« 2009 Orange Bowl results - final score: Virginia Tech 20, Cincinnati 7 | Main | 2009 International Bowl preview, odds, & prediction: Connecticut vs. Buffalo »

January 02, 2009


pac 10 played 5 bowl games while the sec plays 7 or 8 bowl games. this imbalance gives the sec an unfair edge to "earn points" so this whole point system is flawed.


To the genius below, your complaint is invalid. It's not a fault of the system that the PAC-10 is only good enough to put 5 teams in December bowl games, while the SEC has 5 of their 7 teams playing in January. Adding to that point, the 'imbalance' also works the other way, as it is immensely easier to go 5-0 than to go 7-0.


To the genius above, rather.


Another mistake, the PAC-10 had 4 teams in December bowl games, not 5.


Well I think the argument that the SEC had more bowl teams is somewhat valid, somewhat not. Valid in that the potential for "points" is greater with more teams, but remember that these "points" are a zero-sum system, so having more teams can go either way, for or against.

Also, it says something that the Pac 10 only qualified 5 teams. To get more "points" you have to qualify more teams. That said, the SEC has more teams in their conference to start with.

Bottom line, we're talking about two different aspects. One is overall, raw record, and in that, the Pac 10 has clearly performed the best by winning 5 bowl games and losing none.

But the intent of this post was to point out that they were expected to be 4-1, so going 5-0 isn't all that shocking or telling about the state of the conference.

The SEC on the other hand, has won three more games than the oddsmakers thought, and beat the spread 5 times vs. 2, so really it's the SEC that we should be more surprised by at this point.

The Big East went 5-0 in 2006-07 under similar circumstances even with an eight team conference. Somehow I don't remember the rush for anointment that year. . .

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search SportsRatings