brophog

The Big Ten has enough room for everyone.

It will be. Rutgers contribution just won't be very much.

Sparty finally figures out you don't need to run plays to beat Maryland. Pulling ahead without Cookie Monster. In other ugliness, Northwestern and Purdue tied at 14 heading to 4th.

Sparty D does what Sparty O don't. Pick 6.

They are overrated. We can beat these guys. : I'll buy second most overrated. I still pick Northwestern (see playoff thread for reasons).

Maryland has three consecutive punts not cross mid field.

They petitioned the league to play Indiana every week.

Cookie Monster having bad day. I really hope our game is more enjoyable to watch than this.

Does the ACC take refunds?

Cookie Monster back in. Sparty is the one with the hangover 7-7. But don't worry, Maryland can't even punt properly.

Cookie Monster out for Sparty, announcers claim sore shoulder. Throwing on sideline.

Get your chores done early. Our game is followed by a very interesting pair of night games.

I want to expand on this topic Reverse causation in this case.I want to expand on this response in case anyone doesn't understand what I mean. TOP does correlate with winning, quite well in fact. The question is, does high TOP cause you to win? The answer is generally no. Being in the state of winning is what often causes high TOP. Therefore we say this is a reverse causal relationship. Two quick scenarios can show why this is the case in alternate possession games. Note that what TOP really means in a game with a fixed time is how many possessions each team will get. Scenario 1: You're Team A and I'm Team B. Team A scores 75% of the time. Team B scores 50% of the time. We each get an equal number of possessions. Who wins given each of the following number of possessions? 8, 10, 12 The Answer: Team A has a high chance of winning every time. TOP did not effect this case. Scenario 2: Same setup as before, but now Team B finds itself up 2 scores. Who wins given each of the following number of remaining possessions? 1, 2, 3 The Answer: It varies. The more remaining possessions left in the game, the higher the likelihood that Team A's higher efficiency overcomes the deficit. If Team B can hold onto the ball, say by running the ball (also a common reverse causation stat), then Team B can limit the number of remaining possessions and increase the chance of winning the game. TOP has an impact in this case. The important stat here is not TOP. Team B could have led that stat in both cases. What is important is efficiency. In case 2, some event changed the relative efficiencies. Maybe it was a pick 6 or a kickoff return. Once up two scores, and therefore in the condition of winning, does TOP matter. Efficiency is the name of the game in alternate possession sports. This is why when I talk about a team I often use the yards per play differential stat. The difference between your yards gained and your opponents is an example of efficiency.

Going back and looking at his picks to see if he picked Nebraska in each respective game MSU - no Purdue - yes Northwestern - yes Minnesota - no Wisconsin - no Illinois - yes So the guy is 1-5 on those picks, I like our chances. Well, nobody's perfect.

Reverse causation in this case.

I agree. Case in point, I listed about a half dozen examples in a thread a few days ago and there was a sizable difference in the rankings for just the two teams I listed. That post had at least 4 methods represented, and that's not a complete listing of known techniques. Best of luck in your endeavors.

Time of possession is the great myth of alternate possession sports. Unless you can keep the ball in perpetuity (which is why we invented clocks) or if you're somehow able score without giving the ball up.

Going back and looking at his picks to see if he picked Nebraska in each respective game MSU - no Purdue - yes Northwestern - yes Minnesota - no Wisconsin - no Illinois - yes

I'm sure "everyone" would vote for him.

This. When we start to rationalize our losses.......... Only fair. We rationalize the wins.

The hardest game of the year is the one after the big win. I'm not worried about Rutgers. They have a Burger King defense and no offense. On paper we shouldn't even be playing this game. That program should have FEMA come in because it's a disaster area. They somehow make the front page and the back page. Fans usually write angry letters, not start fundraising campaigns to replace the coach. At least he does the homework for the players, the ones that aren't arrested or dismissed that is. But I am worried about the game on Saturday.

If what you want is accuracy, don't use a single elimination knockout. Nobody wants accuracy though, they want money. So you build something that makes money and then convince the already indoctrinated public that a playoff (see how I invoked the magic word) is the way to go.

Just a hint: You'll never approximate a real strength of schedule piecemeal like this. You can say game x is tough this way, but not that schedule y is. You can have a schedule with 1 or 2 very good teams be weaker than a schedule of all average teams. It's just how probabilities work.

...and Purdue had a redshirt freshman taking snaps, so that sort of cancels each other out. I am not minimizing what Purdue did, but they aren't exactly the Monsters of the Midway.A really good redshirt freshman, as it were. All in all, we shouldn't have lost to Purdue. But I don't think that loss is as ugly or awful or low-point as, for example, the 2009 ISU loss. That Purdue team could easily be 5-4 the same way we could easily be 9-1. Eh, 09 ISU was even better than that. They were ACTUALLY 7-6 and won a bowl game. They lost to KState on a blocked PAT with 32 seconds to go. They led Kansas going into the 4th quarter. And they were tied with Missouri going into the fourth quarter. So they weren't that far from 9-3. ISU were already outperforming at 7-6. They were actually being out scored that year.

...and Purdue had a redshirt freshman taking snaps, so that sort of cancels each other out. I am not minimizing what Purdue did, but they aren't exactly the Monsters of the Midway.A really good redshirt freshman, as it were. All in all, we shouldn't have lost to Purdue. But I don't think that loss is as ugly or awful or low-point as, for example, the 2009 ISU loss. That Purdue team could easily be 5-4 the same way we could easily be 9-1. As for Purdue, that record is too high. They get out gained by 1.3 yards a play. It's only slightly better than their 2013 season when they went 1-11, and they could equal that year given their remaining opponents. 3 total wins, with 1 of them being FCS, that's a plausible number of expected wins with their scoring numbers.