Steele's 2017 Toughest Schedule Rankings - ESPN Insidera

[socaljim242]

So you are pissed this makes 9-4 Houston look equal to 9-4 Louisville? Do you realize there was a 36-10 game that Houston won vs Louisville?

Pick better examples next time

He did say "which slate" would you rather play. His point is spot on though.

 

[963BUSC]

So you are pissed this makes 9-4 Houston look equal to 9-4 Louisville? Do you realize there was a 36-10 game that Houston won vs Louisville?

Pick better examples next time

Yeah, cause 9-4 Idaho would be even money against 9-4 Tennessee too.

 

[Olyduck]

So you are pissed this makes 9-4 Houston look equal to 9-4 Louisville? Do you realize there was a 36-10 game that Houston won vs Louisville?

Pick better examples next time

5-7 Texas and 7-6 Kentucky is equal to 5-7 SMU and 7-6 Eastern Michigan. Better?

 

[socaljim242]

Alabama plays Mercer who went 6-4 last season(in late Nov). Harder than playing Missouri, Vanderbilt , South Carolina, Ole Miss and Mississippi state , who have worse winning percentage. And last year Bama played Chattanooga who went 9-4, so tougher than half the SEC from the past year. LOL. Yeah great formula .
Chattanooga> half the SEC

 

[7Samurai13]

Alabama plays Mercer who went 6-4 last season(in late Nov). Harder than playing Missouri, Vanderbilt , South Carolina, Ole Miss and Mississippi state , who have worse winning percentage. And last year Bama played Chattanooga who went 9-4, so tougher than half the SEC from the past year. LOL. Yeah great formula .
Chattanooga> half the SEC

How does a team go 6-4 in today's day and age? They got rained out twice and didn't play in a bowl game?

 

[socaljim242]

How does a team go 6-4 in today's day and age? They got rained out twice and didn't play in a bowl game?

Just checked. 6-5. nice catch. 11 game schedule no bowl.

 

[iowajerms]

Potentially 6 more losses. They aren't definite wins. See Iowa losing to NDSU.

It would be 6 more losses if a conference has 9 conference games. B1G has 7 more losses than a conference with 14 teams and 8-game conference schedule.

 

[7Samurai13]

It would be 6 more losses if a conference has 9 conference games. B1G has 7 more losses than a conference with 14 teams and 8-game conference schedule.

You are assuming that no matter who they play will be an automatic win. I'm sure that Rutgers would have lost against most G5 that they would have played instead of the conference game so Rutgers probably didn't have an extra loss because they played a 9 game conference schedule.

 

[iowajerms]

You are assuming that no matter who they play will be an automatic win. I'm sure that Rutgers would have lost against most G5 that they would have played instead of the conference game so Rutgers probably didn't have an extra loss because they played a 9 game conference schedule.

Okay, i get what you are saying.

 

[4down20]

P5 schools should stop playing fcs teams!

You know, if that was the case then we would have never been given the pleasure of watching FCS App St beat #5 Michigan.

 

[4down20]

It would be 6 more losses if a conference has 9 conference games. B1G has 7 more losses than a conference with 14 teams and 8-game conference schedule.

I did the math on that the other day. It represents less than 3% of the results and basically has little to no effect.

 

[Olyduck]

the problem with the math of unbalanced schedules is that not everyone plays everyone else and those teams rotate. SOS under this method can be impacted if you happen to miss the lowest teams from a division or the highest teams.

 

[socaljim242]

I did the math on that the other day. It represents less than 3% of the results and basically has little to no effect.

Thats bullshit. Six or seven guarantee losses because you're playing a conference foes at home or on the road against some conferences lining up a home game late in the season against Chattanooga , Mercer, Towsend ,Tenn State, Georgia Southern , Alcorn State type teams.

 

[theboardref]

If preseason ranking are worthless, what the Fuck does that make preseason SoS?

Phil Steele gonna Phil Steele.

 

[4down20]

Thats bullshit. Six or seven guarantee losses because you're playing a conference foes at home or on the road against some conferences lining up a home game late in the season against Chattanooga , Mercer, Towsend ,Tenn State, Georgia Southern , Alcorn State type teams.

