Wisconsin's Wins by the Numbers

[True2tRA]

This will be one hell of a game. I can't wait to see what type of atmosphere Wisconsin brings.

[dutch91701]

I'm not sure we've played a much stronger non-con schedule

 

It's still early so the numbers aren't that compelling yet, but according to Sagarin we've played the 69th toughest schedule so far, while Wisconsin's SOS is 148.

Last time I checked, there were 120 D1-A teams, so, for what it's worth, there is an ENTIRE DIVISION of college football that has played a tougher schedule than them.

 

Actually, not really. Some IAA teams are ranked higher than IA teams.

 

So, this prompted me to sort Sagarin's schedule ranking just by IA teams, and you weren't far off with your statement -- Wisconsin has played the 113th weakest schedule out of 120 D1 teams. Purdue has played the weakest. FTR, Nebraska listed as 62nd of 120.

I meant simply by the numbers, 148 being more than 120, but I figured it wouldn't be far off.

[Enhance]

I don't think this game is un-winnable, but you definitely have to give credit to Wisconsin for beating the teams they should beat and looking good while doing it. We've beat the teams we should beat and haven't looked as good.

 

But by no means does this mean we can't beat Wisconsin. I still think Nebraska loses, but we've played a tougher non-con thus far.

 

But don't you think it's safe to say that Bo and Carl have been very experimental with their combinations of players on the defensive side. I think this itself has led to the games seeming close, I think Bo and Carl were confident enouph that they could do this and still easily win their first four games. Just seems like we would dial it up, especially on O and score pretty easily when we needed to. See the second half of the Fresno St. game and the same with Washington. We basically ran the ball at will when we needed to and weren't testing things out. Tenn Chat and Wyoming never had a chance and you saw all kind of crazy combinations of players on D.

Well you raise an interesting point, but I personally don't know how much stock or credit to put behind it. There's nothing experimental about the fact that Andrew Green got beat three times against Washington for touchdowns, and got beat a couple other times just on pass protection. There's also nothing experimental about how Cassidy hasn't been playing the safety position consistently well at all.

 

Furthermore, there isn't a lot experimental about the fact that our linebackers (including the all-american candidate) keep screwing up on run-defense and making the wrong reads.

 

I think a lot of what has happened has been about defensive scheme. Our secondary doesn't play well enough to drop seven into coverage. But when we get aggressive, bring an extra blitzer or play bump-and-run, the defense seems to play better.

 

On offense, I think a lot has been experimentation so far, so I agree with your point offensively more-so than defensively.

[HuskerCarter]

Wisconsin is going to want to control the clock and keep our offense off the field as much as possible, much like Wyoming did.

[Blackshirt316]

I'm not sure we've played a much stronger non-con schedule

 

It's still early so the numbers aren't that compelling yet, but according to Sagarin we've played the 69th toughest schedule so far, while Wisconsin's SOS is 148.

 

and using Sagarin's predictor, we're roughly a 10 point underdog.

 

Actually I think it's just under 7.

 

Sagarin's Elo Chess ranking puts us at #5 in the nation and Wisconsin at #18. (It also has Alabama at #1, LSU at #2 and Oklahoma at #7 for reference) and our SOS is at 69 while Wisconsin's is 149th.

 

Tells me Wisconsin is the more experienced team but Nebraska is more talented and far more battle tested.

[Stumpy1]

I don't think this game is un-winnable, but you definitely have to give credit to Wisconsin for beating the teams they should beat and looking good while doing it. We've beat the teams we should beat and haven't looked as good.

 

But by no means does this mean we can't beat Wisconsin. I still think Nebraska loses, but we've played a tougher non-con thus far.

 

But don't you think it's safe to say that Bo and Carl have been very experimental with their combinations of players on the defensive side. I think this itself has led to the games seeming close, I think Bo and Carl were confident enouph that they could do this and still easily win their first four games. Just seems like we would dial it up, especially on O and score pretty easily when we needed to. See the second half of the Fresno St. game and the same with Washington. We basically ran the ball at will when we needed to and weren't testing things out. Tenn Chat and Wyoming never had a chance and you saw all kind of crazy combinations of players on D.

Well you raise an interesting point, but I personally don't know how much stock or credit to put behind it. There's nothing experimental about the fact that Andrew Green got beat three times against Washington for touchdowns, and got beat a couple other times just on pass protection. There's also nothing experimental about how Cassidy hasn't been playing the safety position consistently well at all.

 

Furthermore, there isn't a lot experimental about the fact that our linebackers (including the all-american candidate) keep screwing up on run-defense and making the wrong reads.

 

I think a lot of what has happened has been about defensive scheme. Our secondary doesn't play well enough to drop seven into coverage. But when we get aggressive, bring an extra blitzer or play bump-and-run, the defense seems to play better.

 

On offense, I think a lot has been experimentation so far, so I agree with your point offensively more-so than defensively.

This makes me think that they have been doing something different on defense. Cassidy is one that is known to have the defense down pat. and is the one that gets guys lined up, but he even has looked lost in what we have been doing.

[knapplc]

I'm not sure we've played a much stronger non-con schedule

 

It's still early so the numbers aren't that compelling yet, but according to Sagarin we've played the 69th toughest schedule so far, while Wisconsin's SOS is 148.

 

and using Sagarin's predictor, we're roughly a 10 point underdog.

 

Actually I think it's just under 7.

 

Sagarin's Elo Chess ranking puts us at #5 in the nation and Wisconsin at #18. (It also has Alabama at #1, LSU at #2 and Oklahoma at #7 for reference) and our SOS is at 69 while Wisconsin's is 149th.

 

Tells me Wisconsin is the more experienced team but Nebraska is more talented and far more battle tested.

 

But Sagarin also says that it's too early and the numbers aren't well connected, so the predictions are Bayesian. There's a lot of inference going on, but not so much that the SOS disparity is completely unrealistic.

 

Probably the easiest thing to glean from the Sagarin rankings right now is that each team will be playing their toughest opponent this week.

[stlspartan]

Whichever team is successful running the ball is going to win.

[T_O_Bull]

Used to rely on the numbers to pick NFL games. My bookie got rich.

T_O_B

G>B>R

[HuskerCarter]

I don't think this game is un-winnable, but you definitely have to give credit to Wisconsin for beating the teams they should beat and looking good while doing it. We've beat the teams we should beat and haven't looked as good.

 

But by no means does this mean we can't beat Wisconsin. I still think Nebraska loses, but we've played a tougher non-con thus far.

 

I can walk away from a loss in this game if the score is close, at least with in 10 points and if we looked good there, knowing the guys gave it their all. If we lose by more than 10 points or we didn't look very good out given the circumstances, well i invoke the right to be pissed off.