Tom Dienhart ranks B1G nonconference schedules

Donate To GopherHole

I find it hysterical that our schedule is 11 and Illinois and Indiana are at 5 and 6. Baffling, too.
 

Wow, I majorly disagree with some of those rankings, although didn't take time to read his analysis. Seems like he's mostly looking at opponents' last year's records and whether they went to a bowl (regardless if it was the MAC #5 bowl seed or what have you).

Obviously Michigan, with away games at Bama and ND is far and away #1, and kudos to them. But how is IU #6 playing 2 FCS teams? Nebraska's schedule rated #3 is very shaky as all the FBS teams they play have new coaching staffs. I believe Northwestern is the only team playing 3 BCS conference schools.
 

I ran some numbers. Here's the order the article gives:

Michigan
Michigan State
Nebraska
Penn State
Illinois
Indiana
Ohio State
Northwestern
Purdue
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin

But if you put it in order of the average Sagarin ranking, the order is quite different:

Michigan
Penn State
Michigan State
Iowa
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Nebraska
Ohio State
Purdue
Illinois
Minnesota
Indiana
 

SelectionSunday said:
http://btn.com/2012/04/23/dienhart-ranking-big-ten-non-con-schedules/
Click to expand...


smart non-conference scheduling by minnesota.
whoever arranged this schedule should be in line for a bonus!

anyone can see how this type of NC scheduling has benefitted wisconsin.

to schedule non-conference heavyweights, such as texas, north carloina, southern cal, etc. is just plain stupid...it beats up the players, it beats up the win/loss record, and it beats up the long-suffering fans...
 


dinkything said:
anyone can see how this type of NC scheduling has benefitted wisconsin.
Click to expand...

You mean like last season when it would have cost them a shot at a national title game appearance had either one of the Hail Mary games gone their way?
 

GoAUpher said:
You mean like last season when it would have cost them a shot at a national title game appearance had either one of the Hail Mary games gone their way?
Click to expand...


yes, precisely...why schedule an alabama or oregon in september...and lose to a superior team early...and essentially take yourself out of the nc hunt??

a football team gets more credit for beating up on a low-level mac team or an fcs team, as opposed to losing to an fbs heavyweight...not saying this is the way sit should be...it just is...
 

dinkything said:
yes, precisely...why schedule an alabama or oregon in september...and lose to a superior team early...and essentially take yourself out of the nc hunt??

a football team gets more credit for beating up on a low-level mac team or an fcs team, as opposed to losing to an fbs heavyweight...not saying this is the way sit should be...it just is...
Click to expand...

Wow, you missed the point entirely. Wisconsin was HURT by having a horrible creampuff sched. Had they won 1 more game in the B1G (either MSU or OSU, take your pick) they would have had their shot at a NC game appearance dashed by low BCS computer scores. The scores that dislike weak non-con scheduling.

Now, that's not a worry for the Gophers right now. But I'd argue that once you're past the point of bowl eligibility scheduling 1 quality non-con game is a good move for the program and fans. After all, one lower tier bowl is like the other so no loss there. It offers a quality road trip on the away leg of the home and home and it offers a good marketing piece on the home leg (a never-ending non-con slate of cupcakes is hard to stomach when you're paying for season tickets). It also has zero bearing on the conference season and thus doesn't hurt the team's chances at winning a division (or even for a good bowl game) if they have a good to great season.

As for the credit for beating a weak schedule thing getting more credit than losing to a heavyweight? I don't agree with that. Maybe it's true for power programs, but I think you'd find the Gophers pigeonholed as having "feasted on cupcakes" and dismissed for that reason (see: pretty much every Glen Mason season ever).
 

GoAUpher said:
Wow, you missed the point entirely. Wisconsin was HURT by having a horrible creampuff sched. Had they won 1 more game in the B1G (either MSU or OSU, take your pick) they would have had their shot at a NC game appearance dashed by low BCS computer scores. The scores that dislike weak non-con scheduling.

Now, that's not a worry for the Gophers right now. But I'd argue that once you're past the point of bowl eligibility scheduling 1 quality non-con game is a good move for the program and fans. After all, one lower tier bowl is like the other so no loss there. It offers a quality road trip on the away leg of the home and home and it offers a good marketing piece on the home leg (a never-ending non-con slate of cupcakes is hard to stomach when you're paying for season tickets). It also has zero bearing on the conference season and thus doesn't hurt the team's chances at winning a division (or even for a good bowl game) if they have a good to great season.