It's not bullshit, it's math and you don't see it because you pretend it's more than 1 game rather than realizing it's 1 game in a 12 game schedule.

You go further in your mistake by foolishly looking at labels like "P5, G5 and FCS" are real measurements of strength, without regard to the fact that G5 and even FCS teams are often better than P5 teams.

But here's the math for you:

Alabama plays 8 SEC opponents every year, who each have 12 game schedules. Which means Alabama's SEC opponents play 96 games on the year. Of those 96 games, 8 of them are FCS teams. That's 7.68% of the SEC opponents games.

However, in conference games also come with guaranteed wins along with the losses. Meaning, it's impossible that all 8 of those extra games would be losses with a 9 game schedule. The maximum amount of those losses would be 7.

And now we are down to 6.72% for a maximum difference.

As it is, 6 of the 8 teams Alabama has in conference are SEC West teams, and the divisions are one sided. The most common scenario is that the SEC West teams will win and the SEC East teams will lose. So of the maximum potential of 7 remaining losses, there is maybe in reality only 2 or 3 extra losses on the formula, down to 1.92%-2.88%.

The amount of difference here is meaningless and it fully explains why the conferences that have gone to 9 game conference schedules haven't seen basically any real benefit for going to it.

Now, the other factor is adding the extra game to Alabama's schedule. And since Alabama is in the SEC West, already has Tennessee on permament rivalry, here is a list of the potential opponents every year.

Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
Missouri

So basically, the only times Alabama will generally be tested is when it happens to land on Florida or Georgia. That addition would happen a total of 2 out of 6 years.

And of course, the only real change in that extra game is whatever the difference is to the opponent being replaced. Which can actually in many cases end up being worse and lowering the schedule strength.

Got any other bullshit you want to accept because it makes you feel better?

 

[socaljim242]

It's not bullshit, it's math and you don't see it because you pretend it's more than 1 game rather than realizing it's 1 game in a 12 game schedule.

You go further in your mistake by foolishly looking at labels like "P5, G5 and FCS" are real measurements of strength, without regard to the fact that G5 and even FCS teams are often better than P5 teams.

But here's the math for you:

Alabama plays 8 SEC opponents every year, who each have 12 game schedules. Which means Alabama's SEC opponents play 96 games on the year. Of those 96 games, 8 of them are FCS teams. That's 7.68% of the SEC opponents games.

However, in conference games also come with guaranteed wins along with the losses. Meaning, it's impossible that all 8 of those extra games would be losses with a 9 game schedule. The maximum amount of those losses would be 7.

And now we are down to 6.72% for a maximum difference.

As it is, 6 of the 8 teams Alabama has in conference are SEC West teams, and the divisions are one sided. The most common scenario is that the SEC West teams will win and the SEC East teams will lose. So of the maximum potential of 7 remaining losses, there is maybe in reality only 2 or 3 extra losses on the formula, down to 1.92%-2.88%.

The amount of difference here is meaningless and it fully explains why the conferences that have gone to 9 game conference schedules haven't seen basically any real benefit for going to it.

Now, the other factor is adding the extra game to Alabama's schedule. And since Alabama is in the SEC West, already has Tennessee on permament rivalry, here is a list of the potential opponents every year.

Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
Vanderbilt
Kentucky
Missouri

So basically, the only times Alabama will generally be tested is when it happens to land on Florida or Georgia. That addition would happen a total of 2 out of 6 years.

And of course, the only real change in that extra game is whatever the difference is to the opponent being replaced. Which can actually in many cases end up being worse and lowering the schedule strength.

Got any other bullshit you want to accept because it makes you feel better?

Yeah I " foolishly looking at labels like "P5, G5 and FCS" in a week in the schedule while every other conference has to play a conference foes Alabama along with every SEC team uses that extra game to play
Mercer, Chattanooga, Alabama A&M and a bunch of other two building trucking schools. You can't spin your way out of that. Nothing you can conjure up can camouflage the fact that those games are glorified practice games all played at home. You bring up Michigan and Ap State. The reason we still remember is because its so rare. You know what wouldn't be rare? An SEC team losing if they had the balls to play even lower teams from big conferences. When the last time Alabama or Florida or other SEC teams went to play at Texas? at Ohio State ? At Michigan? at Wisconsin? At Virginia at Colorado at Oregon at Iowa, at USC at UCLA, At Purdue? You know why its rare? Because they might lose once in a while. Better to play Mercer at home then Chattanooga then Charleston Southern then Western Carolina then Chattanooga again then Western Carolina (I'm starting to see a pattern). Those were those extra games Alabama played at home instead of a conference foe this year and the past five years. 3% difference my ass.

