|
Post by ballvolley on Sept 23, 2007 20:42:31 GMT -5
With the first week done, a few observations:
Penn State: Legit, and will have one of the dominating years in recent history. On their way to 20-0, and not making the Final Four would be a huge underachievement.
Michigan: Talented, but overrated. Lucky Hawaii win and relatively easy slate pre-Big Ten skyrocketed them, but I see them finishing in the 12-8 or 11-9 range.
Ohio State: rated about right, and still finding their groove. Typical OSU team that will lose one then rebound brilliantly. Still think they'll finish top 4, likely at #4.
Northwestern: Bright spot. Showed toughness v. Ohio State coming from behind in the 5th, and gave PSU 2 games worth of headaches until the lost steam in the 3rd. Maybe as high as 5th for them this year thanks to athletic freshman and senior OHs playing like seniors.
Purdue: Underachieving. Musical liberos and line-ups prevent them from getting a groove. The road will be a struggle. Better with the season, but maybe as low as a 6th or 7th finish.
Michigan State: same ole, same ole makes them predicatble and beatbable, esp when they're on the road. Not deep this year, but their future looks bright. 8th place, and praying for a berth.
Indiana: Better -- well coached, they'll push every team hard but need a year to get over the hump. After this season, they'll crawl out the cellar in no time to make the Big Ten top to bottom competitive for the first time.
Iowa: Better than Iowa past, but they should have made bigger strides by now. They'll steal last place from Indiana, with maybe one decent win along the way.
Wisconsin: They'll battle Minnesota for #2. Veteran squad, big, physical, plenty of ball control -- Penn State will be challenged in Madison.
Minnesota: Typical Hebert teams -- early season hiccups that they learn from that make them better and better week to week. His super frosh are worth the hype, and they are finding a nice rythym. #2 or #3 seems to be the place for them, potenitally pulling a PSU 5 game upset at home.
Illinois: Almost there. They are one big gun away from thos andful of tough 5 gamers actually going there way. This could be their return to the NCAA year if they can improve; seeing their 2nd half of the Big Ten year as their best.
|
|
|
Post by ugopher on Sept 23, 2007 22:27:11 GMT -5
The problem for Indiana, Iowa, and some of the others is while they are getting better so are PSU, MN, and WI. You can improve substantially but still not make strides position-wise.
|
|
|
Post by crazyvbfan on Sept 23, 2007 22:33:58 GMT -5
interesting synopsis. id disagree with a couple tho but overall not bad. there will be some more upsets down the road as there always is
|
|
|
Post by smiley on Sept 23, 2007 22:55:20 GMT -5
I'd pretty much agree with everything said so far. The bottom half is getting better but so is the top half. I'm kind of curious how good the bottom halves of the Pac10 and B12 are. No question that their top teams are very good but how good are their bottom ones?
|
|
|
Post by BigTenVball on Sept 24, 2007 7:14:59 GMT -5
bigger problem with iowa, is that they are very improved, but lost their number one AND number two hitter this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Sept 24, 2007 7:49:29 GMT -5
With the first week done, a few observations: Penn State: Legit, and will have one of the dominating years in recent history. On their way to 20-0, and not making the Final Four would be a huge underachievement. Michigan: Talented, but overrated. Lucky Hawaii win and relatively easy slate pre-Big Ten skyrocketed them, but I see them finishing in the 12-8 or 11-9 range. Ohio State: rated about right, and still finding their groove. Typical OSU team that will lose one then rebound brilliantly. Still think they'll finish top 4, likely at #4. Northwestern: Bright spot. Showed toughness v. Ohio State coming from behind in the 5th, and gave PSU 2 games worth of headaches until the lost steam in the 3rd. Maybe as high as 5th for them this year thanks to athletic freshman and senior OHs playing like seniors. Purdue: Underachieving. Musical liberos and line-ups prevent them from getting a groove. The road will be a struggle. Better with the season, but maybe as low as a 6th or 7th finish. Michigan State: same ole, same ole makes them predicatble and beatbable, esp when they're on the road. Not deep this year, but their future looks bright. 8th place, and praying for a berth. Indiana: Better -- well coached, they'll push every team hard but need a year to get over the hump. After this season, they'll crawl out the cellar in no time to make the Big Ten top to bottom competitive for the first time. Iowa: Better than Iowa past, but they should have made bigger strides by now. They'll steal last place from Indiana, with maybe one decent win along the way. Wisconsin: They'll battle Minnesota for #2. Veteran squad, big, physical, plenty of ball control -- Penn State will be challenged in Madison. Minnesota: Typical Hebert teams -- early season hiccups that they learn from that make them better and better week to week. His super frosh are worth the hype, and they are finding a nice rythym. #2 or #3 seems to be the place for them, potenitally pulling a PSU 5 game upset at home. Illinois: Almost there. They are one big gun away from thos andful of tough 5 gamers actually going there way. This could be their return to the NCAA year if they can improve; seeing their 2nd half of the Big Ten year as their best. I don't think it's a slam dunk that PSU will be 20-0. I don't think anyone associated with their program feels their annual trip into Madison will be enjoyable. This year's edition of the Badgers appears better than last year's, and while some may say the Lions have improved also, they were swept pretty easily by Wisconsin last year in the Field House. I think the Gophers will give them a mighty run for their money in Minnesota as well.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Sept 24, 2007 8:38:43 GMT -5
I'd pretty much agree with everything said so far. The bottom half is getting better but so is the top half. I'm kind of curious how good the bottom halves of the Pac10 and B12 are. No question that their top teams are very good but how good are their bottom ones? Of the three conferences, I think the Big12 bottom is probably the weakest this year, but there are some problems with the basic terms of the question. The first difficulty is in determing how many teams define the "bottom half". Sometimes that "half" is only three teams. The other issue is that natural cycles for each individual program throw in too many variables to ever be sure of the direction of an entire conference.
