Weakest Schedules in 2016

tweeterhawk said:
Editor/publisher of this site is srsly mad about ESPN trashing Big Ten for having easy schedules in 2016. But when teams in a demonstrably weak conference (5-5 in 2015 bowls) play each other nine times a season it does not statistically amount to strong schedules for most B1G program.

http://hawkeyenation.com/2016/espn-getting-early-start-on-big-ten-hating
Click to expand...

I think there is a built in bias in the FPI against Big Ten, yes. Look at Wisky sched. 38th in nation and they play 5 teams in ESPN FB writer Mark Schlabach's Preseason Top 16. Syracuse plays four in his Top 25. That doesn't count Nebraska, who will be solid, or Northwestern, who won 10 games and will likely be underrated. Garbage, and bias
 
Being that the B1G West is one of the weakest divisions, if not the weakest Power 5 division in the nation, most teams in it are going to have schedules that are ranked low or weak, whatever you want to call it.

The big factors will be the 3 crossovers and non-confererce games, which in Iowa's case is usually very weak. I'll give the Gophers some credit, the played TCU and USC lately.
 
JonDMiller said:
I think there is a built in bias in the FPI against Big Ten, yes. Look at Wisky sched. 38th in nation and they play 5 teams in ESPN FB writer Mark Schlabach's Preseason Top 16. Syracuse plays four in his Top 25. That doesn't count Nebraska, who will be solid, or Northwestern, who won 10 games and will likely be underrated. Garbage, and bias
Click to expand...

It's all garbage, though. "All" as in any kind of preseason projections. They are total pie in the sky guessing and have zero relevance to anything. It's purely water cooler fodder and the fact that anyone gets irked by it is hilarious.

When in history has any preseason poll come even remotely close to what actually shakes out at the end of the year (in any sport)? It's just hilarious to look back at the media's predictions after the season because of how far off they are. Saying my team's schedule is four spots tougher than your team's schedule (or whatever) is just ridiculous. It's going to turn out to be about as accurate as Mel Kiper's board.
 
Xerxes said:
Being that the B1G West is one of the weakest divisions, if not the weakest Power 5 division in the nation, most teams in it are going to have schedules that are ranked low or weak, whatever you want to call it.

The big factors will be the 3 crossovers and non-confererce games, which in Iowa's case is usually very weak. I'll give the Gophers some credit, the played TCU and USC lately.
Click to expand...
Is the BIG west the weakest? I'm not so sure about that. Are you talking how they ended the year or expected to be this year based on schedule or reputation? Last year three teams in the west finished with 10 wins or more. 5 of the 7 went to bowl games... Every league will have a team or two in the toilet. Wisky/MN/ Neb won their bowl games. (Granted MNs best win was against Illinois in conference) Having 3 ranked teams one of them in the top 10 at the end of the year hardly seems to be bashing material. What Jon pointed out about Wisky is exibit A for this argument. Where's the logic in what they are trying to say there?
 
Hawkfnntn said:
Is the BIG west the weakest? I'm not so sure about that. Are you talking how they ended the year or expected to be this year based on schedule or reputation? Last year three teams in the west finished with 10 wins or more. 5 of the 7 went to bowl games... Every league will have a team or two in the toilet. Wisky/MN/ Neb won their bowl games. (Granted MNs best win was against Illinois in conference) Having 3 ranked teams one of them in the top 10 at the end of the year hardly seems to be bashing material. What Jon pointed out about Wisky is exibit A for this argument. Where's the logic in what they are trying to say there?
Click to expand...

This is just my opinion but when I look at over the long haul, where would I want Iowa to be in order for them to have the best chance at winning a division championship, and that pick is either the B1G West or the ACC Coastal. The Coastal has an absolute sleeping giant in Miami plus teams like VT who has been good for the last 25 years. GT and North Carolina have shown that they can rise up.

In the B1G West you have Wisconsin which is a very good program but like they're very similar to Iowa. They go as far as their QB and D take them even when they have a great RB. And they don't often have a great QB. Nebraska, up until last year, was a consistent 9 game winner but also showed beyond doubt they were a big step behind the top B1G teams. Good teams beat them regularly. They have never risen up in a big game since being a member of the B1G. Northwestern, solid program with a great coach but nothing to fear regularly. Illinois, bad program that should be much better. Minnesota, bad program that has gotten better but have probably peaked unless something crazy happens. Purdue without Tiller is a bad program.

When I look at that group, if Iowa can continue putting together solid/good defenses and get some better QB play over the long haul, they are in a great spot. Winnable division every year with no superpowers programs. Ever other division has a superpower/blue-blood whatever you want to call it.
 
