T1B

Miami isn't that good. they were vastly overrated most of the year.....Oklahoma shit its pants about 14 times and still almost won at Miami with Landry Jones (who i'm not bashing, just pointing out).

everyone loves Randy Shannon (did you know he was a LB at Miami?) but his teams are really undisciplined...though, that KO return was pretty slick.

I wish Iowa could be like the rest of the Top 20 teams and beat nobody but get credit for doing so. Instead, we have to win by double digits on the road against 10 win football teams and get ripped apart for it. I gotta admit, Iowa was very lucky in that Wisconsin game. We held them to about 50 yards of offense in the 2nd half on pure luck and racked up about 250 yards. That was all luck. Clearly Wisconsin just didn't care about the game. The Iowa game is never big to them especially with Bielema as their coach. Right Van?

Props to Bielema for not choking a big game away. Didn't see that coming.

He surely feckin' tried...

What's with all the props for the Miami qb all year. Dude looked scared all night. He definately made the difference, for Whiskey.

Unlike Sam I took Whiskey, the points were too many, but did not think they'd win outright

Bielema needs to spend more time working on game management and less time fantasizing about bending Erin Andrews over. 3 possessions in the 4th quarter, he fucked up with his strategy. Piss poor game management damn near cost them that game.

wisconsin > iowa

M Club wrote:wisconsin > iowa

Haha! Not even close. They're 7-21 in the last 28 vs Iowa. But yeah, they're clearly better.

TheJON wrote:

M Club wrote:wisconsin > iowa

Haha! Not even close. They're 7-21 in the last 28 vs Iowa. But yeah, they're clearly better.

What's the rose bowl record for both?

WolverineSteve wrote:

TheJON wrote:

M Club wrote:wisconsin > iowa

Haha! Not even close. They're 7-21 in the last 28 vs Iowa. But yeah, they're clearly better.

What's the rose bowl record for both?

Is that (rose bowl) the measure by which all Big 10 teams are guaged? see 97 rose bowl where bitchigan garnered a 1/2 title against a clearly inferior, suck WSU team (which they barely beat by some stroke of luck and zebra help) vs. the Peyton Manning-led Tenn Vols team that got bitch-slapped by Nebraska. But yeah, Vegas oddsmakers are full of shit had that game (NU vs. Mich.) been played.

Can't believe you fucks still put so much stock into that game. (Rose Bowl)

H4ever wrote: Can't believe you fucks still put so much stock into that game. (Rose Bowl)

much better than SECBSH are the toothless fucks exiled to nebraska because even the south thinks they're trash. oh look, nebraska finally got around to winning a meaningless bowl game and the cornroaches start crawling out from under the trailer looking to beat their chests about a glorious past. shocked.

michigan dominated far better teams than wazzu throughout the year. i'm curious how many points under their average michigan held them to in that game. as far as hanging your hat on peyton manning's pee pee: point me to any big games he won at tennessee, svp. thanksbye.

putting stock in the rose bowl has more to do with who's won more big ten titles, for the most part. glad i could help you. ball gag yourself with a pair of underoos that has "made in nigeria" stitched on the inside.

jon wrote:Haha! Not even close. They're 7-21 in the last 28 vs Iowa. But yeah, they're clearly better.

how does this square with your talk of matchups you bring up w/r/t iowa's success against penn state? just wondering, because i could look up overall and conference records, and i'm pretty sure i know which way the < or > points.

happy ny, dicks.

I still have to root against the canes, NICE JOB WISCY.

Miami is improved but I don't know if Shannon can get them back.

H4ever wrote:quote="WolverineSteve"] Can't believe you fucks still put so much stock into that game. (Rose Bowl)

Can anyone be so dumb? Well, consider the source I guess. As Mclub pointed out my question is more about overall conference relevence. Since Johnny chose to use a 35 year timeframe, it pre-dates the bcs. Try to keep up here, the Rose Bowl used to be the best a Big10 team could hope for. I can remember Wisky winning a few in Pasadena but can barely remember Chuck Long's Hawkeyes getting hammerfucked out there. So while head to head works as a snapshot against a particular opponent I would argue that getting to, and winning Rose Bowls, makes a program more successful.

Glad I could help, you fucking douchebag.

M Club wrote:cornroaches

M Club wrote:

H4ever wrote: Can't believe you fucks still put so much stock into that game. (Rose Bowl)

much better than SECBSH are the toothless fucks exiled to nebraska because even the south thinks they're trash. oh look, nebraska finally got around to winning a meaningless bowl game and the cornroaches start crawling out from under the trailer looking to beat their chests about a glorious past. shocked.

michigan dominated far better teams than wazzu throughout the year. i'm curious how many points under their average michigan held them to in that game. as far as hanging your hat on peyton manning's pee pee: point me to any big games he won at tennessee, svp. thanksbye.

putting stock in the rose bowl has more to do with who's won more big ten titles, for the most part. glad i could help you. ball gag yourself with a pair of underoos that has "made in nigeria" stitched on the inside.


.

Cornroach? rack it! that's funny. Good to see some Michigan/Nebraska hatred back. This goes back to 97 and beyond. Too bad you weren't as good as Central Michigan this year.....mighta made a middle december shit bowl (speaking of meaningless bowl games)

But, you guys must be ecstatic about the fine job/track Ritchie has the vaunted Wolverines on. Maybe you guys and USC can hook up in a shit bowl next year. Love to see Rodriguez or Carroll hoisting the fucking Little Caesars trophy above their heads and prancing around like M2 on ecstacy at a Renn-faire.

H4ever wrote: But yeah, Vegas oddsmakers are full of shit had that game (NU vs. Mich.) been played.

Not trying to pick on H4ever, he is just the latest to drop this line as if to prove one team is better than the other.

Vegas odds makers don't try to pick who is going to win they try to get even money to come in the door on both teams. Perfect example is the guy we had on our station the Monday after the SEC and Big XII title game. He was discussing how his casino set the line. He indicated that in his opinion the game was going to be very even and thought either team could win. But given the way the Texas offense struggled against Nebraska and how Bama blew out UF, they expected much of the impulse to go to Bama. As such they made Bama a 4 point fav.

So again no shot at H4ever, but you shouldn't use vegas odds as to who they think will win, You should only look at it as a way to get even money for the house.

Lefty, they're usually one and the same. If Vegas sets a double digit spread it's safe to say that they're stating who should be favored. Yes, they do so in order to create as close to 50-50 betting as possible, but if they need to set a double digit spread in order to do so then it's pretty telling.

Put it this way: Vegas doesn't set double digit spreads in games they feel the underdog would win. They know the public isn't that stupid. The spreads have to at least somewhat reflect reality, or else the house would lose its ass.