Fantasy Index Scheduletron -- strength-of-schedule analysis
Strength of Schedule doesn’t look like it will be a big factor this year. Sure, some team will play the hardest schedule in the league and somebody else will play the easiest, but there isn’t a team with a schedule that looks way out of whack.
This is a shift from the last two years, when chance dictated that strong divisions tended to match up against other dominant divisions, causing a lot of teams to have either unusually strong or weak schedules.
This year, on the other hand, looks unusually bland.
Arizona projects to play the easiest schedule. Its opponents went 114-142 last year. But when you factor in that St. Louis went 1-15 last year, the Cardinals’ other 14 games are against teams that went a combined 112-112 – so not a schedule that can be called a cupcake. In comparision to other schedules of the last 15 years, Arizona doesn’t rank in the top 20.
The same is true at the other end of the spectrum. The Houston franchises past and present (the Texans and Titans), project to play the hardest schedules, but they’re not as hard as what you typically see from a hardest schedule. Their opponents went a combined 140-116 last year.
All of the schedule figures below, by the way, are preseason numbers – what teams were expected to face. Things won’t necessarily play out that way. The Saints last year, for example, were suppose to play one of the league’s half-dozen hardest schedules, but they instead played the league’s easiest schedule, with their opponents going only 106-134 in games against other teams.
My research, however, leads me to believe that when a team projects to play an easy or hard schedule, that’s a good indication that their schedule will at least trend in that direction. I roll out those numbers from time to time.
EASIEST SCHEDULES OF THE PAST 15 YEARS
(Showing all teams projecting to play schedules of 114-142 or easier).
Pct Year Team
.387 2008 New England (99-157-0)
.395 1999 Cleveland (101-155-0)
.406 1999 Cincinnati (104-152-0)
.414 2009 Chicago (105-149-2)
.420 2009 Minnesota (107-148-1)
.422 2008 San Diego (108-148-0)
.426 2000 Philadelphia (109-147-0)
.428 2009 Green Bay (109-146-1)
.430 2000 St. Louis (110-146-0)
.434 1999 St. Louis (111-145-0)
.434 2009 Pittsburgh (110-144-2)
.438 1999 Baltimore (112-144-0)
.438 1999 Tennessee (112-144-0)
.438 2002 Cleveland (112-144-0)
.438 2008 Oakland (112-144-0)
.438 2009 Baltimore (111-143-2)
.441 2000 Arizona (113-143-0)
.441 2000 Oakland (113-143-0)
.441 2002 Houston (113-143-0)
.441 2002 Pittsburgh (113-143-0)
.441 2009 Arizona (113-143-0)
.443 2003 Arizona (113-142-1)
.443 2003 Seattle (113-142-1)
.443 2009 San Francisco (113-142-1)
.445 1999 Jacksonville (114-142-0)
.445 2002 Cincinnati (114-142-0)
.445 2005 St. Louis (114-142-0)
.445 2006 Chicago (114-142-0)
.445 2008 Denver (114-142-0)
.445 2010 Arizona (114-142-0)
HARDEST SCHEDULES OF THE PAST 15 YEARS
(Showing all teams projecting to play schedules of 140-116 or harder).
Pct Year Team
.598 2008 Pittsburgh (153-103-0)
.594 2008 Indianapolis (152-104-0)
.594 2009 Miami (152-104-0)
.592 2009 Carolina (151-104-1)
.590 2009 New England (151-105-0)
.588 2009 Atlanta (150-105-1)
.586 2000 Buffalo (150-106-0)
.580 2009 Tampa Bay (148-107-1)
.574 2001 Minnesota (147-109-0)
.570 1996 Green Bay (146-110-0)
.570 1999 Oakland (146-110-0)
.570 2000 Miami (146-110-0)
.570 2009 Buffalo (146-110-0)
.568 2009 NY Jets (145-110-1)
.563 1996 San Diego (144-112-0)
.563 2000 Indianapolis (144-112-0)
.559 1996 Detroit (143-113-0)
.559 1997 Dallas (143-113-0)
.559 2000 NY Jets (143-113-0)
.559 2008 Jacksonville (143-113-0)
.557 2009 New Orleans (142-113-1)
.555 1996 Seattle (142-114-0)
.555 1996 Chicago (142-114-0)
.555 2000 Minnesota (142-114-0)
.555 2001 Tampa Bay (142-114-0)
.551 1996 Kansas City (141-115-0)
.551 1998 Pittsburgh (140-114-2)
.551 2008 Baltimore (141-115-0)
.551 2008 Minnesota (141-115-0)
.549 1998 Chicago (140-115-1)
.547 1997 Kansas City (140-116-0)
.547 2005 Miami (140-116-0)
.547 2008 Cleveland (140-116-0)
.547 2008 Cincinnati (140-116-0)
.547 2008 Houston (140-116-0)
.547 2010 Houston (140-116-0)
.547 2010 Tennessee (140-116-0)
—Ian Allan
- Comments [3]
Readers' Comments
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.
Posted by MICHAEL LONG | Mar. 02 at 09:12 AM
Does it make sense to simply count the number of easy or hard games, based on last year's schedule? If one team had to play a team that went 15-1 and another that went 1-15, then their opponents' schedule is 0.500, same as a team that had to face two 8-8 teams. I think I'd be more interested in fantasy players facing more "easy" opponents. I realize that a lot can change in a year, but that affects SOS based on overall percentages as well.
Posted by IAN ALLAN | Mar. 02 at 10:27 PM
That can be done. Outside of the fantasy arena, you sometimes hear talk about teams having to play X number of games against playoff teams or teams with winning records. I am not sure, however, which you would consider a better fantasy schedule: a team playing two games against 8-8 opponents, or a team playing a game against a 1-15 and a 15-1.
Posted by MICHAEL LONG | Mar. 03 at 09:07 AM
I don't know about "better", but easier to manage. I know I'd start my players against the weaker teams, and try to have other options when they're playing stronger teams. But it's a struggle to know who to play when the opponents are all middle of the road. Thanks.