LordOfEntropy

Recently, a thread carried on for a while regarding strength of schedule - does it mean anything? Opinions from both sides were expressed. I became curios enough to look up the stats and do some quick statistical analysis. Here's the breakdown in win/loss ratio changes from 2001-2002 seasons.

2001 2002
TEAM W/L W/L NET CHANGE MAJOR CHANGE?
Jets 10/6 9/7 -1 N
Patriots 11/5 9/7 -2 N
Dolphins 11/5 9/7 -2 N
Bills 3/13 8/8 +5 Y
Steelers 13/3 10/5 -3 N
Browns 7/9 9/7 +2 N
Ravens 10/6 7/9 -3 N
Bengals 6/10 2/14 -4 Y
Titans 7/9 11/5 +4 Y
Colts 10/6 10/6 0 N
Jaguars 6/10 6/10 0 N
Raiders 10/6 11/5 +1 N
Broncos 8/8 9/7 +1 N
Chargers 5/11 8/8 +3 N
Chiefs 6/10 8/8 +2 N
Eagles 11/5 12/4 +1 N
Giants 7/9 10/6 +3 N
Redskins 8/8 7/9 +1 N
Cowboys 5/11 5/11 0 N
Packers 12/4 12/4 0 N
Vikings 5/11 6/10 +1 N
Bears 13/3 4/12 -9 Y
Lions 2/14 3/13 +1 N
Bucs 9/7 12/4 +3 N
Falcons 7/9 9/6 +2 N
Saints 7/9 9/7 +2 N
Panthers 1/15 7/9 +6 Y
49'ers 12/4 10/6 -2 N
Rams 14/2 7/9 -7 Y
Seahawks 9/7 7/9 -2 N
Cardinals 7/9 5/11 -2 N

For purposes of this analysis, I considered a "major" change a change in ratio of at least 4 games from previous year. Based on that criteria, only 6 teams displayed a "major" change, roughly 19.35%, or one in five.

People may draw their own conclusions as to whether strength of schedule has any relevance or not.

Sorry for formatting, columns lined up nicely, but formatting was lost during the posting process.


[Edited on 29/5/2003 by LordOfEntropy]

BillyCarpenter1

All of that and $1.00 will buy you a coke.