CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on November 02, 2018, 05:38:03 PM
-
Link to last week's rankings (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?topic=6273.0).
Only 12 voters so far. Votes through @fezzador (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=44) :
| Team/Poster | AVG | Rank | StdDev | Best | Worst | Range | LW AVG | LW Rank | Chg Avg | Chg Rank |
| M | 1.00 | 1 | - | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1.00 | 1 | - | 0 |
| tOSU | 2.75 | 2 | 1.36 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 2.83 | 2 | 0.08 | 0 |
| MSU | 3.42 | 3 | 1.00 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 5.33 | 5 | 1.92 | 2 |
| NU | 3.92 | 4 | 1.16 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5.44 | 6 | 1.53 | 2 |
| PU | 5.17 | 5 | 1.03 | 4 | 7 | 3 | 7.22 | 8 | 2.06 | 3 |
| PSU | 5.67 | 6 | 1.50 | 3 | 8 | 5 | 3.00 | 3 | (2.67) | -3 |
| UW | 7.00 | 7 | 1.04 | 5 | 8 | 3 | 6.94 | 7 | (0.06) | 0 |
| Iowa | 7.08 | 8 | 1.68 | 2 | 8 | 6 | 4.56 | 4 | (2.53) | -4 |
| UNL | 9.25 | 9 | 0.45 | 9 | 10 | 1 | 10.39 | 10 | 1.14 | 1 |
| MD | 9.83 | 10 | 0.58 | 9 | 11 | 2 | 8.78 | 9 | (1.06) | -1 |
| ILL | 11.58 | 11 | 0.79 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 12.72 | 13 | 1.14 | 2 |
| MN | 12.17 | 12 | 0.58 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 11.17 | 11 | (1.00) | -1 |
| IU | 12.17 | 13 | 1.11 | 10 | 13 | 3 | 11.61 | 12 | (0.56) | -1 |
| RU | 14.00 | 14 | - | 14 | 14 | 0 | 14.00 | 14 | - | 0 |
Drop the high and low:
| Team/Poster | AVG | Rank | StdDev | Best | Worst | Range | LW AVG | LW Rank | Chg Avg | Chg Rank |
| M | 1.00 | 1 | - | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1.00 | 1 | - | 0 |
| tOSU | 2.50 | 2 | 0.97 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 2.63 | 2 | 0.13 | 0 |
| MSU | 3.30 | 3 | 0.48 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 5.31 | 5 | 2.01 | 2 |
| NU | 4.00 | 4 | 1.05 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5.50 | 6 | 1.50 | 2 |
| PU | 5.10 | 5 | 0.88 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 7.31 | 8 | 2.21 | 3 |
| PSU | 5.70 | 6 | 1.16 | 4 | 7 | 3 | 2.88 | 3 | (2.83) | -3 |
| UW | 7.10 | 7 | 0.88 | 6 | 8 | 2 | 7.06 | 7 | (0.04) | 0 |
| Iowa | 7.50 | 8 | 0.53 | 7 | 8 | 1 | 4.50 | 4 | (3.00) | -4 |
| UNL | 9.20 | 9 | 0.42 | 9 | 10 | 1 | 10.38 | 10 | 1.18 | 1 |
| MD | 9.80 | 10 | 0.42 | 9 | 10 | 1 | 8.88 | 9 | (0.93) | -1 |
| ILL | 11.50 | 11 | 0.71 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 12.81 | 13 | 1.31 | 2 |
| MN | 12.20 | 12 | 0.42 | 12 | 13 | 1 | 11.19 | 11 | (1.01) | -1 |
| IU | 12.30 | 13 | 0.95 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 11.69 | 12 | (0.61) | -1 |
| RU | 14.00 | 14 | - | 14 | 14 | 0 | 14.00 | 14 | - | 0 |
Various graphical illustrations:
<br />(https://thumb.ibb.co/gNHA7f/B1-GPR-2018-wk10.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gNHA7f)<br /><br />(https://thumb.ibb.co/fxdHnf/B1-GPR-2018-wk10-dist.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fxdHnf)<br /><br />(https://thumb.ibb.co/kNFK00/B1-GPR-2018-wk10-pre-cur.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kNFK00)<br />
Schedule/performance chart:
| Rank | . | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | . | Rank |
| . | Team | M | tOSU | MSU | NU | PU | PSU | UW | Iowa | UNL | MD | ILL | MN | IU | RU | Team | . |
| 1 | M | n/a | 11/24, H | L by 14, H | L by 3, H | miss | L by 35, A | L by 25, A | miss | L by 46, A | L by 21, A | miss | miss | 11/17, A | 11/10, H | M | 1 |
| 2 | tOSU | 11/24, A | n/a | 11/10, H | miss | W by 29, H | L by 1, H | miss | miss | L by 5, A | 11/17, H | miss | L by 16, A | L by 23, A | L by 49, A | tOSU | 2 |
| 3 | MSU | W by 14, A | 11/10, A | n/a | W by 10, A | L by 10, A | L by 4, H | miss | miss | 11/17, H | L by 21, H | miss | miss | L by 14, H | 11/24, A | MSU | 3 |
