Big 10 vs. SEC - Playoff predictor

[LAVol1]

The latest odds of making the playoff per ESPN for B10 and SEC leaders:

Team Odds Top 25 opponents on full schedule
Oregon - 95.6% 2
UGA - 92.3% 5
tOSU - 91.3% 3
Indiana - 86.6% 1
Texas - 77.9% 3
Vols - 73.9% 3
PSU - 73.7% 1

So, two of the four B10 playoff contenders only have to play one top 25 team the ENTIRE season. Oregon plays 2 and tOSU 3. No SEC contender plays less than 3. Also, the weak conference teams of the B10 are much worse than the SEC weaker teams.

Sagarin rates 7 B10 teams worse than ANY SEC team not named Mississippi St. Teams outside the Top 25:

Big 10 SEC
Purdue - 109 MSU - 84
Northwestern - 79 UK - 53
Michigan St. - 70 Vandy - 52
Rutgers - 79 AU - 47
Maryland - 67 Ark - 42
UCLA - 59 Miz - 30
Illinois - 55
Michigan - 40
Wisconsin - 37
Minnesota - 28
USC - 26

Will the weak schedules of the B10 be rewarded with a playoff birth?

 

[VolCalls]

The latest odds of making the playoff per ESPN for B10 and SEC leaders:

Team Odds Top 25 opponents on full schedule
Oregon - 95.6% 1
UGA - 92.3% 5
tOSU - 91.3% 3
Indiana - 86.6% 1
Texas - 77.9% 3
Vols - 73.9% 3
PSU - 73.7% 1

So, three of the four B10 playoff contenders only have to play one top 25 team the ENTIRE season. No SEC contender plays less than 3. Also, the weak conference teams of the B10 are much worse than the SEC weaker teams.

Sagarin rates 7 B10 teams worse than ANY SEC team not named Mississippi St. Teams outside the Top 25.

Big 10 SEC
Purdue - 109 MSU - 84
Northwestern - 79 UK - 53
Michigan St. - 70 Vandy - 52
Rutgers - 79 AU - 47
Maryland - 67 Ark - 42
UCLA - 59 Miz - 30
Illinois - 55
Michigan - 40
Wisconsin - 37
Minnesota - 28
USC - 26

Will the weak schedules of the B10 be rewarded with a playoff birth?

I don’t know what you’re trying to get at, here - that the B1G should only get one team in the playoffs and the SEC should have 7?

 

[SockeyeVol]

I'm glad we got rid of the BCS model so nobody will bitch about selection bias anymore.

 

[Berry4Heisman14]

Handle business against UGA and we will have nothing to worry about

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

The Big 10 benefits from the media bias people claim the SEC benefits from.

 

[VolPack22]

Playoff births are very laborious.

 

[LittleVol]

The latest odds of making the playoff per ESPN for B10 and SEC leaders:

Team Odds Top 25 opponents on full schedule
Oregon - 95.6% 1
UGA - 92.3% 5
tOSU - 91.3% 3
Indiana - 86.6% 1
Texas - 77.9% 3
Vols - 73.9% 3
PSU - 73.7% 1

So, three of the four B10 playoff contenders only have to play one top 25 team the ENTIRE season. No SEC contender plays less than 3. Also, the weak conference teams of the B10 are much worse than the SEC weaker teams.

Sagarin rates 7 B10 teams worse than ANY SEC team not named Mississippi St. Teams outside the Top 25.

Big 10 SEC
Purdue - 109 MSU - 84
Northwestern - 79 UK - 53
Michigan St. - 70 Vandy - 52
Rutgers - 79 AU - 47
Maryland - 67 Ark - 42
UCLA - 59 Miz - 30
Illinois - 55
Michigan - 40
Wisconsin - 37
Minnesota - 28
USC - 26

Will the weak schedules of the B10 be rewarded with a playoff birth?

Texas AM lost to Norte Dame
LSU lost to USC
Till last weekend both of those teams were the leaders in SEC.

That didn’t help the SEC with those two early losses.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Texas AM lost to Norte Dame
LSU lost to USC
Till last weekend both of those teams were the leaders in SEC.

That didn’t help the SEC with those two early losses.

But their lead in the conference was fugazi. No one thought either team was even top 3 in the conference. They just benefitted from the schedule. Now that they're facing tougher competition A&M got exposed. And LSU might follow suit.

 

[bigorangedude]

You lost me at tOSU.

 

[sami]

The latest odds of making the playoff per ESPN for B10 and SEC leaders:

Team Odds Top 25 opponents on full schedule
Oregon - 95.6% 1
UGA - 92.3% 5
tOSU - 91.3% 3
Indiana - 86.6% 1
Texas - 77.9% 3
Vols - 73.9% 3
PSU - 73.7% 1

So, three of the four B10 playoff contenders only have to play one top 25 team the ENTIRE season. No SEC contender plays less than 3. Also, the weak conference teams of the B10 are much worse than the SEC weaker teams.

Sagarin rates 7 B10 teams worse than ANY SEC team not named Mississippi St. Teams outside the Top 25.