As for the credit for beating a weak schedule thing getting more credit than losing to a heavyweight? I don't agree with that. Maybe it's true for power programs, but I think you'd find the Gophers pigeonholed as having "feasted on cupcakes" and dismissed for that reason (see: pretty much every Glen Mason season ever).
Click to expand...


no, actually, you missed the point...

you will see what I mean when top 10 ranked michigan is down against alabama, 28-3, in the 2nd quarter of their nationally televised game on Labor Day weekend....

meanwhile, wisconsin will have drilled northern iowa earlier that same day, and they will surpass michigan in the following week's rankings.......that snickering sound you will be hearing will be coming from bret bielema, as he continues to follow the wisconsin model....

getting pounded in big non-conference games (like michigan vs. alabama) does NOT help as much as you suggest
 



dinkything said:
no, actually, you missed the point...

you will see what I mean when top 10 ranked michigan is down against alabama, 28-3, in the 2nd quarter of their nationally televised game on Labor Day weekend....

meanwhile, wisconsin will have drilled northern iowa earlier that same day, and they will surpass michigan in the following week's rankings.......that snickering sound you will be hearing will be coming from bret bielema, as he continues to follow the wisconsin model....

getting pounded in big non-conference games (like michigan vs. alabama) does NOT help as much as you suggest
Click to expand...

And yet none of that has anything to do with the accuracy of my point RE: Wisconsin last season and their shot at the title game. Meanwhile, if Michigan gets it done in the conference season they will still represent the B1G in a BCS bowl (another point of mine). Meanwhile, you don't hear any Michigan fans complaining about the quality of opponent, just the neutral site venue.

I'm not arguing that your week to week rankings will be improved with compared to a loss. That's just how polls work. I'm saying that on the whole, the upside to scheduling quality games is much higher and the downsides minimal.
 

So dinkything, if you think Big Ten teams shouldn't schedule any tough opponents you must love how Tubby schedules for basketball, right?
 

So in terms of the Gophers, would you rather lose big to a heavyweight or lose narrowly to a Dakota team? Which scenario is better for our ranking?
 

The average Sagarin ranking of Wisconsin's schedule ranks #4 in the Big Ten. Their schedule doesn't have any really good teams, but there's no really bad teams on it.
 



GoAUpher said:
And yet none of that has anything to do with the accuracy of my point RE: Wisconsin last season and their shot at the title game. Meanwhile, if Michigan gets it done in the conference season they will still represent the B1G in a BCS bowl (another point of mine).
Click to expand...

when it comes to an invite to the national championship game, a one-loss team from the big 10 is never going to get the benefit of the doubt vs. a one-loss team from the SEC...end of story

as to your second 'point'..."if Michigan gets it done in the conference season they will still represent the B1G in a BCS bowl".......geez, why didn't I think of that?
 

zambam said:
So dinkything, if you think Big Ten teams shouldn't schedule any tough opponents you must love how Tubby schedules for basketball, right?
Click to expand...


if you're trying to change a culture of losing, then yes, it's best to schedule winnable games, imho....
 


zambam said:
Then why in the world did you mention Michigan?
Click to expand...


that was after the thread took its detour....


my original point was the gophers have one of the easiest non-conference schedules...and that is a good thing, imho, as jerry kill tries to (re) build the program
 

zambam said:
Then why in the world did you mention Michigan?
Click to expand...


although speaking of michigan, one could argue that richrod did his best to create a culture of losing in ann arbor....

but don't worry about michigan, they will have their tail between their legs come labor day weekend, as they take their public pummeling...which should end any talk of having a national championship season in 2012...
 

dinkything said:
that was after the thread took its detour....


my original point was the gophers have one of the easiest non-conference schedules...and that is a good thing, imho, as jerry kill tries to (re) build the program
Click to expand...
And I'm not arguing that for this season it's good. Obviously it is. I'm speaking in general, and I did not critique you post on that point. I'm saying that with how far out the schedules have to be made you take the better opponent when you can get it. You never know how a team (yours or the opponent will be) but you should still look to get a pretty good BCS home and home going every year b/c of the overall benefits.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom