It's time to take a look at the 2008 non-conference football schedules. I have taken the liberty of looking at four BCS conferences- the Big 10, Big 12, Pac-10 and the SEC.
I took the 5 most competitive teams from each of these conferences and rated their SOS.
On a scale one 1-5, each team's opponent gets a ranking. Add the scores up and divide by the number of teams they played to get an average.
5- Member of a BCS conference and won their bowl.
4- Member of a BCS conference with a bowl loss or a non-BCS member bowl winner.
3- Member of a BCS conference with a losing record or a non-BCS member who won conference.
2- FBS (formerly division 1A) member with a winning record.
1- FBS member with a .500 or worst record or bowl loss.
0- FCS (formerly division 1AA) member.
First up, the Big-10.
Ohio State=2.0
Youngstown State-0
Ohio-1
USC- 5
Troy-2
Michigan=1.75
Utah-4
Miami of Ohio-1
Notre Dame-1
Toledo-1
Wisconsin=1.5
Akron-1
Marshall-1
Fresno State-4
Cal Poly-0
Penn State=2.25
Coastal Carolina-0
Oregon State-5
Syracuse-3
Temple-1
Illinois=1.75
Missouri-5
Eastern Illinois-0
Louisiana-LaFayette-1
Western Michigan-1
The Pac-10.
Oregon=2.6
Utah State-1
Purdue-5
Boise State-2
UCLA-=4.3
Fresno State-4
Tennessee-5
BYU-4
USC=3.0
Virginia-4
Ohio State-4
Notre Dame-1
Cal=3.0
Michigan State-4
Maryland-4
Colorado State-1
Arizona State=2.0
Northern Arizona-0
UNLV-1
Georgia-5
The BIG-12.
Oklahoma=3.0
Tennessee-Chattanooga-0
Cincinnati-5
Washington- 3
TCU-4
Kansas=1.5
Florida Int'l-1
Louisiana Tech-1
South Florida-4
Sam Houston St -0
Texas=2.5
Florida Atlantic-4
Arkansas-4
Rice-1
UTEP- 1
Mizzou=1.25
Illinois- 4
SE Missouri-0
Nevada-1
Buffalo-0
Texas A&M=2.25
Arkansas State-1
New Mexico-4
Miami-3
Army-1
The SEC.
LSU=.75
North Texas-1
Troy-1
App State-0
Tulane-1
Georgia=2.75
Georgia-Southern-0
Central Michigan-3
Arizona State-4
Georgia Tech-4
Florida=2.5
Hawaii-3
Miami(Fl)-3
The Citadel-0
Florida State-4
Tennessee=1.75
UAB-1
UCLA-4
Northern Illinois-1
Wyoming-1
Arkansas-2.5
Western Illinois-0
Louisiana-Monroe-1
Texas-5
Tulsa-4
Conference averages:
Pac-10- 2.98
Big 12- 2.2
SEC - 2.05
Big-Ten- 1.85
Which conference is the biggest cream cake offender of them all? The Big Ten. They averaged under a 2.0.
Looking at who they have on their schedules so far, it looks like they are going after the fluffiest of cream puffs, the true gourmet's choice of the caloric-laden pastry, based on last year's final records.
Another point of contention is while the SEC gets blamed for cream puff scheduling, they came in third to the Pac-10 and two of their teams have to play a 13th game, although it's not a non-conference game. Give them credit.
A final look at the 2007 season.....
No real surprises on the SOS. Jeff Sargarin, who does SOS rankings for the BCS, had the following top five schools for his toughest 2007 schedules:
1-UCLA
2-Washington
3-Florida
4-Nebraska
5-Oregon
Phil Steele released his final 5, and he had these schools in the top 5:
1-Washington
2-UCLA
3-Oklahoma State
4-Nebraska
5-Arizona
Schools that made the top 10 in the BCS rankings have also had their SOS rankings released. The rankings were released by Jeff Sargarin, the same man who is responsible for some computer BCS poll rankings:
LSU #11
OSU #53
Kansas #74
West Virginia # 40
USC #29
OKlahoma #44
Mizzou #25
Georgia #23
VaTech #36
Florida #3
What does this all mean? Obviously, a team with a high SOS and a very good record (ie-LSU) is no fluke. Same with Georgia and USC. Two teams with very good SOS's and ended up the year with only two losses. OSU was ranked #1 preseason but their SOS was #53, and their performance in the title game reflected that lack of competition to warrant that lofty ranking.
