Michigan vs msu strength of schedule
This is my first Forum topic so go easy on me.
Link to source:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt11.htm
After having to deal with lil' bro complain that we played 8 home games and didn't play Wisconsin or PSU I find the strength of schedule rankings very interesting. The following schedule rankings are taken from Sagarin. Can anyone tell me if these are official? Is there an official schedule ranking?
Alabama: 15
LSU: 7
Ok St: 3 (jobbed? I think so.)
msu: 38
Iowa: 39
Michigan: 40
Wisconsin: 44
Va Tech: 59
Boise St: 75
Some thoughts:
After playing Wisconsin twice and Georgia (of the SEC!) msu's strength of schedule was marginally better than ours. So I don't get why msu and detroit media are saying that Michigan didn't play anybody.
These rankings only confirm my belief that OK St got jobbed and that Boise St needs to join a major conference (not the Big East) to get my respect.
January 13th, 2012 at 2:52 PM ^
...that "MSU schedule was stronger" meme can be attributed to State's schedule including 5 teams that finished in the top 25 to our 3. But we also faced less creampuffs, so...
BCS Bowl>Non-BCS Bowl
January 13th, 2012 at 3:00 PM ^
account that OSU was down 4 starters when they played MSU I would say our schedule was actually tougher. Also they got a boost from the B1G championship game.
January 13th, 2012 at 4:59 PM ^
Sagarin rankings actually have a very unique emphasis. In that system, the difference between San Diego State and Youngstown State (two nearly interchangeable cupcakes) is greater than the difference between playing Alabama and Ole Miss. So, the fact that you missed Wisconsin completely while we played them twice is pretty much completely irrelevant to their rankings.
If you honestly believe UM had a stronger schedule than MSU, you're more delusional than I thought.
January 13th, 2012 at 5:18 PM ^
DenardsThirdHeisman, a lot of the time I assume that you're a troll, but that's actually a pretty good point. Sagarin ratings are kind of bullshit anyway, seeing as Texas A&M is still ranked in the top 15.
This is really dumb, and this thread probably deserves to be trolled. I will take the initiative:
d1kk r0d !$ t3h 5ukk0rz!!!1!!0n3!11un0! 5cyouM & d3naaar333d ar3 t3h n00b7!
I'm bored now.
January 13th, 2012 at 5:20 PM ^
If you think Youngstown State and SDSU are "interchangeable creampuffs", I think you have that delusional finger pointed in the wrong direction.
January 13th, 2012 at 5:26 PM ^
In 2010, SDSU went 9-4, losing all four of their games by a total of 15 points - that includes #25 Utah and Rose Bowl (...do you know what that is?) Champion, #3 TCU. Youngstown State does not play Division-1 football. Calling these two programs interchangeable is absurd.
Go get an Anti-Missouri tattoo and never come here again.
January 13th, 2012 at 7:00 PM ^
on their entire schedule NOT make a bowl game of some sort(EMU, Minny) , compared to MSU schedule where they had four teams not play in a bowl game (FAU, CMU, IU, Minny - not counting Youngstown St) , I would say our schedule was as tough, if not tougher than theirs. Apples and oranges really. After we beat them this year, they will have no more excuses for anything.
January 13th, 2012 at 3:01 PM ^
This feels unnecessary, but whatever.
Schools bitch and moan because they like to bitch and moan, and at this point everyone should just tune them out. SOS always drives me crazy because it doesn't necessarily mean that you did well in those games - I remember a couple of years ago in basketball Georgia made it to the tournament because they played the toughest schedule in basketball, though they basically went .500 in the process.
UM and MSU play effectively the same schedule year in and year out. Yes, MSU had to play Wiscy twice. UM scheduled SDSU, which is better than any OOC game MSU played. Plus, UM played Illinois while MSU played IU, which may have actually been the worst team in the Big 10 least year in spite of Gopherquest.
But regardless, both teams play tough schedules and UM lost fewer games. I get why MSU fans complain because it does suck to play that extra game in the B1G tourney and lose, but it wasn't like they were going to selected for a BCS bid and it was actually their own chance to get one provided they won. So thems the shakes, and wasting more time here lamenting the sorry state of Sparta is a meaningless exercise.
