include

[Steve]

Originally Posted by SouthernHawk

ISU had more yards, I'll give you that. However, Iowa's offense was more effective.

YPA - Iowa 6.07, ISU 5.77
TD/INT - Iowa 17/7, ISU 9/14
YPC - Iowa 3.5, ISU 3.1
YPR - Iowa 11.5, ISU 9.6
Iowa averaged 18.5 PPG, ISU averaged 18.1 PPG

Iowa also had far fewer turnovers than ISU.

You can try to make the argument that ISU played against great defensive opponents, but being stagnant against UNI, Kent State, Texas Tech, Missouri, and Iowa. But really, again, that's an idiotic argument. If your only argument is "yeah, well, it's easy, because ISU plays in the much harder Big 12, therefor their stats are more impressive" your only argument, then I don't know what to tell you. You obviously aren't a very knowledgable sports fan if that's your only argument. Because, basically, no matter what the statistics, no matter what the conference does, they'll always be poor in your opinion, and that will forever be your invalid argument.

So really, an argument can be made either way for the worst offensive team, but given the fact that Iowa turned the ball over less than ISU and scored more points per game than ISU, I think it's a valid argument that ISU's offense was no better than Iowa's.

One look at an objective strength of schedule puts an end to your spin. Sagarin had Iowa's SOS as the 75th ranked in the nation. One would have a hard time finding many if any BCS conference teams with a worse rating. ISU's schedule was ranked #20 in terms of difficulty. Most "knowlegable sports fans" understand the impact of SOS for what it is without trying to make excuses for Iowa's poor offensive performance.

College Football Ratings Page