Putting the season in perspective in terms of strength of schedule

#1
V

Volosaurus rex

Doctorate in Volology
Joined
Dec 2, 2009
Messages
6,040
Likes
4,255
#1
"Paul Myerberg of USA Today revealed that UT's meat grinder schedule is startling. 'Toughest skeds, by opp. winning %: Purdue (.743), Utah (.724), Tenn (.724), UGa (.714), Miss St (.697).' Now, look at that list and find the teams with a shot of going to a bowl game. Purdue, Utah & Miss State are all staying at home. Georgia is in the post-season and Tennessee might be" (The Tony Basilio Show).

However, let's subject those findings to a little closer scrutiny, since the combined winning percentage of one's opponents doesn't necessarily provide a precise barometer for comparative analysis of strength of schedule. Tennessee has played four teams currently ranked by the AP in the top eight nationally (Alabama, Oregon, Auburn and Missouri at 1st, 5th, 6th and 8th), as well as South Carolina, which is ranked 12th, and two other opponents which were ranked when Tennessee played them (Georgia and Florida) but who subsequently dropped out of the polls due to a crippling series of injuries. Vanderbilt, no matter how much of their success this year is predicated upon smoke and mirrors, as well as fortuitous scheduling, will nonetheless finish with a winning record and go bowling.

Purdue's opposition, on the other hand, simply does not stack up in terms of national ranking, regardless of their combined winning percentage. The Boilermakers have played one top ten opponent (Ohio State, 4th) and three other teams currently ranked in the top 20 (Michigan State, Wisconsin and Northern Illinois, which are ranked 13th, 16th and 20th, respectively), as well as Notre Dame, which was ranked when Purdue played them but subsequently fell out of the AP poll.

The Utes' schedule ranks more favorably but still is not as top heavy as the gauntlet we have faced this year. Utah faced two top 10 opponents in Oregon and Stanford, which are now 5th and 10th respectively, as well as UCLA, Arizona State and USC, which currently rank 14th, 19th, and 23rd nationally.

Although these data are not surprising, they empirically prove that we have played the toughest schedule in the country and it really isn't close. 'tis something that critics of Butch Jones and his coaching staff might want to consider. For a complete listing of the current AP poll, see 2013 NCAA College Football Polls and Rankings for Week 13 - ESPN.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#4
#4
Volosaurus rex said:
"Paul Myerberg of USA Today revealed that UT's meat grinder schedule is startling. 'Toughest skeds, by opp. winning %: Purdue (.743), Utah (.724), Tenn (.724), UGa (.714), Miss St (.697).' Now, look at that list and find the teams with a shot of going to a bowl game. Purdue, Utah & Miss State are all staying at home. Georgia is in the post-season and Tennessee might be" (The Tony Basilio Show).

However, let's subject those findings to a little closer scrutiny, since the combined winning percentage of one's opponents doesn't necessarily provide a precise barometer for comparative analysis of strength of schedule. Tennessee has played four teams currently ranked by the AP in the top eight nationally (Alabama, Oregon, Auburn and Missouri at 1st, 5th, 6th and 8th), as well as South Carolina, which is ranked 12th, and two other opponents which were ranked when Tennessee played them (Georgia and Florida) but who subsequently dropped out of the polls due to a crippling series of injuries. Vanderbilt, no matter how much of their success this year is predicated upon smoke and mirrors, as well as fortuitous scheduling, will nonetheless finish with a winning record and go bowling.

Purdue's opposition, on the other hand, simply does not stack up in terms of national ranking, regardless of their combined winning percentage. The Boilermakers have played one top ten opponent (Ohio State, 4th) and three other teams currently ranked in the top 20 (Michigan State, Wisconsin and Northern Illinois, which are ranked 13th, 16th and 20th, respectively), as well as Notre Dame, which was ranked when Purdue played them but subsequently fell out of the AP poll.

The Utes' schedule ranks more favorably but still is not as top heavy as the gauntlet we have faced this year. Utah faced two top 10 opponents in Oregon and Stanford, which are now 5th and 10th respectively, as well as UCLA, Arizona State and USC, which currently rank 14th, 19th, and 23rd nationally.

Although these data are not surprising, they empirically prove that we have played the toughest schedule in the country and it really isn't close. 'tis something that critics of Butch Jones and his coaching staff might want to consider. For a complete listing of the current AP poll, see 2013 NCAA College Football Polls and Rankings for Week 13 - ESPN.
Click to expand...

Do we help make teams look better than they really are?
 
#7
#7
7 ranked teams is rough. UT always plays a stout schedule. IIRC CDD faced 5 ranked teams his first year.
 
#8
#8
It's year one, Butch has plenty of leash. But next year we have another ridiculous schedule... and the next year... and the next year.

I don't think the fanbase barometer is just looking at wins and losses, we're looking at HOW we are winning/losing.

Are we getting blown out Oregon, Bama, Mizzou, Auburn again?

Are we scraping by Western Kentucky and South Alabama or thumping them and putting in reserves by halftime?

If Butch wins out, I'd say he has surpassed reasonable expectations in year one.
 
#9
#9
Stevorino said:
It's year one, Butch has plenty of leash. But next year we have another ridiculous schedule... and the next year... and the next year.

