The numbers in parentheses are the actual SOS and the numbers to the left are their rankings. The final numbers are conference standing.
1. IA (0.569) - 7th Place
2. OSU (0.553) - 3rd
3. PU (0.544) - 12th
4. PSU (0.516) - 11th
5. IL (0.513) - 10th
6. MD (0.508) - 9th
7. MN (0.493) - 13th
8. MSU (0.485) - 8th
9. MI (0.481) - 2nd
10. IN (0.467) - 4th
11. N (0.464) - 1st
12. NW (0.456) - 5th
13. RU (0.455) - 6th
These are, of course, early season numbers and because everyone plays everyone the final SOS will be very close to .500 for everyone. Also I added spacing to group similar SOSs together and created five tiers for easy comparison.
Pretty much as expected, the best conference standings goes to the teams with the weakest opponents. But, a couple things stand out - OSU 3rd in conference is in the top SOS tier. Could they be the best team?
And then there is NW and Rutgers. Maybe their surprising W/L record is simply because they have the weakest schedule in the early going.
Bottom line - standings are going to shuffle, root hard for the Huskers.
1. IA (0.569) - 7th Place
2. OSU (0.553) - 3rd
3. PU (0.544) - 12th
4. PSU (0.516) - 11th
5. IL (0.513) - 10th
6. MD (0.508) - 9th
7. MN (0.493) - 13th
8. MSU (0.485) - 8th
9. MI (0.481) - 2nd
10. IN (0.467) - 4th
11. N (0.464) - 1st
12. NW (0.456) - 5th
13. RU (0.455) - 6th
These are, of course, early season numbers and because everyone plays everyone the final SOS will be very close to .500 for everyone. Also I added spacing to group similar SOSs together and created five tiers for easy comparison.
Pretty much as expected, the best conference standings goes to the teams with the weakest opponents. But, a couple things stand out - OSU 3rd in conference is in the top SOS tier. Could they be the best team?
And then there is NW and Rutgers. Maybe their surprising W/L record is simply because they have the weakest schedule in the early going.
Bottom line - standings are going to shuffle, root hard for the Huskers.
Last edited by a moderator: