|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
01-03-2006, 04:47 PM | #1 |
Special Teams
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 44
Posts: 368
|
Strength of Schedule
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 |
Advertisements |
01-03-2006, 04:51 PM | #2 |
The Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,674
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
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. |
01-03-2006, 04:54 PM | #3 |
MVP
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 63
Posts: 10,672
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
no one can say we played a cupcake schedule like the eagles usually do
|
01-03-2006, 04:54 PM | #4 | |
Special Teams
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 44
Posts: 368
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
Quote:
|
|
01-03-2006, 04:55 PM | #5 |
Serenity Now
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,008
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
Great info.
Someone should forward it to Sally Jenkins. |
01-03-2006, 04:56 PM | #6 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,674
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
Quote:
|
|
01-03-2006, 11:29 PM | #7 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,680
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
Quote:
__________________
Redskins Member since 1970 |
|
01-03-2006, 11:46 PM | #8 |
Special Teams
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 174
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
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.
__________________
Go skins! |
01-04-2006, 09:25 AM | #9 |
Special Teams
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 389
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
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. |
01-04-2006, 10:32 AM | #10 |
MVP
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 46
Posts: 10,164
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
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.
|
01-04-2006, 10:56 AM | #11 |
MVP
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 46
Posts: 10,164
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
I did some quick calculations on the strength of schedules to remove each teams influence on its own SOS and saw that it doesn't chance it dramatically especially at the top. A couple teams makes serious jumps or falls but overall it stay about the same. The schedule does seem to have a profound effect on a teams playoffs chances. Here's the newer numbers I came up with with their original ranking to the left.
1 Seahawks 0.445833333 2 Panthers 0.458333333 3 Bucs 0.458333333 4 Dolphins 0.458333333 5 Bears 0.466666667 9 Rams 0.475 6 Colts 0.479166667 7 Jaguars 0.479166667 8 Bengals 0.4875 10 Vikings 0.4875 14 Bills 0.4875 11 Falcons 0.491666667 16 Lions 0.491666667 18 Cardinals 0.495833333 21 Titans 0.495833333 19 Browns 0.5 12 Steelers 0.504166667 13 Giants 0.504166667 22 Saints 0.504166667 17 Chiefs 0.5125 25 Jets 0.5125 28 Texans 0.5125 20 Patriots 0.516666667 23 Ravens 0.516666667 26 Packers 0.516666667 15 Broncos 0.520833333 27 Eagles 0.525 29 Raiders 0.525 30 49ers 0.525 24 Cowboys 0.529166667 31 Redskins 0.55 32 Chargers 0.566666667 |
01-04-2006, 10:59 AM | #12 |
MVP
Join Date: May 2004
Age: 46
Posts: 10,164
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
One more thing after looking at the numbers some more. The Skins and the Chargers clearly had the toughest schedules this year and I think that should give us some hope. The charges barely missed the playoffs after being considered a pretty good team all year and we barely made it after putting together a late season rally but both teams played schedules far harder than any other playoff team.
|
01-04-2006, 01:31 PM | #13 | |
A Dude
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 45
Posts: 12,421
|
Re: Strength of Schedule
Quote:
Now if that isn't a testament to the two best coaches in the NFL, Belichik and Gibbs, I don't know what is. |
|
|
|