Strength of Schedule

Schedule Difficulty for Top 10 for 2003

by Bill Donaldson

I've been using a simplistic mathematical approach for calculating schedule difficulty for a number of years. Most quick stabs at analysis seem to take a purely a "seat of the pants" approach, and fail to consider the number of times teams meet the higher ranked teams. What follows is the approach I've used in the past.

I determine schedule difficulty of the top ten teams in the Coaches' Pre-Season Poll by providing 10 points for each time they compete against the top-ranked team (whether in a dual meet or a multi-team meet), 9 points for competing against the second-ranked team, and down to 1 point for competing against the tenth-ranked team. No consideration is given for competing against lower ranked teams or for where the meet is conducted. What this approach is most likely to provide is the difficulty each of the 10 teams will have in going undefeated.

The system, compared with a retrospective analysis, seems to be a good predictor of schedule difficulty, but the only team ever to go undefeated all the way through the NCAA championship is Georgia (They've gone undefeated three times). And they always have one of the most difficult schedules, by my preseason assessment. Last year, UCLA Head Head Coach Valerie Kondos announced before the season the objective of going undefeated. After the first weekend on the East Coast, UCLA had lost two meets to Georgia and one to Alabama. They scheduled each of the two teams who defeated them at the National Championships twice and lost to each twice before the NCAA Championships.

Traditionally the Southeastern Conference teams rank at the top in schedule difficulty, because they always have 3 or 4 teams in the top 10, they meet each other several times (Georgia and Alabama traditionally meet 4 times --- the Super Six Challenge, the SEC Championships, and twice during the regular season), and they take on other high ranked teams outside the conference. No other teams even come close. Here are the 2003 rankings:

One parameter some others consider is the number of top-10 teams met, without regard to the number of times they met or their ranking within the top-10:

Now that the season is half-over, this analysis was rerun on the ranking based on the Regional Qualifying Scores, to see if the ranking has changed at all.

Interestingly, UGA at the midpoint of the season now has the strongest schedule, while Utah remains the weakest (by this method). With the exception of the newcomers, most of the rankings have stayed the same, with the exception of Nebraska. Interestingly, using the same criteria, #11 Auburn would have 38 points and #12 Washington would have 66 points, or the 2nd toughest schedule.

Now that the Regular Season is now over, this analysis was rerun based on the rankings from the final Regional Qualifying Score Rankings, to see the changes once again.

It would appear in the final assessment based on RQS that OU and Alabama had the most difficulty schedules (by this method). OU perhaps has logged some of the longest miles (other than the Hawaii meets) of any of the schools, with trips from coast to coast. With the exception of the newcomers, most of the rankings have stayed the same, with the exception of Nebraska. But stop the presses! Using the same criteria, #11 Washington has a Difficulty Index of 60, and #12 Oregon State an Difficulty Index of 59. These results are indicative of the weighting of strong conference rankings, and of extensive travel schedules for both teams.


Features \| 2003 Capsule Previews \| 2003 Team Previews \| 2002 Superlatives \| 2003 Archive
Home: Features: 2003 Archived Feature