Can someone please remember the Big Ten went 5-0...

• lhslep134

  

  Ya'll are illogical if you don't see the logic that losing 5 games as an underdog in each isn't something incredibly noteworthy .
• vball10set

  FatHobbit;623353 wrote:Are you new here?

  athlete37;623354 wrote:+1

  
  +2
• SportsAndLady

  

  lhslep134;623456 wrote:Ya'll are illogical if you don't see the logic that losing 5 games as an underdog in each isn't something incredibly noteworthy .

  
  Give it up dude...know when you're wrong
• lhslep134

  

  SportsAndLady;623663 wrote:Give it up dude...know when you're wrong

  
  I still don't understand how 5 underdogs losing is such a big deal....can you or someone else please elaborate on why it's a big deal?
• SportsAndLady

  

  It's never good when 5 of your conference teams lose in the same day.
  
  It's also never good to justify those losses.
• lhslep134

  

  SportsAndLady;623747 wrote:It's never good when 5 of your conference teams lose in the same day.
  
  It's also never good to justify those losses.

  
  Didn't say it was good, but it IS justifiable if all 5 were underdogs. 5 underdogs losing < 5 teams losing when some of them are favorites
• lhslep134

  

  chicago510;623342 wrote:LOL this dude covers sports? He must be BFF with that guy with a 10 year olds voice who called the Buckeye game with Matt Sylvester.
  

  
  hahahahha no, that dude sucks, I coulda told you his broadcast would be worthless
• enigmaax

  lhslep134;623735 wrote:I still don't understand how 5 underdogs losing is such a big deal....can you or someone else please elaborate on why it's a big deal?

  
  Didn't read the whole thread, but would you agree that the Big Ten sucks? If they had five underdogs in the year's biggest games, should those five have even been there?
  
  I'm not entirely sure what the point here is, but most people say the Big Ten's bowl performance proves they suck. You seem to be saying that, yeah, they already sucked before the bowls. If that is the case, everyone is making the same point.
• lhslep134

  

  Enigmaax,
  
  Yes, there was a reason the Big 10 was an underdog in every game. But EVERYONE (including me) expected a much better showing when really, there wasn't any reason to, and that's the point of my thread. But you also gotta remember they got matched up with better teams in every game they lost.
• enigmaax

  lhslep134;623861 wrote:Enigmaax,
  
  Yes, there was a reason the Big 10 was an underdog in every game. But EVERYONE (including me) expected a much better showing when really, there wasn't any reason to, and that's the point of my thread. But you also gotta remember they got matched up with better teams in every game they lost.

  
  Well, I don't believe their matchups were terrible. I know people think Alabama is great, but they lost three games. Michigan State was a Big Ten champ and they were annihilated. Nearly everyone thought big, bad Wisconsin was going to roll TCU and put them in their place. The other three games don't mean a whole lot except in the big picture (though as a Florida fan, sorry, they were terrible this season and I was dreading having to read all the thrashing they were gonna take from OSU/Big Ten fans).
  
  The most powerful conference in college football (look for the answer as to why the BCS didn't happen sooner...and why a playoff won't happen anytime soon) doesn't get its choice of bowl games and then get to use "match-ups" as a crutch or excuse for failure. Nobody is buying that.
  
  The other thing, as it relates to this board, is that for all the "SEC chest thumping", every single damn time the Big Ten has even a shred of glory or the SEC has a slight mishap the whole damn Pandora's box about why the SEC isn't so great is opened up. Big Ten fans have a major complex already about the SEC and when things got rolling, sure enough, up pops a thread about the Big Ten/SEC in bowl games. Obviously, that story is going to take a turn when the Big Ten turns in an unprecedented tank job.
• GOONx19

  

  enigmaax;623939 wrote:Big Ten fans have a major complex already about the SEC and when things got rolling, sure enough, up pops a thread about the Big Ten/SEC in bowl games. Obviously, that story is going to take a turn when the Big Ten turns in an unprecedented tank job.

  
  I go to an SEC school and can assure you that SEC fans have the exact same complex about the Big Ten.
• Footwedge

  Big 10 is 4 and 3 against the spread this bowl season. The SEC is 3 and 4 against the spread. Soooo..it's been more profitable humping the big 10 then the SEC. This despite the fact that the SEC is 4-3 straight up and the Big 10 is 2-5.
• Pick6

  

  I find it interesting that SEC fans here..not sure if it was on this thread or not, but they use the excuse like "georgia and tennessee didnt deserve a bowl game" to cover the loss to literally half of a unc team, and a mediocre mid major. But when big ten fans say things like "michigan didnt deserve a bowl game" or "we thought michigan state wasnt that good all along", we cant make the excuses.
  
  For the record, I agree that Georgia and Tennesse didnt deserve to be in a bowl game..as well as i agree with the big 10 fans explanations.
  
  I personally think there are too many bowls, causing them to be watered down. A michigan team that got lucky and beat ONE AQ with a winning record, 7-5 at that, doesnt deserve a bowl game.
• dwccrew

  

  lhslep134;622706 wrote:What excuses am I making? Please enunciate for me please....

  Just look at you post below.
  

  lhslep134;622708 wrote:They lost in 5 of the 5 games on New Years day they were underdogs in...
  
  
  Does that shock you? Please elaborate......

  You use the fact that they were all underdogs as an excuse.
  

  lhslep134;623456 wrote:Ya'll are illogical if you don't see the logic that losing 5 games as an underdog in each isn't something incredibly noteworthy .

