Strength of Schedule

Pages : [1] 2

amorentz
01-03-2006, 04:47 PM
I found it interesting to note that the Skins had the second-toughest schedule this season, based on the post-season strength of schedule rankings. Also, only one other playoff had opponents that finished over .500 (the Pats at .508) and the Broncos finished with opponents at .500.

All of the other playoff teams finished within the top 15 for ease of schedule, including the Seahawks who finished with the easiest schedule (and a L at the hands of our Skins).

Not that any of this means much, but its pretty damn interesting to me that we played a harsh schedule and came out looking good in every game except the first Giants game. We played a lot of tough teams real tough, and I hope we get a second crack at them in the playoffs...

Here are the rankings:

Seahawks 0.43
Panthers 0.449
Bucs 0.449
Dolphins 0.457
Bears 0.457
Colts 0.457
Jaguars 0.465
Bengals 0.477
Rams 0.484
Vikings 0.484
Falcons 0.492
Steelers 0.492
Giants 0.492
Bills 0.5
Broncos 0.5
Lions 0.504
Chiefs 0.504
Cardinals 0.508
Browns 0.508
Patriots 0.508
Titans 0.512
Saints 0.523
Ravens 0.523
Cowboys 0.523
Jets 0.527
Packers 0.531
Eagles 0.531
Texans 0.535
Raiders 0.539
49ers 0.539
Redskins 0.539
Chargers 0.559

steveo395
01-03-2006, 04:51 PM
The redskins also had the best strength of victory in the league, and the only team with a strength of victory over .500 in the league

Also seattle's strength of schedule looks a lot harder than it really was because they played the colts backup players, but still got credit for playing a 14-2 team

The Redskins never played any team's backups at the end of the year.

dmek25
01-03-2006, 04:54 PM
no one can say we played a cupcake schedule like the eagles usually do

amorentz
01-03-2006, 04:54 PM
The Redskins never played any team's backups at the end of the year.

Except for the Eagles, but that wasnt intentional!! :laughing2

CrazyCanuck
01-03-2006, 04:55 PM
Great info.

Someone should forward it to Sally Jenkins.

steveo395
01-03-2006, 04:56 PM
Except for the Eagles, but that wasnt intentional!! :laughing2
that actually made our schedule look easier though because the eagles went 6-10, unlike seattle playing the colts

SUNRA
01-03-2006, 11:29 PM
The redskins also had the best strength of victory in the league, and the only team with a strength of victory over .500 in the league

Also seattle's strength of schedule looks a lot harder than it really was because they played the colts backup players, but still got credit for playing a 14-2 team

The Redskins never played any team's backups at the end of the year.

Wait a minute. We just played Philly's second and third string teams. They didn't look too bad until the second half of the game.

skinsttw
01-03-2006, 11:46 PM
Interesting post. I thought our schedule was supposed to be easy this year, then a lot of teams turned things around, like Chicago, NYG, and Tampa.

bedlamVR
01-04-2006, 09:25 AM
The same can be said of the Rams, they played an injury delpleated side and still beat the Cowboys We played the Eagles second and third string players because that was all they had left through injuires, it wasn't a concious decision to specifically feild a weakend side the Eagles very much wanted to put us out of the playoffs.

The Colts- seahawks game was just another exhibition match neither really had that much to gain totally different situations.

FRPLG
01-04-2006, 10:32 AM
With all the parity in the league I think it is still interesting to see how the playoff teams in general seem to have the easier schedules while the others have the harder schedules. Of course I would think that the Seahawks strength of schedule is hurt by the fact that they are 14-2 so that's an automatic 4 more losses for their opponents than a 10-6 team like the Skins. I'd love to see strength of schedule minus the teams own win or loss. Sort of measure how the teams they played did against everyone else not including you. That seems a little more fair to me.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum