Author
Topic: Big Ten East v West
(Read 4330 times)

LittlePig · « **Reply #14 on:** September 08, 2021, 03:10:30 PM »

There is talk that if the Big Ten, ACC and PAC are serious about forming a scheduling alliance the Big Ten would go back to 8 conference games so that each Big Ten team can play 1 game OOC against the ACC and 1 game OOC against the PAC

Not sure if that will ever happen but if the Big Ten really does go back to 8 games, I think the best way that works with 14 teams total is to get rid of divisions. This would require changing the NCAA rules for CCG so the conference can send whatever 2 teams they want to the CCG. but thats ok because it seems like all conferences are trending that way anyway.

Instead the Big Ten can set up a 8-game conference schedule where each team has 3 permanent rivals and plays the other 10 teams 50% of the time. I believe this is the best approach even if the scheduling alliance never happens.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #15 on:** September 08, 2021, 03:20:30 PM »

Quote from: LittlePig on September 08, 2021, 03:10:30 PM

There is talk that if the Big Ten, ACC and PAC are serious about forming a scheduling alliance the Big Ten would go back to 8 conference games so that each Big Ten team can play 1 game OOC against the ACC and 1 game OOC against the PAC

Not sure if that will ever happen but if the Big Ten really does go back to 8 games, I think the best way that works with 14 teams total is to get rid of divisions. This would require changing the NCAA rules for CCG so the conference can send whatever 2 teams they want to the CCG. but thats ok because it seems like all conferences are trending that way anyway.

Instead the Big Ten can set up a 8-game conference schedule where each team has 3 permanent rivals and plays the other 10 teams 50% of the time. I believe this is the best approach even if the scheduling alliance never happens.

I'd be good with that.

May be some wonky tiebreakers for the CCG in a 14-team conference, particularly if you have one team that ran away with 1st and you have 2, 3, or more teams tied for second.

But I'm sure the tiebreaker gurus can figure out some convoluted and arcane method that nobody understands...

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 08, 2021, 03:25:59 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on September 08, 2021, 01:59:58 PM

Indiana in 2020...

Yards per play: 5.05 / Opponent yards per play: 5.52
First downs: 162 / Opponent first downs: 161
Penalties: 34 (358 yards) / Opponent penalties: 60 (566 yards)
Indiana turnover margin: 8 (one per game in the shortened season)
Fourth down conversion: 53.33% (8 of 15) / Opponent: 30.77% (4 of 13)
Red Zone conversion: 82.86% (29 of 35) / Opponent: 64% (16 of 25)
FG%: 90.9% (10 of 11) / Opponent: 41.7% (5 of 12)

Statistically, Indiana wasn't a particularly amazing team.

They did a few things well. They got a lot of interceptions (17) while not throwing many (5), which gave them an excellent turnover margin (despite being -4 in fumbles lost relative to opponent). They got a very high 4th down conversion rate. They held their opponents to surprisingly low red zone percentage,

and a surprisingly low FG percentage. And of course there's a significant difference in penalties.

I'd argue, however, that many of those stats--which were probably the difference between a 6-2 and 4-4 or 3-5 record--are not sustainable year over year.

Fool's gold, IMHO.

I was kinda thinking the same thing but didn't want to do the research to prove it. Of course the guy who DID do the research is a fan of their rival, LoL. Anyway, I agree, they were solid in 2020 but probably not quite as good as their record.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #17 on:** September 08, 2021, 03:35:14 PM »

Quote from: betarhoalphadelta on September 08, 2021, 03:20:30 PM

I'd be good with that.

May be some wonky tiebreakers for the CCG in a 14-team conference, particularly if you have one team that ran away with 1st and you have 2, 3, or more teams tied for second.

But I'm sure the tiebreaker gurus can figure out some convoluted and arcane method that nobody understands...

In a situation like you described I'd want to emphasize record against the runaway #1 rather than record against each other.

