That's 47 points vs 41 points, valid that the extrapolation didn't add up. To do the extrapolation, I just divided 46 by two to get a midpoint, then tried to create a realistic 7 point spread based on easy scores to arrive at in a normal football game somewhere around that number. It wasn't scientific, or exact, based on some strange betting method or some crap like that. I just wanted a decent, plausible final score prediction to work off of.
Then I tried to figure out how much difference in points CJB would be to JR using common sense. If it was 7 points, then that would be a 40% diff. If it was 3 points, that's much less difference. Then I took the 54% win pct from the site where I got the betting lines and added 10% to it.
If you go to 27 - 20, and assume CJB is 7 points less, that's still 35% worse than JR. I don't think the difference between them is 35%. If it's 3 points less, at that score, that's a 15% difference between the two of them. That's close enough to what is probably true -- CJB would have had a 60% completion percentage vs JR's 75% completion percentage vs Ball State, and that passes the sniff test. Meaning that Iowa then goes to a 31% chance of winning, and that still sniffs out, too.
The main point is that a 10 - 15 % diff in performance in a game where Iowa probably won't win is an acceptable risk to start CJB and get him ready for B1G ball. IMHO 24 - 14 with CJB (which is 41 points instead of 46.5) is probably realistic in a first start performance on the road against a good football team. I optimistically think he's better than JR, but probably closer to 3 points better in his first start as well.
EDIT:
Yes, the reasoning is wishful thinking, but without seeing both of them play against equal opposition it's difficult to tell how much better or worse each is...