| 4 | NU | W by 3, A | miss | L by 10, H | n/a | L by 4, H | miss | L by 14, A | 11/10, H | L in OT, A | miss | 11/24, A | 11/17, A | miss | L by 3, H | NU | 4 |
| 5 | PU | miss | L by 29, A | W by 10, H | W by 4, A | n/a | miss | 11/17, A | L by 2, A | L by 14, H | miss | L by 39, H | 11/10, H | 11/24, H | miss | PU | 5 |
| 6 | PSU | W by 35, H | W by 1, A | W by 4, A | miss | miss | n/a | 11/10, A | L by 6, A | miss | 11/24, A | L by 39, H | miss | L by 5, H | 11/17, H | PSU | 6 |
| 7 | UW | W by 25, H | miss | miss | W by 14, H | 11/17, H | 11/10, H | n/a | L by 11, H | L by 17, A | miss | L by 29, A | 11/24, A | miss | L by 14, A | UW | 7 |
| 8 | Iowa | miss | miss | miss | 11/10, A | W by 2, H | W by 6, H | W by 11, A | n/a | 11/23, A | L by 23, A | 11/17, H | L by 17, H | L by 26, H | miss | Iowa | 8 |
| 9 | UNL | W by 46, H | W by 5, H | 11/17, A | W in OT, H | W by 14, A | miss | W by 17, H | 11/23, H | n/a | miss | 11/10, A | L by 25, A | miss | miss | UNL | 9 |
| 10 | MD | W by 21, H | 11/17, A | W by 21, A | miss | miss | 11/24, H | miss | W by 23, H | miss | n/a | L by 30, A | L by 29, A | 11/10, H | L by 27, A | MD | 10 |
| 11 | ILL | miss | miss | miss | 11/24, H | W by 39, A | W by 39, A | W by 29, H | 11/17,A | 11/10, H | W by 30, H | n/a | L by 24, A | miss | L by 21, H | ILL | 11 |
| 12 | MN | miss | W by 16, H | miss | 11/17, A | 11/10, A | miss | 11/24, H | W by 17, A | W by 25, H | W by 29, H | W by 24, H | n/a | L by 7, A | miss | MN | 12 |
| 13 | IU | 11/17, H | W by 23, H | W by 14, A | miss | 11/24, A | W by 5, A | miss | W by 26, A | miss | 11/10, A | miss | W by 7, H | n/a | L by 7, H | IU | 13 |
| 14 | RU | 11/10, A | W by 49, H | 11/24, H | W by 3, A | miss | 11/17, A | W by 14, H | miss | miss | W by 27, H | W by 21, A | miss | W by 7, A | n/a | RU | 14 |
| . | Team | M | tOSU | MSU | NU | PU | PSU | UW | Iowa | UNL | MD | ILL | MN | IU | RU | Team | . |
| Rank | . | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | . | Rank |
-
Strangely enough my top 10 stays the same. Only changes, ILL moves up 2 spots to #11. Minn and Indy each drop down 1 spot.
1. Mich
2. NW
3. MSU
4. Purdue
5. OSU
6. PSU
7. Iowa
8. Wisc
9. MD
10. Neb
11. ILL
12. Minn
13. Indy
14. Rut
-
1. Michigan
2.D
3. O
4. E
5. S
6. N
7. ‘
8. T
9. M
10. A
11. T
12. T
13. E
14. R
-
1. Michigan: Still playing well in November. Should have a couple layups before putting a bruisin on the Buckeyes
oh boy
2. Northwestern: I mean, they aren't that great, and they lost to Akron, but they were competitive with Michigan and Notre Dame and are very likely to be in the B1G championship game.
3. Michigan State: Playing enough defense to get up and punch some people
4. Purdue: Very impressive win against Iowa, but that early loss to NW killing them
5. Penn State: Couldn't get much going against Michigan, neither could anyone else
6. Ohio State: Well at least they ran the ball some. Defense impressively shabby
7. Iowa: Still in this mushy middle
8. Wisconsin: Also in this mushy middle.
9. Nebraska: Certainly a legit team, defense still a concern
10. Maryland: Offense is hit and miss
11. Indiana: Can never quite get enough
12. Illinois: What the hell where did that come from
13. Minnesota: Shamed into purgatory
14. Rutgers: Rutgers
-
The middle is getting harder to order, when at this point in the season it should be easier. Michigan State being 3 is actually pretty remarkable, when considering the injuries and offensive woes.
Michigan getting a glimpse of a healthy Tarik Black and a Rashan Gary that looked effective is a positive sign. I'll be curious to see a more aggressive next phase of the RPO developed, like the Gentry TD yesterday. The West race will be an interesting one, with Northwestern in the driver's seat.
