Phil Steele's 2008 Toughest Schedule

On my website for the last few weeks I have listed the combined 2007 records of this years opponents for the 2008 season. This is a nice guideline for who plays the toughest schedules but if you have read my magazine you know that last years record is not a true indicator of the strength of THIS years years. As an example if you play Notre Dame this year you will be playing a bowl squad but using last years records you would only get credit for playing a 3-9 team. Here is my ranking of this years schedules based on how tough each team is for the 2008 season! I have an entire article in the magazine which goes more in depth on the differences and why I feel the "Phil Steele Toughest Schedules" are the most accurate of a teams upcoming schedule. If you read the article you will also get a bonus of teams that have the much easier schedules than last year and those that play the much tougher schedules. In the magazine the last 4 years the teams in the "Going UP" box have had better records 34 out of 42 times or 81%. Teams in the "Going Down" box have had weaker records 31 out of 38 times or 81.5%. Here are this year TRUE toughest schedule rankings.

Below is Phil Steele's 2008 toughest schedule. All factors are taken into account in these rankings. You will also find the article as reprinted from page 317 in "Phil Steele's College Football Preview." There is also a list on teams that will benefit and that will struggle due to the strength of their schedules.

The question arises each year, “Who plays the toughest schedule?” At the beginning of the season, the NCAA usually releases a rating of each team’s schedule based on their opponents’ win/loss record from the previous season. This is a good method but it does have its obvious flaws.

The first flaw is basing the ratings on opponents’ records from the previous season. Let’s look at a couple of examples from last year. At the start of the year I had Illinois rated as one of the top teams in the Big Ten and they went on to knock off #1 Ohio St and play in the ROSE BOWL. My ratings had them as an above average opponent at the start of the year and they finished the regular season #13 in the country. Using 2006’s record as the criteria for determining the strength of an opponents’ schedule, however you would count them as a 2-10 team. Connecticut turned out to be one of the top teams in the Big East as they rose to #16 in the polls with an 8-1 record at one point. My power ratings had them as a bowl caliber team prior to the year but once again with a 4-8 record in 2006 the NCAA method would have had them counted as a weakling. Miss St, UCF, Air Force, Fresno St, Memphis, Colorado and Bowling Green all had 4 wins or less in 2006 yet all made it to bowls last year. On the flip side of the coin Notre Dame was in an obvious rebuilding year yet was still counted as a 10-3 team if you based strength of schedule on LAST YEARS’s rec ord, and they were far from a January bowl team in 2007 at just 3-9!

The second flaw is basing it on pure overall records. If a team plays a FCS (IAA) school that was 11-1 in 2006, that would count as a MUCH tougher game in the NCAA ratings than facing a team like Florida St, California, South Carolina or Alabama. All of those BCS powers had weak records last year but should be bowl teams this season and are MUCH tougher than a 1AA team. To give you an example from 2002, my ratings foresaw that teams playing Kansas St were facing a Top 10 team based on my preseason ratings. The NCAA strength of schedule ranking rated a game against a power like Kansas St as just a game vs a 6-6 opponent (2001 record). Kansas St finished #7 in the AP poll for 2002 and walloped their opponents by an average score of 45-12, not exactly numbers from a typical middle-of-the-road opponent. In 2005, judging a team based on their previous season’s record, teams that drew Notre Dame (6-6) and Alabama (6-6) appeared to be drawing an average team but my ratings had those two as bowl caliber teams and I rated the Tide a darkhorse National Title contender. ND was #5 in the final regular season poll and, at one point, Alabama was 9-0 and #4, but by going by 2004’s record, both were supposed to be mediocre foes.

Let me delve a little further into 2003’s ratings. Coming into the season, I rated Notre Dame as the team that would face the NCAA’s toughest schedule. When the season was over, they did indeed face THE TOUGHEST schedule. The NCAA rankings at the start of the year only had ND’s schedule ranked as the 49th toughest, a fairly average slate. Let’s take a look at some of their opponents. The Irish faced 10 bowl eligible teams. Their opponents in 2003 finished a combined 97-55. Once again, my strength of schedule is based on THIS YEAR’S strength of opponents NOT on opponent records from the previous year. Basing it on their opponents’ final records of 2002, it looked like a mediocre slate. They ended up facing teams that were ranked #1, #6, #9, #11 and #18 in the final AP poll, plus bowl squads from Pitt, Navy, Mich St and BC. Hardly a mediocre schedule as they faced 9 teams with winning records, the 2nd highest total in the NCAA that year!

I have many more examples from years past on my website www.philsteele.com for those of you that want a little more in-depth history on strength of schedule. These examples clearly show that basing schedule strength on last year’s opponents record is inaccurate.

One chart that I find very helpful is comparing this year’s schedule with last year’s and I will delve into that more in a bit but here is my list of who ended up playing the toughest schedules in 2007. The 2007 bowl eligible teams are in boldface. Four of the teams that played the six toughest schedules did not make it to a bowl and the two that did finished a combined 13-13!

Now let’s turn our attention to 2008. This year I again decided to see what method the NCAA would come up with for toughest opponents faced and compare them to my chart, which I always list in the magazine. Let’s first look at the NCAA rankings. In the right hand column is a chart of all 120 teams and the combined 2007 opponents’ records from last year. It is ranked in order of highest % of opponent wins (or toughest schedule) to lowest % of opponent wins (or easiest schedule).

On the next page are my rankings for the nation’s toughest schedules this year. These rankings take two major factors into account. The first is my 8 sets of Power Ratings. This ensures that a IAA team is rated much lower than South Carolina, which was 6-6 last year but will be an SEC bowl team this year.

The second factor is the amount of home and away games played. As an example, this year some teams will have as many as 8 home games, while others play as many as 8 on the road.

Listed on page 318 are this year’s toughest schedules rated from the most difficult to the easiest. The toughest schedule again this year according to my rankings belongs to Washington while the easiest belongs to Tulsa.

Let’s pick out some teams to show you the flaws of just using last year’s overall opponent records. Based on 2007’s opponent records UAB plays the 15th toughest schedule while Vanderbilt takes on a much more manageable #48 slate. Both teams play Tennessee and South Carolina. For UAB those are their ONLY two BCS conference foes on the schedule. Vandy meanwhile plays TEN BCS conference teams, including Florida and Georgia who are both in the Top 5! Do you think Vandy’s HC Bobby Johnson would take the NCAA’s #15 toughest schedule over his #48 slate? He would jump at the chance and start lining up bowl invitations instead of going through the tough year they will face this season.

Wyoming faces the 17th toughest schedule based on last year’s records. The Cowboys face a grand total of ONE BCS conference team! There are 65 BCS conference schools and ALL 65 would love to trade their schedule for Wyoming’s, which my ratings rank as the 65th toughest schedule.

According to the NCAA’s method, which is based on winning percentage for opponents, Florida International plays the 66th toughest schedule and NCSt faces the 61st toughest. Florida Int’l has to battle such “powers” as W Kent, N Texas and ULL playing 3 teams from BCS conferences (9 opp non-BCS!). NCSt’s “equal” schedule has TEN teams from BCS Conferences and outside of the ACC they face USF (who also faces FIU), South Carolina and East Carolina which are teams who are all near the top in their leagues. They will likely be an underdog in 8 or 9 of their games. If they played Florida International’s schedule they would be favored 9 of the 12 games.

Let me get a little more in depth. According to opponents win %, Tennessee has a very soft slate with their opponents winning % at just 51.7% (78-73) in 2007. The NCAA rates it as the #67. Tennessee’s “cupcake” schedule features road trips to UCLA, Auburn, Georgia and South Carolina! They also draw Florida, Alabama, Miss St and Kentucky at home! I rate their schedule as the 16th toughest. According to last year’s record Stanford’s opponents are only #49. I rate their schedule #14 as they have to play 5 of their 7 road games against teams that were in bowls last year. They also face a much improved Notre Dame team in South Bend and host National Title contender USC who will be out for revenge after last year’s upset.

In 2004 on these pages, I looked at Iowa St’s schedule and forecast a turnaround season. Of their 11 foes, only 1 ranked in my Top 25 at the start of the year. While teams like N Illinois, Kansas and Nebraska all had great seasons in 2003, they were far from powers in 2004. Based on 2003’s records, Iowa St faced the 8th toughest schedule in the country!!!!! My ratings had their schedule at #60 and I felt only 1 of their foes would be in the Top 25 and just 5 or 6 in bowls (which is a low number for a BCS school). When the dust cleared, Iowa St faced only 5 bowl teams and came within a missed FG of winning the then-weak Big XII North, hardly the 8th toughest schedule in the land.

As a comparison, I also said that based on 2003’s record, Kentucky had the 105th toughest schedule or 15th easiest in 2004, with their opponents just 63-76 (45%). I looked at their schedule and saw 5 Top 25 contenders, as well as projected 2004 bowl teams like S Carolina and Louisville. I said that Kentucky clearly played a much tougher schedule than Iowa St, yet based strictly on 2004’s records, Iowa St played the 8th toughest and Kentucky the 15th easiest. UK’s foes finished the year at 72-56 (#20), hardly an easy schedule.

Here are the teams with the biggest discrepancy in the two methods of determining toughest schedule and you can check out each team’s schedules to see which method you think is better. I list the difference in rankings between the two in ( )’s. Most UNDERRATED schedules (i.e. teams that face a tougher slate than NCAA % rankings): 1. NCSt (51), 2. Tennessee (51), 3. Purdue (50), 4. Vanderbilt (44), 5. Stanford (35), 6. Navy (35), 7. Iowa (30), 7. Ohio (30), 9. Toledo (29), 10. USC (28).

