Michigan still #4 in SP+ (but closes gap)
New SP+ ratings are out:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/34808339/college-football-sp+-rankings-week-7 ($ I think)
Michigan remains at #4 behind OSU, Georgia, and Alabama. But where previously those teams were far and away the top three, Michigan is just 1.2 points (i.e. on a neutral field) behind #3 Alabama. (+2.5 vs Georgia, +6.1 vs OSU.)
Keep in mind these ratings are based on down-to-down (ypp) & explosive play success rate -- opponent-adjusted and garbage time excluded -- with some recruiting ratings and preseason projections. (Bill has argued repeatedly that including these makes the ratings more accurate.)
Also keep in mind these are **NOT** supposed to serve as any kind of backward-looking résumé rankings a la traditional polls. They do not argue, for example, that 5-2 Texas should be ranked ahead of Ole Miss or that 4-2 Minnesota should be ahead of 6-0 TCU and 7-0 Clemson.
Rather, they serve as forward-looking projections as to how teams would compare on a neutral field. In this sense, the ratings are (far) more important than the rankings.
Allowing 2.5 points for home field (Bill's preferred boost), projected spreads for Michigan's remaining schedule using current SP+:
-22.5 vs #56 MSU
-22.5 @ #72 Rutgers (comparable to @Indiana)
-25 vs #65 Nebraska
-16.5 vs #30 Illinois
+8.5 @ #1 OSU
Top 5:
Other teams of note, using rankings out of convenience:
Minnesota is at #10 despite two straight uninspiring performances. (Keep in mind they lost the Purdue game without Ibrahim.). They were so incredibly efficient vs MSU etc that they might be a little overvalued here.
Clemson is at #15 -- somewhere between Kentucky and Cincinnati -- according to these ratings, a shocking contrast with general polling consensus. The ACC in general looks awful by this metric as well.
Clemson's wins thus far: #86 GT, FCS Furman, #118 La Tech, #29 Wake (in OT), #41 NC St, #94 BC, #37 FSU. If the rankings generally hold up -- unlikely to be exact, but the ACC can't gain a lot of ground in conference season -- their best win will either be Wake or #33 South Carolina. The ACC Coastal's best team is #39 Pitt -- so much for a big CG win. If the committee looks at similar ratings, Clemson probably can't afford a loss and won't have a win as good as Cincinnati had last year.
Then again, Michigan's non-con opponents continue to trawl the depths:
#128 Colorado St.
#127 Hawaii
#126 UConn
(This is like benchpressing an empty barbell, then adding 2.5 lb weights one at a time. Anyway "we're not going for bulk, we're going for tone...")
3 of the 4 vanquished Big 10 foes thus far are looking pretty alright though:
#24 Maryland
#28 Iowa
#84 Indiana
#18 Penn St
That's three wins that are already better than anything Clemson has, FWIW.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:27 PM ^
The scariest part about OSU isn't the death star offense, but rather that their defense might be pretty good. Knowles was a really good hire for them
We're rolling right along though, and that's without much of a downfield passing game. I think it's lurking in there, we just haven't deployed it against either good defense we've played because it was not needed
October 16th, 2022 at 1:41 PM ^
But do we actually know anything about their defense? Who is the best offense they've played so far, Wisconsin? MSU?
October 16th, 2022 at 1:51 PM ^
Ding ding ding. They’ve played, and been challenged by, no one. What is their best win? Wisconsin? MSU? That’s saying something.
Their defense could be good. But it’s stupid to just assume that they are. Make them go against a team that can actually move the ball.
October 16th, 2022 at 2:45 PM ^
Who is the best offense they've played so far, Wisconsin? MSU?
Yes but (checks notes) *IOWA* is coming to the shoe this weekend
October 16th, 2022 at 1:42 PM ^
Cutting in line as I meant to include post-game win expectancies (who would most likely win based on statistical comparison) as well:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1llrN8luL0XWuP8Y-Pb1NXKU84JhXLeUPafy1RfITEDw/edit#gid=967943920
Michigan had a full 100.0% postgame win expectancy vs Penn State. That 17-16 3rd quarter score was one of the biggest mirages of the season thus far.
Michigan also had 100.0% postgame win expectancy vs CSU, Hawaii, UConn, and Indiana. They were 94.4% vs Maryland and 84.2% vs Iowa. Only two schools have had a better "worst" PGWE:
Ohio St 95.9% vs ND
Georgia 89.6% @ Mizzou
October 16th, 2022 at 3:09 PM ^
Purdue! Surprising that they only managed 40% against Nebraska.
(But not surprised that Nebraska lost a game despite 60% PGWE.)
Looks like Illinois is actually the team to beat in the West (jaw drop!), and this is after they have to be kicking themselves for losing against Indiana despite an overwhelming 73% WE.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:42 PM ^
Still TBD.
Their offense is absolutely a known quantity and is downright lethal. They will score points on Michigan. But their defense hasn’t been challenged by anyone. They’ve gotten to tee off on hapless offenses and overmatched G5 teams up to this point.
We’ll know a bit more after their trip to Happy Valley, but we may not know how good they really are until The Game. They won’t see an OL or running game anywhere close to as good as what Michigan has until they actually play Michigan. Michigan just laid waste to a very, very good defense. A top-5 rushing defense. There is a lot of evidence to suggest Michigan can make plenty of hay on OSU’s defense, too.
October 16th, 2022 at 4:56 PM ^
Honestly, given how the PSU game went, and the dropoff of teams in the Big 10 except OSU and Michigan, you could argue that neither Michigan nor OSU will be challenged until The Game.