1. Mich
2. OSU
3. MSU
4. NW
5. Purdue
6. Wisconsin
7. Iowa
8. PSU
9. Neb
10. Maryland
11. ILL
12. Minn
13. Indy
14. Rut
-
1. Mich
2. OSU
3. NW
4. MSU
5. Purdue
6. Wisconsin
7. PSU
8. Iowa
9. Neb
10. Maryland
11. ILL
12. Minn
13. Indy
14. Rut
-
1. Michigan
2. Ohio State
3. Michigan State
4. Purdue
5. Northwestern
6. Penn State
7. Iowa
------------------------
8. Wisconsin
9. Nebraska
10. Indiana
----------------------------
11. Maryland
12. Illinois
13. Minnesota
14. Rutgers
-
1. Michigan
2. Ohio State
3. Northwestern
4. Michigan State
5. Purdue
6. Wisconsin
7. Penn State
8. Iowa
9. Maryland
10. Nebraska
11. Indiana
12. Minnesota
13. Illinois
14. Rutgers
-
1 Wolverines
2 Buckeyes
3 Spartans
4 Nittany Lions
5 Wildcats
6 Boilermakers
7 Badgers
8 Hawkeyes
9 Cornhuskers
10 Terrapins
11 Hoosiers
12 Fighting Illini
13 Golden Gophers
14 Scarlet Knights
-
1. (1) Michigan: Dominating win. Ohio State loses one of the next two (easily possible), and Michigan doesn't even need to win The Game to get to Indianapolis (just beat Rutgers and Indiana).
2. (3) Michigan State: Slight underdog against Ohio State right now, but feel like they are playing better.
3. (2) Ohio State: Nebraska is better than their record shows, but not that much better. If things fall into place this team can do anything, but time is about up for that.
4. (5) Northwestern: No great shame in losing to Notre Dame. Team has overachieved and I don't expect them to end up this high, but they have control of their destiny and stand a definite chance to make the Big Ten Championship.
5. (4) Penn State: Michigan really is good. They will be better next week.
6. (8) Purdue: Of the opening 3 loses, really only Eastern Michigan inexcusable. Rest have turned out better than looked for awhile. Boilermakers not out of it for the west title yet.
7. (6) Wisconsin: Won as expected this week.
8. (7) Iowa: Close loss to Purdue cost them.
9. (9) Nebraska: Remain better than their record shows.
10. (10) Maryland: Be interesting to see how they finish out after all the coaching issues.
11. (13) Illinois: Higher than I expected to put the Illini this season. Convincing win over Minnesota.
12. (11) Minnesota: Still have the win over Indiana to help a bit.
13. (12) Indiana: Below expectations this year.
14. (14) Rutgers: Will take a lot to win another game this year.
-
Some crazy stats I thought I’d add to the discussion.
Michigan- just in B1G play-
Michigan: 36.5 PPG
Opponents: 12.5 PPG
Average margin of victory: +24 points
Michigan: 429 offensive yards per game
Opponents: 186.6 offensive yards per game
Outgaining their B1G opponents on average of 242+ yards per game.
They have yet to play Rutgers. Numbers could get even more wonky this week vs Rutgers if we see a repeat of 78-0.
-
Greetings from Barcelona. I really can't do these this week as I did not see anything but a couple of minutes of the Rutger game on my phone.
All I can do is plainly state that Michigan is the top team in the league. They may also be the only team capable of hanging with Bammer right now (defense and all that).
-
Oh, and I did see the scores.
Is PJ Barnum's ass warm yet in Minnie?
Is all that #RTB hot air in the #ELITE circus tent starting to suffocate people in year 0.1 yet?
-
Greetings from Barcelona. I really can't do these this week as I did not see anything but a couple of minutes of the Rutger game on my phone.
All I can do is plainly state that Michigan is the top team in the league. They may also be the only team capable of hanging with Bammer right now (defense and all that).
Barcelona is amazing. You lucky sob!
There’s this really good breakfast/brunch place in the Gothic Quarter there called Milk. You should definitely hit that place up!
Not sure Michigan can hang with Bammer. Probably have the only defense that can really slow them down- but that’s all you can do is slow them down. They are still gonna score their points. Michigan doesn’t have the offense to go toe to toe. I think they have the personnel to have that kind of offense- they just don’t have the coaching on that side of the ball. They need to unleash Patterson already, use Chris Evans properly, never throw a pass to Sean McKeon again, get Nick Eubanks more involved in the passing game, and get Tarik Black up to speed and then MAYBE they’d have an offense good enough to possibly keep up. Way that offense has been going though- no shot.
-
Badge, Barcelona is beautiful, enjoy it. I will be headed back there in December for a trip, planning to take the wife with me next summer. I was there in September and was pleasantly surprised how pretty it is there.
-
Oh, and I did see the scores.
Is PJ Barnum's ass warm yet in Minnie?
Is all that #RTB hot air in the #ELITE circus tent starting to suffocate people in year 0.1 yet?
Yeah the fan base is getting restless but PJ did step up and fire the DC which was what needed to happen. His next hire will have to be a good one to save his job as his seat will get hotter the next two years
-
Last week in parenthesis...
