Patriots 2008 strength of schedule
I’m taking this straight from the baseball listserv I’m on, where a gentleman named William Juliano posted the following (note: the Pats were #3 in the NFL in 2007 in terms of strength of schedule, which is based on opponent’s 2006 winning percentage):
“Excluding the 0-16 record in h-2-h competition, the Patriots’ opponents
were 120-120. While that might not seem impressive, it does hold up
to the strength of schedule of other “great” teams. Off the top of my
head, I used the 1984 49′ers (15-1), 1985 Bears (15-1) and 1972
Dolphins as comparables (14-0).
Like NE, the Bears also faced a 120-120 schedule in their super bowl
season. Unlike NE, the Bears did lose a game, albeit it to a youngster
named Dan Marino.
The 1984 49ers had a very easy schedule. Their opponents were 105-
133-2. Of course, that looks like a gauntlet compared to the 1972
Dolphins’ schedule, which featured a record of 69-108-5, or a
brutal .352 winning percentage.
When you consider these historical comps, I think it’s pretty evident
that if they win the Super Bowl, the 2007 Pats should go down as one
of the most dominant/successful teams in history. Even though they
lost a game, I’d still keep the 1985 Bears in the discussion because
they blew threw the playoffs (outscored opponents 91-10) and lost to
a very good team (1985 Dolphins were 12-4).”
Back to me, in short… if the Pats do win the Super Bowl to go 19-0, memo to Mercury Morris: Shut up, moron - and be advised the Pats are in an even better “neighborhood” than you and your 1972 counterparts (to take nothing away from their accomplishment, as they could only play the schedule before them… just to note that the 2007 Pats undefeated season, if achieved, would clearly be more impressive).
January 18th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
This has been an unbelievable year of [whatever the opposite of parity is] There are good teams, and lousy teams, and that is it. The good teams; San Diego, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, Giants, Dallas, Green Bay, New England… that is it. Seattle, Buffalo, Minnesota Tennessee and Washington showed flashes of being acceptable, but they all had major flaws. The rest of the league was comprised of TERRIBLE teams.
I don’t think there is any question that the Patriots schedule was very difficult this year. If they win the Super Bowl by beating the Packers, they will end up having to play every good team in the NFL. That would be very impressive indeed
January 19th, 2008 at 10:48 am
To your point, at this point, based on ESPN’s final regular season power rankings (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking), the Pats finished #1… duh. Of the next 13 in the power rankings (i.e. to #14 overall), they’ve played (and of course beaten) nine of those thirteen. They haven’t played #5 Green Bay (but still could, in the Super Bowl), #11 Tennessee, and #12 Tampa Bay.
In short, if they play against (and beat) the Packers in the Super Bowl - they will have hit every team (except themselves, of course) in the top ten of the NFL power rankings… over 19 games (specifically 15 opponents, as they played the three AFC East teams twice, and the Chargers twice).
So if the Packers get to the SB, of the 15 opponents they will have faced in the regular and postseason… 9 of them will be behind them in the Top Ten of the NFL’s power rankings. I think that’s pretty good.
January 19th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Oops… forgot they haven’t (and won’t) play #7 Seattle - so um… nevermind about “everyone else in the top ten”. Still… I’m not sure they could’ve had a “tougher” schedule.