Here are the strength of schedule definitions:
Strength of schedule ratings represent the expected number of losses an elite team two standard deviations better than average would have against each team's schedule to date (ELS), the expected number of losses a good team one standard deviation above average would have against the schedule to date (GLS), and the expected number of losses an average team would have against the schedule to date (ALS).
An average team goes 5-7 against our schedule (last year). We were projected for 3.6 wins last year, and Key had most of the wins, so he overachieved vs projections. I don’t have the 2023 numbers yet. A good team (top 25-30) wins about 8 or 9 games against last year’s schedule. An elite team (playoff contender) wins 10 or 11.
That shows a couple of things—if you have six patsies and six top ten teams, you’re not going to see much difference between ALS and GLS—you’ll see six wins.
Our schedule (based on last year) has
Top 10: 1 team - UGA
11-20: 1 team - Clemson
21-30: 2 teams - Louisville and Ole Miss
31-40: 1 team - Wake (no Pitt this year ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ )
41-50: 1 team - Syracuse
51-60: 0 teams
61-70: 1 team - UNC
71-80: 0 teams
81-90: 1 team - Miami
91-100: 1 team - UVA
101-110: 1 team - Boston College
Beyond 110: Bowling Green and South Carolina State
If we ignore home field advantage (we shouldn’t ) and we assume Miami doesn’t improve (they will) and we assume matchups don’t matter (they do) and overlook luck and injuries (etc.):
A BC quality team gets 3 wins.
A GT team last season gets 5 wins (4 if we factor in home field)
An average team gets 5 wins. So, we could improve A LOT and get the same number of wins
An above-average top 50 team gets 6 wins
A top 40 team gets 7 wins
A number 25 team gets 8 wins
A top 20 team gets 10 wins
A top 10 team gets 11 wins
A number 1 team gets 12 wins.
I’m overestimating a little—you could take one win away from those and still have about the same view of the schedule. Anywhere from +1 win to -2 wins from the numbers above is a conservative range.
Also, Louisville is a tough team to start the season with. If we win that, it’s a BIG win.
These are last year’s numbers. The first third of the columns (through DFEI RK) are opponent adjusted efficiencies. The middle third are unadjusted. The right third of the columns are strength of schedule.
.
Rk | Team | Rec | FBS | FEI | | | ELS | Rk | GLS | Rk | ALS | Rk |
92 | Georgia Tech | 5-7 | 4-7 | -.33 | | | 1.45 | 25 | 3.69 | 41 | 7.06 | 50 |
24 | Louisville | 8-5 | 8-5 | .46 | | | .66 | 64 | 3.29 | 48 | 7.81 | 31 |
22 | Ole Miss | 8-5 | 7-5 | .49 | | | 1.33 | 29 | 4.10 | 27 | 8.07 | 19 |
31 | Wake Forest | 8-5 | 7-5 | .35 | | | .63 | 69 | 2.97 | 56 | 7.17 | 47 |
90 | Miami | 5-7 | 4-7 | -.32 | | | .54 | 74 | 2.26 | 67 | 5.59 | 72 |
102 | Boston College | 3-9 | 2-9 | -.46 | | | .73 | 58 | 3.11 | 55 | 6.74 | 58 |
61 | North Carolina | 9-5 | 8-5 | .10 | | | .59 | 72 | 2.83 | 60 | 7.11 | 49 |
95 | Virginia | 3-7 | 2-7 | -.33 | | | .33 | 88 | 1.89 | 75 | 4.96 | 76 |
18 | Clemson | 11-3 | 10-3 | .57 | | | 1.18 | 32 | 3.77 | 40 | 7.72 | 33 |
49 | Syracuse | 7-6 | 6-6 | .17 | | | .85 | 51 | 3.58 | 44 | 7.59 | 36 |
1 | Georgia | 15-0 | 14-0 | 1.58 | | | 2.26 | 6 | 5.96 | 2 | 10.22 | 1 |