Michigan is the winningnest MBB team in the B1G in the past three regular seasons
Here is a fun fact that occured to me which I don't think I've seen anyone point out: Michigan has the best regular season record of any team in the B1G in the past three years. The teams' records are as follows (invididual season records are ordered as 2014, 2013, 2012):
1. Michigan: 40-14 (15-3, 12-6, 13-5)
2. MSU: 38-16 (12-6, 13-5, 13-5)
3. OSU: 36-18 (10-8, 13-5, 13-5)
4. Wisconsin*: 36-18 (12-6, 12-6, 12-6)
5. Indiana: 32-22 (7-11, 14-4, 11-7)
6. Iowa: 26-28 (9-9, 9-9, 8-10)
7. Purdue: 23-31 (5-13, 8-10, 10-8)
8. Minnesota: 22-32 (8-10, 8-10, 6-12)
9. Illinois: 21-33 (7-11, 8-10, 6-12)
10. Nebraska: 20-34 (11-7, 5-13, 4-14)
11. Northwestern: 18-36 (6-12, 4-14, 8-10)
12. Penn State: 12-42 (6-12, 2-16, 4-14)
*May they be attainted and stripped of all rank and title, of all lands and holdings, and sentenced to death.
Looks like Wisconsin should be getting the Monopoly treatment...
What is the monoply treatment?
If you roll doubles in Monopoly three times in a row, you get sent to jail.
Fantastic!
It's great also seeing the demise of Michigan State and Tom Izzo now too.
I think "demise" is a bit hyperbolic, unless you mean "falling from assumed favorite to just a strong contender for the conference championship". Sure, it was a relatively rough season, but they're still the second-winningest team in the conference over the last 3 seasons.
What struck me is that there is clearly a top tier of 4 teams over the last 3 seasons - Michigan, msu, osu, and Wisconsin. Indiana lacks consistency in a major way, Iowa is somewhere in the middle, and the rest are various shades of mediocre-at-best.
A .70 winning rate in the B1G is something many teams would take, including us for many years. The question for MSU is whether they'll be able to maintain that over the next couple years.
but it's strange that we've kind of quietly emerged as the Big Ten's best program in the last 3 years. 1 title game appearance, 2 regular season B1G titles and 6-2 vs. the former kings of the Big Ten
We were co-champions two years ago, were 1 game away from another co-championship last year, and won it by 3 games this year. Not so quiet in my opinion or that surprising were the winningest program the last 3 seasons.
Good to have confirmed, but also expected since the team has won the B1G two out of those three years and this year was with a rather large margin.
That Indiana game from last year still stings a little. We were that close to 3 straight Big Ten championships.
you roll doubles 3 times in a row in Monopoly, you go to Jail
I prefer the Aunt Jemima treatment
We've also had the most NCAA tournament success.
March 12th, 2014 at 11:34 PM ^
I'd actually say that's OSU for now -- they went to a Final Four and an Elite Eight whereas we got knocked out in the first round and made the Championship game. I think if we do well this year and they stumble we could take the lead in this regard.
These results would look so much different if the games MSU played injured were not counted.
They would be 0-0 so it doesn't improve their record.
March 12th, 2014 at 10:27 PM ^
They finally got back to full strength against Illinois....and went 1-2 to finish the season. I think statistically we can definitely say that they would have been 6-12 in conference if they were full strength which would have given them only 32 Big Ten wins and a tie for 5th. Don't argue, I used math
over the last 5-6 years given Ohio's sanctions wiping out victories, etc. Somehow, I feel like our argument is a more legit reflection of the future but who knows?
That MSU football statistic is extremely misleading. They have been one of the better teams in the Big Ten the last 5-6 years, but pretty far from the best like they have claimed for the last 3 years. Ohio State is a good 4-5 Big Ten wins ahead of them, and until this past year, PSU was ahead of them and Wisconsin tied with them (but Wisconsin also had the 2 straight Big Ten Championship Game wins which is huge feather in their cap). Both OSU and PSU were ineligible for the 2012 B1G champ game or one of them may have one more win. One similarity though is their 2013 season gave the statistic a little more credence, although no one at Michigan was touting this in basketball before this year unlike MSU football.
Big Ten Football wins 2008-2013 (including Championship Game):
OSU 40
MSU 36
PSU 33
Wisconsin 33
Well if you used three years like we did here they would be tied for the most...
MSU: 30
OSU: 30
Wisconsin: 27
They're legit in football just like we are in basketball. Neither are going to go away any time soon.
OSU and MSU are tied if you look at three years, but you couldn't make that claim until after the 2013 season. MSU has been touting this stat about being the best team in the Big Ten since 2011 (after OSU and PSU got hit with sanctions)--and that is the difference I was pointing out. I already said above that you can't discount now how good MSU has been after this year, but it wasn't until this year that it was close to the truth, and they are still tied with OSU for 3 years. Not to mention if OSU is in the 2012 B1G Championship game they may not even be tied (and if you don't count Championship games, OSU would be ahead of MSU by one.)
BTW, I think your math is off. This is what I get for the last 3 years in the Big Ten:
2011-2013 (including Championship Game):
Ohio State: 19
MSU: 19
Wisconsin: 18
PSU: 16
Which is exaclty why any fool knows sparty is primed for a run.
Rationale: since results are B1G only, these are the only three seasons with the current (soon-to-be-historic) 12-team format. At least that's how I justified it in my mind for being less arbitrary.
Impressive even if you think arbitrary as 3 years is a solid sample size - not like he said since January or something. But three years isn't totally arbitrary. I suppose you could do something like 5, but that is kind of arbitrary as well.
March 12th, 2014 at 11:02 PM ^