Football ESPN FPI projects the remaining games on Rutgers Football's schedule

MGSA99

All American
Jan 15, 2002
7,455
3,046
113
Basically it's winnable games against Nebraska and Indiana. Everything else is an automatic L.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUNVA

rutgersguy1

Hall of Famer
Dec 17, 2008
34,227
11,026
113
Basically it's winnable games against Nebraska and Indiana. Everything else is an automatic L.
I said this a few weeks ago and some might think I'm crazy but IMO only OSU is an automatic L. We can definitely lose and even be blown out by other teams on the schedule but the rest are all capable of playing "eh football" or laying an egg and in that kind of game anything is possible IMO.
 

WhiteBus

Hall of Famer
Oct 4, 2011
34,294
17,517
113
We would end the season with 5 straight crushing losses. Oddly we would end up with the same 5-7 regular season record but with a different feeling.
 

RUShea

Junior
Jan 31, 2017
739
1,406
93
We would end the season with 5 straight crushing losses. Oddly we would end up with the same 5-7 regular season record but with a different feeling.
I'm not sold on MSU. I think there's a chance on that one. But yeah, the others don't look good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUTrack94

BeantownKnight

All Conference
Feb 14, 2008
4,104
1,456
113
We would end the season with 5 straight crushing losses. Oddly we would end up with the same 5-7 regular season record but with a different feeling.

So - what you're saying is that, depending on our APR, we can still go bowling?!

Sounds like a win to me!!

😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: miket007

Knight Shift

Legend
May 19, 2011
67,473
61,330
113
Jersey Shore
Basically it's winnable games against Nebraska and Indiana. Everything else is an automatic L.
See below. MSU may be overrated. Depends on how good UW and Minnesota are.

I'm not sold on MSU. I think there's a chance on that one. But yeah, the others don't look good.
I said this a few weeks ago and some might think I'm crazy but IMO only OSU is an automatic L. We can definitely lose and even be blown out by other teams on the schedule but the rest are all capable of playing "eh football" or laying an egg and in that kind of game anything is possible IMO.
Agree with both of you guys.
We can continue to improve. We can hope MSU and Maryland continue to regress.
 

rutgersguy1

Hall of Famer
Dec 17, 2008
34,227
11,026
113
See below. MSU may be overrated. Depends on how good UW and Minnesota are.



Agree with both of you guys.
We can continue to improve. We can hope MSU and Maryland continue to regress.
I wouldn’t even say anything about regression more that the rest are inconsistent.

Strong consistent offense is the concern imo and only OSU brings that week in and out. Our offense is too anemic to keep up. Some of the rest can show flashes of it and are capable but in any given week who knows.

Minnesota has been looking good (schedule has been easy though)…the KC and Tanner Morgan reunion seems to be going well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift

Mr Magoo

Heisman Winner
Nov 15, 2001
12,304
10,106
113
I’m what world, do we have a 1.7% chance of winning Saturday. Other than food poisoning at OSUs pregame, I can’t think of one.
 

BOGDANOVICH

Senior
Gold Member
Nov 11, 2005
2,234
4,444
113
I’m what world, do we have a 1.7% chance of winning Saturday. Other than food poisoning at OSUs pregame, I can’t think of one.
In the parallel world of endless possibilities. If you read theoretical physics and believe in an infinity of parallel universes, then everything that can happen has happened, including Rutgers beating Ohio State in football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pete in LA

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
I would have to agree with that assessment. We are just not there yet.
Not now and not until we hire an offense-first HC. We have a propeller plane that was once serviceable but not anymore in a conference of jets.
 

MADHAT1

Hall of Famer
Apr 1, 2003
24,929
10,721
113
Ohio Stateupset-only stomach .LOSS
Nebraskaat homewin
. Indianahome cookingwin
Minnesotaboat rowing venueupset unlikely
Michiganlittle to nochance for win ( not)
Michigan Stateaway game butgood chance for a win
Penn Stateprobableloss
Marylandchance for wineven as the visiting team (w)
win 3 of the 4 possibilities and get your bowling shoes ready
 

rutgersguy1

Hall of Famer
Dec 17, 2008
34,227
11,026
113
Not now and not until we hire an offense-first HC. We have a propeller plane that was once serviceable but not anymore in a conference of jets.
I've been dying for strong productive offense for ages before it came into fashion here. If you're team lower down the totem pole, if you're elevating your status on the landscape it's more likely on the back of strong productive offense than not. So it's not a guarantee but the avenue with the most potential.

Ironically having said that, my ideal has always been a defensive coach who understands and won't stifle the offense. I often mention defensive coaches who "grew up around" strong offensive coaches. Otherwise you can get KK type results at TT, he'd have been so much better there if his defenses were just mediocre. Strong productive offense with at least a mediocre defense and you have a chance to make noise IMO. Narduzzi's best season was when his offense and qb were at the top of the country. WF same and plenty of others.

