PDA

View Full Version : 2011 Vikings Schedule Strength



Webby
09-16-2011, 08:45 PM
A look at the most difficult schedules in 2011 based on opponents’ 2010 record.
Rank Team Combined W-L Pct.
1. Panthers 142-114 .555
2. Bills 137-123 .535
T3. Jets* 133-123 .520
T3. Colts* 133-123 .520
T3. Jaguars 133-123 .520
T3. Chiefs* 133-123 .520
T3. Chargers 133-123 .520
T3. Broncos 133-1223 .520
T3. Lions 133-123 .520
T10. Dolphins 132-124 .516
T10. Texans 132-124 .516
T10. VIKINGS 132-124 .516
T13. Packers* 130-126 .508
T13. Saints* 130-126 .508
T15. Patriots* 129-127 .504
T15. Eagles* 129-127 .504
T15. Cowboys 129-127 .504
18. Buccaneers 127-129 .496
T19. Browns 126-130 .492
T19. Raiders 126-130 .492
T19. Giants 126-130 .492
T19. Falcons* 126-130 .492
T23. Titans 125-131 .488
T23. Bears* 125-131 .488
T23. Seahawks* 125-131 .488
26. Rams 122-134 .477
T27. Steelers* 121-135 .473
T27. Bengals 121-135 .473
T27. Redskins 121-135 .473
30. 49ers 119-137 .465
31. Ravens* 117-139 .457
32. Cardinals 113-143 .441
*Indicates team made the 2010 playoffs

Traveling_Vike
09-17-2011, 12:56 AM
So much for the "weak" schedule we're supposed to have.

gregair13
09-17-2011, 01:17 AM
Any given Sunday.

MulletMullitia
09-17-2011, 01:42 AM
Colts T3? That makes no sense. They play in the easiest division in the entire NFL. We play in the hardest. We could be in for a long year.

singersp
09-17-2011, 08:09 AM
So much for the "weak" schedule we're supposed to have.

It must be in part because of the division games. Nevertheless, based on those rankings, both the NFC Champ Bears & the SB Champ Packers ended up with an easier schedule than we did & that's not supposed to be the way it works.

Keep in mind too that it may be a bit deceiving. How bad or how good the teams actually were, affects the numbers quite a bit also.

For instance, the Packers play us twice. So essentially they are playing a bad team twice that they should win. However, our 6-10 record (that's counted twice in the ratings) skews their rating differently than if we had gone 2-14.

It's still only 2 wins for the Pack, but the strength of schedule will look much different.

Traveling_Vike
09-18-2011, 12:13 AM
It must be in part because of the division games. Nevertheless, based on those rankings, both the NFC Champ Bears & the SB Champ Packers ended up with an easier schedule than we did & that's not supposed to be the way it works.

Keep in mind too that it may be a bit deceiving. How bad or how good the teams actually were, affects the numbers quite a bit also.

For instance, the Packers play us twice. So essentially they are playing a bad team twice that they should win. However, our 6-10 record (that's counted twice in the ratings) skews their rating differently than if we had gone 2-14.

It's still only 2 wins for the Pack, but the strength of schedule will look much different.

I pretty much agree with you. These SoS things have never carried much weight with me. The first big problem is that they are based on last year's finishes for each opponent, but the teams aren't the same from one year to the next. Second problem, as you mention, is divisional games which count the same opponent twice. The Pack and Bears have "weaker" schedules because they play US twice, while ours is "tougher" because we play THEM twice each.

If you want to take it even further, you need to look at each OPPONENT's strength of schedule from last year. And that should be based on last year's ending records, not the previous season's.
Maybe they were bad because they had an exceptionally tough road, or they were good because they had a really easy one.

You can push that extrapolation as far as you care to. When you get right down to it, Strength of schedule is a crock of poo.

Purple Floyd
09-18-2011, 09:58 AM
You have to beat them all to become a SB champ so it shouldn't matter who you play buy rather how you perform when you play them.