PDA

View Full Version : 2010 Strength Of Schedule


KevinJames
04-19-2010, 01:33 PM
2010 Strength of Schedule
A look at the most difficult schedules in 2010 (based on opponents' 2009 record) Rank Team Combined W-L Pct.

T1. Texans 140-116 .547
T1. Titans 140-116 .547
3. Cowboys* 139-117 .543
4. Bengals* 138-118 .539
5. Jaguars 137-119 .535
6. Patriots* 136-120 .531
7. Giants 135-121 .527
8. Redskins 134-122 .523
9. Eagles* 133-123 .520
T10. Browns 132-124 .516
T10. Colts* 132-124 .516
12. Ravens* 130-126 .508
T12. Lions 130-126 .508
T14. Bears 129-127 .504
T14. Vikings* 129-127 .504
T16. Bills 128-128 .500
T16. Dolphins 128-128 .500
T16. Jets* 128-128 .500
T16. Raiders 128-128 .500
20. Falcons 127-129 .496
21. Steelers 126-130 .492
T22. Packers* 125-131 .488
T22. Chiefs 125-131 .488
24. Broncos 124-132 .484
25. Buccaneers 123-133 .480
26. Panthers 122-134 .477
27. Saints* 120-136 .469
28. 49ers 117-139 .457
T29. Chargers* 116-140 .453
T29. Seahawks 116-140 .453
31. Rams 115-141 .449
32. Cardinals* 114-142 .445
*Indicates team made the 2009 playoffs




2010 NFL schedule: John Clayton examines the potential impact of strength of schedule on the 2010 season - ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=5109753)

atomicbloke
04-19-2010, 01:41 PM
How come the Chuggers always get easy schedules?

bronco militia
04-19-2010, 01:45 PM
How come the Chuggers always get easy schedules?

only two games on the schedule are based on the year prior

RonDaChamp24
04-19-2010, 01:46 PM
How come the Chuggers always get easy schedules?

Because they play in the AFC West?

Look at the 3 teams they play in the division

Us (Broncos) 8-8

Raiders 5-11

Chiefs 4-12

TheReverend
04-19-2010, 01:50 PM
Rarely do the schedules end up being as difficult/easy as they look in the off-season

WolfpackGuy
04-19-2010, 01:52 PM
Well, what's the excuse going to be this year?

Too many road games?

Hulamau
04-19-2010, 03:41 PM
Better than last year ...

s0phr0syne
04-19-2010, 03:42 PM
What did our 2009 SOS end up being, based on 2009 results?


I never have understood why there seem to be plenty of prospective articles like this one, but fewer retrospective ones that analyze what went on in the season that is finished.


Actually, I do understand why--this kind of prospective **** sells in the offseason, but I hate the certainty with which it presumes to be written.