In response to a twitter post from the writers of the Big 10 Conference in which the Big 10 was being criticized for their non-conference schedule being soft or lacking credibility. Contrary to dis-belief but the Big 10 is significantly better than the SEC in many categorical variables which would determine credibility.
Taking the same reference point as the recent October 19, 2012 article written by the author from the Tampa Bay Times as 2006, which I used as the examination point for the SEC in the previous post. This is what I have examined using the same historical facts and non-conference scheduling information about the Big 10.
Since 2006, The Big 10 has NOT significantly increased or decreased their scheduling of FCS opponents. In 2006, the Big 10 scheduled 8 FCS programs and in 2012, the exact same number. Since 2006, the Big 10’s record is 236-81 with a win loss percentage rate of 74.9%. Comparing the Big 10 to the SEC, the Big 10 scheduled 327 non conference games. Since 2006, The Big 10 scheduled 37 less non-conference home games compared to the SEC. This indicates that the Big 10 took more risks playing more road games versus non-conference opponents. By examining each level of program labels, which was determined by the NCAA and BCS committees, the Big 10 scheduled significantly different than the SEC within their non-conference schedule. Since 1996, the Big 10 scheduled 62 FCS programs, which is significantly less than the SEC’s 72. Of the non conference games schedules versus Non BCS programs, the Big 10 scheduled 162 with 129 at home and 33 away at Non-BCS programs. That’s a difference of 14 more road games away at Non-BCS programs than the SEC. The non conferences games scheduled versus BCS programs by the Big 10, is much less than the SEC. The Big 10 scheduled 91 non conference games versus BCS program with 47 scheduled home and 44 away. The BCS numbers translates into a 51.6% which indicates they possess no home field advantage versus BCS programs. However the Big 10 does possess an overall home field advantage within their non conference scheduling practices possessing a rate of 75.5%. Still not as hedonistic as the SEC.
Let review the Big 10 compared to the SEC as in the previous post.
- Illinois(2-5, 2012). 23H/5A at a rate of 82.1%, with an overall non-conference record of (15-13) and a non-conference home record of (14-9). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Syracuse, Arizona State both H/A, Rutgers A, Cincinnati A and Missouri 3H/1A.
- Indiana(2-5). 18H/10A at a rate of 64.2% with an overall non conference record of (18-10) and non conference home record of (13-5). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Virginia 2A and Connecticut H. Indiana scheduled more Non-BCS programs due to the fact that non of the BCS programs wants to schedule an FBS/BCS opponent due to credibility.
- Iowa(4-3). 22H/6A at a rate of 84.6% with an overall non conference record of (21-7) and a non conference home record of (19-3). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Arizona, Syracuse and Pittsburgh all H/A with the traditional Iowa State rivalry being 4H/3A.
- Michigan(5-2). 23H/5A at a rate of 82.1% with an overall non conference record of (21-7) and a non conference home record of (19-4). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Alabama A, Oregon, Vanderbilt and Connecticut all H along with the traditional rivalry with Notre Dame of 3H/4A. Yes the games versus Alabama is an away game since Michigan had to travel 5X’s further than Alabama.
- Michigan State(4-4). 23H/5A at a rate of 75.0% with an overall non conference record of (22-6) and non conference home record of (18-3). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Pittsburgh H/A, California A and the traditional rivalry with Notre Dame with 4H/3A.
- Minnesota(4-3). 20H/8A at a rate of 71.4% with an overall non conference record of (17-11) and a non conference home record of (12-8). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: California, Syracuse and USC all H/A. a nNorthwestern(6-2). 19H/9A at a rate of 67.6% with an overall non conference record of (23-5) and a non conference home record of (17-2). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Duke and Syracuse both H/A, Boston College A and Vanderbilt A.
- Northwestern(6-2). 19H/9A at a rate of 67.6% with an overall non conference record of (23-5) and a non conference home record of (17-2). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Duke and Syracuse both H/A and Boston College and Vanderbilt both A.
- Ohio State(8-0). 24H/4A at a rate of 85.7% with an overall non conference scheduling record of (25-3) and a non conference home record of (23-1). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Miami(Fla.) and USC both H/A, California, Colorado and Cincinnati all H and concluding with Texas and Washington both A.
- Penn State(5-2). 22H/6A at a rate of 72.4% with an overall non conference record of (23-5) and a non conference home record of (20-2). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Notre Dame 1H/2A, Alabama H/A, Oregon State, Syracuse and Temple all H with Virginia A. I believe that when Alabama played at Penn State and not in a neutral site. Alabama’s only real road non conference game that required them to travel further than 800 miles.
- Purdue(3-4). 21H/8A at a rate of 72.4% with an overall non conference record of (17-12) and a non conference home record of (16-5). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Oregon H/A and the traditional rivalry versus Notre Dame 4H/3A.
- Wisconsin(6-2). 22H/6A at a rate of 84.6% with an overall non conference record of (27-1) and a non conference home record of (22-0). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Oregon State H/A, Washington State H and Arizona State A.
- Nebraska(5-2) 6H/2A at a rate of 75.0% with an overall non conference record of (7-1) and a non conference home record of (6-0). Of the non-conference games scheduled versus BCS programs since 2006 are: Washington H and UCLA A.
NOTE: Nebraska’s Big 10 credibility and validity to the Big 10 cannot be determined since their is limited numerical data to assess for Nebraska within the Big10. Nebraska’s FBS credibility is more a Big 12 review. Thus I am not saying that Nebraska is not credible or valid to the Big 10.
What does this information tell us? It significantly indicates that the Big 10 is a more credible FBS conference more so than the SEC. The Big 10 schedules more BCS games both home and away in a more fair reciprocal scheduling format of H and A. The Big 10 schedules less FCS programs and would prefer to schedule more significant FBS opponents in 3 different FBS conferences such as the PAC10/12, Big 12, Big East and Notre Dame. Which every one in the college football world accounts them as credible not because of the name, but history, tradition and national exposure they bring. The Big 1o does not possess any program with a home field scheduling advantage more than 90% like the SEC which possesses 3 (Alabama, Arkansas and Auburn). The Big 10 also possesses a lower non conference home record compared to the SEC, all due to the fact of playing less non conference home games and significantly more credible FBS programs in a reciprocal H/A non conference scheduling format.
With that said, I can determine that those who are trying to dis-credit the Big 10’s non conference credibility are located in a specific southern part of the United States. Needing to self examine their own non conference scheduling practices before throwing stones at others. The data does suggest that the Big 10 is much better, not significantly better, than the SEC within these categorical variables.
Those are the facts and the truths. Like Sgt. Joe Friday said ” Just the facts ma’am.. just the facts”….