I don't think the fanbase barometer is just looking at wins and losses, we're looking at HOW we are winning/losing.

Are we getting blown out Oregon, Bama, Mizzou, Auburn again?

Are we scraping by Western Kentucky and South Alabama or thumping them and putting in reserves by halftime?

If Butch wins out, I'd say he has surpassed reasonable expectations in year one.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. It's not the losing that has rational fans up in arms, it's the blowout losses that have brought about thread titles such as "Any better than Dooley?" and so on. The schedule is always going to be tough, and next year the win's and losses may not be much better, but if we can close the gap on the top 10 teams we will face and be competitive, I for one will view that as improving.
 
#10
#10
At the end of it all, the W-L is all that will remain. There aren't any asterisks in the record books. There won't be any footnotes to denote strength of schedule either. Does anyone give a damn what the strength of schedule was for the '98 team?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
For what it's worth, Next year we play OK instead of OR & Ole Miss instead of Auburn. Otherwise it's about the same. We replace WKy AP & S Ala with Utah St Ark St & Chatt. Prob a little harder little 3 than this year but OK & OM shouldn't be as good as OR & AU were this year.
 
#12
#12
Sick of hearing about teams that were ranked when we played them. That doesn't matter in terms of strength of schedule. It's how they finish. We lost to a pretty lousy Florida team with a back-up QB (who hadn't completed a pass in college yet when he played us). Georgia was already extremely banged up and missing tons of players when we let them drive the length of the field for a touchdown at the end of the game. Neither of those teams were hugely different in personnel when we played them than when they each lost to Vanderbilt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#13
#13
OrangeByBirth said:
At the end of it all, the W-L is all that will remain. There aren't any asterisks in the record books. There won't be any footnotes to denote strength of schedule either. Does anyone give a damn what the strength of schedule was for the '98 team?
Click to expand...
Post of the year!!
 
#14
#14
volboy81 said:
For what it's worth, Next year we play OK instead of OR & Ole Miss instead of Auburn. Otherwise it's about the same. We replace WKy AP & S Ala with Utah St Ark St & Chatt. Prob a little harder little 3 than this year but OK & OM shouldn't be as good as OR & AU were this year.
Click to expand...

Ole Miss will only be better next season. They are high quality.

Tennessee is going to play people and it's never going to be easy...

And that is just the way I like it.
 
#15
#15
oregonvol said:
Sick of hearing about teams that were ranked when we played them. That doesn't matter in terms of strength of schedule. It's how they finish. We lost to a pretty lousy Florida team with a back-up QB (who hadn't completed a pass in college yet when he played us). Georgia was already extremely banged up and missing tons of players when we let them drive the length of the field for a touchdown at the end of the game. Neither of those teams were hugely different in personnel when we played them than when they each lost to Vanderbilt.
Click to expand...


this.
 
#16
#16
oregonvol said:
Sick of hearing about teams that were ranked when we played them. That doesn't matter in terms of strength of schedule. It's how they finish. We lost to a pretty lousy Florida team with a back-up QB (who hadn't completed a pass in college yet when he played us). Georgia was already extremely banged up and missing tons of players when we let them drive the length of the field for a touchdown at the end of the game. Neither of those teams were hugely different in personnel when we played them than when they each lost to Vanderbilt.
Click to expand...

I agree when it comes to UGA, but UF got more and more banged up as they went. Driskel went down against UT, but they were a total MASH unit by the time they played Vandy.

That's why I've always thought the SOS argument, as far as the BCS computers go, is kind of flawed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
Stevorino said:
It's year one, Butch has plenty of leash. But next year we have another ridiculous schedule... and the next year... and the next year.

I don't think the fanbase barometer is just looking at wins and losses, we're looking at HOW we are winning/losing.

Are we getting blown out Oregon, Bama, Mizzou, Auburn again?

Are we scraping by Western Kentucky and South Alabama or thumping them and putting in reserves by halftime?

If Butch wins out, I'd say he has surpassed reasonable expectations in year one.
Click to expand...
Next years is easier compared to this years.
 
#18
#18
oregonvol said:
Sick of hearing about teams that were ranked when we played them. That doesn't matter in terms of strength of schedule. It's how they finish. We lost to a pretty lousy Florida team with a back-up QB (who hadn't completed a pass in college yet when he played us). Georgia was already extremely banged up and missing tons of players when we let them drive the length of the field for a touchdown at the end of the game. Neither of those teams were hugely different in personnel when we played them than when they each lost to Vanderbilt.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of truth in this. I think posters hold on to the UGA loss in hopes it truly showed signs of improvement. But as you said it's pretty much the same team that lost to Vandy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#19
#19
CBJ knew the schedule when he took the job. He takes the 3 million regardless of the record he and every other coach at the top level deserve both the credit and the blame for the results excuses, complaints and what ifs are for amateurs.
 
#20
#20
If you play in the SEC you are going to have one of the harder schedules in college football. That is, after all, what gives our no loss and 1 loss teams the upper hand in getting to the Championship.

Side note, adding Mizzou and A&M only made it more difficult for everyone. Which in turn, helps everyone.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top