A Perspective On the Hog's 2014 Strength of Schedule.....

[Vantage 8 dude]

SIAP. Just read an analysis from football guru Phil Steele who offered some insight and opinion on both last year's schedule as well as his thoughts on the upcoming 2015 season. He had some interesting and telling stats to relate along those lines.

Not surprisingly to many of us he opined that Arkansas had the most difficult overall schedule in the country during the recently completed football season. Not only did we face six bowl teams from the SEC West-all of whom earned a Top 10 ranking at one point during 2014-plus Georgia and SECE champion Missouri, but we also beat the MAC champion Northern Illinois, a better-than-expected UAB, and of course, the University of Texas in the Texas Bowl. To put this in perspective Steele rated other SEC team's Top 25 strength of schedules as: #3 Auburn, #4 Ole Miss, #7 Univ. of Tennessee, #9 Texas A&M and #21 LSU.

As far as the upcoming season is concerned Steele doesn't see much of a let up in the difficulty of our schedule either. The Hog's have the second toughest slate of games with our opponents sporting an overall 2014 winning rate of 63.5% (99-57). This ranks just behind the University of Washington's 64.3% (101-56).

[bigdaddyhawg]

SIAP. Just read an analysis from football guru Phil Steele who offered some insight and opinion on both last year's schedule as well as his thoughts on the upcoming 2015 season. He had some interesting and telling stats to relate along those lines.

Not surprisingly to many of us he opined that Arkansas had the most difficult overall schedule in the country during the recently completed football season. Not only did we face six bowl teams from the SEC West-all of whom earned a Top 10 ranking at one point during 2014-plus Georgia and SECE champion Missouri, but we also beat the MAC champion Northern Illinois, a better-than-expected UAB, and of course, the University of Texas in the Texas Bowl. To put this in perspective Steele rated other SEC team's Top 25 strength of schedules as: #3 Auburn, #4 Ole Miss, #7 Univ. of Tennessee, #9 Texas A&M and #21 LSU.

As far as the upcoming season is concerned Steele doesn't see much of a let up in the difficulty of our schedule either. The Hog's have the second toughest slate of games with our opponents sporting an overall 2014 winning rate of 63.5% (99-57). This ranks just behind the University of Washington's 64.3% (101-56).

And yet some fans cry and whine for tougher out of conference games.

[Theolesnort]

Usually Phil Steele is very astute with his observations and I can't wait to see him rate the upcoming Oline in the pecking order of things. Anyone care to guess where he puts them?

[DeltaBoy]

I like Phil and we are priming for a good run this Fall.

[DukeOfPork]

And yet some fans cry and whine for tougher out of conference games.

Michigan, TCU, Texas, etc.  We already have enough tough OOC games ahead.  Until the SEC West goes through some down years, I really don't want us to schedule any more tough games.

Our schedule strength never drops out of the Top 10.  EVER.  Why make it harder?

[Vantage 8 dude]

And yet some fans cry and whine for tougher out of conference games.

Exactly my thoughts. Then again, as we know some folks will whine and moan about anything.

[hogcard1964]

Usually Phil Steele is very astute with his observations and I can't wait to see him rate the upcoming Oline in the pecking order of things. Anyone care to guess where he puts them?

He'll have us anywhere from 1-5.  With Georgia, Mich St. Ole Miss and Ohio St in competition with us.

[Paul]

Look on the bright side...we don't have to play ourselves! 

[Hawgzinbowlz]

http://philsteele.com/Blogs/2015/MAR15/DBMar13.html

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/23/report-arkansas-played-college-footballs-toughest-schedule-in-2014/

A&M, Alabama, Mississippi St. and Missouri. All within the realm of possibility...In CBBs 2nd year and with the #1 toughest schedule.
Another year in the program and with a few breaks, who knows. At a minimum, some improvement.
Our OOC schedule is where it should be. One good D-1, some decent teams and a high level scrimmage.
Our schedule, and seeing CBB putting the pieces in place for the future, is very entertaining and we will compete for Atlanta with CBB at the helm.

" GO HOGS "

[MuskogeeHogFan]

SIAP. Just read an analysis from football guru Phil Steele who offered some insight and opinion on both last year's schedule as well as his thoughts on the upcoming 2015 season. He had some interesting and telling stats to relate along those lines.

