PDA

View Full Version : The good, the bad, and the ugly


lonny23
10-18-2008, 04:57 AM
I ran the numbers again tonight for total team rankings in the Big 12, but I put a different flavor on it. I still ran the numbers like always, but I counted some of the categories twice. I don't think many people will argue that total offense and total defense aren't mroe important than your punt return defense and some of the other categories.

Here are the revised numbers and I'll give some analysis:

The good

Oklahoma 1307
Texas 1450
Kansas 1600
Missouri 1641
Texas Tech 1657
Oklahoma State 1812

Considering 2 of these teams beat a higher team last week, I'll just say that nobody on this list is immune from an upset if the other team is on and they're off. I do think this is a fair representation of how these teams have played so far to this point, but that doesn't account for teams sandbagging. The level of competition also affects these numbers.

Oklahoma- Average Baylor and good Texas 3927
Missouri- Average Nebraska and good Oklahoma State 4587
Texas- Bad Colorado and good Oklahoma 4855
Oklahoma State- Bad Texas A&M and good Missouri 5363
Texas Tech- Average Kansas State and average Nebraska 5396
Kansas- Bad Iowa State and bad Colorado 6645

On most days, OU would still be the best team in the Big 12. Kansas is not as good as Tech and Mizzou and probably not OSU either. Mizzou would not lose to OSU on most days and would also have a good shot to beat Tech most days and could beat Texas.

If we were to be in a vacuum and only know the stats for the first 7 weeks of the year, I'm speculating that the expected results going forward would be this if we simulated a bunch of games:

1. OU
2. Mizzou
3. Texas
4. Tech
5. OSU
6. Kansas

That's not how I rank the teams currently or what I think will happen, but just what my opinion of what it should be like if all we knew were numbers.

The bad

Baylor 2477
Kansas State 2621
Nebraska 2775

The bad aren't really bad and they can pull off an upset, but it has to be a crazy day for them and a so-so at best day for the good team. This might be the right order, too. OU has a better chance to lose to any of the top 6 teams than any of those 6 teams have a chance to lose to these 3.

The ugly

Iowa State 3097
Colorado 3548
Texas A&M 3722

The ugly are probably in the right order and they won't beat a good team on their best day and the good team's worst day.

Part of the reason I gave a caveat about the past not dictating the future is guys like Ruffin McNeill who say stuff like, "I want to blitz more, but I haven't needed to yet." I would argue that letting a game get to OT because you're holding back on D is not a good idea, but it worked out.

DragonBand06
10-18-2008, 08:01 PM
The ugly are probably in the right order and they won't beat a good team on their best day and the good team's worst day.I think this statement needs a revision after today's game. A&M certainly didn't have their best day (they didn't score offensively in the 2nd half) and if they had, definitely would have had a shot at beating Tech today.

slorch
10-18-2008, 08:03 PM
I think this statement needs a revision after today's game. A&M certainly didn't have their best day (they didn't score offensively in the 2nd half) and if they had, definitely would have had a shot at beating Tech today.

don't give our D any credit, it's not the popular thing to do...

(sshhhhhhhhh, don't tell anyone.)

DragonBand06
10-18-2008, 08:08 PM
don't give our D any credit, it's not the popular thing to do...

(sshhhhhhhhh, don't tell anyone.)Don't get me wrong, Tech had great D in the 2nd half, but it's beyond me how a team can put up 23 in the first half and get shut out in the 2nd half.

rorib7
10-18-2008, 11:04 PM
don't give our D any credit, it's not the popular thing to do...

(sshhhhhhhhh, don't tell anyone.)

Your D looked much better in the second half for sure. Our o-line also looked much worse...maybe that's because your D was making our o-line look bad? I am not sure...

lonny23
10-19-2008, 10:34 PM
I think this statement needs a revision after today's game. A&M certainly didn't have their best day (they didn't score offensively in the 2nd half) and if they had, definitely would have had a shot at beating Tech today.
After going to the game and seeing Johnson and Tannehill, I think A&M should get bumped into the bad category. Bad teams with talent are still dangerous. You have better talent than Colorado and Iowa State do. You might be OK down the line.

lonny23
10-19-2008, 10:35 PM
Your D looked much better in the second half for sure. Our o-line also looked much worse...maybe that's because your D was making our o-line look bad? I am not sure...
Tech was playing D on about 2 out of every 3 plays in the 1st half. They did it on 3 out of 3 in the 2nd half.

tayb
10-19-2008, 10:45 PM
Bad Colorado? :confused:

I guess that is a compliment if a 24 point victory holding the opponent to 260 yards is a bad game.

lonny23
10-19-2008, 11:17 PM
Bad Colorado? :confused:

I guess that is a compliment if a 24 point victory holding the opponent to 260 yards is a bad game.
CU's biggest problem is they have bad offense in an offensive league. That puts them in the bottom half of the league. UT winning by 24 at CU is an OK game. Not bad and not great. You've done a little better the last 2 games!:D

If I were to re-rank those top 6 teams, I'd stick Mizzou at 6 because the other teams wouldn't get down that much to UT before putting up a fight.