Hi, I'm Eye of the Tiger. You may remember me from such defunct diary series as "Reading the Tea Leaves," "Zone Blocking Zealot" and "Yet Another CC Roundup!" With the new era starting here in Ann Arbor, I'd decided to start a new diary series--I just couldn't figure out what it should be. Then it hit me: power rankings! Only, I wanted to see what happened if you tried to eliminate biases based on past performances (i.e. last year) or preseason hype. And I wanted to take my own biases out of the equation as much as possible. So I came up with a methodology for a results-based ranking system:

Methodology

1. All teams are scored on their results this year, and nothing else.

2. A baseline score is derived by associating results with numerical values, as follows:

• 2 – win over “good” team
• 1 – win over “solid” team
• 0 – win over “not good” team/loss to “good” team
• -1 – loss to “solid” team
• -2 – loss to “not good” team

[Note: "good," solid" and "not good" are also performance based, using the same methdology. That means I looked at every team that any Big 10 school has played and tried to score their performances across 4 games. Yes, it took a long time. And was kind of boring.

Notes on categories: "Good" means scoring highly on this scale, and is highly correlated with top 25 deisgnations in major polls and advanced statistical rankings (S&P, FEI, FPI, etc.). On this scoring system, it generally means any team scoring 1.5 or higher. "Not good" generally means any team scoring -1.5 or lower. "Solid" are the teams between 1.5 and -1.5. There aren't many of those in the Big 10 right now, but there are across all of the FBS. As the season progresses, at least a couple Big 10 teams now classified as "good" will end up reclassified as "solid." Possibly one or two of those now classified as "not good" will as well.

Also of note: designations may also change week-to-week. Oregon, for example, is classified as "solid" due to its losses to MSU and Utah; Utah is classified as "good" due to its wins over Michigan and Oregon. If Oregon were to finish the season 10-2, while Utah slid to 8-4, that would likely reverse--and affect Michigan and Michigan State's scores ex post facto.]

3. A place of venue weght is added:

• 0.5 - road win
• 0.0 - home win/road loss
• -0.5 - home loss

4. A margin of victory weight is added:

• 1.0 – large win over “good” team
• 0.5 – large win over “solid” team/small win over “good” team
• 0.0 - small win/loss over "solid" team; large win/loss over "not good" team"
• -0.5 – large loss to “solid” team/small win/loss to “not good” team 
• -1.0 – large loss to “not good” team

[Note: "large" win is defined as a win by 20 points or more. This is a fairly arbitrary number, but one that seems--to me, at least--to be a reasonable indicator of a blowout.]

What's Being Measured

The purpose here is to rank teams according to what they've accomplished and not according to residual biases from preseason and/or the previous year. However, it does output some results that buck the conventional wisdom, and are largely a function of differences in schedule. That is to say, if two teams are both 4-0 and team X played better opposition than team X, it will be ranked higher--regardless of whether team Y is considered to be a more capable squad. These rankings thus do not predict who will end the season "best," just who has done the "most" in the tiemframe covered.

Planned Posting Schedule

I plan to update these power rankings either every 2 or 4 weeks--depending on how much time I have (which, between commuting to two jobs, marriage, parenting, actually watching football and writing freelance on the side isn't very much). But enough about that...

4 Week Rankings

1. Northwestern (4-0, AP #16): 3.5

Well there's one surprise! But if you think about it, it shouldn't be that surprising. After all, Northwestern may not be the most talented or heralded team in the Big 10 right now, but they've accomplished the most: beating a good Stanford team at home and a solid Duke on the road (a close win against Ball State is the only blemish). If you take away preseason hype and previous year bias, they have the best resume in the conference. 

2. Ohio State (4-0, AP #1): 2.5

Last year's champion has taken care of business, with two victories over solid teams (VT and NIU), but doesn't have a victory on par with Northwestern beating Stanford. It won't get that opportunity until November 21, when it travels to East Lansing.

3. (tie) Michigan State (4-0, AP #2): 1.5

Michigan State's win over Oregon looks much less impressive after their dismantling by Utah, and the polls are likely overrating the Spartans. Meanwhile, injuries are starting to take their toll. But this is still a good team by Big 10 standards--they should end with a winning record in conference play.

3. (tie) Michigan (3-1, AP #22): 1.5

The loss against Utah is no longer working against the Wolverines, while the shellacking of BYU accounts for all of Michigan's points. Upcoming games against Northwestern and Michigan State will show us how far we've come in Jim Harbaugh's first year.

3. (tie) Minnesota (3-1, AP NR): 1.5

Another surprise for me--I don't personally find Minnesota all that impressive, but the loss to TCU doesn't really hurt them, while the road win over Colorado State scores well.

6. Iowa (4-0, AP NR): 0.5

A lot of people are wondering how good Iowa is. This system isn't terribly impressed so far. If they beat Wisconsin, though, that's another story...

7. Wisconsin (3-1, AP #19): 0.0

Wisconsin looked respectably enough in the loss to Alabama, but has only played cupcakes since--a fact that keeps its score low.

8. Indiana (4-0, AP NR): -1.0

For the record, this is as bad a score as a 4-0 team can get. Fall back to Earth imminent.

9. Maryland (2-2, AP NR): -2.0

I expected Maryland to grade out worse than this, frankly. But they are clearly trending downward, and with a hurricane and "weather-proof" Michigan team both coming to town this weekend, the death spiral may come fast.

10. Illinois (2-2, AP NR): -2.0

I'd say the same thing about Illinois, but a shockingly easy schedule could help the Illini stay in fighting distance of bowl eligibility, if not quite make it.

11. Penn State (3-1, AP NR): -2.0

The system doesn't think much of the Nittany Lions, and neither do I.

12. Nebraska (2-2, AP NR): -2.5

It's more surprising to see how badly Nebraska fares. I mean, they are not exactly good, but I'd still expect them to beat Maryland, Illinois or Penn State. Losing to BYU and failing to blow out Southern Miss at home hurt though...

13. Purdue (1-3, AP NR): -4.5

Purdue is bad. If they don't pull off a major upset or two, Hazel will be out of a job before the season ends. Apparently they think they have a plan for Michigan State. Somehow I doubt it, but okay.

14. Rutgers (2-2, AP NR): -5.0

LOL.

Summary Statistics

• The mean score for all 14 Big 10 teams is -0.6 and the median is -0.5.
• The range is 3.5 - -5.0.
• There are 6 teams with positive scores, one with a score of 0 and 7 with negative scores.