Clearly, SOS should be an important stat to incorporate when ranking teams.
But the stats are meaningless during the year. Case in point- if Team A is ranked # 1 preseason, and team B beats them, and then team A goes on to lose every game after the first game, does Team B have an honest claim of saying they beat a #1 team?
Of course not, and especially so early in the season. An 0-12 team never deserves that lofty ranking, at any point in the season, so only after the season is complete can a clear picture of how good a team is emerge.
Look at South Carolina and Georgia for perfect examples. South Carolina started with a bang, and was ranked as high as #6, then tanked their last half of the season, while Georgia struggled a bit early, but ended their season looking like one of the best teams in the country.
If your team beat South Carolina, did you beat a #6 team? No, because at the end of the season they were not ranked that high, so that ranking is not valid.
Finally, one thing seems crystal clear. Too many teams are scheduling cream puffs. One cream puff is OK, but three or four is not.
The NCAA should mandate that all FBS schools have to schedule FBS schools only. If the pollsters are going to use SOS ratings to determine a true winner, then they need to make sure all the teams are competing on a fair and level playing field.
2008 preseason SOS top 10 rankings, according to Phil Steele:
1. Washington
2. Arkansas
3. Georgia
4. Vanderbilt
5. Oregon State
6. UCLA
7. Baylor
8. Colorado
9. Virginia
10. NC State
Others: Florida #12, Michigan #15, LSU #19, USC #21, Texas #23, Oklahoma #30, Ohio State #31, Oregon #33, Wisconsin #46, Penn State #48.
comments (62) write a comment »
write a new comment
3 months ago
1.) Your facts are wrong. Those SOS rankings are final rankings for the 2007 season.
2.) How the hell do you come up with those subjective values for non-conference opponents? Troy is better than Western Michigan? Playing Georgia and playing Purdue count as the same thing? I know you did your little system at the top of the "article", but this is just retarded. Why should last season's arbitrary bowl wins/losses count for how quality of an opponent they are this year?
Why dont you just stick to Foxsports because I'm tired of seeing your face on this site.
from 3 months ago
Thomas....
What are you talking about? Which set of stats? One is for 2007, one for 2008. It clearly states that. My facts are wrong? Please be specific.
And for your information, many sports fans use last year's successes and losses as a guiding point for this year because it's objective. Trying to rank SOS for 2008 is subjective.
It's my system, and if you don't like it fine. You don't have to agree, of course. You also don't have to hurl personal insults.
Perhaps you could come up with your own system? I tried to be fair and unbiased.
from 3 months ago
Why would you put Arkansas in the top of the sec? They have never won an SEC championship since the game has been placed
from 2 months ago
man she is wrong but come on she knows a LOT more than u do that's how she's in the position she is and well u...................... come on dude quit bein' stupid.
from 2 months ago
that was 2 thomas.
3 months ago
So you are saying playing Purdue is a better OOC game than Ohio State? Cincinatti better than OU? The list goes on and on, bowl wins are exhibitions (besides the MNC game), do they really mean THAT much?
Wow what a great system...
from 3 months ago
I never said one was better...I assigned a point system. I was objective, not subjective. For example, many analysts ended up thinking USC was a better team than OSU. Same with Georgia. So basically, it came down to how far each team went. It was an unbiased rating system.
3 months ago
Waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!! My conference is at the top. Waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!! Please, give me a break. This article is in your favor, and you are still complaining. First off, this is her opinion and her formula, so back off. Second, who cares what this article says, because as we all know by now, what Thomas says is law, and the rest of us are citizens under his monarchial reign.
