


Nah, the whole division is very offensive…just not the football kind.We’re a defensive division.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nah, the whole division is very offensive…just not the football kind.We’re a defensive division.
Could it be the defensive ratings are good is because the offensive ratings are so bad?Yep. I didnt look up scoring Offense, but total offense lol
![]()
NCAA College Football FBS current team Stats | NCAA.com
Discover the current NCAA FBS Football leaders in every stats category, as well as historic leaders.www.ncaa.com
Total Offense Rankings from best to worst....
Ohio St - 40th
Michigan - 46th
Maryland - 48th
Penn St - 66th
Wisconsin - 73rd
Illinois - 80th
Purdue - 94th
Rutgers - 105th
Nebraska - 110th
Michigan St - 111th
Indiana - 113th
Minnesota - 115th
Northwestern - 119th
Iowa - 130th (dead last)
Yep.
Total Defense rankings from best to worst...
Michigan - 1st
Penn St - 2nd
Ohio St - 4th
Rutgers - 9th
Nebraska - 13th
Iowa - 20th
Minnesota - 32nd
Maryland - 38th
Wisconsin - 43rd
Northwestern - 49th
Michigan St - 54th
Indiana - 56th
Purdue - 71st
Illinois - 92nd.
Could it be the defensive ratings are good is because the offensive ratings are so bad?
well yeah!Could it be the defensive ratings are good is because the offensive ratings are so bad?
I saw a graphic that of the bottom 10 scoring offenses in the Power 5, six of them are in the B1G West.
Oh I know, the conference has some absolute stinkers this year overall. Extremely top-heavy.8 of them are Big 10
Purdue: #103
Northwestern: T - #105
Utah: #107
Minnesota: #108
Illinois: #111
Nebraska: #113
Arizona St: #116
Iowa: #118
Indiana: T - #121
Michigan St: #125
The B1G plays "real" football.8 of them are Big 10
Purdue: #103
Northwestern: T - #105
Utah: #107
Minnesota: #108
Illinois: #111
Nebraska: #113
Arizona St: #116
Iowa: #118
Indiana: T - #121
Michigan St: #125
That’s a mind fuq right there.Could it be the defensive ratings are good is because the offensive ratings are so bad?
CFB has become a "mind fuq" these days...That’s a mind fuq right there.
The B1G plays "real" football.
Did I say that right?
Could it be the defensive ratings are good is because the offensive ratings are so bad?
And pretty damned bad grammar on my part now that I read it. But, IDGAF about grammar nowadays.That’s a mind fuq right there.
Flashy offenses don't always work in good weather places either.To be fair flashy offenses just don't work consistently in the Midwest and Central/Northern Plains come late October thru November.
You get cold/drizzly/windy weather and it's not conducive for teams that rely on the passing game.
Hence Big 10 teams always being "Three Yards and a Cloud of Dust", Slobber-knocker, low scoring games.
Look what happened to Oklahoma @ Kansas the other day.
Flashy offenses don't always work in good weather places either.
And "Three Yards and a Cloud of Dust" offenses will work anywhere if one teams MFers are bigger/faster/stronger than the other teams MFers.
Could it be the offensive ratings are bad because the defenses are really good?Could it be the defensive ratings are good is because the offensive ratings are so bad?
Because Midwestern farm kids are slow?True that.
Just saying there's a reason Big 10 offenses have to be predominately run oriented.
YesCould it be the offensive ratings are bad because the defenses are really good?
![]()
The old “SEC defense” logic.Could it be the offensive ratings are bad because the defenses are really good?
![]()