Not surprisingly to many of us he opined that Arkansas had the most difficult overall schedule in the country during the recently completed football season. Not only did we face six bowl teams from the SEC West-all of whom earned a Top 10 ranking at one point during 2014-plus Georgia and SECE champion Missouri, but we also beat the MAC champion Northern Illinois, a better-than-expected UAB, and of course, the University of Texas in the Texas Bowl. To put this in perspective Steele rated other SEC team's Top 25 strength of schedules as: #3 Auburn, #4 Ole Miss, #7 Univ. of Tennessee, #9 Texas A&M and #21 LSU.

As far as the upcoming season is concerned Steele doesn't see much of a let up in the difficulty of our schedule either. The Hog's have the second toughest slate of games with our opponents sporting an overall 2014 winning rate of 63.5% (99-57). This ranks just behind the University of Washington's 64.3% (101-56).

I think we face one D-I FBS team (Texas Tech) next season that had a losing record in 2014.

[Vantage 8 dude]

I think we face one D-I FBS team (Texas Tech) next season that had a losing record in 2014.

If so that puts the SOS in an even more interesting and impressive perspective.

[carolinahogger]

Look on the bright side...we don't have to play ourselves!

In the last couple of years our SOS has been so high because we don't GET to play ourselves.

[Theolesnort]

That was a very unkind cut but sometimes the truth hurts.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

That was a very unkind cut but sometimes the truth hurts.

When do we ever get to play ourselves? It has nothing to do with our particular SOS year in and year out. Pretty much irrelevant.

[hawgwash]

When do we ever get to play ourselves? It has nothing to do with our particular SOS year in and year out. Pretty much irrelevant.

It's relevant when comparing our SOS with other SEC teams.  We didn't get to play a team with no conference wins, or only 2 conference wins. They did.

[carolinahogger]

It's relevant when comparing our SOS with other SEC teams.  We didn't get to play a team with no conference wins, or only 2 conference wins. They did.

Exactly.  And I would add that Alabama's SOS suffers because they don't play the top team in the SEC West (themselves). 

And to clarify this a bit for muskogee's benefit, if every SECW team's 2014 schedule had consisted only of a round robin schedule of SECW teams, then the team with the highest SOS would have been Arkansas and the lowest SOS would have been that of Alabama.

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

Look on the bright side...we don't have to play ourselves! 

Uh, yeah we do... Just next month and w/out JWILLY..!!

[Vantage 8 dude]

Exactly.  And I would add that Alabama's SOS suffers because they don't play the top team in the SEC West (themselves). 

And to clarify this a bit for muskogee's benefit, if every SECW team's 2014 schedule had consisted only of a round robin schedule of SECW teams, then the team with the highest SOS would have been Arkansas and the lowest SOS would have been that of Alabama.

Still doesn't fully account for the fact we ALSO played NIU, UGa and SECe champion Missouri last year. Try stuffing those facts into your excuse(s) that the only reason our overall schedule was so difficult was we didn't play ourselves. What b.s.!! So I take it then you think Steele's reasoning and rankings are total baloney?

BTW your inane argument/reasoning still doesn't address the REAL crux of the whole rating system: the OVERALL RECORD of our opponents and the fact that all our SECW brethren at one time or another were ranked somewhere in the top ten. You might also want to check out how many of those teams also eventually played in bowl games last year. When you and hawgwash, appropriate name that, figure it out let us know.

[Theolesnort]

 

When do we ever get to play ourselves? It has nothing to do with our particular SOS year in and year out. Pretty much irrelevant.
quote]More irreverent than irrelevant.

[Hoggish1]

And yet some fans cry and whine for tougher out of conference games.

Not me.  The weaker the better in OOC.  The only problem is the fans don't get to see competative football in the OOC games unless we play somebody. 

But TT, NIU and Toledo seem to be reasonable compromises.

[hawgwash]

Still doesn't fully account for the fact we ALSO played NIU, UGa and SECe champion Missouri last year. Try stuffing those facts into your excuse(s) that the only reason our overall schedule was so difficult was we didn't play ourselves. What b.s.!! So I take it then you think Steele's reasoning and rankings are total baloney?

BTW your inane argument/reasoning still doesn't address the REAL crux of the whole rating system: the OVERALL RECORD of our opponents and the fact that all our SECW brethren at one time or another were ranked somewhere in the top ten. You might also want to check out how many of those teams also eventually played in bowl games last year. When you and hawgwash, appropriate name that, figure it out let us know.

Get a grip Vantage.  Nowhere did I say we did not play an incredibly strong schedule.  Clearly we did.  All I'm saying is compared to our fellow SEC west members our SOS is made, to some extent, relatively stronger by the fact we didn't play a team with zero (2013) or two (2014) conference wins.  It's just pure math.