This is starting to get ridiculous. And Thomas, I know the entire site enjoys reading Lisa's writing a lot more than what "Dixon Cox" has to offer.
And one last thing, why didn't you respond to ANY of my points on your "articles" about the SEC and Pac-10??? Probably because they made too much sense??? Yea, I thought so.
from 3 months ago
Its sad to see a once proud fanbase like Bama have to hang from the nuts of their conference since the tide aren't cutting it on the field. Maybe someday UA will be able to hang with the Louisiana Monroes of the world again, I hope so since I like Bama and Forrest Gump.
from 3 months ago
And Cal has done what exactly??? And not just in the last few years, but ever??? Outside of running over a trombone player, I cant think of anything else, just like you cant think of anything else to rag Bama on besides the fact we lost to ULM. You act like that would effect me, but sorry, immune. And hang with ULM??? Didnt Tenn "hang" with yall for a while??? There isnt much "hanging with" when you beat a team 41-17.
from 3 months ago
1938 Rose Bowl FTW!
from 3 months ago
Whoo hoo, score! Uh, yea Bama has a 4-1-1 record in the Rose Bowl and actually mention it in our fight song. Cal hasnt been to the Rose Bowl since 1959 and holds a 2-5-1 record in the game. Yea, thats defnitely something to brag about.
from 3 months ago
"Outside of running over a trombone player..."
Classic, Nic.
from 3 months ago
Nic-
Thanks for having my back. It is just an opinion, and I tried to put out a rating system that was fair from a pure objective sense. While I respect all of the conferences, I looked at the season's results after the bowls. Yes, OSU went to the title game, but it is also a BCS game, and like Georgia, should count the same.
All BCS bowl games' teams had a legit shot at making their case to be in the title game ('cept Hawaii) so they all should be treated equally.
There's no real way to determine who has the most cupcake schedule, but this system rewards winners who finish the season.
3 months ago
Syracuse is a member of a BCS conference. You might want to fix PSU's numbers than.
SU may have had a few bad years, but that's pretty bad to mix them up like that. (They've won a national title in the past.)
from 3 months ago
Yes, and Syracuse had a .500 or worse loss season, hence the 1. A 1 is an FBS team with .500 or worse record. The ranking is accurate.
from 3 months ago
And they are a member of BCS conference with a losing record, hence the 3.
I don't get the scoring system though. IF you went 11-2, loss your bowl game its four points, but 7-6 and won your bowl game its five?
from 3 months ago
James-
Ok, I see your point, yes they are a member of a BCS conference, of course, but I didn't give them credit for that. Thanks for that excellent point. The rankings have been re-edited, and I think you'll like the adjusted rankings. :)
from 3 months ago
And yes, it's doesn't reward your overall season record, it rewards what you did after. I don't believe you should be rewarded for a loss because you were in a bowl. It's what you do with that record in post season that matters.
3 months ago
i'd like to take this opportunity to point out that all of those who want to bang on LSU for their ooc schedule this year:
LSU averages by most sos gurus (steele and sagarin included) to have about the 14th hardest schedule in the country.
i'm not sayin, i'm just sayin.
from 3 months ago
Justin...good point! LSU gets raked over the coals, but the SEC has a whole has taken a step up, while the Big Ten seems to have taken a step down. You have to partially excuse Tress for giving his former team Youngstown St some scheduling love, but still...it's disappointing to see that team on a BCS-contender's schedule.
from about 1 month ago
That is because there conference schedule picks up for the lack of an OOC schedule. Did you read the article and see there OOC schedule? That is pretty pathetic for a team that is constantly on the national radar. Yes the SEC is the best conference, yes they have some very difficult games, and yes LSU scheduled four cupcakes so they could get four easy wins. At least get an Iowa State or Syracuse if you want to beat up on a cupcake. I gaurantee those programs could use a big pay day...
3 months ago
Not this one particular article, per se, but this neverending comparison of conferences has gotten pretty darn old. Not to mention, pointless, meaningless and, most of all, unprovable.
