Jump to content

Opponents Records


NT93

Recommended Posts

These are the combined records of conference opponents only.  So, for example, our record doesn’t count Cal, FIU, etc.  I’m doing this on my phone and I just randomly looked at each team, so sorry they aren’t in any type of order.  Also, not going to guarantee 100% accuracy as this was done pretty quickly without any double checking.  It’s pretty close though. This is only through the games that have been played so far. 


UNT 39-20

Tulane: 23-37

SMU: 18-44

Memphis: 27-32

UTSA: 19-41

Navy: 25-35

Temple: 30-29

UAB: 37-23

FAU: 23-37

Tulsa: 31-29

Rice: 34-26

Charlotte: 29-30

USF: 26-34

ECU: 35-25

What’s the point?  None really.  Just thought I’d be interesting to see.

  • Upvote 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scheduling gods certainly were not kind to us this year.  Sometimes, however, you need to step up and beat a team you weren't supposed to or at least beat a team with a winning record.  The inability to do that has been a theme around here for too long.

Edited by keith
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't surprising though - since teams like UNT spot all of their opponents a victory. Teams like SMU hand all their opponents losses. So it will almost always appear that the good teams played a soft schedule, unless everyone in the league is hovering around .500.  

  • Upvote 4
  • Skeptical Eagle 1
  • Eye Roll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

It isn't surprising though - since teams like UNT spot all of their opponents a victory. Teams like SMU hand all their opponents losses. So it will almost always appear that the good teams played a soft schedule, unless everyone in the league is hovering around .500.  

This!

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

It isn't surprising though - since teams like UNT spot all of their opponents a victory. Teams like SMU hand all their opponents losses. So it will almost always appear that the good teams played a soft schedule, unless everyone in the league is hovering around .500.  

 

1 hour ago, VideoEagle said:

Most schools are members of conferences. Every conference win generates a conference loss for another team. Teams with the best records will have more wins against teams with losing records. It's just math, folks. Discounting wins against teams with losing records ignores basic math! 

This is, of course, true to an extent.  The fact that each school doesn’t play each other is what makes it relevant.  If the conference played a round robin schedule it would be basic math, but they don’t, so it isn’t.  Also, I figured it based on each team’s season record, not just their conference record, so that discounts “a win for Team A equals a loss for Team B.”

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NT93 said:

 

This is, of course, true to an extent.  The fact that each school doesn’t play each other is what makes it relevant.  If the conference played a round robin schedule it would be basic math, but they don’t, so it isn’t.  Also, I figured it based on each team’s season record, not just their conference record, so that discounts “a win for Team A equals a loss for Team B.”

If we had this start to conference play we'd probably be bowl eligible right now. The difference in difficulty between our conference schedule and SMU's (even UTSA's) is crazy. 

image.png.7360ef1163e31870cb3867bd7c466217.png

Now, we should have still made a bowl game, but the AAC did us no favors. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Eye Roll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

If we had this start to conference play we'd probably be bowl eligible right now. The difference in difficulty between our conference schedule and SMU's (even UTSA's) is crazy. 

image.png.7360ef1163e31870cb3867bd7c466217.png

Now, we should have still made a bowl game, but the AAC did us no favors. 

Even though we had the most difficult conference schedule, still a frustrating season because our first six games were the most winnable half of a season in the 10 seasons I've followed. I feel like 5-1 should not have been an unrealistic dream. With even Bennett's defense from last season and Rogers starting all season we could have at least gone 7-5, and that's taking into consideration an 0-4 record during our death stretch.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt from A700 said:

Even though we had the most difficult conference schedule, still a frustrating season because our first six games were the most winnable half of a season in the 10 seasons I've followed. I feel like 5-1 should not have been an unrealistic dream. With even Bennett's defense from last season and Rogers starting all season we could have at least gone 7-5, and that's taking into consideration an 0-4 record during our death stretch.

The FIU and Navy losses are the ones that define the season.  Win those two games and we’re considered a decent team.  But we lost them so we’re considered a bad team.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

If we had this start to conference play we'd probably be bowl eligible right now. The difference in difficulty between our conference schedule and SMU's (even UTSA's) is crazy. 

image.png.7360ef1163e31870cb3867bd7c466217.png

Now, we should have still made a bowl game, but the AAC did us no favors. 

No one is saying our season has not been disappointing, but with an unbalanced schedule, if you don't think it's made a difference, then you probably like to bitch to hear yourself bitch. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Haha 1
  • Oh Boy! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

If we had this start to conference play we'd probably be bowl eligible right now. The difference in difficulty between our conference schedule and SMU's (even UTSA's) is crazy. 

image.png.7360ef1163e31870cb3867bd7c466217.png

Now, we should have still made a bowl game, but the AAC did us no favors. 

We lost to FIU and Navy and squeaked by LaTech early on. Why exactly do you think we would have magically been better against these teams?

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 97and03 said:

FIFY

I almost stated it that way originally.  The only reason I didn’t is because I was wanting to make the point that regardless of winning or losing those games, we’re the same team, only people’s perception would change.  My point being, even if we’d have won those two games, we still wouldn’t be very good.  

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

Should not have lost to FIU, Navy, Memphis, Tulane and maybe even utsa. 

I don’t necessarily disagree, but I think any team in this conference would have trouble beating Tulane, Memphis, UTSA, and SMU in consecutive weeks.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NT93 said:

I don’t necessarily disagree, but I think any team in this conference would have trouble beating Tulane, Memphis, UTSA, and SMU in consecutive weeks.

I agree. I would love to know what our record would be with smu’s cakewalk schedule. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Oh Boy! 1
  • Eye Roll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Tell a friend

    Love GoMeanGreen.com? Tell a friend!
  • What's going on Mean Green?

    1. 6

      New commit Creighton transfer post Brock Vice

    2. 6

      New commit Creighton transfer post Brock Vice

    3. 6

      New commit Creighton transfer post Brock Vice

    4. 6

      New commit Creighton transfer post Brock Vice

    5. 6

      New commit Creighton transfer post Brock Vice

  • Popular Contributors

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      15,382
    • Most Online
      1,865

    Newest Member
    KeithSHU
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.