September 6th, 2017 at 9:28 AM ^
#45 on offense.
September 6th, 2017 at 9:33 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 10:02 AM ^
Agree - I think we need to get to low 30s or above to compete for the playoff this year and I think we will get there over the course of the next 9 weeks.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:49 AM ^
How stupid is this methodology to come up with rankings like this? How can USC still be ranked 7th after the horror show performance against WMU? And Texas is still ranked 23rd, while Maryland actually dropped one place from 70 to 71! Did these guys not pay attention to their game?
Glad to see, however that they're not drinking the MSU Kool-Aid. Ranked 54 both last week and this week.
September 6th, 2017 at 11:38 AM ^
Perhaps WMU is actually decent, but yes week 1 caveats apply, limited sample sizes etc. It is truly meaningless until more games are played though.
September 6th, 2017 at 11:48 AM ^
Well 90 percent of it is pre-season data still. And if you have a methodology that reacts so hard to one game, you don't have a good methodology at all
September 6th, 2017 at 12:56 PM ^
Thank you, well said.
September 7th, 2017 at 11:46 AM ^
So, there is really no value to this at all. Because pre-season projections are simply opinions and speculation based on only moderately relevant facts. Garbage in, garbage out.
I would do away with ALL pre-season rankings, and just start after the second or third week. Whby should USC (or any team) benefit from being artificially placed in a certain position from which it will only be moved incrementaly based on results.
September 6th, 2017 at 11:48 AM ^
the model is still 90% preseason projections.
September 6th, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^
One of the reasons these metrics get increasingly fun to talk about as the season wears on is that they start to get their basis in real in-season data rather than preseason projections or data from last season, although that's usually weighted in on some metrics.
Massey is like that too - interesting now, very interesting later.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:12 AM ^
I tend to agree about Florida's D.
But I also don't think they're quite as good as some people are saying. In Ace's "Enemy Ranked" series, Florida's defensive position groups came in between 4th and 6th on our schedule, iirc. Good, but not the best we'll see.
I do tend to think Ace and this site in general sometimes give a too much weight to proven experience over expected talent - but we'll see. After the first week, I think OSU's defense will be better than Florida's for sure. PSU's, Wisconsin's, Indiana's also have a chance to be better than Florida's.
My opinion is that it all comes down to Speight. If he gets to his ceiling, the offense - and the team - will be elite. If not: see last year.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:24 AM ^
I honestly do not enjoy having to be the guy to keep saying it but it is likely we have seen speights ceiling already. We just need him to be more consistent at that level.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:29 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 11:02 AM ^
that's the OP's entire statement. WS just isn't going to be consistent - and that creates his ceiling.
Go Blue!
September 6th, 2017 at 10:53 AM ^
Yeah, no, you're right. I worry about that too. This might be it for Speight.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:59 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 11:00 AM ^
how often is a player's celing reached in his soph season? almost never. i think speight is better than navarre and navarre got better each year and had one of the best years ever for a UM QB his senior year.
September 6th, 2017 at 6:58 PM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 10:34 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 9:29 AM ^
Wow...what could we be if we make the Offense a top 15 unit paired with our D? Hopefully we get to find out.
September 6th, 2017 at 9:32 AM ^
Wilton should benefit the most from the next three "tune up" games. It's easy to understand why Harbaugh went after Josh Rosen right when he came on board. Imagine if we had Rosen with all the other pieces we have now......
September 6th, 2017 at 3:02 PM ^
with Rosen on Saturday. Guy wanted to walk in day one and be guaranteed to start, wasn't happening at Michigan. He would have come out better at Michigan though, too bad for him.
Back to reality, Wilton, I hope to see his confidence soar during the season. A couple of mistakes or one at least maybe dinged his confidence and I would like to see the confidence go way up.
September 6th, 2017 at 9:33 AM ^
is that both units, but especially the offense, still have a lot of upside.
There's every reason to believe that the WRs, RBs, and the right side of the line will continue to improve this season. I predict a top 20 offense by the end of the season
September 6th, 2017 at 9:37 AM ^
Shit, we DID take a step back from last year, like everyone predicted!!!
THE WHEELS ARE FALLING OFF!!!!
September 6th, 2017 at 9:43 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 9:53 AM ^
OSU gave up over 400 yds passing against IU. Oklahoma's 3 qbs went 32 of 36 for 496 and 4 TDs against UTEP. I know OSU will be a much tougher test, but that efficiency from OU is crazy good.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:31 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 10:12 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 9:49 AM ^
If Wilton hits the wide open pick play TD, and you take away the two catchable WR tipped balls (including one for a pick six), and Evans doesn't slip up on the 4 yd line, the refs don't blow the inelible man down field call, and maybe Nordin hits the 32 yarder... that ranking is significantly better. These are all weird things that easily could have gone the other way.
Point is, I think the offense is systematically sound but some weird execution things happened. This rating, as it currently stands, has a lot of noise in it with only one week of data. This offense is better than this current rating and should be top 15-20 by mid season.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:13 AM ^
September 6th, 2017 at 10:31 AM ^
Yep. Sometimes I will watch Michigan on offense, starting on their own side of the field, and a few minutes later they are inside the opponent's 30 and I will think to myself "how did they do that? Where did those yards come from?"
September 6th, 2017 at 9:50 AM ^
Keep in mind that this ranking is almost entirely preseason projections at this point.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:14 AM ^
Yeah I was gonna say the same. I think he takes like 20% off each week. Because he doesn't totally get rid of preseason rankings until around week 5 or so IIRC. So now it's probably still 80% or so preseason.
September 6th, 2017 at 9:56 AM ^
And the preseason projections are based on previous performance, meaning the S&P+ rankings at this point are mostly just a reflection of last year's teams, just like every other ranking at the moment.
I believe S&P+ switches fully to new season data after Week 6.
September 6th, 2017 at 10:55 AM ^
Glad to see us above Penn State. I hope we continue to separate ourselves from them.
September 6th, 2017 at 11:12 AM ^
is ahead of Purdue #97 and Rutgers #102. Maryland (1-0) is #70.
Go Blue!
September 6th, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^
From the writeup at SB Nation:
"It should come as no surprise that the top of the S&P+ rankings didn’t change much following the first week of action in the 2017 college football season. The preseason S&P+ projections are phased out over a period of about seven weeks, and one week into the season only about 10 percent of the ratings are based on 2017 action."
So let's not get too excited. These should barely change from the preseason.
September 6th, 2017 at 11:57 AM ^
I get why they release it earlier now --- this builds awareness for their product. But it does also mean this same conversation occurs every early September on mgoblog. :-)