Example #1:

Lets say one team runs the table and finishes #1 at 8-0 while three teams tie for second at 6-2. We'll call them team A, team B, and team C. Now suppose:

Team A lost to #1, beat B and C, and lost another game.
Team B lost to #1 and team A, beat team C and won the rest of their games.
Team C didn't play #1, lost to team A and team B, and won the rest of their games.

Traditionally Team A would be the obvious choice because they'd be 2-0 in the H2H while team B was 1-1 and team C was 0-2. I'd rather see team C get the slot on the theory that they haven't had a chance yet while teams A and B each already had their shot at #1.

Example #2:

Again lets say one team runs the table and finishes #1 at 8-0 while three teams tie for second at 6-2:

Team A lost to #1, beat B and C, and lost another game.
Team B didn't play #1, lost to team A, and beat team C, and lost another game.
Team C BEAT #1, lost to B and C, and won the rest of their games.

Traditionally Team A would be the obvious choice because they'd be 2-0 H2H while team B was 1-1 and team C was 0-2. I'd rather see team C get the slot on the theory that they have shown that they can beat #1, let them prove it wasn't a fluke. Conversely, team A already lost to #1 and team B didn't play them.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #18 on:** September 08, 2021, 04:46:22 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on September 08, 2021, 03:25:59 PM

I was kinda thinking the same thing but didn't want to do the research to prove it. Of course the guy who DID do the research is a fan of their rival, LoL. Anyway, I agree, they were solid in 2020 but probably not quite as good as their record.

Yeah, I saw someone on H&R mention the yards per play thing and how they had a great TO margin, and so I figured I'd chase it down on cfbstats.com because I was wondering how you get to a 6-2 record when you go an entire season being beat in yards per play...

I don't think they were as "solid" as people think in 2020. They weren't as bad as I'd like them to be, of course. I think Allen is doing good things there. But when people started throwing them out there as a top-4 in the conference team? Nah... They don't have the talent.

Likewise I could look at picking some stats from Purdue last year:

PPG: 27.2 / Opponent: 29.8
Yards per play: 5.70 / Opponent: 5.38
TO Margin: Even
3rd Down Conversion: 37.5% / Opponent: 43.68%
TOP: 27:36 / Opp: 32:25
Red Zone Success: 75% / Opp: 81.25%
FG Made %: 77.8% / Opp: 100%

You look at those stats and 2-4 or 3-3 would equally make sense. If I told you that Purdue went 2-4 and lost 3 of those games by one possession and the worst loss was 10 points? Makes sense, right? Purdue was in every game, but they had trouble staying on the field on 3rd down, trouble converting in the red zone, and their opponents had advantages there. It's a recipe for a bunch of close losses.

Purdue looks like a middling to slightly below middling B1G team, which is probably what they are. Their stats pretty much look like their record.

But IU goes 6-1 in conference and everyone thinks they're the shizznit, but when you look at their stats you realize that they were punching above their weight class last year, and that's not sustainable with their talent leve.

LittlePig · « **Reply #19 on:** September 08, 2021, 04:48:57 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on September 08, 2021, 03:25:59 PM

I was kinda thinking the same thing but didn't want to do the research to prove it. Of course the guy who DID do the research is a fan of their rival, LoL. Anyway, I agree, they were solid in 2020 but probably not quite as good as their record.

I get into similar discussions when discussing if an easy schedule can skew a teams record, but you can use the same thinking with luck. Usually my response is, an easy schedule can turn a 7-5 team into an 8-4 team, but it does not turn a 7-5 team into an 11-1 team. At some point, you just have to concede that a team is pretty good.

Indiana was 6-1 in conference last year with its only loss to OSU. You could argue they were a little lucky to beat PSU, and lucky they did not have to play Iowa during champions week, so they might have finished 5-3 in conference if things went a little differently. But they still were a good team last year, and probably will be a good team this year too.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #20 on:** September 08, 2021, 05:05:25 PM »

Quote from: LittlePig on September 08, 2021, 04:48:57 PM

I get into similar discussions when discussing if an easy schedule can skew a teams record, but you can use the same thinking with luck. Usually my response is, an easy schedule can turn a 7-5 team into an 8-4 team, but it does not turn a 7-5 team into an 11-1 team. At some point, you just have to concede that a team is pretty good.