- MICHIGAN (1) - UM and Rutgers are about the only things I'm sure of right now
- IOWA (3) - back to back losses, but on the road, and close
- OHIO STATE (4) - I guess
- MICHIGAN STATE (5) - defense seems to be getting better each week
- NORTHWESTERN (6) - had chances at hope against a pair of likely CFP participants, but couldn't pull either off
- PURDUE (7) - very nice bounce back
- PENN STATE (2) - that was my pick to win the Big Ten?
- WISCONSIN (8) - got a W, didn't inspire a ton of confidence
- NEBRASKA (10) - no matter how it winds up, should be some excitement going into 2019
- MARYLAND (9) - never got a ground attack going, and the offense sputtered
- ILLINOIS (13) - their offense is suddenly looking kind of dangerous
- MINNESOTA (11) - and there goes any hope of a bowl for Fleck in Year 2, or is it Year 0, Pt. II, I can't remember
- INDIANA (12) - that Minnesota loss looks a lot worse
- RUTGERS (14) - they actually seem to be making very small strides
-
(Last,...,Preseason)
1. Michigan (1,1,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,3)
----
2. OSU (2,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) -- suspended by a thread
3. MSU (7,7,5,6,6,6,6,6,3,2) -- what a turnaround
4. PSU (3,4,3,2,2,2,2,3,7,6) -- would Franklin have gone for it or kicked the FG if
Stevens hadn't converted?
5. Northwestern (5,8,7,8,10,10,9,8,8,8) -- tempted to put them #2 despite the OOC loss because
of OSU and PSU falling from expectations
6. Purdue (8,6,8,9,9,9,11,9,9,7) -- Maybe Harbaugh shouldn't be COY
7. UW (6,3,4,4,4,4,5,2,2,4)
8. Iowa (4,5,6,5,5,5,3,5,5,5) -- I know it's low but the losses from above are piling up
----
9. Nebraska (10,10,12,12,12,11,10,10,10,10)
10. Maryland (9,9,9,10,8,8,8,7,6,9)
11. Minnesota (11,12,11,11,11,12,12,12,12,12)
12. Indiana (12,11,10,7,7,7,7,11,11,11)
13. Illinois (13,13,13,13,13,13,13,14,14,14)
14. Rutger (14,14,14,14,14,14,14,13,13,13)
-
4. PSU (3,4,3,2,2,2,2,3,7,6) -- would Franklin have gone for it or kicked the FG if
Stevens hadn't converted?
Kicked it, after icing his own kicker.
-
- MICHIGAN (1) - UM and Rutgers are about the only things I'm sure of right now
- IOWA (3) - back to back losses, but on the road, and close
A couple things I thought were funny:
- I think your UM/RU comment applies to everyone. So far there are ten voters and all ten have Michigan #1 and RU #14. The other 12 teams are all over the place.
- You put a team that has lost two straight at #2 and while I don't agree, it isn't a completely ridiculous assertion. Usually at this point of a season #2 probably wouldn't even have two losses total let alone three total and two straight but that just shows how big the gap is between #1 and #2. So far Ohio State, Iowa, MSU, and NU each have at least one vote for #2 and there is at least a plausible argument for Purdue as well.
-
Hah. With his staff chasing after to stop him, but not in time.
-
Well, #1 and #14 are obvious. Other than that, who knows.
- Michigan: This is obvious.
- Ohio State: There is at least a credible argument for tOSU, PSU, IA, MSU, NU, UW, or PU. I'm sticking with the Buckeyes for now.
- Michigan State: Defense.
- Purdue: Some great results (tOSU, IA) and some terrible results (NU, MSU).
- Northwestern: I do not give them much credit for hanging with Notre Dame because I don't think the Irish are nearly as good as they are assumed to be.
- Penn State: The Nittany Lions should be somewhere between #2 and #8.
- Iowa: They have some "good" close losses against other teams in this range but the problem is that so far this season they are 0-3 against teams in the top half of the conference. Close or not, road or not, eventually you have to win a game.
- Wisconsin: I realize that most of RU's points came after the game was decided but still, the Badgers just do not look good to me lately.
- Nebraska: There is some recency bias here.
- Maryland: Ranking the season as a whole I would put UMD ahead of UNL.
- Illinois: Where did that come from?
- Minnesota: Ugh, they went from likely bowl team and potential B1G-W dark horse to when does basketball start?
- Indiana: When does basketball start?
- Rutgers: Ugh.
-
Last week in parenthesis...
- MICHIGAN (1) - UM and Rutgers are about the only things I'm sure of right now
- IOWA (3) - back to back losses, but on the road, and close
- OHIO STATE (4) - I guess
- MICHIGAN STATE (5) - defense seems to be getting better each week
- NORTHWESTERN (6) - had chances at hope against a pair of likely CFP participants, but couldn't pull either off
- PURDUE (7) - very nice bounce back
- PENN STATE (2) - that was my pick to win the Big Ten?
