Bill Connelly put out his SP+ Rankings for the Big 12. He put out the "bottom half" of the league today and will do the top half tomorrow. Here's the article for the bottom half. Spoiler alert: we are in the bottom half. It's an ESPN + subscriber article, but I figured most people have that at this point, if you want to watch about half of KSU's games these days.
In a nutshell, my takeaways: KSU is ranked a tad low (we always tend to be so in these types of rankings), but not by much. I expect us to be thoroughly average this year, to slightly-above average. I'm going with 6-6 or 7-5 for us this year. He has us at 63, which is higher than Phil Steele, who I think had us in the 70's maybe. I think we'll end up being a little higher than that, but not a significant amount.
Tech is probably ranked a little too high at 70 IMO. I think they are going to be terrible this year. Not ku-bad, but not good at all.
ku is ranked correctly at 113. Woof.
I think he has Baylor way too high at 51. They are not going to be better than us. I would put our ranking around where he put Baylor and I would have Baylor closer to 70. They won't be terrible, but they won't be good. Just a little better than Tech.
He also has TCU too high at 33. I can respect an argument that they'll be better than us this year, but they won't be significantly better, and I actually think we'll beat them in Manhattan and will finish at least tied with them in the conference standings by the end of the year. TCU won't be that great. I would have them probably in the mid-40's or so.
Finally, I haven't even seen WVU's prediction, because they are in the top-half obviously. But since they are going to be ranked above 33rd, I think they are overrated as well. I put them and TCU basically on-par with each other in the mid-40's range. OSU is actually probably going to be pretty close to that as well, but maybe a little better. I would probably put them in the 30's.
Essentially, the Big 12 is a muddled mess between OSU (and maybe even Texas) all the way through Baylor. I think you have one terrible team at the bottom in ku, a bad team in Tech, and you can possibly throw Baylor into that mix too, although I think they are better than Tech, then an incredibly average middle tier with us, TCU, WVU and OSU. I don't know whether to put Texas in that same tier or just a little above. I tend to think they'll be a little better than our middle tier teams. Then you have two good teams at the top in OU and ISU.
In a nutshell, my takeaways: KSU is ranked a tad low (we always tend to be so in these types of rankings), but not by much. I expect us to be thoroughly average this year, to slightly-above average. I'm going with 6-6 or 7-5 for us this year. He has us at 63, which is higher than Phil Steele, who I think had us in the 70's maybe. I think we'll end up being a little higher than that, but not a significant amount.
Tech is probably ranked a little too high at 70 IMO. I think they are going to be terrible this year. Not ku-bad, but not good at all.
ku is ranked correctly at 113. Woof.
I think he has Baylor way too high at 51. They are not going to be better than us. I would put our ranking around where he put Baylor and I would have Baylor closer to 70. They won't be terrible, but they won't be good. Just a little better than Tech.
He also has TCU too high at 33. I can respect an argument that they'll be better than us this year, but they won't be significantly better, and I actually think we'll beat them in Manhattan and will finish at least tied with them in the conference standings by the end of the year. TCU won't be that great. I would have them probably in the mid-40's or so.
Finally, I haven't even seen WVU's prediction, because they are in the top-half obviously. But since they are going to be ranked above 33rd, I think they are overrated as well. I put them and TCU basically on-par with each other in the mid-40's range. OSU is actually probably going to be pretty close to that as well, but maybe a little better. I would probably put them in the 30's.
Essentially, the Big 12 is a muddled mess between OSU (and maybe even Texas) all the way through Baylor. I think you have one terrible team at the bottom in ku, a bad team in Tech, and you can possibly throw Baylor into that mix too, although I think they are better than Tech, then an incredibly average middle tier with us, TCU, WVU and OSU. I don't know whether to put Texas in that same tier or just a little above. I tend to think they'll be a little better than our middle tier teams. Then you have two good teams at the top in OU and ISU.
Last edited by a moderator:
