Link: Final Bowl Results by Conference

[ALA2262]

SEC 8-2
IND 2-1
Sunbelt 3-2
AAC 4-3
MWC 4-3
PAC 12 4-3
B1G 4-5
MAC 3-4
ACC 4-7
CUSA 3-5
Big 12 1-5

Conference Bowl Records

 

[TideEngineer08]

What do we win? A bowl of fruit salad?

 

[rgw]

The ACC and Big-12 embarrassed themselves this bowl season. I’m surprised the Big Ten did so poorly when they felt like they were the 2nd best conference this year. Matchups matter and they caught some bad ones. Any year where the SEC can send a 10-2 Alabama team to the Citrus Bowl, you can kinda bet on the SEC having a favorable bowl matchup slate.

For whatever it is worth, the last time Alabama was in the Citrus the SEC also had the best bowl record by conference in 2010 but with only a 5-5 record.

 

[carder24]

What do we win? A bowl of fruit salad?

$140m+

 

[PacadermaTideUs]

For what it’s worth, I’ve always felt bowl winning percentage was a horrible way to rank conference strength. That’s how you end up with the Sun Belt, who sent only 5 teams bowling, being ranked higher than the B1G

I’ve always thought number of bowl wins, followed by number of bowl participants is a far better way to evaluate conference strength, based solely on the bowl season.

By that measure, the rankings would look like this:

1. SEC 8-2
2. ACC 4-7
3. B1G 4-5
4. (Tie) AAC 4-3
P12 4-3
MWC 4-3
7. CUSA 3-5
8. MAC 3-4
9. Sun Belt 3-2
10. Ind 2-1
11. B12 1-5

No matter how you slice it, the Big 12 looks horrible.

 

[Perrett4Bama]

For what it’s worth, I’ve always felt bowl winning percentage was a horrible way to rank conference strength. That’s how you end up with the Sun Belt, who sent only 5 teams bowling, being ranked higher than the B1G

I’ve always thought number of bowl wins, followed by number of bowl participants is a far better way to evaluate conference strength, based solely on the bowl season.

By that measure, the rankings would look like this:

1. SEC 8-2
2. ACC 4-7
3. B1G 4-5
4. (Tie) AAC 4-3
P12 4-3
MWC 4-3
7. CUSA 3-5
8. MAC 3-4
9. Sun Belt 3-2
10. Ind 2-1
11. B12 1-5

No matter how you slice it, the Big 12 looks horrible.

Mississippi State and Auburn are fired....

 

[DzynKingRTR]

$140m+

When should I expect the check? Or will they send cash?

 

[PacadermaTideUs]

When should I expect the check? Or will they send cash?

It’s a Build-A-Bear gift card. Congrats.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

The conference of ONE TRUE CHAMPION might want to compare their playoff record with their slogan. Just saying.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

Oh I forgot to say:

S E C ..... S E C ..... S E C

 

[DzynKingRTR]

The conference of ONE TRUE CHAMPION might want to compare their playoff record with their slogan. Just saying.

Well one team did actually win a game so close enough.

 

[Wakecrash]

By that measure, the rankings would look like this:

I think if you look at what teams they played in the bowls Big10 clearly had a better bowl performance than ACC. ACC only had Clemson, Big 10 had 3 teams beat ranked opponents. ACC wins include, Eastern Michigan, Temple, and Miss ST that was without the starting quarterback because the starting linebacker punched him in the eye,, that had to be great for team chemistry.

When considering strength of the bowl schedule, SEC dominance was clear this year. SEC 1, and it doesn't seem accurate to have a 2 or a 3.

Perhaps an interesting way to look at it would be take total payout of each bowl game, and award total dollars to the team that won, add it up and see how each conference ranks based on dollars awarded.

 

[B1GTide]

I think if you look at what teams they played in the bowls Big10 clearly had a better bowl performance than ACC. ACC only had Clemson, Big 10 had 3 teams beat ranked opponents. ACC wins include, Eastern Michigan, Temple, and Miss ST that was without the starting quarterback because the starting linebacker punched him in the eye,, that had to be great for team chemistry.

When considering strength of the bowl schedule, SEC dominance was clear this year. SEC 1, and it doesn't seem accurate to have a 2 or a 3.

Perhaps an interesting way to look at it would be take total payout of each bowl game, and award total dollars to the team that won, add it up and see how each conference ranks based on dollars awarded.