- WISCONSIN (8) - got a W, didn't inspire a ton of confidence
- NEBRASKA (10) - no matter how it winds up, should be some excitement going into 2019
- MARYLAND (9) - never got a ground attack going, and the offense sputtered
- ILLINOIS (13) - their offense is suddenly looking kind of dangerous
- MINNESOTA (11) - and there goes any hope of a bowl for Fleck in Year 2, or is it Year 0, Pt. II, I can't remember
- INDIANA (12) - that Minnesota loss looks a lot worse
- RUTGERS (14) - they actually seem to be making very small strides
How close can we get to some order with transitive property?
I do feel like 2-8 is a group, and 9-13 is a group
PSU, Purdue, UW > Iowa
Purdue > OSU
NW > MSU
NW, MSU > Purdue
OSU, MSU > PSU
NW > UW
So...
NW > MSU > Purdue > OSU > PSU > Iowa
You can actually do that without any transitive breaks, and you can fit Wisconsin anywhere between NW and Iowa, and it still works
9-13 group
NU > Minn
UMD > Minn, Ill
Ill > Minn
Minn > IU
So the bottom doesn't really need to change. As long as you have Minnesota #12 and Indiana #13, you can put the other three 9-11, so long as you have Maryland above Illinois, which I do, so since there is so much of a mess, but somehow, the transitive property still somehow works (which has to never be the case). You don't have to use these to take out my original rankings, but it's funny how clean that actually worked
- MICHIGAN (1)
- NORTHWESTERN (6)
- MICHIGAN STATE (5)
- PURDUE (7)
- OHIO STATE (4)
- PENN STATE (2)
- WISCONSIN (8)
- IOWA (3)
- NEBRASKA (10)
- MARYLAND (9)
- ILLINOIS (13)
- MINNESOTA (11)
- INDIANA (12)
- RUTGERS (14)
-
1) Michigan
2) Ohio State
3) Penn State
4) Northwestern
5) Wisconsin
6) Michigan State
7) Purdue
8) Iowa
9) Maryland
10) Nebraska
11) Illinois
12) Minnesota
13) Indiana
14) Rutgers
-
Barcelona is amazing. You lucky sob!
There’s this really good breakfast/brunch place in the Gothic Quarter there called Milk. You should definitely hit that place up!
Not sure Michigan can hang with Bammer. Probably have the only defense that can really slow them down- but that’s all you can do is slow them down. They are still gonna score their points. Michigan doesn’t have the offense to go toe to toe. I think they have the personnel to have that kind of offense- they just don’t have the coaching on that side of the ball. They need to unleash Patterson already, use Chris Evans properly, never throw a pass to Sean McKeon again, get Nick Eubanks more involved in the passing game, and get Tarik Black up to speed and then MAYBE they’d have an offense good enough to possibly keep up. Way that offense has been going though- no shot.
I do feel UM could hang with Bama and Clemson. I think the Offense is the reason.
Michigan’s defense was this elite before especially in 2016. The difference now is they are fresh, and often playing with lead. That really lends itself to Brown’s very aggressive style.
-
How close can we get to some order with transitive property?
I do feel like 2-8 is a group, and 9-13 is a group
PSU, Purdue, UW > Iowa
Purdue > OSU
NW > MSU
NW, MSU > Purdue
OSU, MSU > PSU
NW > UW
So...
NW > MSU > Purdue > OSU > PSU > Iowa
You can actually do that without any transitive breaks, and you can fit Wisconsin anywhere between NW and Iowa, and it still works
9-13 group
NU > Minn
UMD > Minn, Ill
Ill > Minn
Minn > IU
So the bottom doesn't really need to change. As long as you have Minnesota #12 and Indiana #13, you can put the other three 9-11, so long as you have Maryland above Illinois, which I do, so since there is so much of a mess, but somehow, the transitive property still somehow works (which has to never be the case). You don't have to use these to take out my original rankings, but it's funny how clean that actually worked
- MICHIGAN (1)
- NORTHWESTERN (6)
- MICHIGAN STATE (5)
- PURDUE (7)
- OHIO STATE (4)
- PENN STATE (2)
- WISCONSIN (8)
- IOWA (3)
- NEBRASKA (10)
- MARYLAND (9)
- ILLINOIS (13)
- MINNESOTA (11)
- INDIANA (12)
- RUTGERS (14)
Yup, you pretty much just duplicated my own rankings and what was my logic behind the order I came up with. Nice Sumnary. The only part where I cheated on my own list is to put Iowa above Wisc.
Now in order for this order to hold this weekend, NW needs to beat Iowa. Otherwise it all falls as apart. It would also help if PSU beats Wisc, but the list won't fall apart if Wisc beats PSU. Then you just move Wisc above PSU.
-
And MSU has to beat OSU, otherwise you get an MSU, OSU, Purdue conundrum
-
And MSU has to beat OSU, otherwise you get an MSU, OSU, Purdue conundrum
Lol, yup, Iorgot about that one. ~???
-
Results posted, votes through @fezzador (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=44) .
There was a lot of movement this week:
- MSU was up two, passing Iowa and PSU.
- NU was up two, passing Iowa and PSU.
- PU was up three, passing PSU, IA, and UW.
- PSU was down three, passed by MSU, NU, and PU.
