-Jim Root

I’m not sure if you’ve heard, but Big Ten teams are apparently doing quite well at home this year. It’s a very poorly-covered phenomenon, but I’m here to tell you: Big Ten home teams have had some success!

Okay, so perhaps you have heard about this. As of this morning, B1G home teams are 33-6 overall in conference games (plus Penn State’s win at the Palestra), a remarkable win rate that dwarfs that of most conferences – especially the ACC. But here at the Weave, we’re worried about more than just the outright winners and losers – we want to know what that’s meant against the spread, which home teams are covering most, etc. As my favorite movie podcast would say, we’re connoisseurs of context.

First off, the spread details. When I started writing this article on Monday, B1G home teams were 24-12 ATS with an average cover margin of +5.9 points per game, a trend that matched up well with what we’ve seen in terms of win/loss records. Of course, I idiotically chose to prioritize my weekly Power Rankings, and the three Big Ten games last night were intent on submarining the point of this article, as all three road teams covered. I will not be deterred, though, so we press on!

To bring everything to current status, Big Ten home teams are now 24-15 ATS (61.5%) with an average cover margin of +5.4 points per game. If you could bet a 61.5% trend all year, you’d build a castle with your winnings, so even with last night’s trio of losses, this is intriguing. Here’s how that record breaks down by team:

Within that data, though, there are other trends that can be identified (note: I use the word “trend” very lightly here, give how tiny the sample size is). For example, home underdogs have been outstanding, going 9-2 ATS with an average cover margin of +13.7 points per game – and eight of the 11 have won outright. That means the spread has only mattered once in 11 “home dog” situations, so you may want to consider the moneyline if you like the dog in the future:

On the other end of the spectrum, double-digit favorites have been dragging down the effectiveness of the home team trend. Big favorites are just 3-6 ATS with an average cover margin of -2.8 points per game:

Both of those graphics indicate a pattern: the “better” B1G teams (those that would be favored in a road game) have been struggling against the number, while the “worse” ones (those that would be big underdogs) have fared far better. And if we flip that initial table of Home ATS records to instead look at Road ATS records, that is unsurprisingly the case:

Michigan State, Michigan, Ohio State, Maryland, Purdue – probably the five Big Ten teams who have spent the most time in the AP Poll, and the ones with the highest preseason expectations – are a horrendous 1-13 ATS on the road in conference play. Four of them have lost a game by 18+ points on the road, and the one that hasn’t (Ohio State) has lost all three road games by double-digits.

Meanwhile, your Big Ten road warriors are…Nebraska and Rutgers?! Of course, just as everyone would have suspected! Another interesting way of framing it: the only teams to win a road game outright that wasn’t against Northwestern are Wisconsin (2x), Rutgers, and Illinois.

So, what do we think the cause is for this? The answer can come in both a micro and a macro sense. The Big Ten has historically had very strong home courts, so perhaps we should not be terribly shocked by this. According to KenPom’s home court advantage (HCA) stats, most of the league ranks highly:

Per fellow Weaver Matt’s offseason examination of home court advantage, the Big Ten ranked 8th in 2019 Home Court Advantage based on actual results, trailing only the Mountain West, Pac 12, SWAC, Southland, Atlantic 10, Southland, and Summit – most of those leagues have brutal travel that could help explain such a clear home edge.  

The Big Ten, on the other hand, is pretty tightly clustered, save for the geographically baffling additions of Maryland and Rutgers. That leaves a couple other feasible explanations. My favorite of those is simply the environment: most Big Ten teams have absolutely rabid fanbases, packing the stands and creating a hostile atmosphere for the opposition. That’s a very romantic answer, since we as fans desperately want to believe we’re making an impact on the game – but in the Big Ten, it very much seems to be true.

Alternately, there’s just a level of comfort that comes from playing at home, especially for young role players. Early in the season, Michigan stood out as a very clear team where this was having an impact, as emerging starters like Eli Brooks and David DeJulius struggled a lot more in hostile environments. Whether it’s the supportive crowd, not having to travel at all, or something as simple as a comfort level with the rims you’re shooting at (weirdly, this mattered to me as a player), the comforts of home often have natural advantages.

The significantly less romantic answer is officiating, which I have negative desire to get into in this article, so let’s just pretend I didn’t mention it. Another possible explanation is that road teams just get so revolted to see Dan Dakich calling the game on the sideline that they tank to get out of the arena as fast as possible; I cannot confirm this one, though.

Ultimately, this is still extremely early in the Big Ten’s 20-game schedule (about 25% of the way through). It remains to be seen if this heavy home court advantage is merely an early season blip or a real trend that is going to carry throughout conference play, and perhaps Tuesday night was actually the start of some regression towards the mean. Still, this is the type of angle that can give you an “edge” against oddsmakers: if you strongly believe this trend will continue (or crash back the other way), you should be aggressively playing that notion going forward. I tend to think the home courts do matter more than in other leagues, and though the oddsmakers may slowly catch up to this, I will be anxiously anticipating any future B1G home ‘dogs.