| 2003 | Penn State3–9 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #99 (of 117 teams · 19.4 pts/g · 233 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #30 (of 117 teams · 21.3 pts/g allowed · 255 points) | #70 (of 117 teams · -1.8 /g · -22 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| Median | of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003 | 0 (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–10 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (Regular-season wins over teams ranked 1–25 in the final Playoff Committee Rankings: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Regular season only, with each opponent's rank frozen at the final regular-season poll — so a team you pin is measured against games it could also have played.) | — (No team has a rank for this) | #59 (Scoring offense: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range #7–#114. 1 of 11 in the top 10.) | — (No team has a rank for this) | #35 (Scoring defense: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range #8–#99. 1 of 11 in the top 10.) | #49 (Point margin: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range #8–#108. 2 of 11 in the top 10.) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) | — (No team has a rank for this) |
| 2003 | Illinois1–11 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #107 (of 117 teams · 16.9 pts/g · 203 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #99 (of 117 teams · 33.2 pts/g allowed · 398 points) | #107 (of 117 teams · -16.3 /g · -195 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Indiana2–10 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #114 (of 117 teams · 14.8 pts/g · 177 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #94 (of 117 teams · 32.3 pts/g allowed · 388 points) | #108 (of 117 teams · -17.6 /g · -211 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Iowa10–3 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #41 (of 117 teams · 28.7 pts/g · 373 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #8 — top 10 (of 117 teams · 16.1 pts/g allowed · 210 points) | #13 (of 117 teams · +12.5 /g · +163 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Michigan10–3 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #11 (of 117 teams · 35.4 pts/g · 460 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #11 (of 117 teams · 16.9 pts/g allowed · 219 points) | #8 — top 10 (of 117 teams · +18.5 /g · +241 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Michigan State8–5 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #49 (of 117 teams · 27.9 pts/g · 363 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #41 (of 117 teams · 22.5 pts/g allowed · 293 points) | #49 (of 117 teams · +5.4 /g · +70 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Minnesota10–3 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #7 — top 10 (of 117 teams · 38.7 pts/g · 503 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #35 (of 117 teams · 21.9 pts/g allowed · 285 points) | #9 — top 10 (of 117 teams · +16.8 /g · +218 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Northwestern6–7 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #94 (of 117 teams · 20.2 pts/g · 263 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #57 (of 117 teams · 25.1 pts/g allowed · 326 points) | #81 (of 117 teams · -4.8 /g · -63 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Ohio State11–2 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #75 (of 117 teams · 24.8 pts/g · 322 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #16 (of 117 teams · 17.6 pts/g allowed · 229 points) | #41 (of 117 teams · +7.2 /g · +93 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Purdue9–4 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #59 (of 117 teams · 26.9 pts/g · 349 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #14 (of 117 teams · 17.4 pts/g allowed · 226 points) | #28 (of 117 teams · +9.5 /g · +123 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |
| 2003 | Wisconsin7–6 | 0 / 0 — at or above the median (Top-10 classes in the 5 recruiting cycles before that season: median of 11 Big Ten teams in 2003. Range 0–0.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) (No Playoff Committee poll for this season — the committee began in 2014. Not the same as no ranked wins.) | — (— · —) | #58 (of 117 teams · 27.3 pts/g · 355 points) | — (— allowed · —) | #51 (of 117 teams · 23.5 pts/g allowed · 306 points) | #54 (of 117 teams · +3.8 /g · +49 on the season) | — (—) | — (— /g · — on the season) | — (— of last season's passing production returning) | — (— of last season's receiving production returning) | — (— of last season's rushing production returning) | — (— composite · a squad total, so not comparable across seasons) | — (— predicted points added per play · not opponent-adjusted) | — (— allowed per play · lower is better, so #1 is the best defence) | — (— of plays successful) | — (— of opponent plays successful · lower is better) | — (— average PPA on successful plays) | — (— allowed on opponent successes · lower is better) |