Just recently I came across an article on Elko and his description of coaching philosophy and I agree with it a lot. It's still way early in his tenure but I think he'll get Duke to respectable (.500 or better) but we'll see.

Here are some excerpts from the article:

“Just pay attention to who’s winning,” Elko said. “You’ve got Bill Belichick in New England. You’ve got Kirby (Smart) and Nick (Saban) and Luke Fickell. Those are three of the four Playoff teams last year. I know there’s this allure of offense, but really the most successful coaches are the defensive guys who understand offense. They’re not trying to win games 7-3, but they understand how to run a program with a bit of that defensive mentality while still allowing the offense to flourish.”

And he won’t apologize for finding success on defense in a points-happy era of college football. Elko doesn’t believe that traditional statistics show the impact of a great defense in today’s game. Even old-school defensive-minded head coaches like Pat Narduzzi have grown (sort of) comfortable winning shootouts. But that doesn’t mean defense matters any less.

“You have to balance what you’re doing to what you’re playing against, which is what we’ve always done,” Elko said. “A lot of matrixes off of what they do. What are the averages of our opponents? If you’re playing teams that average 51 points a game and you hold them to 31, you’re one of the better defenses. People get lost in archaic boxes of this number of points or less, or this amount of yards or less. …

“Winning games 52-48 in a championship season, it happens across the board. It doesn’t mean, if you have a game like that or a couple of games like that, that you’re unsuccessful on defense. Or that you’re running an offensive program or defensive program. You’re just trying to win. That’s what I’ve always tried to sell.”

Article is paywall
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift

RU#1fan

Heisman Winner
Mar 7, 2003
19,672
8,809
113
Need a half serviceable QB to have a chance in those 7 non OSU games.
 

Local Shill

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
Aug 30, 2001
20,366
5,271
113
Easton Avenue's finest gin mills
The bar is pretty low at this point for this teaam with this offense.
Besides winning at least two games, the main thing I want to see is to actually be in the game against Sandusky in the second half.

We've scored something like 2 total TDs against them in 8 years. Just completely ridiculous. The scores haven't been completely ugly against them like some of the Michigan and all of the OSU games but we haven't even come close to really challenging them since 2014.
 
Last edited:

Shelby65

All Conference
Apr 1, 2008
2,763
1,637
113
I've been dying for strong productive offense for ages before it came into fashion here. If you're team lower down the totem pole, if you're elevating your status on the landscape it's more likely on the back of strong productive offense than not. So it's not a guarantee but the avenue with the most potential.

Ironically having said that, my ideal has always been a defensive coach who understands and won't stifle the offense. I often mention defensive coaches who "grew up around" strong offensive coaches. Otherwise you can get KK type results at TT, he'd have been so much better there if his defenses were just mediocre. Strong productive offense with at least a mediocre defense and you have a chance to make noise IMO. Narduzzi's best season was when his offense and qb were at the top of the country. WF same and plenty of others.

Just recently I came across an article on Elko and his description of coaching philosophy and I agree with it a lot. It's still way early in his tenure but I think he'll get Duke to respectable (.500 or better) but we'll see.

Here are some excerpts from the article:

“Just pay attention to who’s winning,” Elko said. “You’ve got Bill Belichick in New England. You’ve got Kirby (Smart) and Nick (Saban) and Luke Fickell. Those are three of the four Playoff teams last year. I know there’s this allure of offense, but really the most successful coaches are the defensive guys who understand offense. They’re not trying to win games 7-3, but they understand how to run a program with a bit of that defensive mentality while still allowing the offense to flourish.”

And he won’t apologize for finding success on defense in a points-happy era of college football. Elko doesn’t believe that traditional statistics show the impact of a great defense in today’s game. Even old-school defensive-minded head coaches like Pat Narduzzi have grown (sort of) comfortable winning shootouts. But that doesn’t mean defense matters any less.

“You have to balance what you’re doing to what you’re playing against, which is what we’ve always done,” Elko said. “A lot of matrixes off of what they do. What are the averages of our opponents? If you’re playing teams that average 51 points a game and you hold them to 31, you’re one of the better defenses. People get lost in archaic boxes of this number of points or less, or this amount of yards or less. …

“Winning games 52-48 in a championship season, it happens across the board. It doesn’t mean, if you have a game like that or a couple of games like that, that you’re unsuccessful on defense. Or that you’re running an offensive program or defensive program. You’re just trying to win. That’s what I’ve always tried to sell.”

Article is paywall
Good points. Yet to win consistently you have to prioritize scoring. Schiano doesn’t do that, which is why he can’t recruit QBs and receivers, and why he won’t ever win consistently.
 

Knight Shift

Legend
May 19, 2011
67,473
61,330
113
Jersey Shore
spongebob squarepants sleeping GIF