Big 10 SEC
Purdue - 109 MSU - 84
Northwestern - 79 UK - 53
Michigan St. - 70 Vandy - 52
Rutgers - 79 AU - 47
Maryland - 67 Ark - 42
UCLA - 59 Miz - 30
Illinois - 55
Michigan - 40
Wisconsin - 37
Minnesota - 28
USC - 26

Will the weak schedules of the B10 be rewarded with a playoff birth?

I've been making this point all season, thank you for charting it out like this. I'm not a fan of the 12-team playoff to begin with, but a primary reason is that all 'Power 4' conferences aren't close to being equal.

The Big 10 is considered by the 'committee' and the hack national media (who are almost exclusively from the north) as the equal to the SEC, but it's clear they have really only two legit championship contenders, a few pretenders benefiting from ridiculous schedules, and a load of dreck. The ACC has one possibly legit team who is yet to play anyone, and the Big 12 is closer to the Mountain West and AAC than they are to the SEC.

 

[Godfatha]

Texas AM lost to Norte Dame
LSU lost to USC
Till last weekend both of those teams were the leaders in SEC.

That didn’t help the SEC with those two early losses.

Yep, Brian Kelly gonna Brian Kelly. That USC team is bad.

 

[adam.vol]

Texas AM lost to Norte Dame
LSU lost to USC
Till last weekend both of those teams were the leaders in SEC.

That didn’t help the SEC with those two early losses.

Texas defeating Michigan and Alabama defeating Wisconsin didn’t help the SEC either. It’s like none of those games matter at the end of the year.

 

[NighthawkVol]

The latest odds of making the playoff per ESPN for B10 and SEC leaders:

Team Odds Top 25 opponents on full schedule
Oregon - 95.6% 1
UGA - 92.3% 5
tOSU - 91.3% 3
Indiana - 86.6% 1
Texas - 77.9% 3
Vols - 73.9% 3
PSU - 73.7% 1

So, three of the four B10 playoff contenders only have to play one top 25 team the ENTIRE season. No SEC contender plays less than 3. Also, the weak conference teams of the B10 are much worse than the SEC weaker teams.

Sagarin rates 7 B10 teams worse than ANY SEC team not named Mississippi St. Teams outside the Top 25.

Big 10 SEC
Purdue - 109 MSU - 84
Northwestern - 79 UK - 53
Michigan St. - 70 Vandy - 52
Rutgers - 79 AU - 47
Maryland - 67 Ark - 42
UCLA - 59 Miz - 30
Illinois - 55
Michigan - 40
Wisconsin - 37
Minnesota - 28
USC - 26

Will the weak schedules of the B10 be rewarded with a playoff birth?

We need Indiana to lose to Michigan this weekend. Then Ohio State will knock them out the following week.

 

[reecetn]

If only 3 SEC teams get in the big ten has a chance for one spot in the semi finals.

 

[Dadof2Vols]

I made this point last year when I stated I wanted UGA to be left out just so people would start arguing that the beauty pageant entries need to stop.

Sankey has expanded to the of the conference and we will see it this year as more Beauty pageant entries for B10 over SEC beasts.

Now Greg wants to fix it by having b10 vs SEC games as the non conference. He has over played his hand.

His backup plan is CFP-16 with 4 mandatory SEC and 4 B10 so the beauty pageant will still occur.

 

[NEWDAYVOL]

I was going to post something similar yesterday. We are cannibalizing's ourselves like never before in the SEC and it's to the other MUCH weaker conferences advantage.

It's early but I don't know if the massive super conference thing is the best idea. I could see conferences going back to being smaller and more regional in the future. I don't see the upside. More $$$? But what's the point if you reinvest it all, finish 9-3, and behind Boise St. and multiple weaker BIG10/12/ACC teams every year that have a slightly better record.

If the goal is to win a National Championship we've all made it harder on ourselves putting the best teams in college football in one conference. It simply comes down to this: our 9-3 teams aren't going to make the playoffs and yet there's very few if any other P4 teams who wouldn't lose 3 games or more in SEC play.

 

[UT97Vol]

How is Oregon only at one? They played Ohio St, Boise, and Illinois - all ranked - assuming this is going off time of game.

Because if it's current rankings then we've only played one, and Oregon has played two.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

How is Oregon only at one? They played Ohio St, Boise, and Illinois - all ranked - assuming this is going off time of game.

Because if it's current rankings then we've only played one, and Oregon has played two.

The committee uses the current top 25 as opposed to the ranking at the time of the game. Which is why I keep advocating for us to pull for Bama the next few weeks. Same for Vandy. The higher the ranked team we beat, the better the resume .

 

[UT97Vol]

In that case it's going to be difficult to know what those are going to look like at the end of the year, because so many teams on the fringe of being ranked could enter/fall out. Take Vandy for example. Could be ranked when we play them and then out after we beat them. So, I'm not sure how much credibility all that has.

The committee is going to go by eye test and then (whether it's fair or not) programs that are more likely to draw viewers. Talking with a colleague at work about this who's a Penn St grad. He's worried Indiana gets in over Penn St with the same record. And there's just no way that's going to happen. The committee is always going to favor blue bloods or near blue blood programs over those that aren't used to being there.