The bigger the conferences get the less I agree with you here. Back when the Big Ten actually had 10 members and each team played eight of the other nine each year I agree, schedule didn't make much difference. Miss the worst team, go 5-3, miss the best team, go 6-2. Now . . .

For a middling team schedule can be pretty big. Play the best three teams in the other division, go 3-6; play the worst three teams in the other division, go 6-3. That is a MUCH bigger difference.

The SEC is about to go to 16 teams. If they stick with their eight game schedule then each team will only be playing half of the teams in the league each year. That will make it impossible to just say "SEC schedule" because there will be an enormous difference each year between the strongest and the weakest "SEC schedule".

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #21 on:** September 08, 2021, 05:36:45 PM »

Quote from: LittlePig on September 08, 2021, 04:48:57 PM

I get into similar discussions when discussing if an easy schedule can skew a teams record, but you can use the same thinking with luck. Usually my response is, an easy schedule can turn a 7-5 team into an 8-4 team, but it does not turn a 7-5 team into an 11-1 team. At some point, you just have to concede that a team is pretty good.

Indiana was 6-1 in conference last year with its only loss to OSU. You could argue they were a little lucky to beat PSU, and lucky they did not have to play Iowa during champions week, so they might have finished 5-3 in conference if things went a little differently. But they still were a good team last year, and probably will be a good team this year too.

IMHO we underestimate luck and volatility.

There are ~130 teams in FBS (I can't keep track annually). Out of those 130, you don't think there's at least 1 team that will have a +4 or -4 variance to expected wins in a given year?

Yeah, we look at it after the fact and say "they forced a bunch of turnovers; they were a good team", but there's a difference between teams that can force a bunch of turnovers year-over-year through scheme and who got lucky.

Let's look at IU's interceptions per year since Tom Allen became coach (hence where scheme could affect it):

2016: 13 INT in 13 games: 1 per game
2017: 5 INT in 12 games: 0.42 per game
2018: 13 INT in 12 games: 1.08 per game
2019: 7 INT in 13 games: 0.54 per game
2020: 17 INT in 8 games: 2.13 per game

Which season looks like the outlier here?

BTW in 2016-2019, IU threw more interceptions than they gathered in every year except 2018, where they were equal. In 2020 they only threw 5 picks.

Turnovers are one of the biggest correlations to wins in the entire game.

Look at their turnover margin per 2020 game:

PSU: Win, +1
@Rut: Win, +3
UM: Win, +2
@MSU: Win, +2
@OSU: Loss, -1
UMD: Win, +2
@UW: Win, +1
bowlOleMiss: Loss, -2

Every win was +, every loss was -. That's not sustainable IMHO.

Hawkinole · « **Reply #22 on:** September 09, 2021, 01:51:42 AM »

Quote from: LittlePig on September 08, 2021, 03:10:30 PM

There is talk that if the Big Ten, ACC and PAC are serious about forming a scheduling alliance the Big Ten would go back to 8 conference games so that each Big Ten team can play 1 game OOC against the ACC and 1 game OOC against the PAC
* * *
Instead the Big Ten can set up a 8-game conference schedule where each team has 3 permanent rivals and plays the other 10 teams 50% of the time. I believe this is the best approach even if the scheduling alliance never happens.

I doubt this will happen. Iowa's athletic department will object as it wants to schedule Iowa State every year, and UNI at least twice a decade. Still hoping Iowa replaces Iowa State on its schedule every other year, or so with Notre Dame.

