Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Schedule Analysis

isu81

isu81

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
2,348
1,556
113
I was going to put this in the cesspool that is the Klenakis thread or add to Chris' "Adapt or Perish" thread, but wanted to start fresh. A lot of threads ultimately break down in to "But our schedule is so brutal every year...." Obviously, that is true. But is it really that much different than lower tier teams in other BCS conferences? I randomly chose a lower-tier team in the other three power conferences and looked at their schedule compared to ours.

First, I'll categorize.

Tier 1 is in-conference games we (or other lower-tier team) will lose most years.
Tier 2 are tough teams in conference we will lose to more often than not.
Tier 3 are teams in conference we will compete with or beat most years.
OOC1 are out of conference games against pretty good teams
OOC2 are out of conference games against mid-level. Maybe other decent/mid level BCS conference or mid majors that won a bowl game, best I could do.
OOC3 are out of conference that there is not an excuse to lose to. FCS, low level mid majors, whatever.

Our schedule:
Tier 1: Baylor, Oklahoma, Texas
Tier 2: KSU, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech (?), TCU (?). First two are borderline Tier 1, other 2 borderline Tier 3.
Tier 3: Kansas, West Virginia
OOC1: Iowa
OOC3: NDSU, Toledo

Pac 12 - Utah: (Also play 9 conference games)
Tier 1: USC, Oregon, Stanford
Tier 2: UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Washington
Tier 3: Colorado, Washington State
OOC1: BYU
OOC2: Utah State
OOC3: Weber State

Big Ten - Rutgers:
Tier 1: Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State
Tier 2: Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, Maryland
Tier 3: Indiana
OOC2: Washington State, Navy
OOC3: Howard, Tulane

SEC - Tennessee:
Tier 1: Georgia, Florida, Alabama, South Carolina
Tier 2: Missouri, Ole Miss
Tier 3: Vanderbilt, Kentucky
OOC1: Oklahoma
OOC2: Utah State
OOC3: Chattanooga, Arkansas State

I think these are all pretty comparable.

My point in doing this is the same as Chris doing his article. I get tired of the "tough schedule" excuse. As long as we are a lower-tier team playing in a tough conference, our schedule will be tough. As new legislation develops, it most likely will only get worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneErik
S

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
44,440
12,681
113
isu81 said:
I was going to put this in the cesspool that is the Klenakis thread or add to Chris' "Adapt or Perish" thread, but wanted to start fresh. A lot of threads ultimately break down in to "But our schedule is so brutal every year...." Obviously, that is true. But is it really that much different than lower tier teams in other BCS conferences? I randomly chose a lower-tier team in the other three power conferences and looked at their schedule compared to ours.

First, I'll categorize.

Tier 1 is in-conference games we (or other lower-tier team) will lose most years.
Tier 2 are tough teams in conference we will lose to more often than not.
Tier 3 are teams in conference we will compete with or beat most years.
OOC1 are out of conference games against pretty good teams
OOC2 are out of conference games against mid-level. Maybe other decent/mid level BCS conference or mid majors that won a bowl game, best I could do.
OOC3 are out of conference that there is not an excuse to lose to. FCS, low level mid majors, whatever.

Our schedule:
Tier 1: Baylor, Oklahoma, Texas
Tier 2: KSU, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech (?), TCU (?). First two are borderline Tier 1, other 2 borderline Tier 3.
Tier 3: Kansas, West Virginia
OOC1: Iowa
OOC3: NDSU, Toledo

Pac 12 - Utah: (Also play 9 conference games)
Tier 1: USC, Oregon, Stanford
Tier 2: UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Washington
Tier 3: Colorado, Washington State
OOC1: BYU
OOC2: Utah State
OOC3: Weber State

Big Ten - Rutgers:
Tier 1: Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State
Tier 2: Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, Maryland
Tier 3: Indiana
OOC2: Washington State, Navy
OOC3: Howard, Tulane

SEC - Tennessee:
Tier 1: Georgia, Florida, Alabama, South Carolina
Tier 2: Missouri, Ole Miss
Tier 3: Vanderbilt, Kentucky
OOC1: Oklahoma
OOC2: Utah State
OOC3: Chattanooga, Arkansas State

I think these are all pretty comparable.

My point in doing this is the same as Chris doing his article. I get tired of the "tough schedule" excuse. As long as we are a lower-tier team playing in a tough conference, our schedule will be tough. As new legislation develops, it most likely will only get worse.
Click to expand...

Put in Iowa's Big Ten Schedule for analysis. For some reason you chose Rutgers.....why?
 
JHUNSY

JHUNSY

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2013
5,211
2,975
113
Des Moines, IA
Texas should be Tier 2. Oklahoma State should be Tier 1. TCU should be Tier 3. Tech has potential so I suppose they fit there. Bottom line, our schedules will always have the same opponents because of our conference games and set up series with Iowa and UNI.