When the top 3-4 teams in each conference plays the top 3-4 teams from other conferences year in and year out, then we can better answer who's the best conference. Hell, as it is now, the top teams WITHIN their own conferences don't play against each other year in and year out!
As long as CBS & ESPN (and ABC to a much lesser extent) are the "voices of college football", they'll always have a huge say so in who plays in the MNC Game. This same concept applies to the Heisman Trophy.
Tell you what. Let's get rid of the individual conferences and throw everyone's name in a (computer) hat. Program the computer to have NO CRITERIA when choosing who plays who. Whatever is spit out is the schedule you'll play.
Save the dribble of tradition and all of that other garbage. Tradition left the building at the behest of billion dollar television contracts.
Isn't it our goal to fnd out who the best is? Well, until we play ANY & EVERYBODY WHENEVER & WHEREVER we'll never know.
If you're all that your mouth (and marketing agency) says you are, then you'll show up on Saturday and beat everyone on your schedule.
It doesn't get any simpler than that.
from 3 months ago
Touche.
Another reason the NFL is better, everything is settled on the field.
NCAA is amateur sports for a reason.
from 3 months ago
I'm all for a layoff system, at least a plus 1, but there are two problems with football playoffs.
1- it's more physical than basketball and doing a March madness type of playoff will most likely cause more injuries which may skew the final standings.
2- basketball is played indoor, football is not. Weather will affect the games and travel plans. You have to make it fair for all teams, some of these games will be played in severe weather to accommodate cold-weather football teams. Weather shouldn't be a factor in determining a champion, should it?
3 months ago
Oh god, please don't get Thomas started back up again on his little Pac-10 rant.
from 3 months ago
I don't read him much since he leaves such insulting remarks for me on my blog. Funny, he still reads my blogs. He's a glutton for punishment I guess.
3 months ago
I'm sorry this is one of the worst systems for determining schedule strength i have ever seen. In this system FAU, New Mexico, and East carolina are 4's and Purdue is a 5. Based off LAST year's teams.
from 3 months ago
Hey! Florida Atlantic is a good team, and may be a BCS buster this year! :) East Carolina was also a very good team and as a 4 TD dog, lost to Va Tech 7-17. They finished well last season.
How else can you rate an SOS this year? You can't on this year's performance...it hasn't happened and no one knows what will happen. You have to use some sort of objective analysis. So how would you do it? I'm curious.
from 3 months ago
Oh I get it...you're a Wolverine fan and your team scored a 1.75. Sorry....it happens.
3 months ago
schedules are made 4- 7 years in advance...all polls and SOS rankings should be withheld till mid october....
3 months ago
Jim-
I would agree with that. That's why I used last year's SOS to rate this year's SOS.
3 months ago
i understand...have to use something...hate preseason polls...big false indicators....
3 months ago
I hate them too, because they are usually wrong and can reward soft schedules. But they do keep us busy complaining about them til the season starts, which seems like an eternity away. That's gotta be worth something.
3 months ago
I agree with all who said SOS needs to wait until at least midseason. There's only so many ways to judge it right now without using speculation, and teams aren't always the same one year as they are the next.
I mean, if FSU and Miami have the renaissances that the experts have been predicting for years (don't hold your breath, but I said "if"), Florida's schedule goes from "favorable for the SEC" to "brutal." Even then, young teams are tougher at the end than the beginning and injuries can drastically demote a team's toughness (see Oregon, 2007).
All you can do before a season is look at the intent of a schedule, since they are made so far in advance. If a team schedules Duke to say they have an ACC team or Vandy to say they have an SEC team, that doesn't count. If a school in 2001 schedules Notre Dame for a game in 2007, it's hard to ding them for that. Unfortunately, there really isn't a way to do this completely quantitatively since the documentation on when the contracts are made is scant and haphazard.
