From: noonan@icd3 (Michael Noonan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Schedule Strengths, Again
Date: 9 Sep 92 18:32:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.192826.6318@ods.com>,
scott@ods.com (Scott Harper) writes:

> I haven't heard a lot about it this week (yet), but after the
> Pigskin Classic there was a lot of talk about A&M's easy 
> schedule.
[snip]
> After this weekend's first full schedule of games, I decided to 
> look at some of the real "power" schedules...  I left out the 
> conference matchups (Alabama/Vanderbilt, FSU/Duke, etc.) because 
> these games are unavoidable (the Aggies get SMU, TCU, etc).
                                                        ^^^
"etc" here means the entire Southwest Confernece.

> Here's what I came up with (there are probably others that I
> missed, but I just wanted to point out some obvious ones): 
>
>                  Sept. 5             Sept. 12
>                  ---------------     --------------------
> Notre Dame       Northwestern
> Penn State       Cincinnati          Temple
> Nebraska         Utah                Middle Tennessee St.
> Colorado         Colorado St.
> Clemson          Ball St.
> California       San Jose St.
> NC State         Appalachian St.
> Tennessee        SW Louisiana
> Miami                                Florida A&M
> Washington                           Wisconsin
> Oklahoma                             Arkansas St.
> UCLA                                 Fullerton St.
> Ohio State                           Bowling Green
> Georgia Tech                         Western Carolina
>
> Ok, I'm not saying A&M plays the world's toughest schedule.  I am
> saying it's not as bad/any worse than some of the other top 25
> teams.  

Yes it is (worse than some of the other top 25).  Your analysis is
dependent on two weeks worth of games, and not even complete.  Why
do you leave out Michigan as an opponant of Notre Dame on the 12th?

How can you eliminate conference match-ups if your goal is to argue
overall schedule strength?  Or is that your goal?
For example, the reason SEC schools can get away with scheduling
a few patsies to start off the season is because they are *in* the
SEC.  Their schedules are already guarenteed to be some of the
toughest.  A&M's schedulr does not have that luxury.  A&M needs to
beef up its overall schedule.

If you want to look at just two games, let's look at the two 
toughest games (my picks) of the teams you listed:

-------------------------------------------------------------
Notre Dame       Michigan      Penn State
Penn State       Miami        @Notre Dame
Nebraska        @Washington    Oklahoma/Colorado
Colorado         Oklahoma      Nebraska
Clemson          Florida St   @NC St
California      @Washington    Stanford
NC State         Florida St    Clemson
Tennessee        Florida       Alabama
Miami            Florida St   @Penn St
Washington       Stanford      Nebraska
Oklahoma        @Colorado      Nebraska
UCLA             Stanford     @BYU
Ohio State      @Michigan     @Syracuse
Georgia Tech     Florida St    Clemson

Texas A&M       *Stanford      Tulsa
-------------------------------------------------------------

And if we only look at regular season scheduling (i.e A&M doesn't 
play Stanford) A&M's schedule would *really* suck.  The next toughest
games would be Texas or LSU.  I don't think I'd rank A&M's two
toughest higher than *any* of these others.

>And if your answer is "well, A&M plays in the SWC", well,
>I say your conference has patsies too...

I would say that the SWC is an entire conference of patsies, and
that the only way A&M can gain respect is by playing some non-
conference games that have some national implications (i.e. Stanford)
I know Texas A&M is adding Oklahoma - good for you.  But until you
play a rebuilt Oklahoma team, your schedule is not that spectacular.
Even then it could still use some more meat.

>Besides, everyone should
>agree that the emotional aspect of conference games makes many of 
>them that appear to be walks on paper turn out to be tough games.

This remark detracts only from Notre Dame's schedule.


These facts have been posted previously (I sum them up here)...
  Texas A&M plays 3 returning bowl teams, the least of any top 10 team.
  Texas A&M plays only 4 returning winning teams.
  Texas A&M plays only one team in the AP top 25 (Stanford, not even on
     their regular schedule).
  Texas A&M plays no top 10 teams.



My own personal gripe with A&M's schedule is the localized aspect of it.
If more respect in the polls is what you want, play a Big East team,
play a Big 10 team or an ACC team.  How about a series with a Pac10 or
even a WAC team?  Spread it around a little.  The only regular season
team you guys play that is not in Texas (SWC) or borders Texas (Tulsa,
LSU), is Missouri.  You don't even have to pick the toughest team in
those leagues - when the voters see you playing in their area, they will
give you more respect.  Right or wrong, that's the way it is (IMO).
Actually, I think A&M is getting a tremendous amount of repect in the 
polls this year anyway, so maybe my point is moot.


Cheers...

-Mike Noonan