Big 10 Power Rankings: Post-Week 6

Submitted by Eye of the Tiger on

I'm back with a post-ANNIHILATION edition of these here power rankings. Those of you who like it when your fandom is validated by systems with numbers will undoubtedly enjoy this edition more than the last two, as I did. But more on that later...

First, a note on methodology. I won't rehash how this system works, but rather refer you to the explanation given last week. One note: I decided to implement the +/-0.5 weight for conference games. These are Big 10 power rankings, after all, so it didn't make sense to count Stanford and Michigan as equals in Northwestern's score. Here's how adding that bonus affected last week's standings:

  1. Northwestern: 6.0
  2. Iowa: 5.0
  3. Ohio State 3.0
  4. Michigan: 2.5
  5. Michigan State: 1.5
  6. Illinois: 1.0
  7. Minnesota: 0.5
  8. (tie) Wisconsin: -2.0
  9. (tie) Penn State: -2.0
  10. Indiana: -2.5
  11. Maryland: -3.0
  12. Nebraska: -4.5
  13. (tie) Purdue: -5.0
  14. (tie) Rutgers: -5.0

(So that MSU/Minnesota tie that made everyone feel icky? Not an issue anymore.)

Also note: in the interests of consistency, this will be the last methodological change implemented this season. Further suggestions will be considered in the offseason.

 

Post-Week 6 Rankings

1. Michigan (5-1 (2-0), AP #11): 6.5

(+ 3) As in most other systems that deliberately ignore preseason assumptions, this one now recognizes Michigan as the most accomplished Big 10 team. The Wolverines neither benefit from nor are penalized by any rescoring this week, outside the 0.5 conference win bonus now awarded for beating Maryland. But that win over Northwestern, which was ranked #17 in F+, is the single most valuable win by any Big 10 team so far this season (3.5). And what a win it was! Let's bask in its glory for a moment, and eagerly await Saturday's opportunity to add another.

 

 

2. Northwestern (5-1 (1-1), AP #20): 5.5

(-1) The good news for the Wildcats is that the 38-0 loss to Michigan doesn’t count against them (due to Michigan being classified as "good"), and thanks to previous, highly-scored victories over Stanford and Duke, they remain in second place. Besides, Northwestern isn’t out of the race for the Big 10 West, though—far from it. Though Iowa has the easier path, the ‘Cats have a chance to stake their claim when the two go head-to-head in Evanston next week. Lose, though, and it will be hard for Northwestern to recover.

3. Iowa (6-0/2-0, AP #17): 5.0

(-1) Iowa has impressed so far—with 4/6 of its wins scoring positively (and only the win over Illinois State producing a penalty). This might even be Kirk Ferentz’s best team since 2009, when they finished 11-2, won the Orange Bowl and ended the season ranked #7. But Iowa also has been gifted with an incredibly easy conference schedule. That won’t do many favors in these here power rankings, but after playing Northwestern next week, which looks like a tossup game right now, there aren't many bumps left in the road. A win on Saturday and it should be smooth sailing to the Big 10 title game.

4. Ohio State (6-0 (2-0), AP #1): 4.5

(-1) Last week's win against Maryland was at least less unimpressive, right? Right. But something's still wrong with the Buckeyes, and no one's quite sure what that is. an Interestingly, most observers see the previous week's close win over Indiana as indicative of Ohio State’s perplexing, yet lingering malaise. I tend to agree, but it actually helps the Buckeyes according to the rules of this system, as gave Indiana a boost in F+ (and thus leads to their reclassification as “solid,” which 1.0 points to the baseline and eliminates a 0.5 MoV penalty. Still, they'll need a quality win to boost their position here, and the weak schedule doesn't really offer that opportunity until the last two weeks (when they play MSU and Michigan back-to-back).

5. Michigan State (6-0 (2-0), AP #7): 3.5

(=) Another week, another near-loss against an inferior opponent—this time 31-24 over lowly Rutgers. I know there have been a lot of injuries, especially on the OL, but really it’s the defense that looks out of whack. And given how well Pitt has been playing, this *might* imply that Narduzzi was Fukunaga to Dantonio’s Pizzolato (albeit with a better working relationship). Take the former out of the equation, and you’re left with the True Detective: Season Two of Big 10 defenses. (For those paying close attention to the scores: this week the Spartans benefit from Central Michigan moving up from “not good” to “solid” last week. That adds 1.0 points to the baseline score and eliminates a -0.5 MoV penalty for a total swing of 1.5, which is a lot at this early stage.)

6. Wisconsin (4-2 (1-1), NR): 1.0

(+2) The Badgers scored 0.0 from their non-conference schedule, which was three cupcakes plus Alabama. Then the home loss against Iowa deducts a point, while the win at Nebraska (which F+ had at #34, if you can believe that) adds two. Still very much in the hunt for the West, though at this point I’d be surprised if they actually pull it off.

7. Minnesota (4-2 (1-1), NR): 0.5

(=) Minnesota beat up a bad Purdue team. That’s good? But Colorado State has been downgraded from “solid” to “not good” (which means the small MoV negates the road win bonus). That’s bad. Still, at least Ohio is “solid.” That’s good! The frogurt is also cursed….that’s bad.

7. Illinois (4-2 (1-1), NR): 0.5

(-1)

Huh…turns out Middle Tenessee is “solid” this week, so that’s something positive.

9. Penn State (5-1 (2-0), NR): 0.0

(=) The Nittany Lions are our perfectly average team of the week, at 0.0 (having played two conference doormats negates a -1.0 MoV penalty for unconvincing wins over “not good” opponents). So I guess that’s progress for a team that looked like it might be one of the doormats itself just a couple weeks ago. The problem for PSU is that there aren’t a lot of likely wins left on the schedule—away at Maryland and home versus Illinois probably, but the rest (OSU, Northwestern, Michigan and MSU) are all playing above PSU’s pay grade right now. A 6 or 7 win season seems likely, even with 5 already in the bag. If that happens, then 2016 is a do-or-die season for James Franklin.

10. Maryland (2-4 (0-2), NR): -2.5

(+1) Despite a 2-4 (0-2) record, a 3-game losing streak and the coach getting fired, Maryland’s score is surprisingly not awful--and even helped them move up one spot. Why? Because 3/4 losses came to “good” teams (WVU, Michigan, OSU), and this system does not penalize for blowout losses to “good” teams.

11. Indiana (4-2 (0-2), NR): -3.5

(-1) Indiana demonstrates why the transitive property has limited application to college football: one week after almost upsetting AP #1 Ohio State, the Hoosiers get shellacked by Penn State. That’s like almost beating a Porsche 918 in a drag race, and then getting smoked by a Toyota Corolla.

12. Nebraska (2-4 (0-2), NR): -6.5

(=) Death by a thousand cuts.

12. Rutgers (2-3 (0-2), NR): -6.5

(+1) Getting Carroo back certainly helps, to the degree that a very fast kid with a bucket and access to a garden hose can help fight a raging warehouse fire. Also, Rutgers should get a boost next week: since opponent strength is based on last week’s F+ ranking, Washington State is still classified as “not good” (#94). That might change after WSU beat Oregon (i.e. MSU's "quality OOC win"). Look out, Nebraska!

14. Purdue (1-5 (0-2), NR): -7.5

(-1) Like Indiana, the Boilermakers took their best shot at one of the conference’s wobbly fat cats (MSU in this case)—only to get destroyed the following week by the congressman from average (losing 41-13 to Minnesota). This team is bad.

 

Summary Stats

  • Mean: 0.0 (woohoo!)
  • Median: 0.5
  • Range: 14 (-7.5 to 6.5)

 

Observations

This week's changes were more incremental than last time. Michigan vaulted into the top spot, Wisconsin clawed its way back into positive territory and Indiana took a dive, but otherwise things look more or less the same.

Of the games being played this Saturday, none are likely to really shake things up. Michigan or Michigan State will benefit greatly from a win, but the loser won't give up too much ground (seeing as how both are in the top 25 of F+). A PSU upset of OSU would be something, but does anyone see that happening, even considering OSU's malaise? I don't. 

As far as our game goes, well, I'm fairly confident we're going to win. I know, I know--they've had our number for years. But our defense is better than their offense, and our offensive staff should be able to figure out their declining defense. But I wouldn't be shocked if we lost either--they were highly rated preseason for a reason, after all, and Dantonio is a very capable and motivated coach. Still, I'm thinking 27-17 to the good guys, or something like that. Maybe not even that close.

One final note: I'm going out of town this weekend, so I'm unlikely to do one of these next week. Might still happen, but in all likelihood I'll wait for the bye week. GO BLUE!

Comments

Jevablue

October 13th, 2015 at 8:58 PM ^

Pre season, you could barely find a rag anywhere in America that could make a case for Michigan for being the 6th or 7th best team in the Big Ten.  Yet on this site last year you could also see detailed analysis showing the 10 year rolling average of M as-recruited talent being somewhere very comparable to say that of LSU and in the top 10 nationwide.  And now  suddenly we see objective analysis showing M at the top of the BIG as well as probability ratings favoring wins for every remaining game on the schedule.

Every single commentator that thought the talent wasn't there was wrong. And now the talent not only has a coach that develops it, but the talent seems a little pissed at hearing it was not there.  

Let Dantonio try and manufacture a chip for their shoulders, it will not be enough.

Eye of the Tiger

October 13th, 2015 at 10:05 PM ^

There are stil areas where we aren't rolling out elite talent (offensive skill positions, for example), but on the DL and the secondary especially, we are finally reaping the benefits of all those top 10 recruiting classes. 

I think the deal was: we had the talent, just not the skill. And where we had the skill, we just didn't have the scheme. 

Now we have skill and scheme to go with raw talent.