3 months ago
David-
Scheduling Baylor shows intent of scheduling a BCS team but only willing to play a cupcake. No one expects Tulane or Utah State to be a contender in the next ten years, so scheduling them shows cupcake intent. Is that a new word? Cupcake intent?
That was part of the reason why I scored more points for BCS teams than FBS schools. At least with BCS schools you know they are used to playing high level of competition.
I agree with you on the "intent" part. That was great insight.
3 months ago
here lisa is where i completley disagree....you are, maybe ,not by intention, but are accusing schools of scheduling "cupcake" out of conference games...too tough to figure a cupcake 5 years down the road...mizzou and kansas for years were cupcakes...but last year both were much better than ndame, mich or florida for that matter.....i think the point of your article is good..but trying to rate legit d-1a programs as "cupcakes" from year to year is real hard.....i think focusing on the schools who book d-1aa opponents as there out of conference schedule should get the real "cupcake" icon....
3 months ago
Jim-
Well, I agree with you...that's why FCS schools got zilch in points. The schools that schedule them get no love from me.
Look, it's hard to predict how well a team will progress in 4 or 5 years. However, scheduling Temple, Buffalo, Akron, Louisiana Tech, Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Lafayette, North Texas, Tulane, Utah State, and a plethora of FCS schools is fooling no one. The intent is there.
Kansas may not have been a powerhouse 4 or 5 years ago, and neither was Mizzou. However, they were still competitive in play. Kansas has always given K-State a game, if memory serves. Same with Iowa State and Iowa. In fact, scheduling Iowa State in four years might be a bad idea. They are due. :)
3 months ago
I'm not familiar with the process in other states, but Ohio schools apparently get money for playing Ohio State in the Horseshoe, which is part of the reason you see teams like Youngstown State, Ohio, Akron and Toledo on the schedule every year. Does that make it okay to beat up on patsies? Absolutely not, but then again, the MAC is Ohio State's favorite punching bag.
That said, the Big Ten's OOC schedule is abysmal. What the hell are the Badgers thinking in scheduling Cal Poly!? At least Michigan has Utah (potential upset) and Ohio State has USC this year...
from 3 months ago
Ryan-
Here's the scary part...Cal Poly upset San Diego State a few years ago. They're no App St, but be careful...they run that triple-option (I think) and could confuse your D for a quarter or two.
3 months ago
Lisa,
Good article. I always take pride in my Vols' scheduling decent opponents (even though besides UCLA they are all 1s in your system). But I still take pride in the fact that UT hasn't played an FCS opponent since 1983. I think the FCS teams should be a negative because it doesn't help your team and if you lose it is REAL bad, which Michigan fans will attest to.
Also, any time you try and put numbers up there or facts...it seems to confuse some people on this site. Lord knows when I wrote by article about the Big Ten and backed it up with facts all I got were people calling me a moron.
3 months ago
LOL! When you use numbers, there can be no bias. Good point on the Vols...I was surprised they scored as low as they did...but UCLA was so decimated by injuries last year, their overall record didn't show how good they really were, but couldn't do anything because of two hurt QBs and a host of other injuries.
As far as people calling you names, well, the keyboard cowards are out there, and just remember they would never say that to your face. So they are cowards...just keep reminding yourself of that...it's easy to dismiss them when you do that. :)
from 3 months ago
Numbers by themselves say nothing. Until an interpretation is added, they still mean nothing. The preparation of data and the interpretation of said data can introduce bias, so it's not quite accurate to say that simply by having numbers you have no bias.
3 months ago
Lisa.. stats won't give a perfect and exact answer that all can see and agree on but I think you done a fine job with the effort. I have said in the passed that SEC teams can't afford to schedule USC, OSU and OKLA because the SEC schedule is already stronger than any other conference, these facts just show that SEC teams are making an effort to make their schedules even stronger.
