Kolkata, Feb 15 (PTI) Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, who released a report on how more than a third of rural Muslim families in West Bengal have to survive within Rs 2,500 a month, has said the community constitutes a large proportion of the poor in the state.About 80 per cent of the Muslim households in rural West Bengal report income of Rs 5,000 or less per month, which is close to the cut-off level of income for poverty line for a family of five, according to the study Living Reality of Muslims in West Bengal.”What is remarkable is the fact that Muslims constitute a very much larger proportion of the poor and the deprived in West Bengal,” Sen said releasing the report at a function here yesterday.”The fact that Muslims in West Bengal are disproportionately poorer and more deprived in terms of living condition is an empirical recognition that gives this report an inescapable immediacy and practical urgency,” he said.The study said “What is even more striking is that 38.3 per cent Muslim households in rural West Bengal earn Rs 2,500 or less per month, which is one-half of the cut-off level of income for the population below the poverty line.”The survey report, prepared by SNAP, Guidance Guild and Pratichi Trust, which is chaired by Sen himself, was carried out in 325 villages and 73 urban wards from a sample of 81 community development blocks and 30 municipal bodies across Bengal.At the other end of the spectrum, it said only 3.8 per cent Muslim households reported earning Rs 15,000 and above per month. PTI NIK KK VMNadvertisement
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Tottenham boss Pochettino: Dele Alli an animal, a beastby Paul Vegas10 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveTottenham boss Mauricio Pochettino says Dele Alli back to his best.Alli produced a goalscoring performance for the midweek Carabao Cup quarterfinal win over Arsenal.He is an animal, very competitive, he’s a beast,” Pochettino said of the England international. “So competitive, he’s a street boy playing football. He’s a very talented player.”All that he is doing is a fantastic thing. He has unbelievable quality to finish how he does. If you don’t have the quality it is difficult to finish like that.”
TagsTransfersAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say DC United striker Rooney admits Man Utd ambitionsby Paul Vegas10 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveDC United striker Wayne Rooney admits he’d like to manage Manchester United in the future.Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, a former team-mate of Rooney’s, guided his new side to a comfortable victory at Cardiff City.Asked if he would consider coaching and would like to manage the club, Rooney said: “Yeah of course. I’m doing my coaching badges. It’s something I’m passionate about.”Football is what I know, what I grew up with. It would be foolish if I didn’t try and go into coaching.”If I’d like to manage Manchester United… of course! One day that would be my absolute dream if that could happen. It’s a massive club.”I’m sure Ole isn’t giving us his true feelings but I’m sure deep down he is absolutely ecstatic.”For any player who has played for Manchester united, to have the opportunity to manage them would be an absolute honour.”Football is what I’ve done since I was a child, getting in the first team at 16. That’s what I know. I’m not going to sit here and say I’m going to go into an office or be an agent.”
fournette congratulates chubbLSU sophomore running back Leonard Fournette dominated Eastern Michigan on Saturday, rushing for 233 yards and three touchdowns on just 23 carries. But afterwards, he actually wanted to talk about another tailback who plays in the SEC.Fournette, in both his post-game press conference and later a tweet, congratulated Georgia running back Nick Chubb for tying Herschel Walker’s record for consecutive 100-yard games in a Bulldogs uniform. Chubb’s 146 yards came in defeat to Alabama. It was the 13th straight time he’s crossed the mark.Via NOLA.com:Congrats to the homie @NickChubb21— 7⃣ (@_fournette) October 4, 2015In just four games, Fournette has 864 rushing yards and 11 touchdowns. If he keeps it up, he’ll be breaking records of his own.
NEW ORLEANS, LA – JANUARY 01: An Ohio State Buckeye helmet is seen on the sidelines prior to the start of the game during the All State Sugar Bowl at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome on January 1, 2015 in New Orleans, Louisiana. (Photo by Streeter Lecka/Getty Images)From 2001 to 2011, Jim Bollman worked for Ohio State, serving as both the offensive coordinator and the offensive line coach. In his final year with the Buckeyes, as Eleven Warriors notes, he didn’t “seriously” recruit Taylor Decker, leading the four-star then-recruit to commit to Notre Dame. Decker eventually switched his commitment to Ohio State after Urban Meyer was brought in, and, as we all know, he’s become a star for the program.Monday afternoon, Decker was asked about having to face off against Bollman, who now works for Michigan State, this Saturday. Eric Seger captured his response.Taylor Decker wasn’t an OSU target til Meyer came. Prior regime incl. MSU TE coach Bollman: “He didn’t want me either. So hopefully we win.”— Eric Seger (@EricSeger33) November 16, 2015Monday night, Decker took to Twitter to issue a statement on the matter. He clearly wants to make his final home game a positive experience – he feels that what he said is being “spun” a bit.pic.twitter.com/0e9XiuY8Pd— Taylor Decker (@TDeck68) November 16, 2015Decker and the Buckeyes kick off at 3:30 PM ET against the Spartans. As you probably know, there’s a lot on the line this year.
Related ArticlesThe Complete History Of The NFLMay 1, 2018Introducing NFL Elo RatingsSept. 4, 2014The Best NFL Teams Of All Time, According To EloSept. 18, 2015Did The Packers Squander Aaron Rodgers?Dec. 5, 2018The Browns Are A Hot Super Bowl Pick For 2019. (Wait, What?)July 15, 2019 Multiply all of those factors together, and you have the total number of Elo points that should shift from the loser to the winner in a given game. (Elo is a closed system where every point gained by one team is a point lost by another.) Put another way: A team’s postgame Elo is simply its pregame Elo plus or minus the Elo shift implied by the game’s result — and in turn, that postgame Elo becomes the pregame Elo for a team’s next matchup. Circle of life.We also adjust each starting quarterback’s rating based on his performance in the game, adjusting for the quality of the opposing defense. (Read on for more details about how that process works.)Elo does have its limitations. Aside from changes at quarterback, it doesn’t know about trades or injuries that happen midseason, so it can’t adjust its ratings in real time for the absence of an important non-QB player. Over time, it will theoretically detect such a change when a team’s performance drops because of the injury, but Elo is always playing catch-up in that department. Normally, any time you see a major disparity between Elo’s predicted spread and the Vegas line for a game, it will be because Elo has no means of adjusting for key changes to a roster and the bookmakers do. (But this should be much less frequent after the addition of our QB adjustments, since oddsmakers don’t tend to shift lines much — or at all — in response to changes at non-QB positions.)The quarterback adjustmentNew for 2019, we added a way to account for changes in performance — and personnel — at quarterback, the game’s most important position. Here’s how it works:Both teams and individual quarterbacks have rolling ratings based on their recent performance.Performance is measured according to “VALUE,” a regression between ESPN’s Total QBR yards above replacement and basic box score numbers (including rushing stats) from a given game, adjusted for the quality of opposing defenses.The formula for VALUE is: -2.2 * Pass Attempts + 3.7 * Completions + (Passing Yards / 5) + 11.3 * Passing TDs – 14.1 * Interceptions – 8 * Times Sacked – 1.1 * Rush Attempts + 0.6 * Rushing Yards + 15.9 * Rushing TDs.3For seasons before game-level sack logs are complete (pre-1981), the sack term is zeroed out.This metric is also adjusted for opposing defensive quality by computing a rolling rating for team QB VALUE allowed, subtracting league average from the VALUE an opponent usually gives up per game, and using that to adjust a QB’s performance for the game in question. So for example, if a team usually gives up a VALUE 5 points higher than the average team, we would adjust an individual QB’s performance downward by 5 points of VALUE to account for the easier opposing defense. The DetailsFiveThirtyEight has an admitted fondness for the Elo rating — a simple system that judges teams or players based on head-to-head results — and we’ve used it to rate competitors in basketball, baseball, tennis and various other sports over the years. The sport we cut our teeth on, though, was professional football. Way back in 2014, we developed our NFL Elo ratings to forecast the outcome of every game. The nuts and bolts of that system are described below.Game predictionsIn essence, Elo assigns every team a power rating (the NFL average is around 1500). Those ratings are then used to generate win probabilities for games, based on the difference in quality between the two teams involved, plus adjustments for changes at starting quarterback, the location of the matchup (including travel distance) and any extra rest days either team had coming into the contest. After the game, each team’s rating changes based on the result, in relation to how unexpected the outcome was and the winning margin. This process is repeated for every game, from kickoff in September until the Super Bowl.For any game between two teams (A and B) with certain pregame Elo ratings, the odds of Team A winning are:Pr(A)=110−EloDiff400+1Pr(A)=110−EloDiff400+1ELODIFF is Team A’s rating minus Team B’s rating, plus or minus the difference in several adjustments:A home-field adjustment of 55 points at base, depending on who was at home, plus 4 points of Elo for every 1,000 miles traveled. This means the Giants get a 55-point Elo bonus when “hosting” the Jets (despite both teams calling MetLife Stadium home), while the Patriots would get a 65-point Elo bonus when, say, the Chargers come to visit. There is no base home-field adjustment for neutral-site games such as the Super Bowl1Unless a team somehow makes the Super Bowl in its host year. or international games, although the travel-distance adjustment is included for the Super Bowl.A rest adjustment of 25 Elo points whenever a team is coming off of a bye week (including when top-seeded teams don’t play during the opening week of the playoffs). Our research shows that teams in these situations play better than would be expected from their standard Elo alone, even after controlling for home-field effects.A playoff adjustment that multiplies ELODIFF by 1.2 before computing the expected win probabilities and point spreads for playoff games. We found that, in the NFL playoffs, favorites tend to outplay underdogs by a wider margin than we’d expect from their regular-season ratings alone.A quarterback adjustment that assigns every team and each individual QB a rolling performance rating, which can be used to adjust a team’s “effective” Elo upward or downward in the event of a major injury or other QB change. (See below for more details about how this adjustment works.)We also tested effects for weather and coaches (including both head coaches and coordinators) but found that neither improved the predictive value of our model in backtesting by enough to warrant inclusion.Fun fact: If you want to compare Elo’s predictions with point spreads like the Vegas line, you can also divide ELODIFF by 25 to get the spread for the game. Just be sure to include all of the many adjustments above to get the most accurate predicted line.Once the game is over, the pregame ratings are adjusted up (for the winning team) and down (for the loser). We do this using a combination of factors:The K-factor. All Elo systems come with a special multiplier called K that regulates how quickly the ratings change in response to new information. A high K-factor tells Elo to be very sensitive to recent results, causing the ratings to jump around a lot based on each game’s outcome; a low K-factor makes Elo slow to change its opinion about teams, since every game carries comparatively little weight. In our NFL research, we found that the ideal K-factor for predicting future games is 20 — large enough that new results carry weight, but not so large that the ratings bounce around each week.The forecast delta. This is the difference between the binary result of the game (1 for a win, 0 for a loss, 0.5 for a tie) and the pregame win probability as predicted by Elo. Since Elo is fundamentally a system that adjusts its prior assumptions based on new information, the larger the gap between what actually happened and what it had predicted going into a game, the more it shifts each team’s pregame rating in response. Truly shocking outcomes are like a wake-up call for Elo: They indicate that its pregame expectations were probably quite wrong and thus in need of serious updating.The margin-of-victory multiplier. The two factors above would be sufficient if we were judging teams based only on wins and losses (and, yes, Donovan McNabb, sometimes ties). But we also want to be able to take into account how a team won — whether they dominated their opponents or simply squeaked past them. To that end, we created a multiplier that gives teams (ever-diminishing) credit for blowout wins by taking the natural logarithm of their point differential plus 1 point.MovMultiplier=ln(WinnerPointDiff+1)×2.2WinnerEloDiff×0.001+2.2MovMultiplier=ln(WinnerPointDiff+1)×2.2WinnerEloDiff×0.001+2.2This factor also carries an additional adjustment for autocorrelation, which is the bane of all Elo systems that try to adjust for scoring margin. Technically speaking, autocorrelation is the tendency of a time series to be correlated with its past and future values. In football terms, that means the Elo ratings of good teams run the risk of being inflated because favorites not only win more often, but they also tend to put up larger margins in their wins than underdogs do in theirs. Since Elo gives more credit for larger wins, this means that top-rated teams could see their ratings swell disproportionately over time without an adjustment. To combat this, we scale down the margin-of-victory multiplier for teams that were bigger favorites going into the game.2Special note: In the case of a tie, the multiplier becomes 1.525, or 2.2 times the natural log of 2 (which, based on the formula above, effectively assumes the absolute margin of victory in any game must be at least 1). The rolling rating represents the VALUE we’d expect a quarterback (whether at the individual or team level) to produce against a passing defense of average quality in the next start. To convert between VALUE and Elo, the rolling rating can be multiplied by 3.3 to get the number of Elo points a QB is expected to be worth compared with an undrafted rookie replacement. Preseason QB ratings are also assigned at the team level. These consist of one-third weight given to the team’s previous end-of-season rolling QB rating and two-thirds weight given to the preseason rolling rating of the team’s projected top starter.Pregame and preseason ratingsSo all of that is how Elo works at the game-by-game level and what goes into our quarterback adjustments. But where do teams’ preseason ratings come from, anyway?We use two sources to set teams’ initial ratings going into a season:At the start of each season, every existing team carries its Elo rating over from the end of the previous season, except that it is reverted one-third of the way toward a mean of 1505. That is our way of hedging for the offseason’s carousel of draft picks, free agency, trades and coaching changes. We don’t currently have any way to adjust for a team’s actual offseason moves, aside from changes at quarterback, but a heavy dose of regression to the mean is the next-best thing, since the NFL has built-in mechanisms (like the salary cap) that promote parity, dragging bad teams upward and knocking good ones down a peg or two.For seasons since 1990, we also use Vegas win totals to help set preseason Elo ratings, converting over-under expected wins to an Elo scale. (This addition to the model helped significantly improve predictive accuracy in backtesting, by a little more than half the improvement that adding the QB adjustment did.) As a side note, this is partly why we mix the projected startIng QB’s rolling rating into the preseason team QB rating — we assume that changes at quarterback are “baked into” Vegas over/unders and must be adjusted for to avoid double-counting the improvement added by an upgrade at QB.These two factors are combined, with one-third weight given to regressed Elo and two-thirds weight given to Vegas-wins Elo. This blend is what forms a team’s preseason Elo rating.Note that I mentioned “existing” teams when mentioning end-of-season ratings from the previous year. Expansion teams have their own set of rules. For newly founded clubs in the modern era, we assign them a rating of 1300 — which is effectively the Elo level at which NFL expansion teams have played since the 1970 AFL merger. We also assigned that number to new AFL teams in 1960, letting the ratings play out from scratch as the AFL operated in parallel with the NFL. When the AFL’s teams merged into the NFL, they retained the ratings they’d built up while playing separately.For new teams in the early days of the NFL, things are a little more complicated. When the NFL began in 1920 as the “American Professional Football Association” (they renamed it “National Football League” in 1922), it was a hodgepodge of independent pro teams from existing leagues and opponents that in some cases were not even APFA members. For teams that had not previously played in a pro league, we assigned them a 1300 rating; for existing teams, we mixed that 1300 mark with a rating that gave them credit for the number of years they’d logged since first being founded as a pro team.InitRating=1300×23YrsSince1stSeason+1505×(1−23)YrsSince1stSeasonInitRating=1300×23YrsSince1stSeason+1505×(1−23)YrsSince1stSeasonThis adjustment applied to 28 franchises during the 1920s, plus the Detroit Lions (who joined the NFL in 1930 after being founded as a pro team in 1929) and the Cleveland Rams (who joined in 1937 after playing a season in the second AFL). No team has required this exact adjustment since, although we also use a version of it for historical teams that discontinued operations for a period of time.Not that there haven’t been plenty of other odd situations to account for. During World War II, the Chicago Cardinals and Pittsburgh Steelers briefly merged into a common team that was known as “Card-Pitt,” and before that, the Steelers had merged with the Philadelphia Eagles to create the delightfully monikered “Steagles.” In those cases, we took the average of the two teams’ ratings from the end of the previous season and performed our year-to-year mean reversion on that number to generate a preseason Elo rating. After the mash-up ended and the teams were re-divided, the Steelers and Cardinals (or Eagles) received the same mean-reverted preseason rating implied by their combined performance the season before.And I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the Cleveland Browns and Baltimore Ravens. Technically, the NFL considers the current Browns to be a continuation of the franchise that began under Paul Brown in the mid-1940s. But that team’s roster was essentially transferred to the Ravens for their inaugural season in 1996, while the “New Browns” were stocked through an expansion draft in 1999. Because of this, we decided the 1996 Ravens’ preseason Elo should be the 1995 Browns’ end-of-year Elo, with the cross-season mean-reversion technique applied, and that the 1999 Browns’ initial Elo should be 1300, the same as any other expansion team.Season simulationsNow that we know where a team and quarterback’s initial ratings for a season come from and how those ratings update as the schedule plays out, the final piece of our Elo puzzle is how all of that fits in with our NFL interactive graphic, which predicts the entire season.At any point in the season, the interactive lists each team’s up-to-date Elo rating (as well as how that rating has changed over the past week and how any changes at QB alter the team’s effective Elo), plus the team’s expected full-season record and its odds of winning its division, making the playoffs and even winning the Super Bowl. This is all based on a set of simulations that play out the rest of the schedule using Elo to predict each game.Specifically, we simulate the remainder of the season 100,000 times using the Monte Carlo method, tracking how often each simulated universe yields a given outcome for each team. It’s important to note that we run these simulations “hot” — that is, a team’s Elo rating is not set in stone throughout the simulation but changes after each simulated game based on its result, which is then used to simulate the next game, and so forth. This allows us to better capture the possible variation in how a team’s season can play out, realistically modeling the hot and cold streaks that a team can go on over the course of a season.Our simulations also project which quarterback will start each game by incorporating injuries, suspensions and starters being rested. For example, we might know that a quarterback is out for Weeks 1 and 2 but back for certain in Week 3. Or our forecast might have some uncertainty around a quarterback’s injury and project that he has only a 10 percent chance of playing next week but a 50 percent chance of playing the following week, and so on. In cases where we don’t know for sure which quarterback will start a game, the team’s quarterback adjustment is a weighted average of the possible starting quarterback adjustments.Late in the season, you will find that the interactive allows you to experiment with different postseason contingencies based on who you have selected to win a given game. This is done by drilling down to just the simulated universes in which the outcomes you chose happened and seeing how those universes ultimately played out. It’s a handy way of seeing exactly what your favorite team needs to get a favorable playoff scenario or just to study the ripple effects each game may have on the rest of the league.The complete history of the NFLIn conjunction with our Elo interactive, we also have a separate dashboard showing how every team’s Elo rating has risen or fallen throughout history. These charts will help you track when your team was at its best — or worst — along with its ebbs and flows in performance over time. The data in the charts goes back to 1920 (when applicable) and is updated with every game of the current season.An important disclaimer: The historical interactive ratings will differ from the ratings found in our current-season prediction interactive because the historical ratings do not contain our quarterback adjustments. (If you’re interested in looking at the historical QB adjustment data, it’s available on our data homepage.) The quarterback Elo adjustment is applied before each game by comparing the starting QB’s rolling VALUE rating with the team’s rolling rating and multiplying by 3.3.For example: when Aaron Rodgers was injured midway through the 2017 season, he had a rolling VALUE rating of 66. The Green Bay Packers’ team rolling VALUE rating was 68, and backup Brett Hundley had a personal rating of 14. So when adjusting the Packers’ Elo for their next game with Hundley starting instead of Rodgers, we would have applied an adjustment of 3.3 * (14 – 68) = -1764After rounding. to Green Bay’s base Elo rating of 1586 heading into its Week 7 game against the Saints. This effectively would have left the Packers as a 1409 Elo team with Hundley under center (before applying adjustments for home field, travel and rest), dropping Green Bay’s win probability from 63 percent to 39 percent for the game despite playing at home. In cases like these, the QB adjustment can have a massive effect! Version History2.0Quarterback adjustments are added, along with special adjustments for travel distance, bye weeks and playoff rating spreads.Sept. 4, 20191.1Ratings are extended back to 1920, with a new rating procedure for expansion teams and other special cases. Seasonal mean-reversion is set to 1505, not 1500.Sept. 10, 20151.0Elo ratings are introduced for the current season; underlying historical numbers go back to 1970.Sept. 4, 2014 ReferencesPro-Football-Reference.comAutocorrelation / Elo rating / Monte Carlo simulations / Regression to the mean / ESPN’s Total Quarterback Rating You can track these quarterback ratings on a team-by-team and division-by-division basis using this interactive page, which shows the relative quality of every QB in the league. The average team QB VALUE rating going into the 2019 season was about 49.5 (or about 163 Elo points), a leaguewide number that has increased substantially over the history of the NFL as passing has become more prevalent and efficient. So a rolling rating that would have made a QB one of the best in football in the 1990s would rank as only average now, even though the zero-point in our ratings remains the replacement-level performance of an undrafted rookie starter.One last note on these ratings involves how they are set initially. We’ll explain preseason team Elo ratings below, but here is how preseason ratings are set for the quarterback adjustment:Before a season, each starting quarterback is assigned a preseason rating based on either his previous performance or his draft position (in the case of rookies making their debut start).For veterans with between 10 and 100 career starts, we take their final rating from the end of the previous season and revert it toward the rating of the average NFL QB start by one-fourth before the following season.For players with fewer than 10 or more than 100 starts, we don’t revert their ratings at all.For rookies making their starting debuts, we assign them initial ratings based on draft position. An undrafted rookie is always assigned a rating of zero for his first start. The first overall pick, by comparison, gets a rating of +113 Elo points before his first start. Model CreatorsNate Silver The founder and editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight. | @natesilver538Jay Boice A computational journalist for FiveThirtyEight. | @jayboiceNeil Paine A senior sportswriter for FiveThirtyEight. | @Neil_Paine For individual QBs, the rolling rating is updated every 10 games. (i.e., Rating_new = 0.9 * Rating_old + 0.1 * Game_VALUE ).For teams, the rolling rating is updated every 20 games.This implies that short-term “hot” and “cold” streaks by individual QBs have predictive value, which can trigger a nonzero pregame QB adjustment even when a team has had the same starter for each of its previous 20 games.
It’s been a year of transition for the Ohio State men’s gymnastics team. Combine a young squad with an entirely new coaching staff led by former Oklahoma assistant, Rustam Sharipov, and it’s clear why some believed 2011-12 would be a rebuilding year for the Buckeyes. But for senior Ty Echard, that’s just not the case. “It’s gone better than I would have thought it ever would have gone,” Echard said. That’s not to say the changeover has been easy, though. “It’s a battle, the whole season’s a battle,” Echard said. In fact, Sharipov said the focus coming into the season was on molding the team internally, rather than to necessarily “accomplish a lot of stuff on the field.” “Our goal is more (to) accomplish (work) at the gym. In the practice, our goal is to unite the team, change their work ethics, how the guys interact with each other, with the coaches,” Sharipov said. “I think that’s going to affect how we look at the competition.” Sharipov said the way the team practices should dictate their performance against other teams. “(Our) outcome is going to come from how we act at the gym,” he said. Being ranked No. 7 nationally suggests the Buckeyes have done just that. Freshman Danny Steiner said he thinks the team has defied much of the expectations that surrounded them at the beginning of the season. “With the change in coaching with Rustam as our head coach now, I definitely think it’s gone a lot farther than anyone expected us to go,” he said. Steiner credits Sharipov and his staff as the reason the team has been able to get adjusted to the new coaching changes, and said he believes they’ve been able to “move forward and progress a lot faster than (they) would usually be doing.” Although OSU fell 355.500-347.200 to No. 2 Penn State Saturday, Sharipov said his team’s performance was an improvement from how they competed against Michigan more than two weeks ago. He said against the Wolverines, the Buckeyes’ hit percentage was too low, and it’s always tough traveling to a place where it isn’t a secret that they’re not liked. “They’re going to do everything to make you be uncomfortable,” Sharipov said. Against Penn State, though, he said he was pleased with OSU’s 77 percent hit percentage, despite the loss. Sharipov said consistently improving the Buckeyes’ hit percentage, which measures the frequency an athlete successfully lands his routine, is going to be a key to their success down the stretch, and he wants to see it improve to 80-85 percent by the end of the season. And with a contest at Illinois looming Friday, that mindset remains the same. “Our plan is to beat them on execution and the hit percentage,” Sharipov said. “I watched their routines against Penn State a couple weeks ago and they also messed up a couple events. Everybody’s a human being; there’s always room for error.” Steiner said he thinks this season has said a lot about what kind of team the Buckeyes have. “We’re a hardworking team who’s out to prove everyone else wrong — everyone’s assumptions about Ohio State and where the gymnastics has gone,” he said. “I think we’re just proving people wrong, just making our point saying, ‘We’re here, don’t count us out.’”
It’s a new season. That’s the attitude the Ohio State men’s ice hockey team has heading into the postseason. OSU (15-13-5, 11-12-5-1 CCHA) is the No. 9 seed in the upcoming CCHA tournament and will face No. 8-seed Notre Dame (17-16-3, 12-13-3-0 CCHA) in a best-of-three series in South Bend, Ind., starting Friday. “We talked about it right away at the beginning of the year. We talked about the only thing that really matters is the playoffs,” said OSU coach Mark Osiecki. The Buckeyes ended the regular season on a 1-9-4 skid after being in first place in the CCHA with a 14-4-1 record and No. 2 national ranking in early January. OSU, tied for the No. 18 ranking in the PairWise with the Fighting Irish, which helps select and seed schools for the 16-team NCAA Tournament, likely needs to beat Notre Dame and possibly their second-round opponent in the conference tournament, to have a chance to compete for a national championship. “It’s a new season now, what happened in the regular season doesn’t matter at all,” said OSU senior defenseman and co-captain Sean Duddy. “So we’re just kind of throwing the win-loss record out of there, and we’re 0-0 right now.” Along with wanting to start fresh, OSU has developed an “us-against-the-world mentality” with its postseason life on the line. “I think it’s great for our players,” Osiecki said. “Certainly you’re not going to get great bounces and probably not going to get the reffing to go on your side, especially when you’re on the road. I think our team likes that challenge. I think being the underdog, being as young as we are, I think they relish that.” Duddy said the key to success this weekend will be the team playing to its strengths. “The games where we tried to get too fancy are the game’s where we didn’t have success,” he said. “We’ve got to play the way that we can play, the way we need to play, which is being physical and keeping it simple.” Getting off to a fast start in the first period could help OSU as well. The Buckeyes have given up the first goal of the game in each of their past four losses, and have only led after the first 20 minutes in three of their past 14 games. Duddy said scoring early and being able to play with a lead would be a major emotional lift for the team. “Playing with a lead, especially in playoffs where the games are all so tight, it’s really defensive minded … if you can get that first goal, it’s huge for momentum. It’s huge playing with a lead. We’d definitely like to do that,” he said. Duddy himself and his fellow teammates are looking forward to giving everything they have on the ice this weekend. “It’s lose and you’re done basically. So everyone’s putting it all on the line,” he said. “There’s nothing to save it for.” The Buckeyes and Fighting Irish will drop the puck at 7:35 p.m. Friday in South Bend and play again Saturday at the same time. If necessary, game three of the series will be played Sunday at 7:05 p.m.
Ohio State sophomore forward Dakota Joshua’s initial reaction following his go-ahead goal in the third period against Minnesota at the Schottenstein Center on Feb. 11. Credit: Jacob Myers | Assistant Sports EditorAfter concluding the regular season with a road sweep over No. 18 Wisconsin, the No. 13-ranked Ohio State men’s hockey team (20-10-6, 11-8-1 Big Ten) heads to legendary Joe Louis Arena on Thursday to compete for a Big Ten tournament championship and an automatic ticket to the NCAA Tournament.OSU will take on the Michigan State Spartans (7-23-4, 3-14-3 Big Ten) at 4:30 p.m. in the first round of the tournament on Thursday. Although the Buckeyes went 3-1 against MSU in the regular season, history has shown it’s a battle to the end between the two teams.“It’s just two good hockey teams,” OSU coach Steve Rohlik said. “It just seems it comes down to the wire. We’ve got a lot of respect obviously for Tom and his program and we’ve got to go up there and play our best hockey.”Michigan State comes into this game off of a loss and a tie at No. 5 Minnesota last weekend. The Spartans are 7-23-4 overall and 3-14-3 in conference this season. In spite of having just three conference wins, one was over the Buckeyes at Value City Arena in which the Spartans scored three goals in just eight minutes.“They’re a relentless team,” senior captain Nick Schilkey said. “They throw pucks at the net and they get to the net hard.”The Buckeyes are currently sitting at No. 14 in the PairWise rankings and likely need just one win this weekend to secure an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament. Winning the conference tournament, however, would cement OSU’s tournament dreams with an automatic NCAA bid.“We’ve definitely talked about it and our goals are still in tact,” Schilkey said. “We win a couple games and everything is still right there for us. It’s just a matter of us going out and playing our game. We can’t think about Friday, Saturday. We have to focus on Thursday. There’s no tournament, there’s nothing else passed this Thursday if we don’t win.”Sophomore forward Mason Jobst was the lone Buckeye to earn All-Big Ten first team honors and was also named the Big Ten scoring co-Champion after his 33 points in conference play.