- UW was unchanged but passed Iowa and got passed by PU.
- Iowa was down four, passed by MSU, NU, PU, and UW.
- UNL was up one, passing UMD.
- UMD was down one, passed by UNL.
- IL was up two, passing MN and IU.
- MN was down one, passed by IL.
- IU was down one, passed by IL.
Noncontiguous votes:
- LittlePig and @MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1572) voted tOSU #5 and #6 respectively, everyone else had the Buckeyes second or third.
- Fezz voted MSU #6, nobody else had them below #4.
- @ELA voted Iowa #2, nobody else had them above #7.
The PU/MN game doesn't look as interesting now and Michigan/RU never did but the other 10 B1G teams all have games this weekend against teams that they are ranked at least relatively close to:
- #1 Michigan at #14 Rutgers
- #2 Ohio State at #3 Michigan State
- #4 Northwestern at #8 Iowa
- #5 Purdue at #12 Minnesota
- #7 Wisconsin at #6 Penn State
- #11 Illinois at #9 Nebraska
- #10 Maryland at #13 Indiana
This should be an exciting weekend especially when you consider that the better team is on the road for five of the seven games.
M/RU:
Nothing interesting here, it is the B1G's undisputed best against the B1G's undisputed worst.
tOSU/MSU:
At least for this week, this game will answer the question "who is the next best team after Michigan?" (at least unless MSU and NU both win).
NU/IA:
For all practical purposes this is the last chance for any team not named Northwestern to win the B1G-W.
PU/MN:
Purdue needs a win to stay on pace, MN needs a win to keep any remaining bowl hopes alive.
UW/PSU:
This will likely be a big factor in bowl positioning.
IL/UNL:
Which team can keep looking up?
UMD/IU:
In theory this should be an easy win for Maryland but the Terps' next B1G road win will be their first since winning in Minneapolis in September of last year.
-
1. Michigan
2. Ohio State
3. Michigan State
4. Northwestern
5. Penn State
6. Purdue
7. Iowa
8. Wisconsin
9. Nebraska
10. Maryland
11. Illinois
12. Minnesota
13. Indiana
14. Rutgers
-
Medina, sorry I am so late to the festivities for the 2nd straight week.
1. Iowa -- Just kidding.
1. Michigan
2. Ohio State
3. Northwestern
4. Michigan State
5. Penn State
6. Wisconsin
7. Purdue
8. Iowa
9. Maryland
10. Indiana
11. Illinois
12. Nebraska
13. Minnesota
14. Rutgers
The Big Ten isn't what it used to be. It was difficult watching Northwestern go down to Notre Dame.
-
Barcelona is amazing. You lucky sob!
There’s this really good breakfast/brunch place in the Gothic Quarter there called Milk. You should definitely hit that place up!
Not wanting to poop in this thread so I'll take it to the SOC from last weekend...
-
I added in @LetsGoPeay (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7) 's and @Hawkinole (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=25) 's votes. The only change is that IU is now slightly ahead of MN for 12/13.
-
Massey composite rankings (97 rankings), with last week in parenthesis...
- Alabama (2)
- Clemson (1)
- Georgia (3)
- MICHIGAN (5)
- Notre Dame (6)
- Oklahoma (7)
- LSU (4)
- West Virginia (12)
- OHIO STATE (9)
- Central Florida (15)
- Kentucky (8)
- Mississippi State (17)
- PENN STATE (11)
- Washington State (16)
- MICHIGAN STATE (24)
- Fresno State (18)
- Florida (10)
- IOWA (13)
- Washington (21)
- Missouri (-)
- NC State (23)
- Utah (14)
- Utah State (-)
- Iowa State (22)
- South Carolina (-)
- 32. Purdue (40)
- 41. Wisconsin (41)
- 42. Northwestern (43)
- 56. Maryland (48)
- 75. Indiana (70)
- 84. Minnesota (66)
- 89. Nebraska (87)
- 97. Illinois (102)
- 117. Rutgers (118)
-
MSU getting a sneaky boost from the season opening win over Utah State, which as of now I believe is the Big Ten's only OOC win over a ranked opponent?
-
Massey composite rankings (97 rankings), with last week in parenthesis...
- Alabama (2)
- Clemson (1)
- Georgia (3)
- MICHIGAN (5)
- Notre Dame (6)
- Oklahoma (7)
- LSU (4)
- West Virginia (12)
- OHIO STATE (9)
- Central Florida (15)
- Kentucky (8)
- Mississippi State (17)
- PENN STATE (11)
- Washington State (16)
- MICHIGAN STATE (24)
- Fresno State (18)
- Florida (10)
- IOWA (13)
- Washington (21)
- Missouri (-)
- NC State (23)
- Utah (14)
- Utah State (-)
- Iowa State (22)
- South Carolina (-)
- 32. Purdue (40)
- 41. Wisconsin (41)
- 42. Northwestern (43)
- 56. Maryland (48)
- 75. Indiana (70)
- 84. Minnesota (66)
- 89. Nebraska (87)
- 97. Illinois (102)
- 117. Rutgers (118)
Michigan would whoop Georgia imo.
