I know this is an old topic at this point, but everytime I look at Texas Tech #4, BYU #12, Utah #15, Arizona #17, and Houston #21, all I can think is "Why?" None of these teams have done anything other than beat up on other B12 teams. Why are they being treated differently than a G5 conference that did the same? As best I can tell, this is the full list of P4 OOC wins from the entire B12:

BYU beat Stanford
Utah beat UCLA
Iowa State beat Iowa
TCU beat UNC
TCU beat SMU
Baylor beat SMU
UCF beat UNC
West Virginia beat Pitt

Cleaning that up a little, less than half the conference has a win over a P4 opponent, and the whole conference has only beat 6 total P4 teams: Iowa, SMU, UNC, Stanford, UCLA, and Pitt. I guess you could say that Iowa, SMU, and Pitt were at least middling teams, but the other three were just bad, and none of them is a signature win. So what in the world did the B12 do to earn 5 top 25 spots?





(and yes, I know the answer is that the committee only looks at win-loss records and completely ignores strength of schedule arguments, but this is pretty egregious).

Anti-SEC bias.

When you rise to the top, the media immediately turns to tear you down. It latches on to the shiny object and creates any narrative it can.

The Big 12 is a historically awful league, on par with the old mountain west, made up of trash schools that were left behind in big boy football.

I've ranted about the overrated BDF in any number of threads over the last month. The response is always the same "They're better than the ACC." This is true, but it isn't the point.

EDIT - I think Tceh is for real, but certainly untested.

It is still regarded as being a quality conference and will need another few years of it failing to live up to hype for it to balance out, assuming there's no additional conference shake ups

What's the SEC's best non-con win? Outside of us.

I think...
This has been around for a while now. I know we've seen it, and talked about it, at length since we left the BigXII.
First off... The media NEEDS another big conference. PAC12 is dead, and the ACC is in shambles. They don't want just SEC, & B1G.

Secondly... I think this gets to the heart of it. When have we seen regular peer to peer takedowns of the BigXII by another conference? I'm talking JFF over OU type takedowns? It hasn't happened very much. Take bowls for example. SEC sends a few to the CFP (when it was a 4 team spread) our #3 heads to whatever get's next pick, and so forth. So we end up with a BigXII v SEC Cotton bowl game but it's our #4 vs their #1. Half the SEC teams starters have opted out and SEC goes down in the bowl. By next August no one remembers what players were or were not in the game. The only thing that remains is W-L. Look just a few years back, right before the sips moved to SEC. Georgia had ONE JOB, and they laid a giant rotten egg in that bowl. When given the opportunity the SEC has not won chunks of their post season games against Big12. One off wins won't do it, certainly not to be remembered. The Big12 has done just well enough to not be completely discredited.

To completely discredit the conference, they need to be so regularly and dependably dismantled it's seen as no different that stopping for a gallon of milk on the way home.

Maroon Dawn said:

---

It's this desire to not recognize the reality that is painfully obvious this year.

There is no P4

The ACC and B12 are not power leagues. They are the new AAC and MWC mid major leagues of this era.

But everyone else has to sell the lie that it's not just the P2 that conferences outside the B1G and SEC matter that JMU vs Oregon is going to be every bit as good as Boise State vs Oklahoma and not the unnecessary slaughter we all know it will be so that we can keep pretending it's not the P2 and everyone else so definitely stay tuned in!

---

It's going to be must turn off TV when Oregon and Ole Miss are pulling their starters in the 3rd, all because they wanted TWO G5 programs.

If Ole Miss struggles due to poor coaching decisions or obvious issues following the Kiffin distraction, that will be not be the story. The headline will read that G5 held strong against the mighty and vaunted SEC.

Because consumers of these articles and shows get tired of the same people jerking off the SEC and BIG. It's a business and marketing all the teams is what they are trying to do to keep eyes on screens.

SMU lost to Baylor and TCU, and then beat Miami.

Maybe the Big 12 is better than we think, and the ACC is weak? That's what I've been thinking anyway.

I mean it's not like the Big 12 placed three teams in the playoff; BYU went 11-2 and didn't make it and wasn't the first team out; I don't really know what OP wants here. Tech is ranked pretty high at 4, but they did about what you'd expect an elite team to do against a Big 12 schedule, and SP+ and most of the other computer metrics seem to see them as legit top 5.

It happens every year. People simply don't want to admit there's a Power 2 and the talent discrepancy in CFB is massive and only getting worse.

They have 1 team in the playoff, and when their had their starting QB, they won every game by 3 touchdowns.

Ugly said:

---

I know this is an old topic at this point, but everytime I look at Texas Tech #4, BYU #12, Utah #15, Arizona #17, and Houston #21, all I can think is "Why?" None of these teams have done anything other than beat up on other B12 teams. Why are they being treated differently than a G5 conference that did the same? As best I can tell, this is the full list of P4 OOC wins from the entire B12:

BYU beat Stanford
Utah beat UCLA
Iowa State beat Iowa
TCU beat UNC
TCU beat SMU
Baylor beat SMU
UCF beat UNC
West Virginia beat Pitt

Cleaning that up a little, less than half the conference has a win over a P4 opponent, and the whole conference has only beat 6 total P4 teams: Iowa, SMU, UNC, Stanford, UCLA, and Pitt. I guess you could say that Iowa, SMU, and Pitt were at least middling teams, but the other three were just bad, and none of them is a signature win. So what in the world did the B12 do to earn 5 top 25 spots?





(and yes, I know the answer is that the committee only looks at win-loss records and completely ignores strength of schedule arguments, but this is pretty egregious).

---

On the surface, I agree with you. HOWEVER, let's wait and have this discussion after the season is complete. I believe you'll still be right, but let's see what Tceh has to say, along with what the SEC does in their bowl (I realize some keys players are opting out) games and playoffs.

Probably gave U of H a ranking to make LSUs win look better after the Texas bowl.

PascalsWager said:

---

What's the SEC's best non-con win? Outside of us.

---

Besides Notre Dame without spending too much time:

Michigan
Tulane
Arizona State
Georgia Tech



Even though Auburn & Miss St were a combined 2-14 in SEC they are 2-0 against Big 12. Mizz also has a win over Big 12 so I believe SEC 3-0 over Big 12