Big Ten West After Week 9

Donate To GopherHole
Pompous Elitist said:
It’s crazy how sentiment changes considering Iowa was thought by some to be not only the West favorite but maybe Big Ten favorite as well three or four weeks ago. Now Iowa has skidded into the ditch, Ohio State has found it’s rhythm, and poor Indiana is 0-5 in conference. Penn State has faltered. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan State surging.

This thing will probably go down to the wire and outlook will change week to week, no doubt.
Click to expand...
CoMN laid it out pretty well in regards to Iowa. They knocked off 2 ranked teams to start the season, before anyone knew those teams weren't going to live up to expectations (especially Indiana). This illustrates the major problem with preseason rankings as they are just guessing as to how good teams are going to be. And in the case of Iowa State and Indiana those preseason rankings were very very wrong.

Their blowout of Maryland was fueled by a ton of turnovers and their victory over PSU also hinged on turnovers and Clifford getting hurt as they are a very different team without him.

Part of the reason I started doing this post each week was to see the evolution of the division race over the course of the season. It is kind of shocking to see how Iowa has gone from the almost certain champion to a team that s just barely hanging in the race.

At this point I don't think there are going to be a lot of surprises in terms of individual teams (we know who teams are at this point) but we are almost certain to get some key upsets down the stretch that play a role in how the divisions shake out.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
It’s crazy how sentiment changes considering Iowa was thought by some to be not only the West favorite but maybe Big Ten favorite as well three or four weeks ago. Now Iowa has skidded into the ditch, Ohio State has found it’s rhythm, and poor Indiana is 0-5 in conference. Penn State has faltered. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan State surging.

This thing will probably go down to the wire and outlook will change week to week, no doubt.
Click to expand...

My opinion of Iowa changed during the Penn State game. That was the first Iowa game I really watched. I thought Penn State was clearly the better team until Clifford got hurt and PSU replaced him with a nervous rookie that melted down.
 



EG#9 said:
Posters make very valid critique's of both Iowa and Wisconsin, but until I see Minnesota actually come out and be the more motivated/physical/prepared team in these rivarly games I am personally going to be dreading them.
Click to expand...
If you're scared, get a dog.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
It’s crazy how sentiment changes considering Iowa was thought by some to be not only the West favorite but maybe Big Ten favorite as well three or four weeks ago. Now Iowa has skidded into the ditch, Ohio State has found it’s rhythm, and poor Indiana is 0-5 in conference. Penn State has faltered. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan State surging.

This thing will probably go down to the wire and outlook will change week to week, no doubt.
Click to expand...
I knew Iowa was over rated as they wouldn’t have the benefit of those turnovers all season and I knew they were poor offensively. I also knew OSU would be OSU again once the young QB settled in. Knee is too strong, but those were my thoughts weeks ago. When I kept ranking OSU over Iowa.
 

RememberMurray said:
All of those teams have good defenses. So it may come down to which one can move the ball on the others.

Iowa has now failed miserably against both Purdue and Wisconsin. The Hawkeyes scored 14 points in those two games.
Click to expand...
Love how you roll out “stats” to try and prove a point about Mertz but ignore stats and agree that Minnesota’s offense is ”clearly better and it’s not even close” when the stats say otherwise. Congrats on that extra 17 yards of offense you get per game.

1635778038268.png
 

RememberMurray said:
Do you really hope the division format is abolished?

I see the division setup as the one window of opportunity for a Wisconsin, an Iowa or a Minnesota to — once in a blue moon — catch lightning in a bottle and edge out Ohio State for a rare conference title.

Realistically, the other teams just can't compete with the Buckeyes in recruiting on a year-to-year basis. Ohio State will always have superior talent.

Which means winning the championship of the West (lesser) division, and then putting it all together for one "miracle on Ice, Lake Placid" moment in Indianapolis is really the only way any other B1G school can beat Ohio State for the conference crown.

