the 5 turnovers. Amazing that they turned it over 5 times and only lost by 7.
Click to expand...
If you believe PJ, the turnovers cost Mich the game. I believe it.
 

Anybody want to look at the other BCS/Power 5 Conference records to determine what effect it had on their Bowl Conference records? That would mean some work, but it would be important.

Here's what was posted earlier in the thread on the Big Ten:

2000 2-4 (33%) Citrus Bowl (Michigan)
2001 2-4 (33%) Alamo Bowl (Iowa)
2002 5-2 (71%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2003 3-5 (38%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2004 3-3 (50%) Capital One Bowl (Iowa)
2005 3-4 (43%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State), Orange Bowl (Penn State)
2006 2-5 (29%) Capital One Bowl (Wisconsin)
2007 3-5 (38%) Capital One Bowl (Michigan)
2008 1-6 (14%) Outback Bowl (Iowa)
2009 4-3 (57%) Orange Bowl (Iowa), Rose Bowl (Ohio State)
2010 3-5 (38%) Sugar Bowl (Ohio State, later vacated)
2011 4-6 (40%) Sugar Bowl (Michigan)
2012 2-5 (29%) Gator Bowl (Northwestern)
2013 2-5 (29%) Rose Bowl (Michigan State)
2014 6-5 (55%) Sugar Bowl, CFP Championship (Ohio State)
2015 5-5 (50%) Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State)
2016 3-7 (30%) Cotton Bowl (Wisconsin)

Did not getting a team in the playoffs have an effect this year? Maybe. Did the SEC getting two teams in effect the Big Ten's Bowl record? Most likely. Did the "we always play better teams" and the "but getting a team in the Playoffs always moved our teams down a notch!" account for the past records? Not much.

The Big Ten got into the "playoffs" 6 times during the last 17 years. All but one time it was tOSU. If you look at the record, it didn't make much difference in the Bowl record of the Big Ten. Matter of fact their best year before this one was in the 02-03 season when they went 5-2 and tOSU won the National Championship. Otherwise getting a team into the BCS/Championship Series seems to have had little affect on the Big Ten's record. It was always pretty bad.

More likely always having to play a "Road" game, sometimes even against an actual Home team had a big effect on the outcome of games. Can't speak to comparative talent levels or style of play, but the "top heaviness" of the Big Ten has been always discussed. Anybody who wants to do all the work is welcome to because that would also be important.

Goldmember made some very good points. Yeah, it happens. :cool:

The other Conferences have complained for years about the Pac-12/Big Ten's lock on the Rose Bowl. Understandable, it's the best venue, pays out the most, gets the best TV ratings and it's, of course, "The Granddaddy of them All". The BCS finally broke that lock. Starting after the '01-'02 season other Conferences got to play on Pasasdena. As Goldmember said, the College Football Playoffs have made it even worse.

The true villain in this scenario though isn't the other Conferences whining about the Big Ten's Bowl tie-ins. It was the demand for a playoff and the money that came with it. The Big Ten and Pac-12(10) tried to hold their ground but finally gave in.

Again anybody, even Badger graydon, is certainly allowed to look at the Bowl situations of all the other Conferences to see what the BCS/CFP did to their Bowl records. It would give a better picture of the overall situation.

Except for the troll, nobody said anything about "misremembering". Only that people latched on to a single reason to explain this years record. A "myth" that getting a Big Ten team into the BCS/CFP meant that it always had a huge negative effect on the Big Ten's Bowl Record. More accurately it was THEE major reason.

If anyone looked at the O.P. you can see it just isn't so.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Harbaugh certainly made some odd decisions but some of the blame should probably also go to the 5 turnovers. Amazing that they turned it over 5 times and only lost by 7.
Click to expand...

Absolutely it had a hand in it. Michigan had 5 turnovers to South Carolina's 3. Though going for it on 4th and long at their own 25, with 3 minutes plus on the line, was also a big factor.
 

Iceland12 said:
#2 Have heard this a lot and it makes sense. The SEC has been top heavy for awhile now. Their scheduling is all designed to create "super teams" and the NCAA won't punish them for it. Matter of fact, denials aside, they reward them for it.
Click to expand...

That's another discussion to have. What makes a conference great? Is it having 2 or 3 great teams every year that have a chance to win the National Championship even if the rest of the conference is weak? Or is strength top to bottom?

I thought I saw somewhere earlier this year that Alabama and Georgia rarely play during the regular season. It sure helps if your best teams don't have to play each other often.
 

GophersInIowa said:
That's another discussion to have. What makes a conference great? Is it having 2 or 3 great teams every year that have a chance to win the National Championship even if the rest of the conference is weak? Or is strength top to bottom?

I thought I saw somewhere earlier this year that Alabama and Georgia rarely play during the regular season. It sure helps if your best teams don't have to play each other often.
Click to expand...

Yeah I posted that in another thread. Georgia has played Alabama 11 times in 40 years.
 

Iceland12 said:
Absolutely it had a hand in it. Michigan had 5 turnovers to South Carolina's 3. Though going for it on 4th and long at their own 25, with 3 minutes plus on the line, was also a big factor.
Click to expand...

Was definitely a strange call but it is one of those that had they punted and not gotten the ball back then he would have been bashed for giving up. And even with the way it played out they still got the ball back down 7 with plenty of time to make something happen.

The real killer for Michigan in that game was the muffed punt.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Was definitely a strange call but it is one of those that had they punted and not gotten the ball back then he would have been bashed for giving up. And even with the way it played out they still got the ball back down 7 with plenty of time to make something happen.

The real killer for Michigan in that game was the muffed punt.
Click to expand...

J.H. would have been bashed because he punted from his deep into his own territory with over 3 minutes left in the game. To a South Carolina offense that they he had pretty much held in check? You think Harbaugh was even considering that?

You are trying way too hard, but Happy New Year to you. :drink:
 

GophersInIowa said:
That's another discussion to have. What makes a conference great? Is it having 2 or 3 great teams every year that have a chance to win the National Championship even if the rest of the conference is weak? Or is strength top to bottom?

I thought I saw somewhere earlier this year that Alabama and Georgia rarely play during the regular season. It sure helps if your best teams don't have to play each other often.
Click to expand...

You can argue every which way.

I like to suggest: what would be the W-L record if the top 3 or 4 teams in each conf played each other? Ohio St, Wisconsin, and Penn St did not get a chance to show what they could've done against Alabama, Auburn, and Georgia, this year. Transitive games analysis does not count.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom