The extent that people use RANKINGS as quantitative characteristics is just ridiculous. I guess it's easier than trying or even pretending to understand the absolute numbers. But it's so, so much worse to compare rankings of different categories. There is absolutely no inherent meaning there.
So, it's cool and significant that the #1 defense faced the #1 offense. Does it mean that they are equal? What does it even mean that they are equal? Say you have the #10 defense against the #60 offense. Which is better? Why? Given that the ranking is perfectly accurate, what is the predicted outcome on that end of the court?
It's just silliness within silliness. The point of a defense is to stop the other team scoring. The point of an offense is to score points. If an offense scores any points, they've beaten the defense. We can't realistically speak to what will happen on a larger sample size without involving probability, so what are these armchair analysts looking at to incorporate that? A ranking???
It’s like NBC’s decision in the 1980’s to sign Notre Dame to a long term contract. Only a small portion of the country likes the Irish, while the rest of the country hates them. But no matter the reason, everybody will watch.
This Iowa State tool is painful to watch, but notice that he was shared on this board as a “hate” watch, so to speak. He’s figured out that he doesn’t need to be liked by everyone, just viewed (and perhaps subscribed) by them.
I am genuinely thankful for the professional and astute analysts we have in the Illini media sphere. Hats off the Werner, Piper, Richey, Tate, LaTulip, Tay, Steve Kelly, The Illini Guys, Champaign on Ice and any others I’ve missed. Even Mike Carpenter’s podcast is a fun guilty pleasure.