JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
I have made the appropriate changes to the data fields and commentary....actually Iowa's on field performance 2008-2011 is now at a +2 based upon their 2007-2010 recruiting class ranking, which is 7th
By using straight rankings 1-2-3-4, Jon's approach obscures the significant gap most years between the Big 2 and the rest in overall recruiting rankings.
2012: UM 4, OSU 3, IA 39
2011: UM 29, OSU 6, IA 25
2010: UM 12, OSU 20, IA 45
2009: UM 14, OSU 1, IA 75
2008: UM 6, OSU 4, IA 44
2007: UM 10, OSU 16, IA 37
2006: UM 9, OSU 13, IA 40
2005: UM 2, OSU 7, IA 8
2004: UM 5, OSU 11, IA 41
PSU was also usually much higher, with several Top 10 rankings.
Using weighted recruiting scores you'll find Iowa and Northwestern overachieved even more than Jon states, and PSU significantly underachieved.
there you go my friend. i thought for a minute you slid into the abyss.
you might want to coin a phrase like big 1, mediocre 1 and the little 10, or something like that. i'm sure you'd be able to come up with something catchier than i....i'm a checkers player....
What you say makes sense in relationship to all 120 D-1 teams, but the straight ranking system is valid within conference, where it becomes relative. In other words, regardless of the disparity between raw national rankings, Iowa is still ranked 4th in the B1G, therefore, should be expected to finish 4th in the B1G, even though they might finish higher or lower in another conference or might be more or less competitive against national opponents. The only meaning the disparity in rankings has is supporting the claim of a B1G 2 / little 10, which, has historically been proven on the field, anyway.
This whole analysis is consistent with the general interpretation of "stars":
5* = obvious difference - elite talent;
4* = noticeable difference - standout;
2-3* = pretty much everyone else.
This is usually pretty accurate, on the whole.
Data seems to invalidate the "Little ol' Iowa" argument. On average, Hawks are the 4th most talented team in the B1G.
This means 1 of 2 things:
1) The coaches are very good recruiters, able to overcome the "challenges" of recruiting to Iowa, or,
2) Those challenges are not nearly as great as many want to make them out to be.
.
Hoke and his style fit the B10 well and he is recruiting well on defense unlike RRod. Michigan will be a threat for some time. I mean they wont be OSU good but good none the less.
For JM's article and the discussion on this topic: BRAVO to all of you! from a "stats guy" who admires common sense.
r^2 is the coefficient of determination. Assuming the correlation coefficient of r=0.8 is correct, this means that r^2 is 0.64. This means that approximately 64% of the variation in win totals can be attributed to an approximate linear relationship between recruiting rankings and win totals.