“(Jobst is) a very talented hockey player but I say this all the time, it’s because of his his hard work that you continue to believe that he’s going to get better,” Rohlik said. “Monday through Thursday he continues to work hard. He does all of the little things right. He’s small in stature but big every night he plays.”In addition to leading OSU in points, Jobst is the first Buckeye since 2003 to reach the 50-point mark in one season, but according to him it could not have been accomplished without his teammates and coaches.“Obviously, you always believe in yourself,” Jobst said. “I’ve believed that I can be successful at this level. I’ve been surrounded by great players this entire year, great team, great coaching staff that has definitely led to my success.”Along with Jobst, three senior received Big Ten accolades. Seniors Schilkey, defenseman Josh Healey and goalie Christian Frey were each named to the All-Big Ten second team and sophomore Dakota Joshua received honorable mention. “I think it says a lot about the program,” Rohlik said. “I think it says a lot about my staff going out there and getting the right hockey players, the right student athletes here at Ohio State. It’s nice to see them getting recognized but I think every one of those guys would give all of those awards back for a team award at the end.”Michigan State only had one player who was named honorable mention in junior defenseman Carson Gatt, who was the Spartans second top-scoring defenseman with 11 points and a plus-two rating. The Buckeyes own the top powerplay in the country, which should boast well against a Spartans penalty kill that ranks 58th of 60 teams. As a defense, Michigan State allows nearly four goals per game while the OSU offense averages four goals each contest.OSU will be facing the Spartans in the final season of Joe Louis Arena, the home of the Detroit Red Wings, which is set to be torn down later this year. OSU sees the opportunity to play in “The Joe” in its farewell season as an honor.“It’s kind of a sad day to understand that it’s going to come down here soon but for us to be able to go there and play in one of the last games up there, I think it’s pretty special,” Rohlik said. “If only those walls could talk and our guys could really understand that history.”The Scarlet and Gray are comfortable playing in road atmospheres, with an 13-2-3 away record to prove it.“Our guys are confident going up and playing in different places and playing on the road,” Schilkey said. “We’ve been successful this year on the road and I think it’s going to be no different this weekend.”
Location: Madison, Wisconsin2017 Record: 13-1 (9-0)Head Coach: Paul Chryst2018 record: 3-1 (1-0)All-time record vs. OSU: 18-59What has happened thus far in 2018:Wisconsin opened the season with three straight non-conference home games that it was expected to win with ease. While the Badgers easily handled Western Kentucky and New Mexico, 34-3 and 45-14 respectively, the BYU Cougars came into Camp Randall Stadium looking for a fight. The Badgers and Cougars traded touchdowns through most of the game before BYU took a three-point lead early in the fourth quarter. Wisconsin got in position to kick a field goal to tie it, but BYU iced Wisconsin’s kicker with a pair of timeouts, leading to a missed kick and securing BYU’s 24-21 win. Coming off the loss, Wisconsin traveled to Iowa where, after going back and forth for most of the game, the Badgers scored two touchdowns in the final minute to win their first Big Ten outing 28-17. Impact Player:Sophomore running back Jonathan Taylor is picking up where he left off after his freshman campaign, where he gained over 2,000 yards from scrimmage. Through four games, he’s averaging 157 yards on the ground — 6.2 yards per carry — with a season-high 253 yards on 33 carries against New Mexico. Look for him to be more involved with the passing game this year, as he’s already approaching the total number of receptions he had last year.Strengths:While Taylor has performed as advertised, junior quarterback Alex Hornibrook has seemingly taken his next step in Wisconsin’s offense. He’s improved across the board, including yards per attempt and passer rating. He’s also cut down on his interceptions. He led the Badgers downfield to give them a chance to tie against BYU and orchestrated the game-winning drive against Iowa in a display of clutch passing ability that wasn’t present in previous seasons with him at the helm. On the defense, the Badgers have held their opponents to only 172.8 passing yards per game and a completion percentage of 58 percent, good for a top 20 defense in the country through four games.Weaknesses:The receiving corps for Wisconsin is thin, with only six receivers having at least two receptions after four games. Junior wide receiver A.J. Taylor and freshman tight end Jake Ferguson have combined for 27 of the team’s 61 total receptions and are the only two receivers with double-digit catches on the roster. The Badgers’ run defense has given up 4.4 yards per carry, allowing 135 rushing yards per game, which are high given the lack of quality opponents so far. Wisconsin still has teams like Michigan and Penn State left on its schedule, both averaging over 200 yards on the ground, so the Badgers will have to fortify their run defense before they take on these run-heavy teams.