[Vantage 8 dude]

Get a grip Vantage.  Nowhere did I say we did not play an incredibly strong schedule.  Clearly we did.  All I'm saying is compared to our fellow SEC west members our SOS is made, to some extent, relatively stronger by the fact we didn't play a team with zero (2013) or two (2014) conference wins.  It's just pure math.

I've got a full grip, hawgwash. Again, the # of opponent wins is a major component in the strength of schedule results. I seriously doubt that the fact we did under perform in the win/loss department was the ultimate factor in the end results. As even you admitted the incredible SOS was a result of having played VERY GOOD teams almost without exception from top to bottom. The only real "weak sister" during the regular season was a (surprisingly) down TTU team.

[carolinahogger]

Get a grip Vantage.  Nowhere did I say we did not play an incredibly strong schedule.  Clearly we did.  All I'm saying is compared to our fellow SEC west members our SOS is made, to some extent, relatively stronger by the fact we didn't play a team with zero (2013) or two (2014) conference wins.  It's just pure math.

Right.  It amazes me that some want to argue this simple and basic mathematical point. 

[Corkscrew Johnson]

Michigan, TCU, Texas, etc.  We already have enough tough OOC games ahead.  Until the SEC West goes through some down years, I really don't want us to schedule any more tough games.

Our schedule strength never drops out of the Top 10.  EVER.  Why make it harder?

There is nothing to be gained by scheduling difficult OOC games.  You take care of business in the SEC, you are going to be in the playoffs.

[Vantage 8 dude]

Right.  It amazes me that some want to argue this simple and basic mathematical point.

And the only "simple and basic mathematical point" is the overall win/loss ratio of ALL the opponent's played last year. The fact that the Hogs didn't have a particularly good record has little to do with the OVERALL win/loss % of other teams. That one game played against us did NOT determine the final outcome of the results. Plan fact, not fiction.

[carolinahogger]

And the only "simple and basic mathematical point" is the overall win/loss ratio of ALL the opponent's played last year. The fact that the Hogs didn't have a particularly good record has little to do with the OVERALL win/loss % of other teams. That one game played against us did NOT determine the final outcome of the results. Plan fact, not fiction.

Here is the one point which I am making.  Please provide a logical argument to exactly this statement:

Our high SOS relative to other SECW opponents has been greatly influenced in the last two seasons by the fact that we have had bad records.  Considering only SECW opponents, Arkansas had the highest SOS of any SECW team and Alabama had the lowest SOS of any other team.  This is due to the fact that the Razorback's SOS is built on playing every SECW opponent except the weakest (Arkansas), which gave us a "stronger schedule".  Meanwhile, Alabama played every SECW opponent except the strongest (Alabama), giving them a "weaker schedule".

The team with the most losses in that scenario WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE HIGHEST SOS.  Thus our high SOS which people want to use as an excuse is simply of function of our team not winning games.  We had the highest SOS BECAUSE WE LOST ALL BUT TWO OF OUR GAMES IN THE SECW.


That is the only point I am trying to make.  If you can't understand it, no problem.  But there is no logical argument which can refute it.  Your previous argument has been to throw out straw man factors which have no relevance to what I am saying.

[DukeOfPork]

Bottom line: we would have a high SOS no matter what.  But part of the reason our SOS is slightly higher than some SEC West teams is because we hurt their SOS and they help our SOS.

[Vantage 8 dude]

Here is the one point which I am making.  Please provide a logical argument to exactly this statement:

Our high SOS relative to other SECW opponents has been greatly influenced in the last two seasons by the fact that we have had bad records.  Considering only SECW opponents, Arkansas had the highest SOS of any SECW team and Alabama had the lowest SOS of any other team.  This is due to the fact that the Razorback's SOS is built on playing every SECW opponent except the weakest (Arkansas), which gave us a "stronger schedule".  Meanwhile, Alabama played every SECW opponent except the strongest (Alabama), giving them a "weaker schedule".

The team with the most losses in that scenario WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE HIGHEST SOS.  Thus our high SOS which people want to use as an excuse is simply of function of our team not winning games.  We had the highest SOS BECAUSE WE LOST ALL BUT TWO OF OUR GAMES IN THE SECW.


That is the only point I am trying to make.  If you can't understand it, no problem.  But there is no logical argument which can refute it.  Your previous argument has been to throw out straw man factors which have no relevance to what I am saying.

The overall SOS is based not only our opponents out of the SECW but other teams as well. Considering ALL our SECW opponents-ranked at one time or another in the top ten-PLUS UGA, NIU (MAC Champ) and SECe champ Missouri ALL went to bowl games (not counting UAB which qualified for one) it ends up that only TTU didn't eventually play in one. Please refute THESE particular FACTS for me.

BTW I'll remind you once again that these ratings were provided by a (assume) non-biased Phil Steele who apparently looked over all the factors when making his rankings. If you truly have a "bone to pick" with your obvious "second guessing" of his analysis I suggest you take it up with him. Not sure how he can be reached but you're a smart guy and I'm sure you can figure that out. Otherwise as far as I'm concerned we can continue to "spit into the wind" and get absolutely no where with our differing opinions/attitudes; therefore, I refuse to waste any further effort. Further I suspect our fellow Hogvillians would applaud this with great enthusiasm.

[DukeOfPork]

It's true that being last in the West increases our SOS because we can't play ourselves (we were, statistically, the "worst" team in the West).

Our SOS advantage over other West teams is a function of that simple mathematical truth AND the fact that we played the two best teams in the East whereas others were able to play Vandy, Kentucky, etc.

[Vantage 8 dude]

It's true that being last in the West increases our SOS because we can't play ourselves (we were, statistically, the "worst" team in the West).

Our SOS advantage over other West teams is a function of that simple mathematical truth AND the fact that we played the two best teams in the East whereas others were able to play Vandy, Kentucky, etc.

I'm glad to see that at least you've been able to recognize that fact. In addition, at the sake of over repeating-check out the schedule from top to bottom and the season records for ALL our opponents. Check too as to whether or not they played in post season games. Ultimately it all comes down to whether one believes the work of Phil Steele. I merely published his findings/opinions (although under the circumstances I do agree); it was others who obviously found fault in his conclusions. If they have a problem with his findings then bitch to HIM.

[hawgwash]

The overall SOS is based not only our opponents out of the SECW but other teams as well. Considering ALL our SECW opponents-ranked at one time or another in the top ten-PLUS UGA, NIU (MAC Champ) and SECe champ Missouri ALL went to bowl games (not counting UAB which qualified for one) it ends up that only TTU didn't eventually play in one. Please refute THESE particular FACTS for me.

BTW I'll remind you once again that these ratings were provided by a (assume) non-biased Phil Steele who apparently looked over all the factors when making his rankings. If you truly have a "bone to pick" with your obvious "second guessing" of his analysis I suggest you take it up with him. Not sure how he can be reached but you're a smart guy and I'm sure you can figure that out. Otherwise as far as I'm concerned we can continue to "spit into the wind" and get absolutely no where with our differing opinions/attitudes; therefore, I refuse to waste any further effort. Further I suspect our fellow Hogvillians would applaud this with great enthusiasm.

Good grief. There's some things you just can't fix. But I'll try one more time. If the Hogs had won 8 conference games last year instead of 2, six of our opponents would have had one additional loss. This would have weakened our SOS.  It's not an opinion, it's not a disagreement with Phil Steele, it's just a statistical certainty. I'm done.

[Vantage 8 dude]

Good grief. There's some things you just can't fix. But I'll try one more time. If the Hogs had won 8 conference games last year instead of 2, six of our opponents would have had one additional loss. This would have weakened our SOS.  It's not an opinion, it's not a disagreement with Phil Steele, it's just a statistical certainty. I'm done.

Bye and don't let the door hit you in your "brains" as you leave stage right. I'll be interested in reading your response and reasoning with Mr. Steele.

[carolinahogger]

Good grief. There's some things you just can't fix. But I'll try one more time. If the Hogs had won 8 conference games last year instead of 2, six of our opponents would have had one additional loss. This would have weakened our SOS.  It's not an opinion, it's not a disagreement with Phil Steele, it's just a statistical certainty. I'm done.

Correct.  I'm done too.   

[DukeOfPork]

I'm glad to see that at least you've been able to recognize that fact. In addition, at the sake of over repeating-check out the schedule from top to bottom and the season records for ALL our opponents. Check too as to whether or not they played in post season games. Ultimately it all comes down to whether one believes the work of Phil Steele. I merely published his findings/opinions (although under the circumstances I do agree); it was others who obviously found fault in his conclusions. If they have a problem with his findings then bitch to HIM.

Forget Phil Steele.  Forget the particular methodology of ANY of the SOS rankings.

If we played exactly the same schedule as Bama last year and we played head-to-head with them, our SOS would be rated higher than Bama because they would improve our SOS while we would weaken their SOS.

Why?  Because they won a lot more games than we did. 

[aar0n]

Bye and don't let the door hit you in your "brains" as you leave stage right. I'll be interested in reading your response and reasoning with Mr. Steele.

I just don't... I can't... How do you not....... Jeezus you've fried my brain with your stupidity.  How do you not understand how SOS works?!

[Vantage 8 dude]

I just don't... I can't... How do you not....... Jeezus you've fried my brain with your stupidity.  How do you not understand how SOS works?!

As I stated previously: please address all future complaints, disagreements and other bitching to the author or the original article-Phil Steele. While I agree with the over all SOS, I'm ultimately reporting what HE wrote/opined. Over and out.

[Theolesnort]

What is there to argue about here? The reality is we had a most difficult schedule and to speculate on changing the wins and loses is just that, speculation. Why do people want to get into arguments in these threads for no real reasons. If, if and and buts were candy and nuts we would all have a Merry Christmas.

[redeye]

It may seem strange and unlikely, but Arkansas regularly has one of the toughest slates of SEC games.  This has been ongoing for many years and it has little to do with other teams being better.  It's why we nearly always play one of the toughest schedules in the SEC.

We regularly get screwed with our conference schedule and someday I'm gonna start a thread to break it all down.  Unless you believe it's the result of a SEC conspiracy, there's no good reason for it, except that we're just unusually unlucky with conference scheduling.

[Vantage 8 dude]

What is there to argue about here? The reality is we had a most difficult schedule and to speculate on changing the wins and loses is just that, speculation. Why do people want to get into arguments in these threads for no real reasons. If, if and and buts were candy and nuts we would all have a Merry Christmas.

Preaching to the choir here. However, it's obvious that a least a couple of posters feel the difficulty of our schedule really only revolves around our own difficulties on the field the past several seasons. Never mind that all but one of our opponents last year either qualified and/or played in bowls last year; in addition several either won or played for their respective conference championships. Apparently the only reason most did is because they played us.

[Theolesnort]

Preaching to the choir here. However, it's obvious that a least a couple of posters feel the difficulty of our schedule really only revolves around our own difficulties on the field the past several seasons. Never mind that all but one of our opponents last year either qualified and/or played in bowls last year; in addition several either won or played for their respective conference championships. Apparently the only reason most did is because they played us.

We had a pretty good team last year and the reason we were 6 and 6 was the strength of schedule. In the conference we were 2 and 6 and to just arbitrarily change our record to like 6 and 2 would not have made the schedule less difficult but just that we were that much better. The teams we played would still be just as difficult but the appearance of the strength of schedule may have looked weaker but that is conjecture. Regardless of how good we were or could have been that was one difficult schedule that wore the west side of the conference down because it was difficult for everyone. At the end of the season not to many were as good as they were entering the season.

[DukeOfPork]

...it's obvious that a least a couple of posters feel the difficulty of our schedule really only revolves around our own difficulties on the field the past several seasons.

Nobody in this thread has said that.

No one.

[Vantage 8 dude]

Nobody in this thread has said that.

No one.

Let me put to you another way: several have claimed that the PRIMARY reason our SOS appears to high is that our own struggles the past several years have meant we're naturally playing higher rated (ranked) teams in terms of difficulty. While perhaps to SOME degree true, what it still doesn't give credit to are the # of highly ranked and successful (in terms of record) teams we played last year. The overall record of these teams have little to do with what the Hog's record was or wasn't. They were still successful no matter OUR own record and rating. Remember too that several of those teams we actually beat as well. Again, I wasn't the one who came up with the original SOS ranking. I merely posted and subsequently agreed with many of the observations. For the sake of clarification one last time: IF YOU HAVE A "BONE TO PICK" OR AN ARGUMENT TO MAKE WITH THE METHODOLOGY, SYSTEM, OR ANY OTHER CONCLUSION(S) PHIL STEELE CAME UP WITH PLEASE ADDRESS IT DIRECTLY TO HIM. I a have had NO part whatsoever to do with his findings; I've merely imparted my own thoughts and opinions which I'm free to do.

[DukeOfPork]

Let me put to you another way: several have claimed that the PRIMARY reason our SOS appears to high is that our own struggles the past several years have meant we're naturally playing higher rated (ranked) teams in terms of difficulty.

Let me stop you there.  Who said that the PRIMARY reason is because of how poorly we've played?  Nobody has said that.