Really not getting all the Georgia love.
-
MSU getting a sneaky boost from the season opening win over Utah State, which as of now I believe is the Big Ten's only OOC win over a ranked opponent?
Iowa State was not ranked at the time Iowa played them, but they are now. I don't know if that counts. I don't know if MSU over Utah State counts either. Both should in my opinion.
-
ranked opponents should only count if ranked in the final poll, but the committee can do whatever
-
LSU would hate that... so would the SEC
-
If Ohio St and Wisconsin win this weekend, the Big Ten is gonna hate it
-
Minnesota beat Fresno State and Purdue beat Boston College, too.
-
Minnesota beat Fresno State and Purdue beat Boston College, too.
I was just referring to those computer rankings, so no BC. But yeah, forgot about Minnesota over Fresno State. In retrospect, that might wind up being the most head scratching non-conference win, perhaps Indiana over Virginia depending on where those teams wind up.
-
I didn't want to vote this week because I'm still very concerned with how bad I see OSU performing. Next week will help me sort out the log jam in the West. I try not to move teams more than 3 spots in a week, but I had to in order to make it, make sense to me.
Good
1. Michigan (--) - Unanimous #1
Not Good
2. Michigan State (+3) - Best Run D in the nation.
3. Ohio State (+4) - At least it was a W? And everyone else showed warts too.
4. Penn State (-2) - That ... was UGLY
5. Iowa (-2) - last second loss to an enigmatic Purdue.
6. Wisconsin (-2) - Rutgers...
7. Purdue (+2) - moving up.
8. Northwestern (--) - In the driver's seat to win the West
Bad
9. Maryland (-3) - 26 yards rushing?!? That's OSU type bad there.
10. Nebraska (--) - Had a lot of Fight in the Shoe
12. Indiana (+1) - Rest up
13. Illinois (+1) - Best Beard in the Big Ten
11. Minnesota (-2) - yuck
14. Rutgers (--) - Guess what, they still suck.
-
I added in @TyphonInc (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=8) 's vote. No changes.
-
3. Ohio State (+4) - At least it was a W? And everyone else showed warts too.
A while back you wanted to drop Ohio State a bunch and I think it was @Brutus Buckeye (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=31) that pointed out that even if Ohio State isn't as good as you had hoped, that doesn't necessarily mean that other teams automatically are.
Michigan State has an elite run defense. What else? Northwestern lost at home to Akron. Purdue lost at home to EMU. Penn State has three losses including at home to Ohio State. Wisconsin has three losses. Iowa has three losses.
Ohio State is obviously NOT what I hoped they would be this year but, other than Michigan, I don't see any teams in this league that I think would beat them on a neutral field tomorrow. That could obviously change depending on how things go in East Lansing on Saturday.
IMHO, the conference as a whole is down this year. Michigan being better than expected helps but of the four teams that were ranked ahead of them in the preseason (tOSU, UW, PSU, MSU) not one looks anywhere close to elite. I would say that PU and M are the only two teams performing at a higher level than I expected.
-
Maaaaaaybe Northwestern is playing about its preseason grade.
But that depends on the way we judge them -- whether we are holding them to eye test or conference resume. Because if it's eye test, you're right, and they're basically exactly who we thought they were. In fact, by eye test, they could win the West and still be LESS than what ELA was predicting (Top 25, if I recall).
But by conference resume, there's no way they aren't outpacing all expectations, perhaps as much as Michigan and Purdue.
-
I had Northwestern and Iowa both right around #20 preseason, higher than I saw them anywhere else.
-
Maaaaaaybe Northwestern is playing about its preseason grade.
But that depends on the way we judge them -- whether we are holding them to eye test or conference resume. Because if it's eye test, you're right, and they're basically exactly who we thought they were. In fact, by eye test, they could win the West and still be LESS than what ELA was predicting (Top 25, if I recall).
But by conference resume, there's no way they aren't outpacing all expectations, perhaps as much as Michigan and Purdue.
I think it is two things. You talked a little bit about both but I want to expand on it a bit.
First, looking at just the conference record, NU is EASILY #2 behind Michigan. Now when you include "eye test" but still only look at conference games it gets mushy. The road win at Purdue, and the double-digit wins over MSU and UW are great and the three point loss to unanimous #1 Michigan is fine. The other two conference games are not good. They needed OT to beat UNL which looked horrible then but may be acceptable now that Nebraska looks a bit better but the squeaker over unanimous #14 Rutgers is ugly no matter how you look at it.
Second is the OOC slate. Losing by 10 to a likely CFP bound Notre Dame isn't a problem but losing by two TD's at home to a Dook team that is below .500 in a weak ACC is bad and losing at home to an Akron team that is below .500 in the MAC is beyond ugly.
The Wildcats are an enigma. When a team has one result that is just out-of-character good or bad I generally view that result as just a fluke and basically ignore it. With Northwestern it isn't one, it is three great games, three terrible games, and three in the middle:
- Three great games: 14 point win over UW, 10 point win in East Lansing, 3 point loss to Michigan: Based on those three alone I would rank Northwestern #2 and I think it would be unanimous.
