Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Mayfield may have matured since then

 for sure it's been what 2 years since he ran from the cops

And it's easier to post good defensive numbers if you run clock on offense effectively and don't  turn the ball over.

I suspect some numbers of the top teams are skewed if they play their twos and threes a lot in the second half.

That's why you gotta dig for the better numbers and kinda weigh stuff differently.
Granted, that might lead to conclusions that don't match the eye test, or have weird quirks in them, which can be interesting when you delve into the why.

RichRod flopped in the B1G because most teams at least pretend to play defense.  When he was picked up by Arizona, he started winning again (maybe not at the same clip as WVU, but he had decent success at least).
In CFB at least, you gotta play both offense and defense competently in order to win.  Being great at one and sucky at the other means you can beat mediocre teams, but get badly exposed by great ones.  Case in point, Oklahoma v. Bama is a strong possibility for an opening playoff round.  Both are great on offense, but only Bama bothers to play any D.  OU has the horses to hang 40 on the Tide, but their only chance to pull it off is to force turnovers, hope the refs are friendly to them, and score on every single possession.  Unless they hire Mike Ditka as their DC, Alabama can basically name their own score.

There's this word again. Since we've said the Pac 12 is disqualifying, and we know the no-defense Big 12 is in that category, and I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the ACC isn't the bee's knees, the only escape from mediocrity is playing in two conferences and being a certain level of good. 
Seems silly to me.
You say, "In CFB at least, you gotta play both offense and defense competently in order to win." Win what exactly? You point to Oklahoma, a team that's 23-2 in two years, and tell me, that's a half-team that will get exposed by far and away the best team in the land. But most teams will get exposed by Bama. It's a sport where only 15 or so teams really contend for a title, and most will be disappointed in the pursuit. But there's 100-plus other teams playing for different things, having moments, getting wins. 

Shoot, Bama exposed Clemson last year. Clemson exposed OSU two years ago. If you're good enough, you go out on a loss, and often, it's a one-sided one. 
I guess my point is, just winning is hard. And however you do it, you've done it. There's always context, but there's always, ALWAYS something more.
OSU went 12-2, and all people wanted to talk about was 31-0
Pelini won nine or 10 games again and again, all we wanted to talk about was missing 10 or 11. 
Wisconsin was sad it wasn't going to Rose Bowls, then made them, got sad it didn't win, then won bowls, got mad it wasn't contending, finished a TD away from the playoff, and some wondered "is this really the ceiling."
(Also, I don't think Ditka was a DC. He was a tight end and offensive guy by trade)

There's this word again. Since we've said the Pac 12 is disqualifying, and we know the no-defense Big 12 is in that category, and I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the ACC isn't the bee's knees, the only escape from mediocrity is playing in two conferences and being a certain level of good.
Seems silly to me.
You say, "In CFB at least, you gotta play both offense and defense competently in order to win." Win what exactly? You point to Oklahoma, a team that's 23-2 in two years, and tell me, that's a half-team that will get exposed by far and away the best team in the land. But most teams will get exposed by Bama. It's a sport where only 15 or so teams really contend for a title, and most will be disappointed in the pursuit. But there's 100-plus other teams playing for different things, having moments, getting wins.

Shoot, Bama exposed Clemson last year. Clemson exposed OSU two years ago. If you're good enough, you go out on a loss, and often, it's a one-sided one.
I guess my point is, just winning is hard. And however you do it, you've done it. There's always context, but there's always, ALWAYS something more.
OSU went 12-2, and all people wanted to talk about was 31-0
Pelini won nine or 10 games again and again, all we wanted to talk about was missing 10 or 11.
Wisconsin was sad it wasn't going to Rose Bowls, then made them, got sad it didn't win, then won bowls, got mad it wasn't contending, finished a TD away from the playoff, and some wondered "is this really the ceiling."
(Also, I don't think Ditka was a DC. He was a tight end and offensive guy by trade)

Bravo.  Couldn’t agree more.

What report?Shelley's hairdressers proctologist.I could see him stepping down after next season as that would complete his 8th season in C-Bus.I couldn't see him stepping down this season out of spite to his detractors(i.e.McMurphy)

SO it's Mike Locksley or "football will cease to matter on campus"?

I'm an optimist and can surely find some good things about his resume, but that is not an ideal state of affairs.

Kinda happens when a shit storm of epic proportions circulates on campus with a player dying and all the legal crap behind the scenes. 
That's why, no matter how many injuries your team had, no matter who you think you should have beat, Maryland had by far the most disappointing year.

McElwain  to interview for Central Michigan HC. Seems about right. I never expected him to stick around.