The Worst 7-0 team you've ever heard of

Of course in a way, but that start last year made a strong team. A team that believed in each other, fought to get better. Sometimes a rocky road is the best road. I was proud of this team last year. We saw a change in them, saw them quit feeling sorry for themselves. Set a path. No one knows what will happen the next two weeks, but I am certain, they will not quit.

 
Mavric said:
cm husker said:
Mavric said:
cm husker said:
I guess we'll see how it plays out, but I think the B10 is poor this year, even if the rankings are good because we've played no one.
default_smokin.gif
I'm not sure what the emoji means. You're usually really data driven, which I appreciate, so if you think my assessment of the B10, especially the B10W, is unfair, I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts on it.
Well, for starters my "data" would be the AP and Coaches' polls. They're imperfect but a pretty good indicator.

Next, I would look at Jeff Sagarin's ratings. There you find B1G teams at #2, 3, 10, 24, 31, 34, and 44. So half the conference is in the Top 45 including about a third of the Top 10.

It's somewhat top-heavy but saying it's "poor" is out of touch with reality.
The polls are the worst actually - they reward what I'm talking about, which is team builds a resume playing almost no one and then if an in conference opponent finally beats them, it's assumed that the opponent is better than the are. I don't rely on the polls and I don't usually like Sagarin's model either, and this year is no different (see, for example, that LSU is ranked higher than a team that beat them).

But, accepting Sagarin on it's face, you have 6 teams in the top 45, correct. But is having 6 in the top 45 a great amount considering that there are only about 65 P5 schools?

The SEC has 7 in the top 25.

The P12 has 5. The ACC has 5

Even the B12, with fewer teams, has 3 in the top 25.

The B10W, even by Sagarin's rankings, is very weak this year.

We'll see how it plays out, but I think the B10 is not that great this year.

 
Top to Bottom

1-Big Ten

2-SEC

3-Pac12

4-ACC

5-AAC

6-Big 12 or the Mountain West....either way neither are getting a team in.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ColoradoHusk said:
grandpasknee said:
We've been preordained this season, in case anyone forgot:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WutYAcRGeJw
The actor that plays the Dr. Pepper guy is originally from Omaha.
I'm actually boycotting Dr. Pepper until they get rid of this guy.

Edit: Not because of this clip (i refuse to watch it) because of the commercials. I find him annoying.
That's a terrible way to treat a fellow Nebraskan

 
Top to Bottom

1-Big Ten

2-SEC

3-Pac12

4-ACC

5-AAC

6-Big 12 or the Mountain West....either way neither are getting a team in.
Based on what?
A very complex method using the formula of Schedule × Margin of Victory - Total Yards Allowed ÷ Common Opponents × Whether or not they recruit the 500 mile radius - Lee Corso's Headgear Selection and viola!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top to Bottom

1-Big Ten

2-SEC

3-Pac12

4-ACC

5-AAC

6-Big 12 or the Mountain West....either way neither are getting a team in.
Based on what?
Big 10 has done the best against the rest of the power 5
Similar to my touble with that argument in favor of the SEC during the post season, that's a misleading stat in that in cross-conference match ups may match a top team against a lower tier team.

For example, NU's P5 win was against the worst P12 team. northwestern's was against the worst ACC team. Iowa's was against the worst B12 team. Minnesota's was against the P12's second worst team (who is 2-5 overall). Wisconsin's was against an SEC who is fourth in its division.

In fact, only Ohio state and Michigan have wins over teams that would be considered among the top in their conference (wisky's win maybe too, but that was while the team was still headed by a now fired coach).

I'm just not seeing that as a reliable proxy for strength of conference.

 
Forget the conferences. It may be a case that there are very few powerhouse teams in all of college football this year.

I'm not the first person with the theory. Saw some guys on Fox say it looks like Alabama & Everyone Else.

And I don't think Alabama gets out unscathed, either.

 
Top to Bottom

1-Big Ten

2-SEC

3-Pac12

4-ACC

5-AAC

6-Big 12 or the Mountain West....either way neither are getting a team in.
Based on what?
Big 10 has done the best against the rest of the power 5
Similar to my touble with that argument in favor of the SEC during the post season, that's a misleading stat in that in cross-conference match ups may match a top team against a lower tier team.
For example, NU's P5 win was against the worst P12 team. northwestern's was against the worst ACC team. Iowa's was against the worst B12 team. Minnesota's was against the P12's second worst team (who is 2-5 overall). Wisconsin's was against an SEC who is fourth in its division.

In fact, only Ohio state and Michigan have wins over teams that would be considered among the top in their conference (wisky's win maybe too, but that was while the team was still headed by a now fired coach).

I'm just not seeing that as a reliable proxy for strength of conference.
How dare we play who was scheduled for us years in advance. At the time Oregon was placed on the schedule they were competing for national titles and winning the PAC 12. The moral of the story is Nebraska has beaten everyone they've played even it hasn't been "pretty". Michigan beat a Colorado team that has dropped off and Ohio State beat OU who isn't the same team from a year ago.
 
The Oregon we played was far from PAC 12's worst.

Iowa State is not the worst Big 12 team, that's Kansas. And typically the Iowegians play a tight game, not this year.

 
So, you want to argue about which 1-6 (0-4) team is the worst? Have at it. I guess we'll settle this on November 12. Should be a hell of a battle.

Oregon was bad this season from day 1.

How many P5 teams have lost to FCS teams this year? At least 2 of them are in the B10 west.

 
Back
Top