3 months ago
Why did you leave out the Big East. They are one of the BCS conferences and they love cupcakes. One they have less members than the other schools so they have more non-conference games. Second, WVU made sure that they would get a better shot at a NC game by taking Virginia Tech off the future schedules. Yes, Auburn, Notre Dame and Kansas (whoops they werent supposed to be good when we scheduled them) are on their 2008 schedules, but each team has at least 3 guaranteed patsies.
from 3 months ago
I left the BE/ACC out because it got ridiculous. Both Clemson and FSU scheduled two FCS schools in one season, and I didn't want to embarrass their fans. Sorry.
3 months ago
Alright, Lisa, ive read your stuff before on FOXSports and I think you are an exellent writer but how in the world is Oregon state a 5 when USC is a 5. And how is Fla state a 4? AND HOW IS OSU a 4? They're just as good as USC this season, possibly better. I dont get the ranking system.
3 months ago
It doesn't rate teams, it rates performances based on how they finished. OSU gets a 4 because they lost their bowl. Oregon State and USC get 5s because they won their bowls. Fla State won their bowl against UCLA....I know it stinks, but that's how it worked out.
Do you give a team a 5 when they got blown out in their championship bowl? Or do you give a team a 5 when they win their bowl even if it isn't a major bowl? Hard to answer, but losses should never be rewarded in my book.
No worries Paul...just show up on Sept 13th and smack my Trojans around and you can count the days to the BCS title game. It all comes down to that game, and I can't wait for it. It should be fantastic!
Thanks for the props, by the way.
3 months ago
Brilliant.
3 months ago
Forget non-conference games, I wish my team played a Big Ten conference schedule every year like Ohio State. In the Big Ten the games might be boring to watch but at least we would get to play in a BCS bowl game every year!
2 months ago
I understand the point system, its your own and i'm not going to get into that b/c it doesnt matter, it's all your opinion and thats fine. However, your taking the results from last year and saying which conference has the biggest cupcake schedule this year. It doesnt work the same way as forecasting in a business using sales numbers from the year before. Teams can be totally different from one year to the next and their opponents as well. I am a Big Ten fan but in no way trying to stick up for them. I thing its great that ohio schools are getting paid tons of money to play at OSU that they can put to good use at their respective schools to build their programs. On the other hand I don't think major conference schools should have cupcake schedules. I think we can all agree that OSU is trying to balance it out by making the USC scenario a permanent fixture. They scheduled Miami back to back years already and I believe a couple other schools in major conferences. Basically all I am saying is OSU had a very weak non conference schedule last year and maybe the Big Ten in general. But that has no relationship to this year's SOS, there just isn't any kind of equation or system that can do it. For all we know, Ohio (6-6 last year) rated a 1 could go undefeated. Although very very unlikely, it's possible.
from 2 months ago
Dan, I understand your point completely. However, the only objective way to rank anyone's schedule is on results, not on what one may THINK will happen.
While my system is imperfect, it is completely objective, and not subjective, which was my goal. Subjectivity gets too debatable. Know what I mean?
2 months ago
Yeah I know what you mean. My only objection on the point system is App St. You gave them a 0 because they are an FCS school but they could give anyone a run for their money, Exhibit A: Michigan haha
2 months ago
I can give a BCS contender a pass on scheduling a cupcake when it is against an in-state school. For instance, LSU plays Tulane this year and for the next seven. Tulane and LSU is one of the oldest rivalries in the South as it dates back to 1893. This year's game will be 97th meeting between these schools.
LSU and Arizona scheduled a few years in advance for the 2003 season. At the time Arizona was a bowl team and LSU was a middle of the road team in the SEC. When the game finally rolled around, LSU was a title contender and Arizona was one of the worst teams in the PAC-10.
LSU and Washington were able to schedule a home and home series because their president (Mark Emmert) used to be LSU's chancellor.
This year's schedule is embarrassing.
2 months ago
why is Notre-Dame 1...the least they should be is 3...with all the top recruiting classes every year
and central michigan is 3 puhleeeaze....
