It’s the schedule stupid
Get ready to be bored with a bunch of statistics.
There are five conferences that don’t have a locked in bid to the BCS. If you go by the power ratings used by the BCS, those leagues finished 2007 in this order: MWC, WAC, CUSA, Sun Belt, and MAC.
What makes them different?
Obviously budget, fan support, exposure, coaching, recruiting, etc all have an impact. But what about things they can control?
Non-conference scheduling is in the hands of the schools (some exception for the MAC which coordinates non-conference scheduling and the power of ESPN counts as well).
So what can we learn from looking at the schedules?
1. None of the five do well against ranked non-conference opponents.
2. In games against teams from the teams with auto-qualification to the BCS (”AQ” leagues), the difference in success between C-USA, MAC, Sun Belt, and WAC is nominal. Only the MWC excelled in those games finishing one game under .500.
3. The MAC had the best winning percentage of games against FBS schools not from an AQ league but played a smaller percentage of its games against those schools. The other four, one win or one loss could have shuffled the order.
4. The two lowest rated leagues #5 MAC and #4 Sun Belt played a higher percentage of games against AQ teams. MAC highest, Sun Belt second highest. The two highest rated leagues #1 MWC and #2 WAC played were also in that order for lowest percentage of games vs. AQ teams.

1 Comment
RSS feed