Here are the most OVERRATED schedules (i.e. teams that face an easier slate than NCAA % rankings): 1. Wyoming (48), 2. UAB (39), 3. Marshall (38), 4. East Carolina (33), 5. Clemson (33), 6. N Carolina (32), 7. Utah (31), 8. Florida Int’l (29), 9. SMU (29), 10. Duke (29).

If you go to my website (www.philsteele.com) you will find out that teams that play a top 20 schedule normally do not fare well. I mentioned earlier about the poor records for teams that took on a top 6 schedule last year but of teams that took on a top 20 slate, ELEVEN were not bowl eligible and ZERO were in the Top 10 at the end of the year. Only two of the 20 even managed to be ranked in the Top 20!

Conversely in 1996, Army & Wyoming faced the two easiest schedules and were a combined 20-2 during the regular season. In 1998 (in this article) I pointed out that Tulane had a similarly soft schedule and they simply went UNDEFEATED! In 1999, I asked, “Who will be this year’s Tulane?” I answered myself by saying Marshall. The Herd then thundered their way to another UNDEFEATED season!!! TCU had a shot at an undefeated season in 2000 and went 10-1 in the regular season. In 2003, I noted the strongest teams playing the easiest schedules. I said TCU, facing the #96 schedule, was one of my surprise teams and they again flirted with an undefeated season. In 2004, I listed both Utah and Boise St as non-BCS teams with talent, an easy schedule and a shot to run the table and both finished the regular season unbeaten!!! In 2005 Ark St played the #119 schedule and made it to a bowl after going 3-8 the previous year! In 2006 Boise St faced the 11th easiest schedule and went undefeated while winning a BCS bowl. Last year Hawaii faced the 2nd easiest schedule. I called for them to get to a BCS bowl and they played in the Sugar Bowl! This year TULSA draws the #120 slate!

In 2004 I added a new feature to this article and took a look at the teams who have much easier, or much tougher schedules than the previous year. I listed the 10 teams who took on the most improved (softer) schedules in 2004 than 2003. Out of the 10 teams, NINE had better records in 2004 than 2003 or 90%!!!!! Overall the 10 teams had a combined record in 2003 of 51-75 40% and improved to 6950 58% in 2004, including Auburn, which went from 8-5 to a perfect 13-0 and Iowa St which went from 2-10 to a bowl!! In 2005, of the 10 teams in the “Going Up” box, EIGHT had better records in 2005 than in 2004. Four teams went from a losing season to a bowl. In 2006 of the 10 teams in this box, 8 ended up with better records including Wake Forest and Arkansas, who both went from losing seasons to January Bowls!!! Also Hawaii, Purdue and Texas A&M went from losing years to playing in a bowl. Last year I listed 12 teams in the box and 9 had the same or better record than in 2006 with teams like Virginia, Indiana and Memphis going from a losing season to a bowl.

Here are the 10 teams with easier schedules that should have better success in 2008 and the number in the parenthesis is the difference (easier) from last yr’s schedule:

In 2004, we took a look at the 10 teams that faced a tougher schedule and I said their records may drop because of it. Those ten teams combined for a 72-55 57% mark in 2003 but the same 10 were just 44-67 39.6% in 2004!!!! Once again, 90% of the teams saw their record get weaker and the only team that did not was Vanderbilt, which went from 210 to 2-9 because they played one less game!! The most notable dropees that made the list were powerhouses Kansas St and Maryland who were coming off 11 and 10 win seasons respectively and both had losing seasons!! In 2005 only ONE of 10 teams in the “Going Down” box managed to have a better record. In 2006 8 of the 10 teams in the “Going Down?” box had weaker records, including Iowa St and Virginia who went from being in a bowl to a losing record. Last year I had 8 teams in the box and surprisingly only 5 had a weaker record. That means over 4 years 82% of the teams in the “Going Down” box have had a weaker record the next year. Here are the teams with harder schedules that may see some dropoff in 2008 and the number in the parenthesis is the difference (harder) from last year’s schedule.

The computer shows me that there are some other teams with one or more of the sets of Power Ratings which call for them to have undefeated seasons. Naturally, if a team is projected at the top of my Power Ratings, it has a greater chance of going unbeaten. In 2002, three sets of my ratings called for Ohio St to go unbeaten and the Buckeyes were the surprise team of the country. In 2003, 11 teams were rated in two or more sets of my Power Ratings with a perfect record. That included the Top 6 in the final AP poll who all were among the 11 teams I listed on this page. In 2005 USC and Texas made this list. The only unbeaten BCS team prior to the bowls in 2006 was Ohio St who made the list. Last year Hawaii made the list and was the only unbeaten team in the regular season. Here are this year’s teams in which one or more sets of my Power Ratings forecast a perfect season as a possibility. This year the teams are Florida, Ohio State, USC, Oklahoma, Georgia, Missouri, West Virginia, USF, Clemson, Utah, BYU, Virginia Tech, Tulsa and Ball St. Keep in mind that good health, a positive turnover ratio and a little luck are needed to go unbeaten. I hope your favorite team has a favorable schedule.