Gerogia is playing two cup cake teams in Georgia Southern and Central Michigan
and Oregon State in PAC-10 is not a competitive team...FYI the only team with a better record in the past three years in PAC-10 is Oregon State
what is the logic for 3...BCS conference team with a losing record is equivalent to non-BCS conference winner
SEC is tough conference but some teams are highly over-rated like Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee which makes SOS look very tough but the fact is they play mostly cup cake teams in the non-conference schedule
PAC-10 is the most under-rated of all BCS conferences...PAC-10 winner can match up with any BCS conference winner not to mention the fact that PAC-10 has won the rose-bowl now like forever
so give PAC-10 the much needed respect it deserves
2 months ago
Haven't gone through and read every comment, but has anyone mentioned that this point system values a win in the International Bowl the same as a win in the Fiesta Bowl? Or for that matter, a win in the PapaJohns.com Bowl (against a C-USA opponent) is valued more than a loss in the BCS National Championship Game? It could probably use some tweaking.
2 months ago
Lisa, FYI there are two Major college football teams in the state of Oreeegone. The University of Oregon and Oregon State University. Oregon plays at Purdue this year not OSewe. I know, I know, all the teams west of the Mississippi suck except for USC, but please don't confuse Oregon with Oregon State.
2 months ago
Dear Lisa,
There are two major college football teams in the state of Oreeeegone. The University of Oregon and Oregon State University. I know we're way out west and eveybody knows that there is only one good football team west of the Mississippi (well maybe Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma & Colorado know about us)
USC-but come on, do your homework. Oregon plays at Purdue this year NOT OSewe.
2 months ago
Steve-
Yes, I know Oregon plays at Purdue...on the 13th, and that's what it says in the article.
I'm not getting where Oregon State comes in...I didn't even list them in this article among the Pac-10 schools that I used. Can you please enlighten me as to what you are talking about? I copied and pasted Oregon's blurb from the top here:
The Pac-10.
Oregon=2.6
Utah State-1
Purdue-5
Boise State-2
Where does it say Oregon State plays at Purdue?
from 2 months ago
as much as i disagree with u whoever the heck that thomas guy thinks he is he is a fool.haha
2 months ago
Lisa,
As a pac-10 fan I love the results but I can't agree with the methodology. The way I see it you can look at strength of schedule one of several ways:
One option is to look at the strength of an opponent at the time the school SCHEDULED the game. This method obviously focuses on the intent of the school at the time it scheduled the game oftentimes a couple of years in advance. I’m sure teams from 2007 like Boston College, USC, Michigan or Purdue didn’t intend a cupcake game when they scheduled Notre Dame for last year.
Another option is to look at the relative strength of an opponent at the time the game is played. Many after-the-fact strength of schedule calculations use a teams RANKING AT THE TIME THEY PLAYED an opponent as a factor because it eliminates the possibility of a team falling apart later in a year from injuries, coaching changes, implosions etc. A good example of this reasoning would be USC or ASU losing to Oregon last year only to have a Dennis Dixon-less team lose three straight to end their regular season and drop massively in the rankings.
A third but by no means final option is to look at a teams SOS at the end of the season after you can see how all of their opponents ended up doing. Obviously this option and the second option are impossible to do preseason.
My problem with your methodology is that you seem to try to cover all of these different lines of reasoning at once, and, in doing so, don’t hit any of them on the nose. If you want to see a schools “cajones” in scheduling, you would really have to look at the strength of the opponent at the time the school scheduled the game (which would be some pretty tough data to collect). If you want to see who will play the toughest teams in 2008, why look back to last years records and bowl games when you could use a metric meant to predict as accurately as possible how a team is going to do in 2008 (taking into account last years bowl games, records and a whole lot more), preseason rankings (no one says you have to use AP or the coaches poll either . . . even if you used your own it would be more accurate than just looking at results from last year). That’s my two cents (might be more like my fifty cents at this point sorry for being so lengthy).
2 months ago
App State would probably do very well if they were in 1-A or FBS or w/e u want to call it. If they can beat Michigan with Chad Henne, Mike Hart, Jake Long, Manningham and others they must be pretty good. They have some fast players I watched them in the national championship game against Delaware they are FAST!
write a new comment