re: BCS works __% of the time? 27%

quote:

---

Shouldn't a superior 8 game + conference champ game schedule trump a three game OOC schedule? There has not been a year any time this decade that the Big XII was better than the SEC.

---

Yes, I believe that the upper half of a schedule is a better indication of overall strenght than the average, but for the most part that's not the way it's done.

quote:

---

Maybe so, but it was still better than the Big XII that year. Keep in mind, "experts" said the same thing about this past season and we see how that turned out.

---

OOC schedules matter in these computer models. The best wins OOC by AU's SEC opponents were:

LSU over 7-4 Troy
LSU over 6-5 Oregon St.
AL over 6-5 Southern Miss
GA over 6-5 Marshall
GA over 6-5 GATech

That's it. There were no other victories over teams with winning records.

AU's SEC opponents also lost to:

MSU lost to non1A Maine
TN (SEC CG participant; AU played twice) lost to 6-5 ND
Kent lost to 4-7 Ohio

All other losses (5 more, but only 1 to a BCS team) were to teams with winning records.

In addition to AU playing the Citadel and MSU losing to Maine, two more nonIA teams were played by AU's SEC opponents: AL played W. Carolina and GA played GA Southern.

To give you a little comparison, in 2007, the entire conference only lost 1 game to a nonBCS team (ULM over AL ).

Here are the comparable numbers for OK:

The best wins OOC by OK's Big12 opponents were:

TX over 7-4 N. TX
Kan over 9-3 Toledo
Ok St over 6-5 UCLA
A&M over 6-5 Wyoming
A&M over 6-5 Clemson
Neb over 8-3 Pitt
Bay over 7-4 N. TX
Col over 7-4 N. TX

OK's Big12 opponents lost to no OOC team with a losing record. OK did not play a nonIA team and it's Big12 opponents played 3 but did not lose to one.

The point of all this is that this kind of performance is going to make OK look better than AU. AU did themselves no favor with their OOC sched, but the SEC performance was a big contributor too.