  
  Yes, it is everyone else. Not you, you're the only one right here. :rolleyes:
  
  Just admit, as others have asked you to, that you are wrong and move on. You obviously do not have a clear understanding of sportsbooks and others, like athlete37, have tried to explain it to you. My advice to you, never bet on sports.
• sportswizuhrd

  Lhslep....If OSU wins Tuesday night and everyone gets excited about it are you going to make a thread telling them all to calm down because they were favored to win?
• lhslep134

  

  sportswizuhrd;624041 wrote:Lhslep....If OSU wins Tuesday night and everyone gets excited about it are you going to make a thread telling them all to calm down because they were favored to win?

  
  I haven't made a prediction on the game. If OSU is favored to win, and they do, then whats the surprise? There shouldn't be any....
  
  
  The favorite SHOULD win and the underdog SHOULD lose. It's not about conference chest bumping, which I personally think is stupid. I've heard a lot of Arkansas fans down here chant "SEC, SEC" well, seriously F*** you guys. If all you can do is hang your hat on your conference and not your team, then wtf is the point of playing in a bowl game? No player on OSU truly gives a shit what the hell the rest of the conference did, and they said so in the interviews they gave....the only reason fans do is b/c they're delusional and irrational...
  
  
  Bobby Petrino said time and time again during his press conference that what his team did during conference play has no bearing on his team's matchup with OSU, it comes down to which team executes better. Enough said.
• lhslep134

  

  dwccrew;624026 wrote:Just look at you post below.
  
  
  
  You use the fact that they were all underdogs as an excuse.
  
  
  
  Yes, it is everyone else. Not you, you're the only one right here. :rolleyes:
  
  Just admit, as others have asked you to, that you are wrong and move on. You obviously do not have a clear understanding of sportsbooks and others, like athlete37, have tried to explain it to you. My advice to you, never bet on sports.

  
  I have/do bet on sports. I bet on sports when I think that the oddsmakers are clearly wrong. I wanted to bet on Alabama to destroy MSU which they did and I wanted to bet on Wisco who covered the spread (I thought Wisco would win, but they didn't and I was wrong)....But if the Big 10 goes 0-5 when they were underdogs in every game then no one should truly give a shit b/c the Big 10 lived up to the shitty billing that they deserved to get by being a bad conference this year.
• enigmaax

  Pick6;624019 wrote:I find it interesting that SEC fans here..not sure if it was on this thread or not, but they use the excuse like "georgia and tennessee didnt deserve a bowl game" to cover the loss to literally half of a unc team, and a mediocre mid major. But when big ten fans say things like "michigan didnt deserve a bowl game" or "we thought michigan state wasnt that good all along", we cant make the excuses.
  
  For the record, I agree that Georgia and Tennesse didnt deserve to be in a bowl game..as well as i agree with the big 10 fans explanations.
  
  I personally think there are too many bowls, causing them to be watered down. A michigan team that got lucky and beat ONE AQ with a winning record, 7-5 at that, doesnt deserve a bowl game.

  
  I agree that bowls seem to reward very, very mediocre teams. The one good thing about bowls, whether or not teams "deserve" them, is that they do provide a solid OOC match up, typically against comparable talent/competition. Everyone talks about how bad Michigan was, but Mississippi State didn't beat any of its top opponents either. The wins and losses do add to the sample size if you're going to have a conversation about which conferences play better football. But it does sometimes get blown out of proportion.
  
  Also, I wasn't paying much attention, but there is no defending an SEC loss to Central Florida. But hey, nobody is perfect. And nobody except the Big Ten was 0-5 on New Year's Day.
• revgat

  lhslep134;624054 wrote:I have/do bet on sports. I bet on sports when I think that the oddsmakers are clearly wrong. I wanted to bet on Alabama to destroy MSU which they did and I wanted to bet on Wisco who covered the spread (I thought Wisco would win, but they didn't and I was wrong)....But if the Big 10 goes 0-5 when they were underdogs in every game then no one should truly give a shit b/c the Big 10 lived up to the shitty billing that they deserved to get by being a bad conference this year.

  
  Individually, yes, each big 10 team was the underdog, but if you were to bet that all 5 lose and parlayed it, you would have a huge payout.
• lhslep134

  

  Enigmaax you can talk all you want about the SEC chest thumpers and the people who jump on the SEC whenever they slip up but I fall into neither category, so yes while I agree there's a major inferiority complex (see Big 2-0 little SEC 0-3 thread) on here, I don't want to be associated with that.
  
  The reason for the thread is that when people who love to bash the Big 10 on here (or general trolls) say we went 0-5, well guess what, we were underdogs in all of the games.
• enigmaax

  lhslep134;624220 wrote:we were underdogs in all of the games.

  
  Right, the statement is "the Big Ten sucks". The fact that they were underdogs and lost all of those games just supports that statement, hence the renewed discussion. It is like, new evidence.
• LHSGUY35

  This is the dumbest thread known to man. Hey the Big 10 was supposed to lose every game. As if that is not indicative to how bad the conference is.
• LHSGUY35

  lhslep134;624220 wrote:Enigmaax you can talk all you want about the SEC chest thumpers and the people who jump on the SEC whenever they slip up but I fall into neither category, so yes while I agree there's a major inferiority complex (see Big 2-0 little SEC 0-3 thread) on here, I don't want to be associated with that.
  
  The reason for the thread is that when people who love to bash the Big 10 on here (or general trolls) say we went 0-5, well guess what, we were underdogs in all of the games.

  
  Tool, this is your header under your user name "F*** THE SEC!"
  
  You're not only a hater, you're delusional.