|
|
|
Post by smiley on Sept 24, 2007 10:22:59 GMT -5
I didn't think it was a confusing question as far as halves go. Half of 10 and 12. I wasn't considering divisions like the B12 has. Also I wasn't speaking of cycles of programs, I was speaking of the present.
I would agree with the B12 offhand but I really don't know that much about the lesser teams in those conferences.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2007 11:03:07 GMT -5
I don't know what's up with OSU. Will they improve as the Big10 season progresses, as they usually do? Or will they implode like they did in 2003? (Gordon's junior year.)
What effect is Stone's retirement announcement having on the Buckeyes?
|
|
|
Post by ballvolley on Sept 24, 2007 11:13:45 GMT -5
They should be fine. The '03 season was a diaster b/c they had the thinnest line-up in school hsitory that included a 5th year senior Buckeye baskbetball player in the middle and McCarthy as a shakey freshman setter. 07 is nothing like that year -- they have the pieces, and should be a top 25 team.
Also, here's the week 1 conference shake out: 1 Penn State 2t Wisconsin 2t Minnesota 4 Ohio State 5t Northwestern 5t Michigan 7t Purdue 7t Illinois 9 Michigan State 10 Indiana 11 Iowa
|
|
|
Post by spikerthemovie on Sept 24, 2007 11:35:02 GMT -5
Actually, aren't Penn State, Wisconsin and Minnesota all tied for first in the conference at this point? Followed by Ohio State, Michigan, Northwestern and Purdue tied for second? Or am I not getting your system?
|
|
|
Post by ballvolley on Sept 24, 2007 11:54:57 GMT -5
predicitng the final per the 1st week; clearly it's a week to week thing, but forecastng for now
|
|
|
Post by spikerthemovie on Sept 24, 2007 11:57:20 GMT -5
Oh, gotcha -- Returning to your original reason for the thread. Sorry about the obtuseness here. Obtusity? Obtusion?
|
|
|
Post by runninrebel44 on Sept 24, 2007 14:02:11 GMT -5
Actually, aren't Penn State, Wisconsin and Minnesota all tied for first in the conference at this point? Followed by Ohio State, Michigan, Northwestern and Purdue tied for second? Or am I not getting your system? Going soley by Big Ten records, you are correct, but by adding the regular season as a tie breaker, you get the actual standings. And I'm not a huge fan of predicting anything or giving a prognosis before the third weekend or so is completed, but I'd say Penn State is the real deal (Duh), Purdue and Ohio State will straighten the ship and get their game back on, and Michigan will come back down to earth soon.
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Sept 24, 2007 14:43:53 GMT -5
I'd pretty much agree with everything said so far. The bottom half is getting better but so is the top half. I'm kind of curious how good the bottom halves of the Pac10 and B12 are. No question that their top teams are very good but how good are their bottom ones? Using this week's Pablo data and looking at the bottom five teams in each conference, here are the averages: Pac-10:Avg. Pablo Rank = 38.4 Avg. Pablo Points = 7869 Big Ten:Avg. Pablo Rank = 58.0 Avg. Pablo Points = 7503 Big 12:Avg. Pablo Rank = 59.0 Avg. Pablo Points = 7464 When defined as the bottom five teams in each conference, the "bottom half" of the Pac 10 is clearly stronger. However, this is due in large part to the inclusion of California with a Pablo ranking of 14 and Pablo points of 8460. For comparative purposes, the highest placed "bottom half" teams in the other conferences are Ohio State (40 and 7775) and Missouri (48 and 7655). The lowest placed teams in each conference are as follows: Arizona State (67 and 7360), Iowa (99 and 6945) and Texas Tech (68 and 7355). Getting back to your original question and using the Pablo analysis described above, it is my opinion that the "bottom half" of the Big Ten and Big 12 conferences are very similar in strength.
|
|