Quin Tarrence retweetledi
Now that the Big Ten is 4-1 vs the SEC in bowl games, I think it’s time we have a serious discussion. Strength of Schedule is a completely flawed metric that begins and ends with a biased opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt.
It begins with a biased pre-season ranking, which influences an initial strength of schedule, then is effected by minimal cross-conference games, and compares conferences that don’t even have the same amount of conference games being played, as well as teams who have drastically different schedules within those conferences.
Biased pre-season rankings.
There is no logical reason why pre-season rankings exist, other than orchestrated drama to increase TV ratings. The CFP system got this right by not ranking teams until November. HOWEVER, the CFP does take into account Strength of Schedule, which traces back to the biased pre-season rankings. If it weren’t, then who’s to argue that the MAC isn’t the best conference (e.g. NIU beating Notre Dame) that faced a few upsets (e.g. Ohio State upsetting Akron) and not the other way around? Obviously we all think it’s the other way around, and that’s an extreme, but the point is it traces back to a human opinion from pre-season expectations.
Minimal cross-conference games.
They’re all games between an unknown placed team from one conference vs another (e.g. future SEC’s 4th place Alabama defeating B1G’s future 15th place Wisconsin, or the future B1G’s 9th place USC defeating SEC’s future 7th place LSU) early in the season to set a preconceived notion that one conference is better than the other without truly knowing anything about each conference yet — not to mention teams evolve throughout the season.
The ACC and SEC only have 8 conference games… by choice.
Half the SEC plays a P4 opponent rival (e.g. UGA-GT, SC-Clemson, etc.) to fool you into thinking they schedule tough Out-of-Conference opponents. But let’s not forget, that’s just the equivalent of a Big Ten’s 9th conference opponent. And the other half schedules an FCS opponent before their rival.
Half of the SEC schedules are only 67% P4 and include an FCS opponent. The other half is 75% P4 and also includes an FCS opponent. While half of the B1G schedules are 83% P4 with no FCS opponent. And the other half is 75% P4 with no FCS opponent. Both types of B1G schedules are objectively more difficult than either type of SEC schedule. Don’t let UGA-GT “out of conference” games fool you. That’s just the equivalent of a 9th Big Ten (or Big 12) conference game.
Some teams have easier schedules than others… by draw. Within their own conference that is. For example, 7 of Michigan’s 9 conference opponents were bowl eligible, while only 5 of Penn State’s 9 conference opponents were bowl eligible. And then all 8 of LSU’s conference opponents were bowl eligible, while only 5 of Georgia’s conference opponents were eligible. Am I arguing LSU would beat Georgia and Michigan would beat Penn State? Well… maybe yes to the later. But the point is, we’ll never know… and that’s even within a conference.
Example Comparisons
Let’s look at Michigan & Bama’s four Out-of -Conference games (well… Michigan’s 3 OOC games and then their first conference game), for example.
🐘: USF, WKU, Mercer and Wisconsin. (Only 2 bowl opponents and an FCS opponent).
〽️: Fresno, Texas, Ark St, and USC (All 4 bowl opponents).
Now let’s compare some key SEC & B1G schedules broken down by # of opponents.
# of Bowl Eligible Reg. Szn Opponents:
Michigan: 10
Texas: 9
Ohio State: 8
Alabama: 8
Penn State: 7
Georgia: 7
Tennessee: 7
# of Playoff-Bound Reg. Szn Opponents:
Michigan: 4
Ohio State: 3
Georgia: 3
Alabama: 2
Texas: 1
Penn State: 1
Tennessee: 1
English
