There’s been a lot of buzz in college football the last few weeks about Strength of Schedule. Teams like Indiana and Notre Dame have been bashed for it while others have received a boost from it.
I understand that it’s a simple concept that gives us an easy comparison between the paths different teams have had to take. But easy and simple don’t necessarily equate to correct.
When you really dive down and analyze schedules, you realize that the difference between a top-ranked and mid-ranked schedule is, in most cases, one game or two. It’s not as if there’s an astronomical gap between the 8th ranked schedule and the 24th, as I’ll get into.
These are very minuscule, fairly non-relevant differences, and it’s very difficult to establish clear demarcation between schedules with supposedly wide gaps in strength. Let me show you what I’m talking about with a few cases:
South Carolina (#8) v. Texas A&M (#24)
South Carolina’s stature has been boosted by it’s top ten SoS ranking, but A&M’s sits down at 24. Still respectable, but 16 spots seems like it should be a big gap, right? Not really. Let’s break it down:
- These two played each other, so that game essentially cancels out with a slight advantage to South Carolina as the home team.
- A&M played FCS McNeese in week two, and South Carolina plays FCS Wofford on Nov. 23. A wash.
- South Carolina’s non-conference featured 4-6 Old Dominion and 3-8 Akron. The Aggies instead played 2-8 New Mexico State and 6-4 Bowling Green. A&M’s slate was slightly harder here, but it’s still a comparison of MAC teams basically.
- A&M opened at home against Notre Dame, and South Carolina closes at Clemson. Pretty close to a wash in terms of strength, in my opinion. Maybe a slight strength edge to the Aggies here.
- Both teams played LSU and Missouri at home.
- A&M has to go to Auburn, while South Carolina had Oklahoma on the road. Not really much difference there. Same with A&M’s early trip to Florida and South Carolina’s game at Kentucky.
- South Carolina gets a slight strength advantage by going to Vanderbilt, while the Aggies got Mississippi State on the road.
- I’d say the Gamecocks going to Tuscaloosa and the Aggies hosting Texas is close to a wash.
- The difference really comes down to South Carolina playing Ole Miss and A&M getting Arkansas instead… the other differences up to this point pretty much cancel out. One game is the difference between 16 spots in strength of schedule.
Penn State (#35) v. Indiana (#106)
I’m swinging for the fences here, but this will illustrate my point perfectly.
- Let’s start with the obvious washes. Both teams had/will have Maryland and Washington at home.
- In non-conference, Penn State played at West Virginia and got two MAC teams at home. Indiana played FIU, Charlotte, and FCS Western Carolina. Kent State and Western Carolina are pretty close to canceling out given how bad the Flashes are, and FIU and Charlotte are both worse than Bowling Green but not by a ton. The main difference here is that Penn State went to West Virginia, which we know now is not a great team.
- Both teams play UCLA, Ohio State, and Purdue. Purdue is so bad that it’s pretty much a wash regardless of where the game is being played. Indiana was on the road against the Bruins and has to go to Columbus, while Penn State got both at home. Strength advantage to Indiana here.
- From here on out, we’re trifling between a bunch of mid-tier, mediocre Big Ten teams. Penn State had to play at Wisconsin, while Indiana went to Michigan State. The Hoosiers hosted Michigan, but the Nittany Lions went to Minnesota. Penn State had to go to USC, and Indiana hosted Nebraska. Sure, there are nuanced differences, but it all comes fairly close to coming out about even.
- The main difference is that, from the state of Illinois, Indiana went to Northwestern, while Penn State hosted Illinois. I’ll give the Nittany Lions the clear strength advantage there.
- So to recap, the main differences between the #35 and #106 schedules were that one team played West Virginia in non-conference and played Illinois instead of Northwestern. That’s not nearly the difference that many around college football would want you to think it is.
It’s not Indiana’s fault that the Big Ten handed it a fairly easy conference schedule. It’s not Texas A&M’s fault that it didn’t draw Ole Miss. You can run down the line of all these schedules and see that the differences are petty and minute.
And let’s face it. Sure, Indiana didn’t go to West Virginia, but it’d probably handle business in Morgantown just fine. Texas A&M probably would be competitive against Ole Miss.
That’s because these are good teams. Good teams handle their schedules the way they are supposed to be handled. Indiana has a weak Strength of Schedule, but it is still 10-0 against said schedule with blowouts along the way. Results, scores, and what we see on the field have to mean more than hypotheticals and arbitrary statistics.
One or two games in a 12-game schedule converts to a 70-spot difference in Strength of Schedule. A weak statistic that vulnerable to variance can’t and shouldn’t be a serious metric used to determine any sort of ranking. It’s that simple.
I know I only looked at two cases here, but they both illustrate a growing problem. We’re acting as if there are massive differences in these schedules which should define the fates of these teams.
The reality is that Strength of Schedule is just one very small, not very flavorful piece of the pie. What teams do with their schedules needs to mean way more than the schedules themselves.
Follow Nick Hedges on X (@nicktrimshedges) or Instagram (@nicktrimshedges)