[quote]Originally posted by norfa:
Well uh , ya it does mean soemthing especially since Ohio State easily beat Washington State, a one loss team now ranked in the top 10. <hr></blockquote>
You are ignoring individual matchups, individual team strengths, the effect of emotions, home field impacts etc. To ignore such things is to ignore the realities of college football.
WSU? Their wins are over Nevada (3-5), Idaho (2-6), Montana State (1AA), Cal (5-4), USC (6-2), Stanford (2-5) and Arizona (3-5). One decent team in USC which they won at home only because the USC kicker missed an extra point. If WSU had played FSU, Oklahoma, Texas and Iowa they would not have one loss nor would they have two losses nor would they be in the top ten.
[quote]I did a comparison of stats/
OSU Iowa Comparison
Ranking Craig Kenzel #8
Brad banks #3
A difference of 13 yards a game.<hr></blockquote>
Lets do this right if we are going to do it. Here are the full stats for the 9 games each has played:
So Krenzel throws about 3/4ths as much as Banks, has the same number of INTs but half as many touchdowns and has thrown for 410 fewer yards. I'm not sure where you came up with the 13 yards a game figure but it is mistaken. Banks is also the superior scrambler and runner.
Maurice Clarett #7 6.2 YPC
Fred Russel Iowa #17 5.2<hr></blockquote>
The problem, well OK, not the only problem but the worst problem with boiling things down to one player is that Clarett accounts for 40% of OSU's rushing attempts and Russell has 46% of Iowa's rushing attempts. That ignores over half of each team's attempts to run the ball. Not a good idea especially since these two running backs both left their games this week with injuries. Now let us compare what actually matters, team rushing:
Ohio State: 408-1976-4.84-21
Slight edge for Iowa though if you like we'll let the 5 touchdowns cancel out the difference.
[quote]Scoring Iowa #9 37.6 per game
Scoring Ohio State #27, 33.1 pergame<hr></blockquote>
I have no idea where you are getting your stats from but they are mistaken. Iowa is #8 in the NCAA 37.78 and OSU is #24 at 33.11. Furthermore Iowa has scored on the better teams that they have faced, 31 on ISU, 42 on PSU, 31 on Purdue, 34 on Michigan. Whereas OSU put up 25 on WSU, 19 on Wisconsin and 13 on PSU. OSU's suffers from a severe stratification between their outputs against good and bad teams, they put up 51 on Kent State, 50 San Jose State, 45 on Indiana and 45 on Texas Tech (87th in total D, 95 in scoring D). Iowa doesnt suffer the same sort of dropoff when they play competent competition. Iowa has the superior offense. They have a three dimensional offense, OSU has a one dimensional offense. One dimension is fine against the Kent States of the world but it won't work so well against decent teams.
[quote]Iowa 5 times has allowed over 21 points in a game.
Ohio State has never allowed over 21 points in a game.<hr></blockquote>
Ohio State has the better overall defense. I won't dispute that. I will dispute this description of the situation though.
One of those 21 points was the Akron game where Iowa gave up 21 exactly. How many points a team gives up with their scrubs in and the game in the bad, since Iowa had a 37-0 lead after the first quarter, is irrelevant. Secondly you also would be citing the Miami Ohio game in which 24 points were scored. Seven of those were scored on a fumble recovery in the endzone and another seven were on a late TD in the last five minutes after Iowa had the game in hand. That leaves 10 points scored against the defense when the game was actually on the line.
The other three games point out a major weakness in Iowa's D. They are vulnerable to a decent passing offense, and as they got ahead in all three games, that forced their opponents to run 3/4/5 wide and throw most of the time. And then those teams were successful. Iowa State trails 24-7 in the second half, then goes on to score 29 points and throw for 361 yards. Penn State trails 35-13 in the 4th quarter and scores 22 points to force overtime, accumulating 399 yards passing. Purdue was down 24-14 and then scored two touchdowns in the last eleven minutes before Iowa scored for the win. Purdue accumulated 410 yards passing. In essense, Iowa has kicked everyone's ass in the first half, their problem is that when they get too far ahead their biggest weakness in their pass defense is most relevant and most easily exploited.
The other side of the coin is that Iowa's run defense is awesome. Naturally that is part of why they have been out ahead in every game. They are #2 in the country at 62.3 yards per game and are at 2.11 yards per carry. Ohio State is quite good at defending the run too, but not on the same level as Iowa. OSU is #8 at 82.2 but they are allowing 3.02 yards a carry, almost 50% more than Iowa. This right here is the key that you are ignoring. Iowa would contain OSU's running. OSU can't pass the ball around the way that Mills, Wallace, or even Purdue with their spread can. It's just not what they do. The matchup favors Iowa. OSU is too dependent on this aspect and Iowa is just too damn good at it.
