JohnStOnge
January 10th, 2009, 02:53 PM
I just finished writing an e mail to a Baton Rouge radio talk show host who did the classic "cut the caller off." I'd been hearing him and callers with the same old "Pac 10 is weak" stuff. So I called in and said there is no way you can make the case, using what's happened when teams from different BCS leagues have played each other, that the Pac 10 is weak. So he hung up on me then said "Actually, you can..." and went on to talk about how you can't just look at won/loss records, how you have to "look below the surface," and proceded to demonstate that he had no idea as to what he was talking about. Anybody that knows me knows that, if I say something like that, I have looked below the surface. Anyway, I thought Pac 10 fans might be interested in the information in my e mail whether that host reads it or not:
Below are the results of BCS era (1998 - 2008) games between the PAC 10 and SEC. The conference record of each team is in parenthesis. For example: The last line under "PAC 10 WINS" indicates that, in 2007, California, which finished 3-6 in Pac 10 play, had a 45 - 31 win over Tennessee, which finished 6-3 in SEC play. Then there's a note to indicate that one of Tennessee's three losses was in the SEC championship game.
PAC 10 WINS
2006 USC (7-2) 50, Arkansas (7-2) 14* - One UA loss in SEC championship
2005 USC (8-0) 70*, Arkansas (2-6) 17
2003 USC (7-1) 23, Auburn (5-3) 0*
2002 USC (7-1) 24*, Auburn (5-3) 17
2008 UCLA (3-6) 27*, Tennessee (3-5) 24
2001 UCLA (4-4) 20, Alabama (4-4) 17*
2000 UCLA (3-5) 35*, Alabama (3-5) 24
2003 Oregon (5-3) 42, Mississippi State (1-7) 34*
2002 Oregon (3-5) 36*, Mississippi State (0-8) 13
2007 California (3-6) 45*, Tennessee (6-3) 31 - One UT loss in SEC championship
SEC WINS
2008 Georgia (6-2) 27, Arizona State (4-5) 10*
2005 LSU (7-2) 35, Arizona State (4-4) 31*
2006 LSU (6-2) 45*, Arizona (4-5) 3
2003 LSU (8-1) 59, Arizona (1-7) 13*
2006 Tennessee (5-3) 35*, California (7-2) 18
2006 Auburn (6-2) 40*, Washington State (4-5) 14
2004 LSU (6-2) 22*, Oregon State (5-3) 21
*-Home Team
The surface is that the Pac 10 is 10-7 vs. the SEC during the period. So let's look below the surface. When we do, we see that the way the matchups fell in terms of where teams ranked in their own conferences should've worked a little bit to the SEC's favor.
SEC teams involved have a slightly better overall conference winning rate (0.579) than the Pac 10 teams do (0.549).
There were 3 games such that the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had identical records within their respective conferences. Pac 10 teams won all 3 of those games.
There were 5 games such that both the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had winning records in their own conferences. The Pac 10 was 3-2 in those games.
There were 4 games such that neither team finished with a winning record in its own conference. The Pac 10 was 4-0 in those games.
There were 7 games involving Pac 10 teams that finished with winning conference records. The Pac 10 was 5-2 in those games. In comparison, there were 11 games involving SEC teams that finished with winning conference records (i.e., more of the games involved the SEC's better teams than involved the Pac 10's better teams). The SEC was 7-4 in those games.
Pac 10 teams that did NOT finish with winning Pac 10 conference records went 5-5 against the SEC. SEC teams that did not finish with winning SEC conference records went 0-6 against the Pac 10.
Pac 10 teams other than USC went 6-7 vs. the SEC. SEC teams other than LSU went 3-10 against the Pac 10.
Or look at it in your own ways. There's no way you're going to be intellectually honest and say that the head to head record suggests SEC superiority. I personally believe the SEC has generally been a little tougher (though not every year) because of power ratings that take all games between all teams into account simultaneously. But I don't think the difference has been anything like people in this area seem to think it's been. If it had been, I don't think there's any way you could see head to head results like those above.
Now a little bit about how the Pac 10 has done against all BCS conferences during the BCS era. Here are the records:
Vs. SEC 10 - 7
Vs. Big 10 34 - 22
Vs. Big 12 27 - 27
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 6-6
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 87 - 69
In short, at this point during the BCS era, no other BCS conference has a winning record in head to head competition against the Pac 10.
If you're thinking it's all because of USC, it's not. Here is how the group of Pac 10 teams OTHER than USC did in games against other BCS conference teams:
Vs. SEC 6 - 7
Vs. Big 10 26 - 22
Vs. Big 12 23 - 24
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 4 - 5
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 69 - 65
So, even with its top program left out of the equation , teams from that league have held their own against teams from every other BCS conference. Yes, if you leave USC out, they've lost more than they've won against three other leagues. But in no case are they more than 1 game below 0.500. And, overall, they have a winning record in non conference play against other BCS leagues WITHOUT USC. I think that people who think the Pac 10 is a weak conference do not have a grasp of what's happened on the field during the BCS era when teams from different BCS leagues have actually played each other.