I think OSU's defense just being competent makes them much better than last year.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:50 PM ^
I really believe they want to get JJ back to deep throws for MSU. That secondary has been a sieve. If we don’t see him throw any or hit some in two weeks I’ll officially start worrying. Idk. They may be able to just pave them like last year and PSU this year.
October 16th, 2022 at 6:01 PM ^
Agreed on JJ vs. MSU. It might sound crazy, but McCarthy will need to play well.
Corum and Haskins combined for only 105 yards in East Lansing last year. Even in 2019 (the 44-10 year), the rushing numbers were modest (101 yards for the RBs). State will sell out to stop the run; U-M will have to hit some throws and not burn so many downs trying to play our preferred game.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:27 PM ^
Good summary. Glad you pointed out what Clemson has actually done and not done so far this season. Agree Michigan has more high quality opposition wins.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:29 PM ^
Good work Newton, gives a fair perspective.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:33 PM ^
Going for tone is the dumb and doesn't exist as a thing. You're either achieving hypertrophy or not by sufficiently breaking down muscle fibers and eating at a caloric surplus. If you're very over weight you might be able to gain muscle and lose some fat simultaneously which I presume is what is meant by toning. Women sometimes want to get toned instead of looking bulky which is an irrational fear. Most natural men struggle to gain muscle and look bulky even when working out 4-5 days a week, a dialed in diet, and plenty of sleep. A woman with less testosterone and a smaller frame should not be worried about suddenly being bulky. Doesn't work that way. Trying to get toned will just derail any potential progress that's hard enough to achieve as it is unless your on gear.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:54 PM ^
Thank you for the advice. I personally spend most of my time clicking on MGoBlog, is this not the best way to achieve the gains I want?
October 16th, 2022 at 10:34 PM ^
You'll have one of the strongest fingers out there.
October 16th, 2022 at 8:46 PM ^
Going for tone means going for reps. Some people aren't trying to increase max weight they want to be able to do lots of reps for stamina in sports like basketball boxing etc.
October 16th, 2022 at 10:34 PM ^
You are still building muscle when doing lower weight and higher reps though.
October 16th, 2022 at 11:14 PM ^
Yep, you're either stimulating a growth response or you ain't. You can optimize for strength or for size to some degree. High volume/reps at lower weight would actually lean toward the size more so than low rep and heavy. Of course it depends on the muscle group.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:33 PM ^
Right now is the best Tennessee and Bama will look all season. As it wears on, their opponents in their close wins will look worse and worse. I expect Texas to drop 2 of their next 5, and A&M to miss bowl eligibility completely. Florida should be a 5 loss team by seasons end, and Pitt could easily sit at 4 losses. Both teams look vulnerable to close wins in the future, as well, and Alabama could even potentially miss out on the sec championship game, with their upcoming road slate and poor pass defense.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:48 PM ^
The nightmare scenario -- as far as media narratives go, let alone implications for Michigan -- is that Georgia beats Tennessee close at home and Alabama beats Georgia close in the SECCG. All would be 1-1 vs the other and ESPN/Danielson/etc would scream bloody murder to have all three in the playoff. "This conference is so tough top-to-bottom" hand-delivered talking points
October 16th, 2022 at 2:43 PM ^
I think Tennessee would just be left out in that scenario.
October 16th, 2022 at 2:50 PM ^
Maybe, but there would be a lot of screaming about it if another 1-loss team got in over them, as they would have the 'best win' (Alabama).
October 16th, 2022 at 8:48 PM ^
Idk none of that matters to me. If michigan wins the conference they're in. If we lose to ohio the rest doesn't matter at all. I do like being in this situation though.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:45 PM ^
so no penalty for losing? i agree with harbaugh. the score is the most important stat.
October 16th, 2022 at 1:51 PM ^
The penalties for losing: negative implications in division race, conference race, national rankings, playoff chances, feeling awful.
Generally if you play better you will not lose, and these ratings will reflect if you play better. But I like having a perspective that is predictive based on the numbers inside the game, i.e. the kind of stuff Vegas uses. If you try to predict, let alone bet on, games using solely win-loss record and AP rankings, you will be totally lost.
October 16th, 2022 at 2:48 PM ^
More Bill C stuff:
I like that no P5 conference has a team over 52% -- makes for an exciting back half of the season. The Big 12 and Pac 12 in particular are gonna be wild.
October 16th, 2022 at 4:13 PM ^
Seems like this about the time of year where P5 teams with lofty expectations who actually suck finally start to drop out. This year's offender was OU who is finally drifting down the rankings
October 16th, 2022 at 6:59 PM ^
Personally, I'm hoping for really shitty weather in Columbus when we play OSU. If both teams have to go one-dimensional with the run game, I like our chances a lot.
October 16th, 2022 at 7:24 PM ^
Clemson's wins thus far: #86 GT, FCS Furman, #118 La Tech, #29 Wake (in OT), #41 NC St, #94 BC, #37 FSU.
And that's what sucks about the 'human' polls. In the human polls they have 2 top 20 wins.
That said, now that NC State lost their QB for the year, they will lose a bunch of games. And that will lower their credit for that win (which is asinine, but that's the way it works. Just like you'll listen to Herbie tout that Ohio State already has a top 5 win for beating one of the worst ND Teams in years).
October 16th, 2022 at 8:54 PM ^
Dont trust these rankings on ohio, their best win is over a team that isn't even top 50. Time for computer rankings to remove all preseason expectations at this point.
October 16th, 2022 at 10:50 PM ^
If we are going to make the playoffs, OSU will have to be our trophy.