All this Stanford talk has taken me into internet link tangent. I was just curious if anyone who has looked at this closely can help me understand how these things are possible.
Someone mentioned that Stanford had only played 1 team currently ranked(Oregon). I thought that was interesting to see how really good they were. Then I click to a different link and see that they played the 8th hardest schedule according to Sagarin.
So you played the #1 ranked team, the Pac 10 is admittedly terrible this year and your hardest out of conference game was the Michigan staple 6-6 Notre Dame and that gets you the 8th hardest schedule in the country? Alabama 15th hardest schedule would like a word.
This lead me to notice the Pac 10 is considered the best conference this year. Huh?
So this lead to me to a few questions for the statistically inclined.
Since the PAC 10 did horribly in non conference with few marquee wins how did Sagarin get them to be the hardest conference?
Did the fact that most of the PAC 10 beat each other up besides Oregon and Stanford lead to a better conference rating? I guess playing more mediocre teams than playing 1 or 2 real hard teams and a tomato can makes for a harder SOS which I don't believe.
Is there a more respected strength of schedule rating than Sagarin or is that the accepted standard, because it seems pretty out of whack.