IdaGriz01
Well-known member
Debated about putting this at someplace where the “soft schedule” discussion arose, but decided it deserved its own thread. The main caveat is, of course, the fact that a team’s conference record in 2016 is not necessarily a good predictor of how they will do this year. But, taken togehter, it is an indication -- with some teams turning out to be stronger this year and others being weaker. A slight complication is that several teams play Big Sky opponents in “designated non-conference” games. So I ignored those games, since they will not count in the conference standings. After that, the calculation was simple … tedious, but simple. (That was a lot of data, so hopefully I didn’t make any egregious mistakes.) FWIW, I did not try to “adjust” for home versus away games.
Team . . . Opponents' Cumulative 2016 Record
SUU . . . . 39-25
UC-D . . . 39-25
PSU . . . . 37-27
Sac-St . . 37-27
MSU . . . 36-28
UM . . . . 35-29
EWU . . . 30-34
UNC . . . 30-34
UND . . . 28-36
WSU . . . 28-36
CP . . . . 26-38
ISU . . . 26-38
NAU . . 25-39
Based on the 2016 records of their scheduled opponents, Southern Utah and UC-Davis are in big trouble unless several of those opponents go in the crapper compared to last year. By this measure, BTW, Cal Poly does not have the weakest schedule. That "honor" goes to NAU … but only by a one-win count.
Sure makes you wonder what criteria -- other than "traditional rival" notions -- the Big Sky honchos look at when they put the schedule together. The opponents at the top of the list won 61% of their games last year, while the winning fraction at the bottom is just 39%. Crazy!
Team . . . Opponents' Cumulative 2016 Record
SUU . . . . 39-25
UC-D . . . 39-25
PSU . . . . 37-27
Sac-St . . 37-27
MSU . . . 36-28
UM . . . . 35-29
EWU . . . 30-34
UNC . . . 30-34
UND . . . 28-36
WSU . . . 28-36
CP . . . . 26-38
ISU . . . 26-38
NAU . . 25-39
Based on the 2016 records of their scheduled opponents, Southern Utah and UC-Davis are in big trouble unless several of those opponents go in the crapper compared to last year. By this measure, BTW, Cal Poly does not have the weakest schedule. That "honor" goes to NAU … but only by a one-win count.
Sure makes you wonder what criteria -- other than "traditional rival" notions -- the Big Sky honchos look at when they put the schedule together. The opponents at the top of the list won 61% of their games last year, while the winning fraction at the bottom is just 39%. Crazy!