 

[4down20]

Yeah I " foolishly looking at labels like "P5, G5 and FCS" in a week in the schedule while every other conference has to play a conference foes Alabama along with every SEC team uses that extra game to play
Mercer, Chattanooga, Alabama A&M and a bunch of other two building trucking schools. You can't spin your way out of that. Nothing you can conjure up can camouflage the fact that those games are glorified practice games all played at home. You bring up Michigan and Ap State. The reason we still remember is because its so rare. You know what wouldn't be rare? An SEC team losing if they had the balls to play even lower teams from big conferences. When the last time Alabama or Florida or other SEC teams went to play at Texas? at Ohio State ? At Michigan? at Wisconsin? At Virginia at Colorado at Oregon at Iowa, at USC at UCLA, At Purdue? You know why its rare? Because they might lose once in a while. Better to play Mercer at home then Chattanooga then Charleston Southern then Western Carolina then Chattanooga again then Western Carolina (I'm starting to see a pattern). Those were those extra games Alabama played at home instead of a conference foe this year and the past five years. 3% difference my ass.

Rare? Teams lose to FCS teams all the time.

I gave you the math, and now you start talking about neutral site and home and home games. Which statistically means an advantage of 2.5 pts for the home team. And is also the reason the biggest games are played at neutral sites.

neutral sites are the best because it's the only time neither team gets an advantage and you cry about it because your team doesn't do it(except when offered to them).

 

[theboardref]

Rare? Teams lose to FCS teams all the time.

I gave you the math, and now you start talking about neutral site and home and home games. Which statistically means an advantage of 2.5 pts for the home team. And is also the reason the biggest games are played at neutral sites.

neutral sites are the best because it's the only time neither team gets an advantage and you cry about it because your team doesn't do it(except when offered to them).

I agree about neutral site matchups. It is great, but saying there is no advantage is not always true. LSU plays BYU in a 'neutral site' game in Houston. Is the crowd going to be even close to 50/50? I will say, Bama plays more in the Atlanta opener so the crowds are usually closer to being split with the ACC schools being nearby. I love the match-ups neutral site games bring together, I loathe what they are doing to the pagentry of college football and how much they screw season ticket holders.

 

[4down20]

I agree about neutral site matchups. It is great, but saying there is no advantage is not always true. LSU plays BYU in a 'neutral site' game in Houston. Is the crowd going to be even close to 50/50? I will say, Bama plays more in the Atlanta opener so the crowds are usually closer to being split with the ACC schools being nearby. I love the match-ups neutral site games bring together, I loathe what they are doing to the pagentry of college football and how much they screw season ticket holders.

Crowds actually have very little effect on home field advantage. I saw some research on the topic, and what actually provides the home field advantage is that players are familiar with the place and it makes them more comfortable.

In the study, LSU wasn't the hardest place to play, it was some stadium which amounted to basically a high school football stadium. It was that way because it was least comfortable for the visiting players.

This is also why home field advantage becomes minimal when you play the same teams often. The other teams become use to playing in them. Of course, the home team will always be most comfortable.

In that manner, Alabama does have a small advantage in some of these places due to having played in them more often. Regulars at the Georgia Dome(not anymore though) and in Jerry World.

The only time crowds have a real effect on the game is when they are so loud that plays can't be called etc. Which is never going to happen at a neutral site, and only happens in a few stadiums(Auburn's student section comes to mind). Alabama for example the seats are too far away from the field, I doubt the crowd ever provides much effect.

 

[iowajerms]

I think crowds can have an affect. It depends on the leaders of the team. I went to a HS with 200-300 students. We got 100s to attend our games. Going from that to 70-100k+ would have an affect right away.

I think little things do too. I believe Iowa's pink locker room did at first when it was new. I think the impact now is very small.