Strength of schedule doesn't matter?

[oaknightshockey1]

Dave Bartoo of the College Football Matrix is a smart dude. He was on the radio here talking about the upcoming college football season and he came out and said that he thinks strength of schedule is pretty worthless. He has stats to back it up...for instance, over the 5 last years, the team with the better strength of schedule has won 51% of bowl games. He goes into a lot of other stuff as well in this interview. For those of you that love stats, this is a great listen.

The Zone - USC Podcast Landing Page
(Click the Aug 13 Seg 10 link and go to 5:35 to get to Bartoo)

There's also an interesting tidbit about how he thinks over the next couple years, the B1G will surpass the ACC and Big 12.

 

[Texas Jefe]

guess we'll find out in the next couple of years if he's right.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Charlie42 is going to commit suicide.

 

[HuskerOC]

SOS really hasn't meant shit in college football in its entire history.

Record, and more importantly, undefeated teams have been the biggest factors in how teams are ranked and respected. Even during the BCS period, the lone change that was really made was to computers and their margin of victory utilized in their analytics. These were put into place due to Nebraska and Oklahoma getting bids to the Championship game, when it was highly controversial that neither belonged after receiving ass kickings in their final game before the BCS Championship game.

Computers were then reduced to being meaningless as the human vote always determined who would play in the BCS Championship game.

Voters may have alluded to thinking about SOS, but I highly doubt votes were cast strictly based upon SOS, but more of something voters considered when comparing teams with similar records and to figure out a legit Top 2 to 3 teams.

I firmly believe SOS will have a profound impact on the 4 team playoff. When you get into the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th teams to determine which is the best, records and quality wins are rarely all that much different between the teams. SOS (if a solid SOS metric is used) can be a huge differentiator between the selection of 1 team over the other. Especially OOC scheduling.

If your 4th team comes down to 2 teams with identical 12-1 records, who do you reward with that last spot. A team that played an FCS team, 2 Sun Belt teams, and a bottom end Power 5 conference team, or a team that schedule 2 Power 5 conference schools, at least 1 of those on the road, and zero FCS teams?

We'll know soon enough in the next couple of years.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

SOS really hasn't meant shit in college football in its entire history.

Record, and more importantly, undefeated teams have been the biggest factors in how teams are ranked and respected. Even during the BCS period, the lone change that was really made was to computers and their margin of victory utilized in their analytics. These were put into place due to Nebraska and Oklahoma getting bids to the Championship game, when it was highly controversial that neither belonged after receiving ass kickings in their final game before the BCS Championship game.

Computers were then reduced to being meaningless as the human vote always determined who would play in the BCS Championship game.

Voters may have alluded to thinking about SOS, but I highly doubt votes were cast strictly based upon SOS, but more of something voters considered when comparing teams with similar records and to figure out a legit Top 2 to 3 teams.

I firmly believe SOS will have a profound impact on the 4 team playoff. When you get into the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th teams to determine which is the best, records and quality wins are rarely all that much different between the teams. SOS (if a solid SOS metric is used) can be a huge differentiator between the selection of 1 team over the other. Especially OOC scheduling.

If your 4th team comes down to 2 teams with identical 12-1 records, who do you reward with that last spot. A team that played an FCS team, 2 Sun Belt teams, and a bottom end Power 5 conference team, or a team that schedule 2 Power 5 conference schools, at least 1 of those on the road, and zero FCS teams?

We'll know soon enough in the next couple of years.

That's his point though...in his eyes, the CFB Playoff is about picking the best teams. He says something in the interview like "So, the committee is giving out scheduling awards now?" I can't articulate the point as well as I'd like, but if you have time, the interview in the OP is pretty interesting.

 

[ElTexan]

The committee will be cowardly and just go by the Coaches' and AP poll ranks.... unfortunately.

 

[podsox]

schedule is important once u get a loss imo. bowl games are pretty useless. some teams come in wanting to be there and others can give two shits

 

[ElTexan]

schedule is important once u get a loss imo. bowl games are pretty useless. some teams come in wanting to be there and others can give two shits

lies. all teams want to win at all times. ask the seniors on those teams if they want to win the LAST GAME THEY WILL EVER PLAY

 

[Gator]

Dave Bartoo .......... has stats to back it up...for instance, over the 5 last years, the team with the better strength of schedule has won 51% of bowl games......

This is a ridiculous statement to make and an even more ridiculous statistic to give.

In 2012 Kansas ended up with the "#9" SOS using the link to SOS provided.
BCF Toys - Strength of Schedule Ratings
yet KU lost to 9 teams with lower SOS.

