Tuesday, November 25, 2008

This is Bullshit

The rule which allows teams to split the Big Ten Title when both teams have met, played, and one of those teams left victorious, needs to come to an end. Because when you have this rule, you get this.

I just threw threw up in my mouth a little.

GO STATE! THE REAL BIG TEN CHAMPS!

19 comments:

Kevin McGuire said...

I was about to comment on this myself today on my site because I saw the web ads for the Big Ten championship locker t-shirts for Ohio State.

I would assume that the only reason to have a co-championship is to sell more merchandise. Perhaps the time has come to find that 12th team, add them, and set up a conference championship in Chicago. Get it done!

Anonymous said...

Imperfect system? Yes. But, both teams had one loss. The difference: OSU lost to the other best team in the Big 10 while PSU laid an egg to 5-3 Iowa. I'd say the quality of the respective losses equals out the head-to-head argument.

Anonymous said...

Congrats on the Co-Championship

JB said...

Wait. You think that the fact that PSU beat TOSU head to head is equaled out by a quality of loss argument? That is nonsensical. PSU won the big ten championship on the field.

WFY said...

Does anybody outside of Ohio think of the Buckeyes as Big11Ten Champions?

Anonymous said...

You knew the rules going in....yet choked in Iowa, just like you did at Ann Arbor in 2005. Quit complaining. To be sole big Ten Champs all you had to do was beat Iowa and you did not. "True Big Ten Champs" would have done so.

Anonymous said...

>>You think that the fact that PSU beat TOSU head to head is equaled out by a quality of loss argument?<<

Not by quality of loss, but by number of wins and losses. PSU and OSU tied in the league, plain and simple.

And PSU's win over the Bucks DOES give them a reward that Ohio State doesn't get: the Rose Bowl berth.

Big Ten title, Rose Bowl berth, yet PSU fans always have to complain about _something_, don't you? Sheesh.

Rather than complain about OSU rightfully claiming a share, perhaps you ought to be complaining about the way your quarterback played against Iowa. That's the reason you're sharing the title to begin with.

Anonymous said...

If you're not going to the MNC or Rose Bowl then you aren't the real Big11Ten Champs. Plain and simple. Enjoy 2nd place,tOSU.

JB said...

believe me, I am familiar with the rules. My argument is that the rule is stupid and should be changed.

If PSU and TOSU hadn't met on the field than I would be fine with a co-championship. But when the teams play and one team wins that team should be the only champ.

Anonymous said...

>>If you're not going to the MNC or Rose Bowl then you aren't the real Big11Ten Champs. Plain and simple. Enjoy 2nd place,tOSU.<<

Then PSU should turn in its Big Ten trophy from 2005, when they didn't go to MNC or Rose. I know, I know... "b-but that's an exception, because the MNC was in the Rose..." my point is that it's an entirely arbitrary criteria. You personally don't get to define what makes a Big 10 championship, that's already been done for you.

>>But when the teams play and one team wins that team should be the only champ<<

But that CAN'T be the case, when a conference doesn't play a round-robin. You, as a PSU fan, think it's unfair that your team has to share with OSU. But it's not fair to punish OSU for not having Iowa on its schedule this year.

However, the head-to-head victory means that it IS fair to "punish" OSU by not letting them go to the Rose. And that's exactly what's happening.

So stop complaining, already. OSU earned its title, same as PSU. Sure, PSU eked out a sloppy win against the Bucks, but at least the Bucks beat all the patsies on their schedule this year. They didn't choke on the teams they were supposed to beat, like PSU did.

So if you want to look at it that way, then it is absolutely fair for PSU to be "punished" for choking on inferior competition by having to share their title.

Anonymous said...

Typical Buckeye fandom arsing!! Personally, I would be completely pissed off at Penn State if we ever end up like Ohio State in 05 and 08 and CELEBRATE IT!! Give me a break! If it makes you sleep better then I'll let you call yourselves "BIG TEN CHAMPS", but we all know you are just lying to yourselves...Look yourselves in the mirror and acknowlege Penn State was better BETTER BETTER than you.

Anonymous said...

>>Personally, I would be completely pissed off at Penn State if we ever end up like Ohio State in 05 and 08 and CELEBRATE IT!!<<

No, you wouldn't. You're celebrating the same thing right now, a Big Ten Co-Championship.

It is I that would be upset if OSU were like PSU. Only three championships since you joined the league fourteen years ago? Please. Northwestern has done better than that.

Meanwhile, OSU just won its fourth in a row. But by all means, continue acting as though you are superior in every way *coughIowachokecough*.

JB said...

PSU isn't acting like it is superior in every way. PSU is only superior for having defeated TOSU in the horseshoe on national TV.

Also, good job at attempting to change the subject.

The fact of the matter is, there should always only be one conference champ. I would love to see a championship game to settle things. However, to allow teams to "share" the title when the better team has already been determined on the field of play is preposterous.

Anonymous said...

>>I would love to see a championship game to settle things. However, to allow teams to "share" the title when the better team has already been determined on the field of play is preposterous.<<

I agree with some of what you say. And you're right, I changed the subject earlier. Bad form on my part.

But back to the point, it is my opinion that the actions "on the field," as you phrased it, did in fact decide a co-championship. Yes, PSU beat OSU, but they lost to an unranked Iowa team. That loss has to count for _something_, otherwise why are the games being played at all?

To say that the Iowa loss shouldn't count against PSU IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER w/ regards to how the Big Ten Championship is decided is arbitrary and unfair to the other 10 teams.

>>there should always only be one conference champ<<

Why? What harm does it do? The only possible bad outcomes of sharing titles is when teams are cheated out of postseason berths, and so long as you're accounting for that with tiebreaking rules for berths, you remove that issue from the equation entirely. No harm, no foul.

PSU isn't being cheated at all, here. They've been subject to (and benefited from) the same rules as the other ten teams.

The only difference here is that some PSU fans have a massive insecurity complex and selfishly want their team alone at the top - even if it means ignoring that the overall quality of PSU's Big 10 season was no better or worse than OSU's.

PSUgirl said...

just look at the All Big Ten Team(s) - the season (statistics) leading Offense and Defense and the coach of the Year - it makes it really easy to figure out the #1 team in the Big Ten.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Championship games, if we ever add a 12th team, what would be the better venue: Outdoors in Chicago (Soldier Field I presume) or indoors in Indy (lucas Oil) . I think those would be the top choices, what do you all think?

drozz said...

by rule, yes OSU would be co-champions. and if they choose to keep with that empty moniker, so be it. they know that they won it on a technicality, and not on the field. it severely is lacking in integrity.

kind of like the "tackles" laurinitis is credited for.

Anonymous said...

Next time try not to "riot" after a win in week 9. Watching those videos now on Youtube is hilarious. Look no further for proof about the state of your program than to see your fans rioting after a win that's won absolutely nothing.

JB said...

Try not to riot? You mean, "try not to get fired up because you beat a conference rival on the road in a huge game?" Oh wait, Tosu didn't beat anyone of real consequence on the road and got beaten at home.

Enjoy Tampa while PSU is in Pasadena at the Rose Bowl.