Huskers SoS was 30th. Or was it 72nd?

NUance

NUance

Assistant Coach
Depending on who’s number you look at, NU’s 2010 SoS was anywhere from 30th to 72nd. And that's just the four below that I looked at. I'm not sure if there's a correct answer for SoS.

30th: Anderson & Hester (one of the BCS computer inputs) LINK

39th: Sagarin (one of the BCS computer inputs) LINK

42nd: Colley Matrix (one of the BCS computer inputs) LINK

72nd: www.collegefootballpoll.com LINK

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Throw out collegefootballpoll.com. Throw in A&H (30th) and Massey (28th) and average them all. You come out somewhere in the low 30's counting the bowl game.

 
This is why I never bought into to the whole stength of schedule thing. They should only count your conference games and then your highest ranked non conference game. If you didnt play a ranked non conference opponent, then go with the team that has the best record.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JTrain said:
Throw out collegefootballpoll.com. Throw in A&H (30th) and Massey (28th) and average them all. You come out somewhere in the low 30's counting the bowl game.
Click to expand...
You don't happen to have a link to Massey's SoS, do you? I couldn't find it.

 
I talked to Sagarin about that topic during the season, but I was specifically asking about the PAC-10's absurdly high SOS. His answer:

knapplc,
The Pac-10 plays a full 9-game round-robin unlike the other BCS AQ conferences.

Thus they have one LESS cupcake game in their schedules.

They did very well in their OUT OF CONFERENCE games (you can figure that out

by adding up the W-L for the teams). And so losing to each other in conference games doesn't really affect the overall conference standing.

Jeff

knapplc wrote:
 
Jeff,
 
Are we seeing a statistical anomaly in the rankings this year? Is it really possible that the Pac-10, comprised of eight teams with five or more losses, can have the nos. 1-7, 10, 12 and 19 SOS?
 
Regards,
knapplc
Click to expand...
Without looking, I'd guess the Big 10 did mediocre in their OOC games, and that contributed to their overall lower SOS.

For the record, I didn't agree with Sagarin's explanation very much. I think the PAC-10's numbers are skewed regardless of his explanation.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top