#9 SOS Kansas lost to #14 SOS Texas
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #21 SOS Texas Tech
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #26 SOS TCU
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #27 SOS Baylor
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #28 SOS Oklahoma St.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #29 SOS Iowa St.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #32 SOS West Virginia
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #103 SOS Northern Ill.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #109 SOS Rice

Of course KU lost to 2 teams with higher SOS also!
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #5 SOS Kansas St.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #6 SOS Oklahoma

My goodness the team with the higher SOS won only 18% of the time! WOW!

Who has a "ranking" system based only on SOS? Bowl games aren't designed to match up teams of near equal strength so looking at SOS is useless. I'm surprised the higher SOS bowl team won 51% of the time.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

This is a ridiculous statement to make and an even more ridiculous statistic to give.

In 2012 Kansas ended up with the "#9" SOS using the link to SOS provided.
BCF Toys - Strength of Schedule Ratings
yet KU lost to 9 teams with lower SOS.

#9 SOS Kansas lost to #14 SOS Texas
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #21 SOS Texas Tech
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #26 SOS TCU
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #27 SOS Baylor
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #28 SOS Oklahoma St.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #29 SOS Iowa St.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #32 SOS West Virginia
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #103 SOS Northern Ill.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #109 SOS Rice

Of course KU lost to 2 teams with higher SOS also!
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #5 SOS Kansas St.
#9 SOS Kansas lost to #6 SOS Oklahoma

My goodness the team with the higher SOS won only 18% of the time! WOW!

Who has a "ranking" system based only on SOS? Bowl games aren't designed to match up teams of near equal strength so looking at SOS is useless. I'm surprised the higher SOS bowl team won 51% of the time.

I think you missed the point. Bowl games ARE (theoretically) designed to match up teams based upon how good they are in their respective conferences. So you get good a good B1G team vs. a good SEC team, a middle-of-the-pack PAC team vs. a middle-of-the-pack Big 12 team, etc. The point being made is that how difficult a team's schedule was the rest of the year had hardly any effect on the outcome of the bowl game. Sometimes, it helps to actually take in the information provided in the OP before going off about how dumb it is

 

[4down20]

I'm not sure where SoS matters in terms of who wins bowl games, or why it should or shouldn't have an effect is relative to what it's for.

But, as far as voters have gone, often times it takes a decent sized back seat, where the focus is only put on who has the highest/best game and maybe you'll see a few other games having affect at most. But record has trumped it big time.

 

[WarDamnPanthers]

I do think the BIG is on the rise. Not that I have a horse in that race.

 

[Codaxx]

I think you missed the point. Bowl games ARE (theoretically) designed to match up teams based upon how good they are in their respective conferences. So you get good a good B1G team vs. a good SEC team, a middle-of-the-pack PAC team vs. a middle-of-the-pack Big 12 team, etc. The point being made is that how difficult a team's schedule was the rest of the year had hardly any effect on the outcome of the bowl game. Sometimes, it helps to actually take in the information provided in the OP before going off about how dumb it is

That doesnt matter. Many bowl games feature Conference X #5 vs ConferenceY #4. Stats are fun, but you have to know what they mean.

 

[charlie42s]

Charlie42 is going to commit suicide.

Your comment is tasteless, especially since Robin Williams recently committed suicide.

FWIW when I was in my early 20's I did try to commit suicide. Given the way my life was going at the time, it's no surprise that I failed and I'm quite happy that I did fail. I received counseling, which mean that I talked with a counselor about my sucky life. One morning I was walking to an appointment with my counselor and going over what I was going to say. It was a beautiful morning and I came to the realization that I should enjoy life, concentrating my attention on the good parts and enduring the negative parts.

Over time I have found that they are many in the world who take pleasure at putting down people in an effort to keep themselves happy. You're now in that category. I suggest you spend some time understanding how your speech/writing affects others.

 

[Codaxx]

I think you missed the point. Bowl games ARE (theoretically) designed to match up teams based upon how good they are in their respective conferences. So you get good a good B1G team vs. a good SEC team, a middle-of-the-pack PAC team vs. a middle-of-the-pack Big 12 team, etc. The point being made is that how difficult a team's schedule was the rest of the year had hardly any effect on the outcome of the bowl game. Sometimes, it helps to actually take in the information provided in the OP before going off about how dumb it is

this also makes the assumption that all conferences are equal every year.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Your comment is tasteless, especially since Robin Williams recently committed suicide.

FWIW when I was in my early 20's I did try to commit suicide. Given the way my life was going at the time, it's no surprise that I failed and I'm quite happy that I did fail. I received counseling, which mean that I talked with a counselor about my sucky life. One morning I was walking to an appointment with my counselor and going over what I was going to say. It was a beautiful morning and I came to the realization that I should enjoy life, concentrating my attention on the good parts and enduring the negative parts.

Over time I have found that they are many in the world who take pleasure at putting down people in an effort to keep themselves happy. You're now in that category. I suggest you spend some time understanding how your speech/writing affects others.

