Today’s Blog is an in-depth look at who plays the toughest schedule this year and also some of the flaws in the other methods in determining schedule strength.

At the beginning of the season, the NCAA usually releases a rating of each team’s schedule based on their opponents’ win/loss record from the previous season, This is a good method but it does have its obvious flaws.

The first flaw is basing the ratings on opponents records from the previous season. Let’s look at a couple of examples. At the start of 2007 I had Illinois rated as one of the top teams in the Big Ten and they went on to knock off #1 Ohio St and play in the ROSE Bowl. My ratings had them as an above avg opponent at the start of the year and they finished the regular season #13 (AP). Using 2006’s record as the criteria for determining the strength of an opponent’s schedule, however, you would count them as a 2-10 team! In 2008, I had teams like Ole Miss and Minnesota on my Most Improved Teams List meaning I thought they were bowl caliber but using the previous year’s record you would have counted them as 3-9 and 1-11 teams (both made bowls, Ole Miss finished #14). On the flip side of the coin, Notre Dame was in an obvious rebuilding year in ’07 yet was still counted as a 10-3 team if you based strength of schedule on 2006’s record and they were far from a January bowl team in 2007 at just 3-9!

The second flaw is basing it on pure overall records. If a team plays an FCS (IAA) school that was 11-1 in 2007, that counts as a MUCH tougher game in the NCAA ratings than facing a team like Alabama who was 7-6 in ‘07 but #1 at the end of ‘08 regular season! My ratings had Bama ranked as a much tougher team than any FCS foe. To give you an example from 2002, my ratings foresaw that teams playing Kansas St were facing a Top 10 team based on my preseason ratings. The NCAA strength of schedule ranking rated a game against Kansas St as just a game vs a 6-6 opp (2001 record). Kanas St finished #7 AP for 2002 and walloped their opp’s by an avg of 45-12, not exactly numbers from a typical middle-of-the-road opponent.

On the flip side let’s look at 2009’s Ball St team. They were in an obvious rebuilding year and my power ratings had them only winning 2 or 3 games. My methods gave teams credit for a weak foe when facing Ball St but basing it on the previous year’s record, teams were given credit for playing a 12-2 team which is what they finished in 2008! That is a MAJOR flaw!

Here are the NCAA rankings for 2011’s Opponent Winning %

NCAA Method (Opponent Win %)

Now below are my 2010 toughest schedules, which take two major factors into account. The first is my 9 sets of Power Ratings. This ensures that an FCS team is rated much lower than Texas and Georgia, two Top 20 teams that finished with a losing record last year! The second factor is the amount of home and away games played. As an example, this year some teams will have as many as 8 home games, while others play as many as 8 on the road. Below are this year’s toughest schedules rated from the most difficult to the easiest. The toughest schedule this year according to my rankings belongs to Colorado while the easiest belongs to Ohio.

Phil Steele's 2011 Toughest Schedules

Here are the teams with the biggest discrepancy in the two methods of determining toughest schedule and you can check out each team’s schedules to see which method you think is better. I list the difference in rankings between the two in ( )’s. Most UNDERRATED schedules (teams that face a tougher slate than the NCAA’s % rankings): 1. UCLA (63) 2. Stanford (56) 3. Utah (53) 4. Vanderbilt (39) 5. Maryland (33) 5. Florida St (33) 7. Auburn (30) 7. Rice (30) 9. Georgia Tech (24) 10. Tennessee (23).

Here are the most OVERRATED schedules (teams that face an easier slate than the NCAA’s % rankings): 1. Toledo (50) 2. Army (47) 3. Rutgers (45) 4. Penn St (42) 5. Bowling Green (39) 6. New Mexico (38) 7. Central Michigan (32) 8. UNLV (25) 9. Nebraska (31) 10. SMU (29).

Naturally teams would much rather face a team from a non-BCS conference like Nevada that went 13-1 last year (but does lose Kaepernick) than say a team like Texas that went 5-7 but will ranked this year. Some teams that really will throw off the SOS if you based it on last year’s records are Miami, Oh (10-4 LY) and on the other side of the coin Cincinnati (4-8). I guarantee you when these two meet this year at Miami, Cincy will be a large favorite and LY they beat the RedHawks 45-3. Based only on LY’s record Miami, Oh is a vastly superior squad.

Now let’s pick out some teams to show you the differences between my method and the NCAA’s and you can decide which one you think is more accurate.

Based on 2010’s opponent records Toledo plays the 31st toughest schedule while UCLA takes on an easy #91 slate. UCLA’s “cupcake” #91 schedule features Houston, Texas, Stanford, USC and Arizona St (10 BCS teams total). Toledo’s much “tougher” slate has just ONE AQ and also one FCS team. Put UCLA vs the #31 Toledo schedule and they are thinking double digit wins. Toledo will be lucky to be favored in 8 or 9 games this year vs their #31 schedule but would be favored in ONE game vs UCLA’s #91 schedule. Do you really think Tim Beckman would trade schedules? For the record my SOS has UCLA’s schedule at #28 and Toledo’s at #81.

Here is another example. Based on 2010’s opponent records, Army plays the 49th toughest schedule while Stanford takes on an easy #105 slate. The Cardinal’s “cupcake” schedule features 11 BCS teams including 3 top 25 teams in USC, Oregon and Notre Dame. Army’s much “tougher” schedule has just 3 AQ teams and one FCS team. If you give Stanford the schedule Army plays this year, they would probably be a double digit favorite over every team and a clear favorite to go 12-0 and play for the national title. Meanwhile Army a bowl team from last year might be a favorite in only two games on Stanford’s schedule. For the record I have Stanford’s schedule at #49 while Army’s is #96.

A great example using two BCS teams is according to the 2010’s opponent records Utah faces the 86th toughest schedule while Rutgers faces the 32nd toughest schedule. According to the NCAA’s method, Utah’s schedule which features 6 road games (incl at USC, BYU and Pittsburgh) is much weaker than Rutgers’ schedule which sees them play “only” 4 true road games. Also no one can argue, the Pac-12 is a tougher conference than the Big East.

So which method do you think is better? Respond back with your questions/comments via Facebook or Twitter!

Only 45 Days Until the First College Football Game!!