I also thoroughly enjoy the rivalries that are fostered by Minnesota playing in the West division. I would hate to see the division format done away with.
Click to expand...
I don't see why current West teams can't do exactly as you say here by simply building up a record to get to the #2 spot in the conference, which then gets you the bid to Indy to face the #1 team.


This seems like an uncharacteristic post for you, RM. You're always the one saying we can do it, and admonishing posters who think we can't.
 

RememberMurray said:
Actually, you make an excellent point about Morgan. His stat line, like Mertz's, was not impressive.

Morgan was better in completion % (70% for Morgan, 50% for Mertz), and yards per attempt (7.9 for Morgan, 4.7 for Mertz).

But Mertz threw 1 TD and had 0 INTs, while Tanner had no TDs and did throw the one INT.

Interesting fact: Northwestern's defense ranks #4 in the B1G against the pass, and Iowa's defense ranks #6 against the pass. I never would have guessed that.

Click to expand...
If you take away Indiana, Maryland, and Iowa state combining to throw 12 ints…iowas defense is actually statistically not much different from Minnesota’s and Purdue’s
 



greatdayne33 said:
Love how you roll out “stats” to try and prove a point about Mertz but ignore stats and agree that Minnesota’s offense is ”clearly better and it’s not even close” when the stats say otherwise. Congrats on that extra 17 yards of offense you get per game.

View attachment 15055
Click to expand...

According to this chart, which you yourself posted, Minnesota is ahead of Wisconsin and Iowa, are they not?

So, your argument is... kinda strange. Almost Sconnie-like.

But: EXCELLENT first post! Well done!
 

greatdayne33 said:
Love how you roll out “stats” to try and prove a point about Mertz but ignore stats and agree that Minnesota’s offense is ”clearly better and it’s not even close” when the stats say otherwise. Congrats on that extra 17 yards of offense you get per game.

View attachment 15055
Click to expand...
Yep....can't see any holes at all in this kind of thinking.....glad you created an account just to tell us that. You can head back to the Badger boards now....we won't really need you for a few more weeks.
 

RememberMurray said:
According to this chart, which you yourself posted, Minnesota is ahead of Wisconsin and Iowa, are they not?

So, your argument is... kinda strange.

But: EXCELLENT first post! Well done!
Click to expand...
You agreed with the poster who said Minnesotas offense is clearly better than Wisconsin’s and it wasn’t even close. If you consider 17 yards that big of a gap I hate to tell how bad Minnesota’s defense must be compared to Wisconsin
 

greatdayne33 said:
Love how you roll out “stats” to try and prove a point about Mertz but ignore stats and agree that Minnesota’s offense is ”clearly better and it’s not even close” when the stats say otherwise. Congrats on that extra 17 yards of offense you get per game.

View attachment 15055
Click to expand...
Minnesota a little better on offense to the tune of 7 more touchdowns on the season
11% better yards per play. Half the number of turnovers.
Wisconsin 110th in scoring offense
Minnesota 74th

Minnesota 11th in red zone scoring
Wisconsin 83rd

Wisconsin 125th at 3rd down conversions
Minnesota 10th



Wisconsin has played a tougher schedule no doubt. But even a blind man could see Minnesota’s offense is a little better at this point. If wisconsin didn’t have an historically good defense (probably a top 10 defense of the past 5 years of college football) the offense would be exposed a little more.
 



greatdayne33 said:
You agreed with the poster who said Minnesotas offense is clearly better than Wisconsin’s and it wasn’t even close. If you consider 17 yards that big of a gap I hate to tell how bad Minnesota’s defense must be compared to Wisconsin
Click to expand...

Uh huh.

Have you been able to view both of Wisconsin's TDs this season? Each one was amazing.
 

Stating the obvious, but the Iowa and Wisconsin games are going to be huge for us. Hopefully we bring our best games of the season those two weeks. We are good at running the ball, but the coaching staff needs to have a plan for how to move the ball and score points if they are able to stop the run.
 