Below are the results of BCS era (1998 - 2008) games between the PAC 10 and SEC. The conference record of each team is in parenthesis. For example: The last line under "PAC 10 WINS" indicates that, in 2007, California, which finished 3-6 in Pac 10 play, had a 45 - 31 win over Tennessee, which finished 6-3 in SEC play. Then there's a note to indicate that one of Tennessee's three losses was in the SEC championship game.
PAC 10 WINS
2006 USC (7-2) 50, Arkansas (7-2) 14* - One UA loss in SEC championship
2005 USC (8-0) 70*, Arkansas (2-6) 17
2003 USC (7-1) 23, Auburn (5-3) 0*
2002 USC (7-1) 24*, Auburn (5-3) 17
2008 UCLA (3-6) 27*, Tennessee (3-5) 24
2001 UCLA (4-4) 20, Alabama (4-4) 17*
2000 UCLA (3-5) 35*, Alabama (3-5) 24
2003 Oregon (5-3) 42, Mississippi State (1-7) 34*
2002 Oregon (3-5) 36*, Mississippi State (0-8) 13
2007 California (3-6) 45*, Tennessee (6-3) 31 - One UT loss in SEC championship
SEC WINS
2008 Georgia (6-2) 27, Arizona State (4-5) 10*
2005 LSU (7-2) 35, Arizona State (4-4) 31*
2006 LSU (6-2) 45*, Arizona (4-5) 3
2003 LSU (8-1) 59, Arizona (1-7) 13*
2006 Tennessee (5-3) 35*, California (7-2) 18
2006 Auburn (6-2) 40*, Washington State (4-5) 14
2004 LSU (6-2) 22*, Oregon State (5-3) 21
*-Home Team
The surface is that the Pac 10 is 10-7 vs. the SEC during the period. So let's look below the surface. When we do, we see that the way the matchups fell in terms of where teams ranked in their own conferences should've worked a little bit to the SEC's favor.
SEC teams involved have a slightly better overall conference winning rate (0.579) than the Pac 10 teams do (0.549).
There were 3 games such that the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had identical records within their respective conferences. Pac 10 teams won all 3 of those games.
There were 5 games such that both the Pac 10 team and the SEC team had winning records in their own conferences. The Pac 10 was 3-2 in those games.
There were 4 games such that neither team finished with a winning record in its own conference. The Pac 10 was 4-0 in those games.
There were 7 games involving Pac 10 teams that finished with winning conference records. The Pac 10 was 5-2 in those games. In comparison, there were 11 games involving SEC teams that finished with winning conference records (i.e., more of the games involved the SEC's better teams than involved the Pac 10's better teams). The SEC was 7-4 in those games.
Pac 10 teams that did NOT finish with winning Pac 10 conference records went 5-5 against the SEC. SEC teams that did not finish with winning SEC conference records went 0-6 against the Pac 10.
Pac 10 teams other than USC went 6-7 vs. the SEC. SEC teams other than LSU went 3-10 against the Pac 10.
Or look at it in your own ways. There's no way you're going to be intellectually honest and say that the head to head record suggests SEC superiority. I personally believe the SEC has generally been a little tougher (though not every year) because of power ratings that take all games between all teams into account simultaneously. But I don't think the difference has been anything like people in this area seem to think it's been. If it had been, I don't think there's any way you could see head to head results like those above.
Now a little bit about how the Pac 10 has done against all BCS conferences during the BCS era. Here are the records:
Vs. SEC 10 - 7
Vs. Big 10 34 - 22
Vs. Big 12 27 - 27
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 6-6
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 87 - 69
In short, at this point during the BCS era, no other BCS conference has a winning record in head to head competition against the Pac 10.
If you're thinking it's all because of USC, it's not. Here is how the group of Pac 10 teams OTHER than USC did in games against other BCS conference teams:
Vs. SEC 6 - 7
Vs. Big 10 26 - 22
Vs. Big 12 23 - 24
Vs. Big East 10 - 7
Vs. ACC 4 - 5
Total w/l vs. other BCS conferences: 69 - 65
So, even with its top program left out of the equation , teams from that league have held their own against teams from every other BCS conference. Yes, if you leave USC out, they've lost more than they've won against three other leagues. But in no case are they more than 1 game below 0.500. And, overall, they have a winning record in non conference play against other BCS leagues WITHOUT USC. I think that people who think the Pac 10 is a weak conference do not have a grasp of what's happened on the field during the BCS era when teams from different BCS leagues have actually played each other.