Lunardi: Non-Con Schedule Strength

**kucyclone** · 06-27-2011, 03:46 PM

Article link (ESPN Insider)

For those without ESPN Insider, here's a summary - I doubt I can just copy and paste the article:

ISU has had the second-worst non-conference strength of schedule among all BCS-conference teams over the last four seasons. The strength of schedule ratings over the past four seasons, 2007-2008 to 2010-2011, were 251, 310, 220, and 310, for an average of 272.75. Oregon State was worst over the same period with an average non-con SOS of 318.75.

The top 5, starting with the worst, over the last four years were Oregon State, Iowa State, Stanford, Nebraska, and Colorado.

"The coaches and athletic directors at these schools need to realize, if not already, that committee members are wise to the ways of "record padding" like never before."

**Malone** · 06-27-2011, 03:49 PM

This makes McDermott's record here look all the more pathetic

**Cydkar** · 06-27-2011, 03:49 PM

When, in the last 4 years, were NCAA committee members going to be a part of ISU's life?

**Clones85'** · 06-27-2011, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by kucyclone

Article link (ESPN Insider)

For those without ESPN Insider, here's a summary - I doubt I can just copy and paste the article:

ISU has had the second-worst non-conference strength of schedule among all BCS-conference teams over the last four seasons. The strength of schedule ratings over the past four seasons, 2007-2008 to 2010-2011, were 251, 310, 220, and 310, for an average of 272.75. Oregon State was worst over the same period with an average non-con SOS of 318.75.

The top 5, starting with the worst, over the last four years were Oregon State, Iowa State, Stanford, Nebraska, and Colorado.

"The coaches and athletic directors at these schools need to realize, if not already, that committee members are wise to the ways of "record padding" like never before."

Anyone think KUcyclone would have posted this if ISU had the TOP 5 SOS the past 4 seasons??? Anyone? .............yeah me either

**madcityCY** · 06-27-2011, 03:52 PM

Posts #2 and #3 say it all. Both true.

**alarson** · 06-27-2011, 03:52 PM

Id be interested to see the general deviation from average most bcs schools have. Most schools have quite a bit of padding, ours may be more than average, but most still have a ton of it. No need to boost the non-con schedule when you've got plenty of meat in your conference schedule. The top non-con schedules are likely to come from those that either 1. are generally good enough year in and year out that what is a strong team to bring in for some other schools is still pretty much a patsy to them, or 2. lower end teams that either bolster their weak conference schedule with tougher nonconference games, or buy-a-win teams that go play a tough nonconference for the funds it brings their AD.

**kucyclone** · 06-27-2011, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by Clones85'

Anyone think KUcyclone would have posted this if ISU had the TOP 5 SOS the past 4 seasons??? Anyone? .............yeah me either

I absolutely would have. I was reading ESPN and I saw ISU mentioned so I posted it. Don't let it get your panties in a bunch.

**brokenloginagain** · 06-27-2011, 03:52 PM

the total list was not really surprising - a few schools with "tourney tradition" that are on a losing streak (stanford, LSU, ncstate, isu) plus most of the struggling programs in the major conferences (oregon state, rutgers, nebraska, colorado, northwestern, etc.).

i like lunardi's work, but i'm not sure i'm in agreement with his conclusion. hardly any teams on that list the past four years have been bubble teams..they've been teams searching for wins and "rebuilding."

**alarson** · 06-27-2011, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by Clones85'

Anyone think KUcyclone would have posted this if ISU had the TOP 5 SOS the past 4 seasons??? Anyone? .............yeah me either

Yeah... definitely KU"cyclone"

**Clones85'** · 06-27-2011, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by kucyclone

I absolutely would have. I was reading ESPN and I saw ISU mentioned so I posted it. Don't let it get your panties in a bunch.

Panties are not in a bunch as this doesn't bother me. I wish our football team loaded up on a really weak non con schedule as well. At ISU that is exactly what we need right now.

But your posts lately haven't exactly been positive in regards to ISU

**kucyclone** · 06-27-2011, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by Clones85'

Panties are not in a bunch as this doesn't bother me. I wish our football team loaded up on a really weak non con schedule as well. At ISU that is exactly what we need right now.

But your posts lately haven't exactly been positive in regards to ISU

**gocubs2118** · 06-27-2011, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Clones85'

Panties are not in a bunch as this doesn't bother me. I wish our football team loaded up on a really weak non con schedule as well. At ISU that is exactly what we need right now.

But your posts lately haven't exactly been positive in regards to ISU

It's completely different for football. SOS is not a criteria thats needed to get into a bowl game.

**CloneSolo** · 06-27-2011, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by kucyclone

Article link (ESPN Insider)

For those without ESPN Insider, here's a summary - I doubt I can just copy and paste the article:

ISU has had the second-worst non-conference strength of schedule among all BCS-conference teams over the last four seasons. The strength of schedule ratings over the past four seasons, 2007-2008 to 2010-2011, were 251, 310, 220, and 310, for an average of 272.75. Oregon State was worst over the same period with an average non-con SOS of 318.75.

The top 5, starting with the worst, over the last four years were Oregon State, Iowa State, Stanford, Nebraska, and Colorado.

"The coaches and athletic directors at these schools need to realize, if not already, that committee members are wise to the ways of "record padding" like never before."

I thought it was a fair, unbiased post. Simply sharing some information that would be relevant to a website dedicated to dispersement of information pertaining to ISU sports. I am a newby to the site, so have no idea about posting history, but understand that not all information regarding ISU will be great to hear. Reality is that our program has struggled in recent years, wins have been harder to come by, therefore scheduling wins required finding lower tier teams. The percentages and numbers in this case don't lie, and put an emphasis on the decline of the program especially under Coach McDermott.

**weR138** · 06-27-2011, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by kucyclone

Article link (ESPN Insider)

For those without ESPN Insider, here's a summary - I doubt I can just copy and paste the article:

ISU has had the second-worst non-conference strength of schedule among all BCS-conference teams over the last four seasons. The strength of schedule ratings over the past four seasons, 2007-2008 to 2010-2011, were 251, 310, 220, and 310, for an average of 272.75. Oregon State was worst over the same period with an average non-con SOS of 318.75.

The top 5, starting with the worst, over the last four years were Oregon State, Iowa State, Stanford, Nebraska, and Colorado.

"The coaches and athletic directors at these schools need to realize, if not already, that committee members are wise to the ways of "record padding" like never before."

ISU basketball is championship basketball. Fred cares about winning the Big XII, do that and the non con is inconsequential. That said, the schedule is going to improve and will not be an issue for ISU.

**rholtgraves** · 06-27-2011, 04:15 PM

I don't see why posting this is hating on ISU, it is a fact that was taken from the ESPN website. It is not kucyclone's opinion, it is not an opinion at all.

Regardless, it is pretty predictable because the bottom teams in power conferences will always try to schedule easy non-con games in hopes they can maybe pull off a few unexpected wins in the conference and go to the NIT or other post season tournament.