Some guy said:
The SOS difference has more to do with Notre dame, eastern Michigan, and army vs Miami, bowling green, Colorado than it does conference schedule
Click to expand...
Agree that the out of conference plays a good part in this but you are kind of blowing off the fact that Wisconsin has played four conference schools that were ranked at the time if playing versus the one that Minnesota has played. Yes it was Ohio State but it was also the first game with a new QB and a new defense and they certainly do not look like the same team now as they did week one or when Oregon dominated them in week 2.
Some guy said:
The SOS difference has more to do with Notre dame, eastern Michigan, and army vs Miami, bowling green, Colorado than it does conference schedule
Click to expand...
 

Some guy said:
Minnesota a little better on offense to the tune of 7 more touchdowns on the season
11% better yards per play. Half the number of turnovers.
Wisconsin 110th in scoring offense
Minnesota 74th

Minnesota 11th in red zone scoring
Wisconsin 83rd

Wisconsin 125th at 3rd down conversions
Minnesota 10th



Wisconsin has played a tougher schedule no doubt. But even a blind man could see Minnesota’s offense is a little better at this point. If wisconsin didn’t have an historically good defense (probably a top 10 defense of the past 5 years of college football) the offense would be exposed a little more.
Click to expand...
Agree with you here saying that Minnesota’s offense has been better than Wisconsin’s. My disagreement is with the idea that it is not even close
 

greatdayne33 said:
Agree with you here saying that Minnesota’s offense has been better than Wisconsin’s. My disagreement is with the idea that it is not even close
Click to expand...
It certainly hasn’t been close in the red zone, 3rd downs, or with turnovers.
It remains to be seen if that is an anomaly due to SOS or a trend.

I pick wisconsin to win the vision at this point but it’s not because of their offense
 


greatdayne33 said:
Love how you roll out “stats” to try and prove a point about Mertz but ignore stats and agree that Minnesota’s offense is ”clearly better and it’s not even close” when the stats say otherwise. Congrats on that extra 17 yards of offense you get per game.

View attachment 15055
Click to expand...
I'll never understand how people get so whipped up they actually start arguments on other teams boards.
 

MplsGopher said:
I don't see why current West teams can't do exactly as you say here by simply building up a record to get to the #2 spot in the conference, which then gets you the bid to Indy to face the #1 team.


This seems like an uncharacteristic post for you, RM. You're always the one saying we can do it, and admonishing posters who think we can't.
Click to expand...

Well, it depends on exactly what it is you're proposing.

— I know you dislike the idea of 2 division winners (with 2 trophies), but I believe you're in a minority (perhaps even a minority of one) on that issue. I know I myself really like two divisions with 2 division winners playing for the championship.

— In your new model, how would the scheduling work, from year to year? Would rivalries be preserved? Would Minnesota still play Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Purdue every season? If not, those rivalries might be lost. That would be a shame, especially the two border rivalries.

Maybe you should lay out your plan in detail so that we can see exactly what you have in mind.
 

RememberMurray said:
Well, it depends on exactly what it is you're proposing.

— I know you dislike the idea of 2 division winners (with 2 trophies), but I believe you're in a minority (perhaps even a minority of one) on that issue. I know I myself really like two divisions with 2 division winners playing for the championship.

— In your new model, how would the scheduling work, from year to year? Would rivalries be preserved? Would Minnesota still play Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Purdue every season? If not, those rivalries might be lost. That would be a shame, especially the two border rivalries.

Maybe you should lay out your plan in detail so that we can see exactly what you have in mind.
Click to expand...
Not to answer for Mpls -- but I with him agree that I don't care for divisions. I think in its current format it hoses Indiana, Rutgers and Maryland. Why should Indiana have to face better teams than Purdue for example.