- Three middle games: 4 point win in West Lafayette, OT win over Nebraska, 10 point loss to Notre Dame: Based on those three alone I would rank Northwestern somewhere in the #2-#4 group.
- Three terrible games: 14 point home loss to Dook, 5 point home loss to Akron, 3 point road win over Rutgers: Based on those three alone I would rank Northwestern #13.
-
NU has been like this for decades. In the Carr era, I used to frequently update OOC winning percentages for the conference, and only Michigan and NU had better win% in the Big Ten than OOC. For Michigan, that was mostly about big non-con games and, since Carr won the Big Ten 5 times and was almost always in the race, ya know, we were just cool with it. But Northwestern had none of these excuses. Which made it a fascinating outlier.
Wanna know my best guess explanation? Honestly, I think a team like Northwestern doesn't care about ANYTHING in the OOC except experimenting to -- later on -- maximize its odds to be the best it can in the Big Ten. And, if true, that's something that Fitzgerald could have easily learned, for example, from Randy Walker.
The biggest flaw in this guess: That this is an incredible risk to their bowl eligibility; so, why do it? Obviouslt that means it needs to be further developed. But I still speculate that it's partway there.
-
NU has been like this for decades. In the Carr era, I used to frequently update OOC winning percentages for the conference, and only Michigan and NU had better win% in the Big Ten than OOC. For Michigan, that was mostly about big non-con games and, since Carr won the Big Ten 5 times and was almost always in the race, ya know, we were just cool with it. But Northwestern had none of these excuses. Which made it a fascinating outlier.
Wanna know my best guess explanation? Honestly, I think a team like Northwestern doesn't care about ANYTHING in the OOC except experimenting to -- later on -- maximize its odds to be the best it can in the Big Ten. And, if true, that's something that Fitzgerald could have easily learned, for example, from Randy Walker.
The biggest flaw in this guess: That this is an incredible risk to their bowl eligibility; so, why do it? Obviouslt that means it needs to be further developed. But I still speculate that it's partway there.
The weirder part this year is that Northwestern opened with a conference win (in a decently challenging road trip to Purdue) before going 0-3. So it's not like you can say it took them a minute to get going in this case.
-
You can if you also say it took Purdue a moment as well to get it going.
-
The weirder part this year is that Northwestern opened with a conference win (in a decently challenging road trip to Purdue) before going 0-3. So it's not like you can say it took them a minute to get going in this case.
True, but Purdue wasn't fully weaponized by then, and that game was UGLY.
Also: I don't think it's necessarily counter to this idea for Northwestern to care a LOT about a week 1 conference opponent and then spend the nonconference weeks prepping more for the Big Ten teams to come than the non-cons in their face those weeks.
-
The weirder part this year is that Northwestern opened with a conference win (in a decently challenging road trip to Purdue) before going 0-3. So it's not like you can say it took them a minute to get going in this case.
Purdue statistically was stronger in that game in a lot of ways with two exceptions: costly turnovers and costly penalties.
Purdue was 0-3 in turnover margin. All three of those Purdue interceptions were followed by NU touchdowns. I can't exactly call them points "off" turnovers as Northwestern drove 55 and 64 yards for two of those scores, but that means they were drives where Purdue was at least in good field position. But that's 3 interceptions, and 21 points for NU.
Penalty-wise, although Purdue had 9-95 and NU had 6-56, the key was one late [unnecessary] personal foul. Purdue had stopped NU on 3rd down, with the ability to get the ball back, down 4. But that extended the drive and NU could run out the clock from there.
Purdue outgained NU, Purdue was better on 3rd down, Purdue had a higher completion percentage, and rushed for 8.1 ypc and over 200 yards. It's not like Northwestern came out and just dominated the game. It's one of those games that Purdue could--and some would say should--have won. Or at the very least had the ball to have a shot at the end. But they shot themselves in the foot one too many times.
-
It wasn't until at least Mizzou at the very earliest where I began to see a light for Purdue that I had expected in the preseason but was missing.
Rondale was great right away, but that's not the same thing.
-
It wasn't until at least Mizzou at the very earliest where I began to see a light for Purdue that I had expected in the preseason but was missing.
Rondale was great right away, but that's not the same thing.
That's certainly true. We were still playing musical QB against Northwestern, and the EMU game was so incredibly sloppy due to weather that we weren't running our normal gameplan anyway. Brohm has since said that he was disappointed in the way he called the EMU game and described it as "playing not to lose".
But even then, the difference between the first half against NU and the second half was stark. It looked like a completely different Purdue team. As you state, the offense hadn't been "fully weaponized" yet, but the defense was stout. Not sure if you remember, but Purdue shut out NU in the second half, but only was able to muster 10 points when they needed 14.
I'm just saying that you can't put everything on Purdue not looking like the team they became without realizing that Northwestern did NOT look particularly good in that game either. It took them several games to get going, Purdue just made more critical mistakes than Northwestern did and that was the difference in that game.