January 13th, 2012 at 3:09 PM ^
January 13th, 2012 at 3:09 PM ^
I'll admit, I'm either too lazy of busy to chase down unclear information, so I appreciate the specific title, the link to information you're citing, and a concise explanation of your point--no reason to give you flak for your forum topic (I did notice you changed your title, though. I like to see a note indicating an edit to a post--not a big deal here since no one had posted before the change.)
I know this has been discussed before, but for some reason Sagarin really loves the Big 12 strength of schedule, so most of the BIG 12 SOS's are inflated imho, including OK State's. I still think their schedule was tougher than Alabama's, though.
January 13th, 2012 at 3:14 PM ^
In the future I will make note of edits to topics.
I changed the title because I wasn't getting any responses. So I figures Michigan vs msu would generate more traffic.
January 13th, 2012 at 6:39 PM ^
Sagarin (and most computer rankings) loves the Big 12 because of its nonconference record. There's a diary writer ( I can't remember who) who rates the conferences against each other, and he covered that fairly well early on in the season.
January 13th, 2012 at 3:14 PM ^
Computer systems like Sagarin calculate strength of schedule by means of either an average, or a median system. The big difference this creates relative to how people evaluate strength of schedule is that the computers distinguish hugely between playing San Diego State (rated 67th) and playing Florida Atlantic (rated 200th), while a human judgment tends to categorize games into "creampuff" (SDSU and FAU), "real game" (Iowa, Notre Dame), and ranked team. (Maybe another category above that).
I don't know which is correct. It's possible there is a threshold effect, where neither team was ever going to lose to either SDSU or FAU, so both games should be treated equally. Teams ranked below around 65 on the Sagarin predictor would generate point spreads of the 20+ variety, which require true freakshows for the favorite to lose. But yes, Sagarin basically rates MSU playing FAU and Wisconsin as being an easier schedule than UM playing SDSU and Western Michigan.
It's also possible that Sagarin is correct to do so. A creampuff is only a creampuff when you beat them. When you lose to them, it's the Horror. When a good team loses to a creampuff, it tends to be because said creampuff was actually kinda sorta decent, rather than a total tire fire. The difference betweeen a 1% chance of losing and 5% chance of losing is either functionally irrelevant (both are in the "our season is shot" range), or huge (five times more likely to lose to the 5% team...)
But basically, MSU played the 107th, 144th, and 200th teams (average Sagarin rank 150). UM played 67th, 76th, and 131st teams (average Sagarin rank of 91). That difference over three games is just a bigger than the difference between playing Wisconsin (6th) and Purdue (72nd), even if it doesn't look like it.
In other words - your mileage may vary.
January 13th, 2012 at 4:19 PM ^
EMU's gonna mess Sparty up next year.
January 13th, 2012 at 4:33 PM ^
Is CMU when sparty comes here
January 13th, 2012 at 4:44 PM ^
Ole CMU and MSU the battle for Michigan's 2nd best team
January 13th, 2012 at 7:22 PM ^
Gotta love them Chips (until they come to A2)
January 13th, 2012 at 5:03 PM ^
From a school that's permanent cross-rival is Indiana.
January 13th, 2012 at 7:20 PM ^
Lil Bro can bitch all he wants but Indiana cannot compare to ohio.
January 13th, 2012 at 11:56 PM ^
Again with the "lil bro" comment. Sparty is REALLY impacting you in real life, aren't they? Jesus dude lol. Why do you ALWAYS have to bring them up??
ANYWAYS...
January 13th, 2012 at 9:43 PM ^
we played more bowl bound opponents this year than any other team in college football. 11/13 opponents were in bowls... 12/13 were bowl elligible, only one not bowl elligible was minnesota. so although we did not play any elite teams, we played solid opponents week in week out.
January 14th, 2012 at 12:34 AM ^
EMU won 6 games but 2 wins were against FCS teams so they needed 7 wins to be bowl eligible. I agree we had a very strong schedule. Playing at home helps though.