My pipe dream would be kick out everyone we added in the last 30 years and have a round robin. I would like a pods based approach or a protected rivalries approach. For pods we'd really need to add 1-2 teams and have 3/4 pods of 4/5 teams. Play your pod every year and then rotate through the other teams. Protected rivalry format would preserve 3 rivalry games, but in stead of pods each team wouldn't necessarily have the same grouping.
 

Some guy said:
If you take away Indiana, Maryland, and Iowa state combining to throw 12 ints…iowas defense is actually statistically not much different from Minnesota’s and Purdue’s
Click to expand...
I know you know this, but you can’t do that
 

noamfromm said:
Not to answer for Mpls -- but I with him agree that I don't care for divisions. I think in its current format it hoses Indiana, Rutgers and Maryland. Why should Indiana have to face better teams than Purdue for example.

My pipe dream would be kick out everyone we added in the last 30 years and have a round robin. I would like a pods based approach or a protected rivalries approach. For pods we'd really need to add 1-2 teams and have 3/4 pods of 4/5 teams. Play your pod every year and then rotate through the other teams. Protected rivalry format would preserve 3 rivalry games, but in stead of pods each team wouldn't necessarily have the same grouping.
Click to expand...

Wait, now — maybe I'm misunderstanding you here.

On the one hand, you're concerned about Indiana, Rutgers and Maryland playing a tougher schedule than Purdue.

Yet you want to "kick out everyone we added in the last 30 years". Wouldn't that include Rutgers and Maryland?
 

RememberMurray said:
Wait, now — maybe I'm misunderstanding you here.

On the one hand, you're concerned about Indiana, Rutgers and Maryland playing a tougher schedule than Purdue.

Yet you want to "kick out everyone we added in the last 30 years". Wouldn't that include Rutgers and Maryland?
Click to expand...
To the first point you raise. Yes I think it's unfair to the those schools that they need to play OSU, Michigan, PSU, and MSU each year. To the second, yes ideally I would like the Big Ten to be the Big Ten and play each school every year. It's not incompatible to want a modicum of fairness in the current structure while ideally wanting to remove teams from the Big Ten.
 


The Wisconsin game will be a very interesting TOP battle. This season, Minnesota has averaged 35 minutes and Wisconsin 34.

Wisconsin gave us a taste of our own medicine in 2019 by dominating that stat. However, a big reason for Wisconsin’s offensive success in that game we’re that we were 110% committed to stopping Jonathan Taylor. He was held to 4.2 yards per carry, well below his season average of 6.3, but the rest of the offense was free to do what they pleased. With no single dominant player for Wisconsin this year, the Gophers will be in a better place to get the Badger offense off the field and win TOP.
 

greatdayne33 said:
Agree with you here saying that Minnesota’s offense has been better than Wisconsin’s. My disagreement is with the idea that it is not even close
Click to expand...

It is significant. The 17 yards per game doesn't tell the whole story either. Fleck is known to slam on the brakes and play conservatively a lot of the time. Especially in games against worse opponents...or in games where the Gophers have large leads. That 370 yards per game has been enough in most of the games this year. If the Gophers needed to air it out to keep up....and increase their yardage total.....it would be far easier than for Wisconsin. Mertz is below average. Morgan and the passing offense here is above average. Running game is similar.
 

fair said:
The Wisconsin game will be a very interesting TOP battle. This season, Minnesota has averaged 35 minutes and Wisconsin 34.

Wisconsin gave us a taste of our own medicine in 2019 by dominating that stat. However, a big reason for Wisconsin’s offensive success in that game we’re that we were 110% committed to stopping Jonathan Taylor. He was held to 4.2 yards per carry, well below his season average of 6.3, but the rest of the offense was free to do what they pleased. With no single dominant player for Wisconsin this year, the Gophers will be in a better place to get the Badger offense off the field and win TOP.
Click to expand...
Allen, their true freshman back, is looking more dominant by the week.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom