As noted on the web site these are not official calculations from the NCAA. They will most likely get released in a week or two.

http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2012/Mar12/DBMar30.html

Quote:(24) Syracuse
(34) USF
(43) Pitt
(44) Louisville
(67) UConn
(77) Cincinnati
(83) Rutgers
(103) Temple

Future Members
(35) SMU
(80) Boise State
(88) UCF
(113) Houston
(116) Memphis
(117) SDSU
(124) Navy

kind of strange to see 124 schools now in there vs 120 before....

I wonder how much that will change once the CUSA schools no longer have to play Rice, UAB, Tulane, etc. and the MWC schools no longer have to play UNM or UNLV.

(03-30-2012 02:39 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  I wonder how much that will change once the CUSA schools no longer have to play Rice, UAB, Tulane, etc. and the MWC schools no longer have to play UNM or UNLV.

We don't play UNM this year. Too bad because the easy W could have come in handy. I'm ok with the awful schedule because this is somewhat of a rebuilding year for us.

I guess that includes FCS opponents? Nova sucked last year. Unfortunately, Maryland did too.

(03-30-2012 10:43 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  I guess that includes FCS opponents? Nova sucked last year. Unfortunately, Maryland did too.

From the website.

Quote:The second flaw is basing it on pure overall records. If a team plays an FCS (IAA) school that was 11-1 in 2007, that counts as a MUCH tougher game in the NCAA ratings than facing a team like Alabama who was 7-6 in ‘07 but #1 at the end of ‘08 regular season! My ratings had Bama ranked as a much tougher team than any FCS foe. To give you an example from 2002, my ratings foresaw that teams playing Kansas St were facing a Top 10 team based on my preseason ratings. The NCAA strength of schedule ranking rated a game against Kansas St as just a game vs a 6-6 opp (2001 record). Kanas St finished #7 AP for 2002 and walloped their opp’s by an avg of 45-12, not exactly numbers from a typical middle-of-the-road opponent.