Post by angryfan on Dec 9, 2007 9:18:05 GMT -5
Since I work around a lot, and I mean a LOT, of die hard, "we're teh best team in teh evar!" Ohio State fans, I've heard my share of how tough they have it, and how OSU has such a tough season. Now, being both a stat dork and an argumentative type, I, along with a co-worker and fellow poster decided to look a little deeper into it.
I figured a good way to go about this, because I'm at work and bored, would be to look at the combined win/loss records for a given team's opponents this year. Bit awkward, I know, but still easier to figure than the BCS system that decides that, no matter what Notre Dame does (like this year, for instance), they will receive a check from the BCS when the Bowl games end for 1.3 million bucks. The total goes up to 4.5 million if they make it to a BCS game.
Must be nice, eh?
Anyway, back to it. I figured I'd start with OSU and LSU, since that's the National Championship. OSU's opponents, the "tough" schedule people have been hammering me about, went a combined 73-71. No, that isn't bad, but does that really scream "we owned a abunch of tough teams" or "who says we can't play Akron AND Ball State"?
By contrast, the Tigers finished up a schedule that saw their opponents go a combined 87-70. Not only did they win, but they did it against teams that also won, which to me says they're good. God, I feel kinda sick writing that, but hey, it's true.
Next up is Virginia Tech and Kansas. Remember Kansas? Poor bastards get hosed because of the lost to Mizzou? Yeah, well, on the eyar, their opponents managed to rack up a "lofty" 61-83 record overall. That's not so hot. As for Tech, yes, they lost to LSU, but their opponents overall were tough all season, finished a combined 89-68. 9 of their opponents finished at or above the .500 mark, compared to7 for the Jayhawks.
The Sooners (fueled by complimentary BBQ sauce, I'm sure) head to the Fiesta Bowl to take on the Mountaineers, and both teams' opponents for the year racked up a total of 75 wins. Difference being that, while West Virginia's opponents lost a combined 69 games, Oklahoma's lost a combined 80. Far as opponents individually, Oklahoma had 7 teams finish at or above .500, with 8 of West Virginia's foes doing so.
USC and the Fightin' Illini (someone explain to me what the hell that is, please) have the Sugar Bowl berths, and I'm sure ESPN will tell us in the coming weeks how dominant, historic, majestic, and spectacularly good in the sac USC is. What they won't be touting is the fact that USC's schedule full o' juggernauts like Idaho (1-11) went a combined 64-81. Hell, of their 11 games, only three of their opponents finished the year above .500, with two finishing at 6-6.
Illinois on the other hand finished a schedule of opponents that combined to go 81-62, with 10 out of 12 opponents either breaking even or finishing with a winning record.
Then, there's the Bulldogs and the Rainbows in the Sugar Bowl. Like many, I've said more than once, let Hawaii and their undefeated record compete for the title, but after looking at the numbers, well, I don't think that would wind up being very pretty. The Bulldogs have said they feel like they got the shaft, after going 10-2 against opponents that combined to go 74-69, with seven opponents finishing above .500, and two others at 6-6.
Colt Brennan had a great year, and Hawaii's coaching staff can thump their chests at running the table, but it kinda loses a bit of luster when you look at those opponents. 12 games in the season, but of those games, a whopping three (!) finished at or above even (Boise State, Freso State with winning records, and Nevada at 6-6). Add to that, three teams, Northern Colorado, Idaho, and UNLV, finished an epic 4-32 (!!). All told, Hawaii's opponents rolled out a tally of 53-92 for the year, the worst total of any of the 10 teams.
Not real sure where all this goes, but I think it just proves we need a playoff system.
EDIT: I HATE when my fingers get ahead of my brain, typos are fixed.
I figured a good way to go about this, because I'm at work and bored, would be to look at the combined win/loss records for a given team's opponents this year. Bit awkward, I know, but still easier to figure than the BCS system that decides that, no matter what Notre Dame does (like this year, for instance), they will receive a check from the BCS when the Bowl games end for 1.3 million bucks. The total goes up to 4.5 million if they make it to a BCS game.
Must be nice, eh?
Anyway, back to it. I figured I'd start with OSU and LSU, since that's the National Championship. OSU's opponents, the "tough" schedule people have been hammering me about, went a combined 73-71. No, that isn't bad, but does that really scream "we owned a abunch of tough teams" or "who says we can't play Akron AND Ball State"?
By contrast, the Tigers finished up a schedule that saw their opponents go a combined 87-70. Not only did they win, but they did it against teams that also won, which to me says they're good. God, I feel kinda sick writing that, but hey, it's true.
Next up is Virginia Tech and Kansas. Remember Kansas? Poor bastards get hosed because of the lost to Mizzou? Yeah, well, on the eyar, their opponents managed to rack up a "lofty" 61-83 record overall. That's not so hot. As for Tech, yes, they lost to LSU, but their opponents overall were tough all season, finished a combined 89-68. 9 of their opponents finished at or above the .500 mark, compared to7 for the Jayhawks.
The Sooners (fueled by complimentary BBQ sauce, I'm sure) head to the Fiesta Bowl to take on the Mountaineers, and both teams' opponents for the year racked up a total of 75 wins. Difference being that, while West Virginia's opponents lost a combined 69 games, Oklahoma's lost a combined 80. Far as opponents individually, Oklahoma had 7 teams finish at or above .500, with 8 of West Virginia's foes doing so.
USC and the Fightin' Illini (someone explain to me what the hell that is, please) have the Sugar Bowl berths, and I'm sure ESPN will tell us in the coming weeks how dominant, historic, majestic, and spectacularly good in the sac USC is. What they won't be touting is the fact that USC's schedule full o' juggernauts like Idaho (1-11) went a combined 64-81. Hell, of their 11 games, only three of their opponents finished the year above .500, with two finishing at 6-6.
Illinois on the other hand finished a schedule of opponents that combined to go 81-62, with 10 out of 12 opponents either breaking even or finishing with a winning record.
Then, there's the Bulldogs and the Rainbows in the Sugar Bowl. Like many, I've said more than once, let Hawaii and their undefeated record compete for the title, but after looking at the numbers, well, I don't think that would wind up being very pretty. The Bulldogs have said they feel like they got the shaft, after going 10-2 against opponents that combined to go 74-69, with seven opponents finishing above .500, and two others at 6-6.
Colt Brennan had a great year, and Hawaii's coaching staff can thump their chests at running the table, but it kinda loses a bit of luster when you look at those opponents. 12 games in the season, but of those games, a whopping three (!) finished at or above even (Boise State, Freso State with winning records, and Nevada at 6-6). Add to that, three teams, Northern Colorado, Idaho, and UNLV, finished an epic 4-32 (!!). All told, Hawaii's opponents rolled out a tally of 53-92 for the year, the worst total of any of the 10 teams.
Not real sure where all this goes, but I think it just proves we need a playoff system.
EDIT: I HATE when my fingers get ahead of my brain, typos are fixed.