FearlessF · « **Reply #23 on:** September 09, 2021, 10:00:33 AM »

Notre Dame could be the ACC team

East and West divisions aren't going away

Abba · « **Reply #24 on:** September 20, 2021, 08:51:24 AM »

Illinois blows a golden opportunity against Maryland, giving the Big Ten East a 4-1 lead this year. Next up:

Nebraska @ Michigan State at 7PM on Saturday. Nebraska has apparently impressed Vegas, as the Spartans are only favored by 4 points.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #25 on:** September 28, 2021, 01:10:56 PM »

Quote from: Abba on September 20, 2021, 08:51:24 AM

Illinois blows a golden opportunity against Maryland, giving the Big Ten East a 4-1 lead this year. Next up:

Nebraska @ Michigan State at 7PM on Saturday. Nebraska has apparently impressed Vegas, as the Spartans are only favored by 4 points.

Nobody updated this, the Spartans won albeit barely so the B1G-E now holds a 5-1 lead on these six games (with current B1G Power Rankings):

#1 PSU won at #6 UW, 1-0 B1G-E
#2 tOSU won at #12 MN, 2-0 B1G-E
#3 Iowa won vs #9 IU, 2-1 B1G-E
#5 MSU won vs #11 UNL, 3-1 B1G-E
#5 MSU won at #13 NU, 4-1 B1G-E
#7 UMD won at #14 IL, 5-1 B1G-E

And the following 16 games remain (with current B1G Power Ranking):

#3 Iowa at #7 UMD on 10/1
#4 M at #6 UW on 10/2
#1 PSU at #3 Iowa on 10/9
#4 M at #11 UNL on 10/9
#8 RU at #13 NU on 10/16
#1 PSU vs #14 IL on 10/23
#4 M vs #13 NU on 10/23
#5 UMD at #12 MN on 10/23
#8 RU at #14 IL on 10/30
#2 tOSU at #11 UNL on 11/6
#5 MSU at #10 PU on 11/6
#6 UW at #8 RU on 11/6
#2 tOSU vs #10 PU on 11/13
#9 IU vs #12 MN on 11/20
#9 IU at #10 PU on 11/27
B1GCG

Cincydawg · « **Reply #26 on:** September 28, 2021, 01:15:37 PM »

This scheduling alliance thing could be mostly for show, and voluntary.

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #27 on:** September 28, 2021, 01:22:32 PM »

I really see the next two weeks being key to whether or not the B1G-W can make it competitive:

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on September 28, 2021, 01:10:56 PM

And the following 16 games remain (with current B1G Power Ranking):
#3 Iowa at #7 UMD on 10/1
#4 M at #6 UW on 10/2
#1 PSU at #3 Iowa on 10/9
#4 M at #11 UNL on 10/9

Obviously Michigan should win at Nebraska but I could see the other three games going 3-0 either way:

Iowa at Maryland: Every single voted voted Iowa ahead of Maryland so we all agree that the Hawkeyes are the better team. OTOH, the Hawkeyes are on the road on a short week and the gap between them may not be all that big.
Michigan at Wisconsin: Only @Temp430 and @Benthere2 voted Wisconsin ahead of Michigan. The other 13 of us agree that Michigan is the better team but the Wolverines are on the road and Madison is a notoriously tough environment.
PSU at Iowa: The same two voters have Iowa ranked ahead of PSU, the other 13 of us agree that PSU is the better team but the Nittany Lions are on the road and Kinnick is another notoriously tough environment.

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

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: Big Ten East v West

LittlePig

Re: Big Ten East v West

betarhoalphadelta

Re: Big Ten East v West

medinabuckeye1

Re: Big Ten East v West

medinabuckeye1

Re: Big Ten East v West

betarhoalphadelta

Re: Big Ten East v West

LittlePig

Re: Big Ten East v West

medinabuckeye1

Re: Big Ten East v West

betarhoalphadelta

Re: Big Ten East v West

Hawkinole

Re: Big Ten East v West

FearlessF

Re: Big Ten East v West

Abba

Re: Big Ten East v West

medinabuckeye1

Re: Big Ten East v West

Cincydawg

Re: Big Ten East v West

medinabuckeye1

Re: Big Ten East v West