Ok Charlie I didn't mean it that way so I apologize.

 

[charlie42s]

Ok Charlie I didn't mean it that way so I apologize.

Thanks. AFWIW I think most schools, fans and pollsters completely ignore SOS. They just look at Win-Loss records.

Maybe it's because I was an athlete, but losing at sports or any game doesn't bother me. How the teams that I follow perform may disgust me, but they don't cause me to be depressed. When competing with a hundred others in an individual event, I remember there is only 1 winner and all the others are losers.

... and there are no winners in Sports Discussion boards.

 

[Gator]

I think you missed the point. Bowl games ARE (theoretically) designed to match up teams based upon how good they are in their respective conferences. So you get good a good B1G team vs. a good SEC team, a middle-of-the-pack PAC team vs. a middle-of-the-pack Big 12 team, etc.

Where did you get this notion? In last Bowl season MORE than half of the games had point spreads of greater than 6 points. They are selected to get the biggest gate and the Bowls couldn't careless about relative strengths of the teams. Therefore looking at SOS using mismatched teams is USELESS!!!

The point being made is that how difficult a team's schedule was the rest of the year had hardly any effect on the outcome of the bowl game. Sometimes, it helps to actually take in the information provided in the OP before going off about how dumb it is

I will repeat it again for you, looking at SOS for MISMATCHED teams is USELESS!!! His stat that the team with the higher SOS won 51% of the Bowl games is STUPID.

Of the 35 Bowl games, 18 had spreads greater than 6 points and 17 had spreads of less than 6 points (none had 6 point spreads).

In the games with spreads less than 6 points (which for the sake of argument we will call (using your term) fairly evenly matched):
Washington -5.5 vs Brigham Young
North Texas -5.5 vs UNLV
Louisville -5.5 vs Miami (FL)
USC -4.5 vs Fresno State
Washington State -4 vs Colorado State
Oregon State -4 vs Boise State
Minnesota -3.5 vs Syracuse
Oklahoma State -3 vs Missouri
Marshall -2.5 vs Maryland
Ohio State -2.5 vs Clemson
North Carolina -2.5 vs Cincinnati
Ole Miss -2.5 vs Georgia Tech
Utah State -2 vs Northern Illinois
Vanderbilt -1.5 vs Houston
Wisconsin -1.5 vs South Carolina
Tulane -1 vs Louisiana-Lafayette
Buffalo -1 vs San Diego State

Favored team won 10 and lost 7 times.
Favored Winners
Wash, NTexas, Lou, USC, Ore St, Marsh, NC, Ole Miss, Utah St, and Vandy

Favored Losers
Wash St, Minn, Ok St, Ohio St, Wisc, Tulane, and Buffalo.

Thus the “favored” teams won 10/17 or 58.8%. This would support the notion that these teams are “fairly evenly” matched.

Now, look at those same 17 games in terms of SOS with the “favored” (better SOS) on the left
# 16 SOS Washington vs # 50 SOS Brigham Young
# 103 SOS North Texas vs # 110 SOS UNLV
# 37 SOS Miami (FL) vs 107 SOS Louisville
# 24 SOS USC vs # 113 SOS Fresno State
# 2 SOS Washington State vs # 74 SOS Colorado State
# 16 SOS Oregon State vs # 73 SOS Boise State
# 52 SOS Syracuse vs # 69 SOS Minnesota
# 23 SOS Missouri vs # 43 SOS Oklahoma State
# 49 SOS Maryland vs # 115 SOS Marshall
# 35 SOS Clemson vs # 67 SOS Ohio State
# 63 SOS North Carolina vs # 105 SOS Cincinnati
# 11 SOS Ole Miss vs # 57 SOS Georgia Tech
# 82 SOS Utah State vs # 104 SOS Northern Illinois
# 39 SOS Vanderbilt vs # 78 SOS Houston
# 30 SOS South Carolina vs # 34 SOS Wisconsin
# 109 SOS Louisiana-Lafayette vs # 123 SOS Tulane
# 72 SOS Buffalo vs # 100 SOS San Diego State

Here the “favored” won 13 and lost 4.

Favored Winners
Wash, NTexas, USC, Ore St, Syracuse, Missouri, Clemson, NC, Ole Miss, Utah St, Vandy, So Carolina, and La-La.

Favored Losers
Miami, Wash St, Maryland, and Buffalo.

Thus the “favored” teams won 13/17 or 76.5%. This would support the notion that SOS is a good predictor for teams are “fairly evenly” matched. Thus, to get down to 51% overall suggests that SOS is NOT very useful for picking games with point spreads greater than 6 points.

 

[Desean12345]

SOS is how the BCS justified most of it's bogus and rigged title game and bowl game pairings. Not sure how much it's going to mean in the upcoming playoff, but i reckon it'll mean a lot.