Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
I'm not debating the legitimacy of Sagarin, although there are how many other rating systems that is used in the BCS? I'm stating that it's debatable on the degree of difficulty(w/bias noted) you are attributing your schedule.
That's a fair point. I just checked Massey, and he not only doesn't like our schedule as much (35th right now, and 37th relative to all games scheduled and not just games played), he also likes AL and FL a
lot more. I have no idea what the root of the big disagreement is (moreso on AL and FL than ND), and I wish I did know where it came from.
On the contrary. They were projected to finish as high as second in some publications, most picked them third in the Big Ten. They have as good a drop back QB as there is in the Big Ten, and he had to split time for most of the year which is unfathomable.
I stand corrected.
Huh? I already talked about MSU. BC has had a steady 7-8 win program for a few years.
But they came into the season without a QB and replacing some very good players in the front four. Although his play has been hit or miss, Shinskie has made their QB play a lot better than it looked like it would be coming into the season.
Washington was slightly better if anything because they beat USC.
Slightly? They went from being one of the worst teams in D1-A to being merely below average (and still competent enough to bite a solid USC team).
U-Conn has been a solid 7 win Big East team, if anything because of their schedule.
They're a better team than they're usually given credit for, between being in the Big East and being a new kid on the block.
Pitt was suppose to be good.
Pitt had some positives coming into the season, but big question marks on offense as they were replacing an outstanding RB in LeSean McCoy, and nobody was expecting Stull to be as good as he has been. I would have expected Pitt to be somewhere around 30th, and they're significantly better than that.
Is that the excuse for not being in a conference?
Huh? It was just a musing about the underrated difficulty of not facing the kind of creampuffs that teams like FL seem to use to populate their non-conference schedule. I don't see how conference membership comes into it.
Nevada was a good opener- and they got bombed by every decent team they played this season.
Which is what made them a good opener. They're marginally competent, but no threat if ND shows up.
Wazzou is horrible, every good team has a couple of these on their schedule.
Every good team has a couple of these on their schedule, but ND only had one.
Purdue is never a breather, especially in West Lafayette. It's a rivalry game.
Well, yeah, that's an issue with being ND that doesn't show up in anybody's strength of schedule. We seem to be a big game for everyone we play. Granted, I would assume that also carries with most Tier 1 schools.
Tate and Floyd do make a difference, but your team wasn't good enough defensively to truck any decent team even at full strength.
Floyd and Allen were out vs. Purdue, and Clausen only played somewhere in the neighborhood of half the game (and at reduced effectiveness).
What about the other rating systems... or is this the only one that works in ND's favor?
Massey:
14 (Pitt) - 16 (USC) - 25 (Stanford) - 40 (BC) - 44 (UConn) - 50 (Nevada) - 51 (Navy) - 69 (MSU) - 73 (UW) - 84 (Purdue) - 98 (Michigan) - 211 (Washington St)
More meh than Sagarin. About the only opponent Massey likes better is Pitt.
They will have some nice NFL draft choices come out of there, though.
