[ad_1]
On November 18, 2000, Drew Henson scored on a naked bootleg and scored a goal and a goal to celebrate a 38-26 Michigan win at Ohio Stadium. The victory brought John Cooper to 2-10-1 against Michigan. It's not a coincidence, it was also Cooper's last game at the Horseshoe.
Bill Clinton was still president and his successor would not be known until 24 days ago. The angels of Charlie was the # 1 box office movie. "Independent Women, Part 1" of Destiny's Child was the number one singles and had just replaced Creed's "With Arms Wide Open".
Michigan has not won in Columbus since. He has won only twice at Ann Arbor.
Now, Michigan has another chance. The stake is the title of the division, probably a conference title (one or the other teams will be a major favorite on Northwestern in Indianapolis), and a good shot at the time. participation in the playoffs. This adds to the usual bragging rights when the Wolverines and Buckeyes meet in one of the sport's most famous rivalries.
Michigan is a 3.5-point favorite, an extreme rarity in this series and especially in Columbus, where they were only favored once (in 2004) on an eight-game slide. S & P + says the Wolverines have 7.1 points better on neutral ground, so around 4 in Columbus.
This raises the question: did the State of Ohio win 15 victories out of 17 against Michigan because the Buckeyes had better teams, or because the Buckeyes played above their level in the great game and that the Wolverines played under theirs?
This is a relevant question for the 2018 meeting. If the first is the case, then Michigan should have little to worry about because finally the Wolverines have the best team.
If this is the case, the state of Ohio should be certain that the levels established by the teams for eleven games will not present a handicap.
To answer this question, we can look at the teams' S & P + scores for the period beginning in 2001, when the current race of the state of Ohio began.
S & P + tells us what is the difference between two teams on neutral ground. No computer system is always right, but this one beats Vegas regularly. With a three point home adjustment, we can see how reality meets expectations:
- 2017: OSU beat the S & P + projection of 1.1
- 2016: OSU State beats the score of 2.2
- 2015: OSU State wins at 29.1
- 2014: Michigan beats him by 12.4
- 2013: Michigan beats it by 7.5
- 2012: OSU beats it by 0.7
- 2011: OSU beats it by 9.8
- 2010: OSU beats him by 9.8
- 2009: OSU beats it by 0.2
- 2008: OSU beats him by 12
- 2007: OSU beats it by 5.8
- 2006: OSU beats it by 0.3
- 2005: Michigan beats it by 0.6
- 2004: OSU beats him by 13
- 2003: Michigan beats him by 7.4
- 2002: Michigan beats him by 1.1
- 2001: OSU beats him by 15.2
The state of Ohio has done better than computers say it should do against Michigan this century. Of how many? It depends.
On the one hand, the state of Ohio has outperformed the S & P + by an average of 4.1 points per game over the last 17 years, with at least slightly over 12 out of 17.
On the other hand, the average is drawn in the direction of Ohio State by one game in particular: 2015, in which the teams should have been equal (Ohio State was 2.9 points better by S & P and the game was played at Ann Arbor) and the Buckeyes won 42-13.
Ohio's outperformance in 2015 is almost double the difference between expected results and actual results. If we look at the median instead of the average, the outperformance of the state of Ohio is 1.1 point per game, a negligible amount.
In seven of the 17 games, the margin was less than 2.2 points from what S & P + would project. Seven times, someone has exceeded this score by more than one point. In the state of Ohio, the team has exceeded expectations six times.
The state of Ohio should not (and probably should not) expect Michigan to play badly, simply because Michigan faces the Ohio State.
With the standard warning that this is college football and that the sample sizes will still be too small to establish statistical reliability, these numbers do not prove that the state of Ohio will likely exceed its usual performance level nor that Michigan will lag behind hers.
The median is probably a better measure than the average with a sample once a year over 17 seasons, especially with a huge outlier value. And this number is small. Ohio State clocking one point better than expected this weekend will end with Michigan's first win in Columbus in 18 years.
In three years of fighting Jim Harbaugh-Urban Meyer, the state of Ohio has done better than the S & P + figure each time. But the only major example of this was 2015. The other three times, Meyer's OSU played against Michigan and went over the projection, it was 2.2 points or less each time. In terms of performance, Meyer's performance was not as surprising.
If you wanted to discover famous times in the history of this series that suggested was over-performing or things were dead even, you could. UM's all-time mark of 58-49-6 is largely the product of its domination at the beginning of the 20th century.
But if we look only at the ten-year war between Bo Schembechler and Woody Hayes, Michigan was 5-4-1 both in terms of actual record and performance compared to S & P + projections. (You can find the historical figures of S & P + here.) The Wolverines beat computers by 2.5 points per game from 1969 to 1978, a solid performance of the machines.
Perhaps the most indicative game of this period? Memorable draw from 10 to 10 in 1973. In this match, S & P + would have predicted … a draw.
Source link