When you add the fact that Clemson was handed their win over OSU by the officials, it becomes even more clear. The ACC only had 3 real wins in bowl games. They did not really beat a single ranked team - not one.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

For what it’s worth, I’ve always felt bowl winning percentage was a horrible way to rank conference strength. That’s how you end up with the Sun Belt, who sent only 5 teams bowling, being ranked higher than the B1G

This is a good point we should not misunderestimate (to quote a former leader).

I’ve always thought number of bowl wins, followed by number of bowl participants is a far better way to evaluate conference strength, based solely on the bowl season.

At one time I did, but I don't any longer. And I think I was wrong before , and it's (respectfully to you) more wrong nowadays.

1) The better teams NOT in the playoff are now at a disadvantage because their future NFL stars are sitting out the bowl games.

In other words, we aren't REALLY getting "Alabama vs Michigan" as if it was an October matchup. We are instead getting "players willing to risk injury in meaningless exhibition" games that leads to timidity and an unwillingness to do one's best.

2) The matchups are hardly necessarily fair.

Drawing conclusions about conference strength when you get the SEC #2 against the Big Ten #7 is about as ludicrous as thinking the Kentucky-Indiana snooze fest played pretty much every year tells us anything about the two conferences. Now, if one team is the indisputably better conference then this might tell us something but each case is different.

3) Teams use bowl games for different reasons.

Sometimes a coach decides that he's going to pull the seniors early to not risk injury or to "let the guys play for a starting spot next year." If Coach A plays his second string and Coach B (let's say he's at Vandy) rarely goes to a bowl game and wants to win even if he has to murder the other team, the game being played is completely different for each team.

4) There are too many bowl games and it's slanted geographically south (for obvious reasons) - which leads to some mediocre SEC teams getting matchups against the overpriced bargain bins of the Sun Belt, MAC, etc.

I mean, Arkansas could probably beat some/most of the lower teams, and they're among the worst in the SEC at present.The SEC SHOULD run the table in those games, which allows the record to be somewhat inflated.

I've got four or five more subpoints, but this is kinda why it falls apart.

By that measure, the rankings would look like this:

No matter how you slice it, the Big 12 looks horrible.

The Big 12 looks awful in another sense.

The Big 12 was 1-5 this year against the SEC.

Baylor got beat by an unmotivated UGA team and pretty easily.
The Big 12 champion got knocked into the next century by the national champion.
A/M (mediocrity) beat Okie St
Mizzou drilled WVA
LSU edged the early season Texas

The sole win for the Big 12 was the one team that DID beat Oklahoma (K State) barely surviving at Starkvegas by a TD. In other words, one of the Big 12's best teams that DID win struggled against an SEC team that lost to Auburn by 33, LSU by 23, A/M by 19, and Alabama 31.

Miss St had a ton of trouble in conference but fought an above average Big 12 team that owned OU in that game - to a 7-point loss.

 

[Mystical]

Who were the number 2 SEC team facing the number 7 Big team?

 

[B1GTide]

Who were the number 2 SEC team facing the number 7 Big team?

Alabama vs. UM? Though UM was #6 in the B1G.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Who were the number 2 SEC team facing the number 7 Big team?

I'm speaking in terms of theoretical matchups.

Rarely outside the playoff is it 2 vs 2 or 3 vs 3 conference-wise was my point - not to be taken quite so literally. (B1G validates it, though, in one sense).

 

[tidefanbeezer]

When should I expect the check? Or will they send cash?

It'll be cash. OBJ will find you after work, so long as you are wearing an LSU jersey.

 

[PacadermaTideUs]

Thank you for your response. I don’t disagree with anything you posted. But I think I’ve been misinterpreted.

Let me be clear: drawing any definitive conclusions about conference strength solely from bowl results is, in my view, a fruitless endeavor.

Nonetheless, it’s an endeavor that, year after year, people enthusiastically partake in. Heck, they even award a trophy to the conference with the “best bowl record”.

My only point is that if you’re going to play that game, winning percentage is probably the worst statistic to base it on. A conference of scrubs who sends only 1 team to a bowl game and eeks out a bowl victory against another scrub will be batting 100%. That conference clearly doesn’t deserve a trophy for its bowl performance superiority.

If you’re going to try to evaluate which conferences had the best bowl seasons, base it on something more representative than winning percentage.

 

[81usaf92]

It was a bad year for the SEC.... Shouldve been 1-6