It's time we just let the team develop and expect more of them instead of making excuses.
 
S

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
44,440
12,681
113
CycloneErik said:
Randomly chose lower-tier teams for a fair analysis.

The only real problem with our schedule is that we're a lower-tier team that doesn't beat lower or middle tier teams regularly.
Click to expand...

What place did Rutgers finish in the Big Ten LAST YEAR?
 
isu81

isu81

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
2,348
1,556
113
Stormin said:
Put in Iowa's Big Ten Schedule for analysis. For some reason you chose Rutgers.....why?
Click to expand...
As indicated, I chose a lower-tier team at random. I don't think there is anyone (including Iowa fans) that would disagree that Iowa has an anomaly of an easy schedule this year. To choose them would not be choosing a lower-level or random team.
 
Rabbuk

Rabbuk

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2011
55,186
42,568
113
I think Rutgers would be comparable to an Indiana or Illinois.
 
CycloneErik

CycloneErik

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2008
105,835
49,715
113
Jamerica
rememberingdoria.wordpress.com
Stormin said:
What place did Rutgers finish in the Big Ten LAST YEAR?
Click to expand...

They're a Big Ten team now.
There's more to life that comparisons with Iowa. I appreciate that he took a wider look instead of this narrow and obsessive one that our fanbase falls into so easily.

It's a good comparison. It's not really that much harder than other lower tier teams face. We just cling to it as some badge of honor, as though it makes losing something to be proud of.
 
mj4cy

mj4cy

Asst. Regional Manager
Staff member
Mar 28, 2006
31,217
13,591
113
Iowa
I'd say Michigan is tier 1. They had a couple down years, but they won't stay down long.
 
S

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
44,440
12,681
113
It would make more sense to use the bottom feeders of last year in the Big Ten for analysis. Purdue, Northwestern and Illinois for comparisons. They finished with the 3 worst conference records.

Northwestern............78th schedule
Purdue.....................43rd schedule
Illinois......................21st schedule
 
S

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
44,440
12,681
113
CycloneErik said:
They're a Big Ten team now.
There's more to life that comparisons with Iowa. I appreciate that he took a wider look instead of this narrow and obsessive one that our fanbase falls into so easily.

It's a good comparison. It's not really that much harder than other lower tier teams face. We just cling to it as some badge of honor, as though it makes losing something to be proud of.
Click to expand...

As I said below, use Northwestern, Purdue, and Illinois........which actually played in the Big Ten last year and had the worst conference records in the league. Why would one choose Rutgers?
 
S

Stormin

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
44,440
12,681
113
isu81 said:
As indicated, I chose a lower-tier team at random. I don't think there is anyone (including Iowa fans) that would disagree that Iowa has an anomaly of an easy schedule this year. To choose them would not be choosing a lower-level or random team.
Click to expand...

Since Rutgers has never played in the Big Ten before HOW can you automatically categorize them as a Lower tier team in the Big Ten since they have not been in the conference previously?
 
isu81

isu81

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
2,348
1,556
113
Stormin said:
What place did Rutgers finish in the Big Ten LAST YEAR?
Click to expand...

OK, can see you intend to drag down this thread as well. How's Illinois:

Tier 1: Ohio State, Michigan State
Tier 2: Nebraska, Iowa, Penn State, Northwestern, Minnesota
Tier 3: Purdue
OOC1: Washington
OOC3: Youngstown, WKentucky, Texas State

Point is that you can do this for most teams that are at the bottom half of their BCS conference. It is really a matter of degree. Does it matter if it is South Carolina or Oklahoma? Gonna lose to either of them. UCLA or Kansas State? Gonna be tough to beat either. Most times, the lower level team loses. Toledo or Texas State? No excuse to lose to either.
 
isu81

isu81

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
2,348
1,556
113
surly said:
not sure how op selected his tiers? is that a historical basis, expectations for the coming year or what?
Click to expand...

As indicated, random. Just thought of a conference and a team that has been (or in Rutgers' case, would expect to be, at the bottom. I have since added Illinois. Should have picked them to start with. My error.
 
CyclonesForever

CyclonesForever

Well-Known Member
Nov 5, 2011
745
409
63
Ames, IA
You think ISU will beat West Virginia more often than not? I see us playing against them sort of like we are against Texas Tech. They will probably win than us but they can't take us lightly and we win a decent amount of them still. I'd love to be proven wrong though.
 
isu81

isu81

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
2,348
1,556
113
Agree and I think Penn State falls in the same category, as does UCLA and possibly Missouri, Arizona and Washington. But I knew the nit-pickers here would destroy me if I allowed my analysis to consider that Michigan, etc. may be on that level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom