Originally posted by FeliSilvestris:
Originally posted by hdhntr1:
...had we played the bottom 4 teams which we go only once a second time rather than playing MSU, Purdue, etc the second time, we might have had 3-4 more wins than the 6 we ended up with. The schedule we had was the difference between winning 6 and 9 wins in the BIG.
A lot of teams could say the same, because to my knowledge no team got to play all their 5 non-RR games against the bottom five teams....certainly not all could...Other teams may also be complaining about their own B1G schedule, that they had to play so-and-so away, that they had to play so and so twice, etc., etc. It is a comparative thing.
For example, Nebby's "repeat games" were against Wiscky, Mary, IOA, ill, and Minny, ranked 1, 2, 4, 7 and 10...all had a non-losing conf records, except Minny (which won 6 r.s. games, as NU)...those 5 seem tougher than NU's 5, considering than IN CONFERENCE Mary was stronger than MSU (in fact swept them in the reg. season).
But, anyhow, both NU and Nebby play THIRTEEN games as part of a ROUND ROBIN with the same teams, so even if Nebby's B1G schedule was indeed tougher than NU's it couldn't be by much, since the RR covers about 3/4 of the B1G schedule.
To talk about SoS you have to compare a team's schedule against the others, using some sort of system or formula for all teams...And when you do it for the B1G schedule, considering the RR and the relative parity of the league, you'll find out that the actual difference in SoS is very small from a team to the next.
P.S. Playing more of the bottom B1G teams would not necessarily have meant more NU victories, since sweeping a B1G opponent (any one) is really tough for NU...the weaker teams won't "look past" NU and may view the NU game as a must-win especially if late in the season they have any hope of getting to a T.