Now OSU would have some success shutting down Russell. The thing is though, Iowa can still beat you passing or with Banks on draws, rollouts, boots etc. They also have Clark as another complication for WILL. They have the balance that OSU lacks that would give them the advantage.
Iowa rushes four plus MIKE run blitzes, maybe secondary blitz even with FS or SAM. All day long on 1st. Then 2/3 and long and play Cover 2 or Cover 3. OSU would not be successful at all. They just are not built for it. Which is not really a shortcoming of OSU too much, for most other defenses they would be OK but Iowa is one of the few with bad ass DTs who can shut down the run, even with 5/6 no problem. This matchup is the key.
[quote]Ohio State is best in the big 10 in total defense, givning up 13.9 per game.
Iowa is fourth giving up 20.6<hr></blockquote>
Total defense refers to the number of yards given up, not the number of points which is scoring defense.
As I've said, OSU has a bit better defense overall. As far as the factors that go into stats, I think that has pretty much been covered.
We should also be discussing TO margin here but I am too lazy to look it up and see what impact it has had.
And really if we wanted to do the stats right what we need to do is take a team's production and then compare it to the mean production for the opponents and see how it is as an over/under but I'm too lazy to do that too.
[quote]Strength of schedule OSU 23
Strength of schedule Iowa 43<hr></blockquote>
OSU is number #24 not #23, if it the BCS formula for SOS that you are refering to. Lets look at BCS SOS factors for each:
Texas Tech 5-4
Kent State 3-5
Washington State 7-1
San Jose State 4-5
Miami Ohio 6-3
Iowa State 6-3
Utah State 2-6
Michigan State 3-5
This is of course one of the obvious flaws of the BCS. SOS is based on records but the record of a team has a ton to do with its schedule. For instance Miami Ohio is viewed as as good as Iowa State in the BCS because they have the same record. As it applies to Iowa, they actually factor in as a better record with the Iowa game removed as all are when a specific team's SOS is counted. Of course Miami Ohio plays and happens to beat a bunch of MAC teams whereas ISU is playing Oklahoma and Texas and losing. Naturally if their schedules were reversed ISU would have the superior record and we all know ISU is the superior team. But in the magic of the BCS things get distorted so that they are viewed as equals, or in Iowa's case with Miami Ohio as the better team.
Another problem is the general worthlessness of a record as team's chance of victory approaches zero. San Jose State is just flat out not going to beat Ohio State. Akron is just not going to beat Iowa. The reverse would be true, Akron could not beat OSU and SJSU couldnt beat Iowa. The problem is that even though these teams chances of victory are both equally negligible, they don't count the same in the BCS. Akron counts as a 1-6, SJSU as a 4-4.
The actual BCS records of OSU's opponents is 34-29. For Iowa it is 30-31. OSU has a slight lead in the 1/3 opponents' opponents factor, 55.75% to 54.85% but that is margin as you can see. to If Iowa had played San Jose State and OSU had played Akron, both would have still won easily. The actual difficult of their schedules would have effectively remained the same as either game would be almost impossible to lose. Except that then Iowa would have the better BCS SOS. It makes little sense and it is why BCS SOS is such a dubious stat. The better method is to look at the teams they have played and compare. Iowa played ISU, lost. OSU beat WSU solidly. Both beat PSU in close games. OSU beat Wisconsin barely, Iowa crushed Michigan. Iowa snuck out a win over Purdue. That pretty much covers the decent teams that they have played.
[quote]The bottom line is Ohio States defense is 6 points a game better than Iowa's. Iowa's offense is four points a game better than OSU's giving OSU a statistical edge of about 2 points. Plus OSU has played a harder schedule. What would your arguments be for saying Iowa is a better team, again?<hr></blockquote>
Again, schedules need to be accounted for in points. Layout the % over under on O and D for each relative to their opponents' season mean and then we will talk. OSU has not played a harder schedule regardless of what the BCS formula says. You still have not addressed the actual football aspects of the game. What does OSU do with SAM? Cover2 or FS for Russell? What in the world to do about Clark? Will you play a one gap and how will you get OSU to run? Can Krenzel throw the post corner, fly, intermediate crosses etc or is it just curls, outs etc. If so how in the world can OSU win?
[ 10-31-2002: Message edited by: ColanderOfDeath ]</p>