As I debated with a fellow VN amigo here just a few days ago, if we lose to UGA, the AP, coaches, and committee are all going to put Bama in front of us even though we beat them. The AP already has them almost back into the top 10 after just one week.

 

[sami]

I was going to post something similar yesterday. We are cannibalizing's ourselves like never before in the SEC and it's to the other MUCH weaker conferences advantage.

It's early but I don't know if the massive super conference thing is the best idea. I could see conferences going back to being smaller and more regional in the future. I don't see the upside. More $$$? But what's the point if you reinvest it all, finish 9-3, and behind Boise St. and multiple weaker BIG10/12/ACC teams every year that have a slightly better record.

If the goal is to win a National Championship we've all made it harder on ourselves putting the best teams in college football in one conference. It simply comes down to this: our 9-3 teams aren't going to make the playoffs and yet there's very few if any other P4 teams who wouldn't lose 3 games or more in SEC play.

No Doubt. Penn State, Indiana, Illinois, Clemson, Pitt, and even probably Miami are at best 8-4 teams if they played an SEC schedule. Aside from maybe Mississippi St., there isn't a gimme win in the conference right now, while the bottom half of the Big 10 are all garbage. I'd like to see how Ohio State and Oregon would do against one of these schedules.

I hope when a few 2- and 3-loss SEC teams get bumped for these pretenders from the Big 10, Sankey thinks twice about going into business with them as an equal partner. But then again, the Big 10 markets are where the big money is, and that is what Sankey is really after.

 

[Vol in Buckeye Land]

No Doubt. Penn State, Indiana, Illinois, Clemson, Pitt, and even probably Miami are at best 8-4 teams if they played an SEC schedule. Aside from maybe Mississippi St., there isn't a gimme win in the conference right now, while the bottom half of the Big 10 are all garbage. I'd like to see how Ohio State and Oregon would do against one of these schedules.

I hope when a few 2- and 3-loss SEC teams get bumped for these pretenders from the Big 10, Sankey thinks twice about going into business with them as an equal partner. But then again, the Big 10 markets are where the big money is, and that is what Sankey is really after.

Oregon would likely still be undefeated but who knows. They aren’t just winning right now, they are leaving no doubt, after looking shaky at the start of the year. The OSU game it clicked for them; I hope we have a similar moment against Georgia.

I can’t help but wonder if Ohio State, with all the talent they have, might actually be hindered by playing a weak schedule year in and year out. Iron sharpens iron as the saying goes. This year is an exception as they’ve already played two games against top 5 opponents (I wasn’t and still am not convinced by Penn State, but it’s a good win nonetheless), but typically you don’t know what they are until the end of the year when they play Michigan (if UM is good) or an SEC team in the postseason.

 

[sami]

Oregon would likely still be undefeated but who knows. They aren’t just winning right now, they are leaving no doubt, after looking shaky at the start of the year. The OSU game it clicked for them; I hope we have a similar moment against Georgia.

I can’t help but wonder if Ohio State, with all the talent they have, might actually be hindered by playing a weak schedule year in and year out. Iron sharpens iron as the saying goes. This year is an exception as they’ve already played two games against top 5 opponents (I wasn’t and still am not convinced by Penn State, but it’s a good win nonetheless), but typically you don’t know what they are until the end of the year when they play Michigan (if UM is good) or an SEC team in the postseason.

I think OSU is a legit playoff team just due to the overwhelming amount of talent, but they never seem to play up to that talent level the way the Saban Alabama teams routinely did. Penn State is incredibly unimpressive to me. If they played an SEC schedule, they are minimum a 3-4 loss team. I agree that Oregon is a step above, and it's ironic that the Big 10's premier team is a Pac 12 school.

 

[VolCalls]

I've been making this point all season, thank you for charting it out like this. I'm not a fan of the 12-team playoff to begin with, but a primary reason is that all 'Power 4' conferences aren't close to being equal.

The Big 10 is considered by the 'committee' and the hack national media (who are almost exclusively from the north) as the equal to the SEC, but it's clear they have really only two legit championship contenders, a few pretenders benefiting from ridiculous schedules, and a load of dreck. The ACC has one possibly legit team who is yet to play anyone, and the Big 12 is closer to the Mountain West and AAC than they are to the SEC.

This wouldn’t be the case if the big two hadn’t gone to 16 teams. We’d be talking about the potential of two from the Big 12, one from the Mountain West and another from he Pac 12.

 

[sami]

This wouldn’t be the case if the big two hadn’t gone to 16 teams. We’d be talking about the potential of two from the Big 12, one from the Mountain West and another from he Pac 12.

Yeah, like I said earlier, it's very revealing that the premier Big 10 team is in reality a Pac 12 team. Texas would have been an unbeaten 1-seed if they were still in the Big 12. They had as easy an SEC schedule as they could have had, and might still be a 2-loss team.

Expansion and consolidation have always sucked, and it is among the things that are ruining the sport.

 

[DowsaTV]

Penn State, Indiana, Illinois, Clemson, Pitt, and even probably Miami are at best 8-4 teams if they played an SEC schedule.

Agreed, see Oklahoma!