they have the roster to win it; but I would not be surprised if they turtle up/choke.
Ohio State blew $20M on a Roster that Finished 4th in the B1G
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
they have the roster to win it; but I would not be surprised if they turtle up/choke.
Ohio State beat Penn State on the road, dismantled Indiana at home and narrowly lost to Oregon on the road. They are not the 4th best team in the Big Ten.
OSU doesnt seem to throw the ball deep hardly at all this year. Also, the last few years I have seen Day just get in his own way and by that I mean for instance they gain 8 yards on first down either by run or pass then they pass again and it is incomplete so they run into a firm defense against a top team and they come up short. I dont watch them a lot unless it is a pretty big game or when they are playing a team the hawks will be playing later.
I think it is Day not having an identity for his offense. When they had Harrison and a couple of others a few years ago they threw the ball downtown, loosened up defenses and that opened it up. Last game I didnt see many deep shots at all. when you have those types of receivers you need to go for some home runs and if they are not there dump off a pass.
And this year they had those OTackle problems as we at Iowa know what that leads to, putrid offense
Well, Indiana beat Michigan. For Ohio State to be a top 2 team in the B1G, all they had to do is beat Michigan at home. Ohio State failed miserably, and, as a result, fell to 4th in the standings.
Final B1G Standings:
| Team | CONF | OVR |
|---|---|---|
| Oregon | 9-0 | 12-0 |
| Penn State | 8-1 | 11-1 |
| Indiana | 8-1 | 11-1 |
| Ohio State | 7-2 | 10-2 |
Where they finished and who is the better team is not the same thing. Which team of those top 4 played all three of the others and beat two of them?
Spot on! If one is disappointed by 8-10 wins per season they are really going to meltdown when 4-6 wins become the norm. Does Iowa even have $20M in its entire NIL fund? Oregon can hire a roster of all future pros, and pay them like some pros. USC is a very wealthy school with a LA donor pool. Iowa can never out resource Oregon and USC, tOSU, that lyin' whore Ann Arbor, Penn St. Even Washington and UCLA have an enormous resource advantage over Iowa. Where is our large urban economy from which draw NIL sponsors? Des Moines is a real city but not a really large urban area. Iowa and Iowa St. split the DSM money.
Iowa is going to make two very high dollar coaching hires in the next couple of seasons. Where's that money? The entire recruiting budget clearly needs much more money as well.
The future is not bright.
So who finished in 3rd place? Someone has to finish in third place. Now I am not trying to be super crazy about this argument as we both see it differently.
Clearly, Oregon has the 1st best record, then psu and IU tied for the 2nd best record. Logically, there has to be one or more teams that have the third best record. By looking at the standings it is clear OSU has the third best record which, if we follow the pattern, means they are in third place. This is why I like to think Iowa has and tied for the 4th best record.
Poor Purdue isn't 18th but "just last" in the Big 10, 9th placeholder of a win-loss record.
The Olympics have the rule in many timed sports that if there is a clear winner of let's say the 100 meter dash then that person gets the gold, and if there is dead heat between the next best time which is called the second best time, then the rule is both runners get a silver medal.
And from everything I have read or seen the person or person's who have the 3rd best time get the bronze medal. They dont skip third place and put them in fourth.
Well, if they were a top 2 team, they'd (1) have beaten Michigan at home as a heavy favorite and (2) be playing in the B1G Championship game. So, at best, they're 3rd best. And in the standings, they are 4th best with 2 conference losses.
The way it's always been done is the standings that follow.
And since there was a tie for 2nd, the tie breaker sent Penn State (and not Indiana) to the B1G Championship game.
1. Oregon ...............9-0
T-2. Penn State.....8-1
T-2. Indiana............8-1
4. Ohio State.........7-2
T-5 Illinois..............6-3
T-5 Iowa..................6-3
T-7 Michigan...........5-4
T-7 Minnesota........5-4
T-9 Rutgers.............4-5
T-9 Washington.....4-5
T-9 USC....................4-5
T-12 UCLA................3-6
T-12 Nebraska.........3-6
T-12 Michigan St....3-6
T-12 Wisconsin.......3-6
16 Northwestern.....2-7
17 Maryland...............1-8
18 Purdue..................0-9
When forced ranking is utilized, the tied teams claim the same rank, however the next rank would represent their subsequent rank "count."So who finished in 3rd place? Someone has to finish in third place. Now I am not trying to be super crazy about this argument as we both see it differently.
Clearly, Oregon has the 1st best record, then psu and IU tied for the 2nd best record. Logically, there has to be one or more teams that have the third best record. By looking at the standings it is clear OSU has the third best record which, if we follow the pattern, means they are in third place. This is why I like to think Iowa has and tied for the 4th best record.
Poor Purdue isn't 18th but "just last" in the Big 10, 9th placeholder of a win-loss record.
The Olympics have the rule in many timed sports that if there is a clear winner of let's say the 100 meter dash then that person gets the gold, and if there is dead heat between the next best time which is called the second best time, then the rule is both runners get a silver medal.
And from everything I have read or seen the person or person's who have the 3rd best time get the bronze medal. They dont skip third place and put them in fourth.
In this example:
1. Oregon
2. PSU
2. IU
4, OSU.
5. ILL
5. IOWA*
* or 6. IOWA, if overall record is considered
We use the same when applying forced rank to our performance evaluations within my company.
And a tariff on tickets sold to Nebraska. Make enough to at least NIL a kicker! 😆
Between the three, who do you think Oregon would rather plan on a neutral field? And I would think you're bright enough to understand that in rivalry games sometimes the better team doesn't win the game.