Xerxes said:
This is just my opinion but when I look at over the long haul, where would I want Iowa to be in order for them to have the best chance at winning a division championship, and that pick is either the B1G West or the ACC Coastal. The Coastal has an absolute sleeping giant in Miami plus teams like VT who has been good for the last 25 years. GT and North Carolina have shown that they can rise up.

In the B1G West you have Wisconsin which is a very good program but like they're very similar to Iowa. They go as far as their QB and D take them even when they have a great RB. And they don't often have a great QB. Nebraska, up until last year, was a consistent 9 game winner but also showed beyond doubt they were a big step behind the top B1G teams. Good teams beat them regularly. They have never risen up in a big game since being a member of the B1G. Northwestern, solid program with a great coach but nothing to fear regularly. Illinois, bad program that should be much better. Minnesota, bad program that has gotten better but have probably peaked unless something crazy happens. Purdue without Tiller is a bad program.

When I look at that group, if Iowa can continue putting together solid/good defenses and get some better QB play over the long haul, they are in a great spot. Winnable division every year with no superpowers programs. Ever other division has a superpower/blue-blood whatever you want to call it.
Click to expand...

Ok yeah I see what your saying and where you were going now. That's pretty much the over arching opinion of them all and I'd agree with it. For sure Iowa is in a great position for the long haul. It's basically them Wisky and NE that'll be jockying at the top with the others sporadically having a good year here and there depending on if they can get a good QB pretty much. I was looking at how should the teams be looked at after the years they had and what is to be expected next yr. Looking at Nebraska they already seem to be getting love from all the media thinking they'll make a big jump. How much of that is based on anything tangible or just the N on their helmets I dunno.. I think it'll be pretty common for the national pundits to always want to rank them and Wisky above us till we have a longer sustained stretch of success. One good year won't be enough to change hearts and minds so much... Which is fine hope we keep winning
 
Fryowa said:
It's all garbage, though. "All" as in any kind of preseason projections. They are total pie in the sky guessing and have zero relevance to anything. It's purely water cooler fodder and the fact that anyone gets irked by it is hilarious.

When in history has any preseason poll come even remotely close to what actually shakes out at the end of the year (in any sport)? It's just hilarious to look back at the media's predictions after the season because of how far off they are. Saying my team's schedule is four spots tougher than your team's schedule (or whatever) is just ridiculous. It's going to turn out to be about as accurate as Mel Kiper's board.
Click to expand...

I agree with this whole-heartedly. I remember 3/4ths of the way thru the season, someone posted the preseason Top 15 vs. where teams were at currently. It was laughable. I think there were something like 7 or 8 SEC teams in the Top 15 and when at the time of the post, there was 1 or 2 (Alabama and maybe one other team), vs. 4 B1G teams (MSU, Michigan, OSU and Iowa). I never get worked up about anything related to preseason rankings, schedules, etc because it all works itself out in the end.....just like it always has.

The only argument to really be made on the flipside is that it is much more difficult to move up into the upper echelon of the rankings when you start outside the Top 25 vs. if you start there. However, Iowa made it all the way to #3 from unranked, so it certainly can be done. However, that took a once in a lifetime, undefeated regular season to get there. Teams that start in the Top 10 can often stay there with 1 or even 2 losses, whereas a team like Iowa gets blasted in the rankings the first loss they take typically, unless it happens early in the season (i.e. 2002 loss vs ISU).
 
SpiderRico said:
I agree with this whole-heartedly. I remember 3/4ths of the way thru the season, someone posted the preseason Top 15 vs. where teams were at currently. It was laughable. I think there were something like 7 or 8 SEC teams in the Top 15 and when at the time of the post, there was 1 or 2 (Alabama and maybe one other team), vs. 4 B1G teams (MSU, Michigan, OSU and Iowa). I never get worked up about anything related to preseason rankings, schedules, etc because it all works itself out in the end.....just like it always has.

The only argument to really be made on the flipside is that it is much more difficult to move up into the upper echelon of the rankings when you start outside the Top 25 vs. if you start there. However, Iowa made it all the way to #3 from unranked, so it certainly can be done. However, that took a once in a lifetime, undefeated regular season to get there. Teams that start in the Top 10 can often stay there with 1 or even 2 losses, whereas a team like Iowa gets blasted in the rankings the first loss they take typically, unless it happens early in the season (i.e. 2002 loss vs ISU).
Click to expand...


When you 'beat somebody' you get to hang around in the rankings. I hasn't done that in awhile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top