Our Schedule

[pnkranger]

Looking back at this season, our schedule was an absolute murderer's row. A few notes:

* According to Ken Pom's site, OU has played the most difficult schedule of ANY team since 2002 (that's the earliest year he has available).
* ESPN BPI, Ken Pom, and Jeff Sagarin all rate OU's SOS as #1.
* We have played 13 games against the top 25 teams (as rated by BPI, Ken Pom, and Jeff Sagarin). No other team has played double digit games against the top 25.
* We have played 6 games against the top 10.
* We have played 19 games against the top 50.

In each ranking system, we are in the top 75 (58, 61, 72 even 9 wins under .500). Not to make an excuse for our record ... but this schedule was not optimal for a team of underclassmen. This year sucked, but I think it's going to pay huge dividends for the future.

 

[p230]

Certainly a "Trial by Fire". It has not been fun to watch but I think this will have gotten a lot of their awe of top teams out of their system. Just a little bit better play and several of those losses become wins. We should have a pretty salty team next year and the year after.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

do they use the team's ranking from when the game happened or what they currently are?

 

[pnkranger]

do they use the team's ranking from when the game happened or what they currently are?

They go based on current ranking. Ken Pom does not consider record at all, and record is a small % of Jeff Sagarin's ratings, I believe. BPI does include record but it's not a key rating item.

All three rating systems look at how well you've played and not necessarily how many games you've won.

 

[oudna]

Looking back at this season, our schedule was an absolute murderer's row. A few notes:

* According to Ken Pom's site, OU has played the most difficult schedule of ANY team since 2002 (that's the earliest year he has available).
* ESPN BPI, Ken Pom, and Jeff Sagarin all rate OU's SOS as #1.
* We have played 13 games against the top 25 teams (as rated by BPI, Ken Pom, and Jeff Sagarin). No other team has played double digit games against the top 25.
* We have played 6 games against the top 10.
* We have played 19 games against the top 50.

In each ranking system, we are in the top 75 (58, 61, 72 even 9 wins under .500). Not to make an excuse for our record ... but this schedule was not optimal for a team of underclassmen. This year sucked, but I think it's going to pay huge dividends for the future.

Nick Zepp "not that tough"

 

[stormspencer]

They go based on current ranking. Ken Pom does not consider record at all, and record is a small % of Jeff Sagarin's ratings, I believe. BPI does include record but it's not a key rating item.

All three rating systems look at how well you've played and not necessarily how many games you've won.

IMO, Kenpom is the best indicator out there of how "good" you actually are. And yes, Kenpom does not factor win/loss record into its metrics....it all about offensive/defensive efficiency per possession combined with SOS and pace of play (number of possessions per game). Additionally he constantly makes tweaks to his system virtually every off-season to factor in an algorithm here and there that wasn't accounted for before hand. One outlier he has had to adjust for in recent seasons is that good teams that play at a slow pace (Virginia, Wisconsin, etc.) tend to be a tad overrated in his ratings. And he even talked about that several years back in his blog....thus, he has had to tinker with his efficiency metrics to account for the adjustment.

 

[NickZepp]

Our schedule wasn't tough enough to where we win only 10 or 11 games. It takes a lot of sucking to win only 10-11 games. We stunk this year. No two ways around it. No making excuses about it. We lost to terrible teams in and out of conference and didn't deserve to be an NCAA caliber team this year.

 

[MsProudSooner]

Our schedule wasn't tough enough to where we win only 10 or 11 games. It takes a lot of sucking to win only 10-11 games. We stunk this year. No two ways around it. No making excuses about it. We lost to terrible teams in and out of conference and didn't deserve to be an NCAA caliber team this year.

Nobody said we were a NCAA caliber team this year. They were simply commenting on how tough the schedule was. :facepalm

 

[NickZepp]

Nobody said we were a NCAA caliber team this year. They were simply commenting on how tough the schedule was. :facepalm

To me that doesn't matter. We shouldn't be so bad to get swept by OSU, Lose to Texas, TCU, Northern Iowa, Memphis, Auburn, Kansas State. Every year is a tough schedule in a conference like the Big 12. Fact is we didn't live up to that schedule. Quit making excuses about it. Next year will be a big year for Lon and the group if we don't make an NCAA Tournament we may see Lon get pushed out.

 

[skyvue]

We lost to terrible teams in and out of conference.

Could you please provide a list of the terrible teams we lost to?

The only team we lost to that is outside of KenPom's Top 100 is No. Iowa, and that was very early in the season.

Auburn (17-12, #82) and Memphis (18-11, #85) certainly are not terrible. Texas is in a situation very similar to ours -- a disappointing record, but also a very young team and a tough schedule. And they're ranked #75 in KenPom.

The next worst team we lost to, TCU, is ranked #41 and everyone else is higher than that (most of them much higher).

So which terrible teams are you talking about?

 

[hoopsaustin]

At the end of the day, All i care about is literally wins and losses.. so ya let's talk about kenpom lol

Some try to justify losing.. some just want to win. I don't care how tough schedules were.. we routinely blew games we shouldn't have. Period.

 

[inoref]

Still lots of learning to do and work to be done with next year team.

 

[chuckb]

To me that doesn't matter. We shouldn't be so bad to get swept by OSU, Lose to Texas, TCU, Northern Iowa, Memphis, Auburn, Kansas State. Every year is a tough schedule in a conference like the Big 12. Fact is we didn't live up to that schedule. Quit making excuses about it. Next year will be a big year for Lon and the group if we don't make an NCAA Tournament we may see Lon get pushed out.

No one made any excuses. Someone created created a thread showing that we have the most difficult schedule in the country and, according to kenpom, the most difficult schedule in the last several years. Our schedule of course is always difficult but it's not always the most difficult in the entire country and it's certainly not always the most difficult in the last several years. Does that mean it's not worth discussing? Maybe to you but I think that's interesting.

The other point that you're missing evidently is that we're a better team than our record would indicate. No one made any excuses for our losses or our record. We've played any very difficult schedule and lost a lot of games. But we're a better team than some (automatic qualifiers in smaller conferences) NCAA tournament teams. The point...we're not as bad as some might think. Agree or disagree, that's up to you. But nobody made any excuses.

 

[chuckb]

At the end of the day, All i care about is literally wins and losses.. so ya let's talk about kenpom lol

Some try to justify losing.. some just want to win. I don't care how tough schedules were.. we routinely blew games we shouldn't have. Period.

Talking about Kenpom isn't justifying losing. Kenpom is, among other things, an analytical site that assesses how good a team is. One of the factors it uses to assess this is strength of schedule. Maybe to you, strength of schedule is irrelevant. Fine. But it matters to those who determine who gets in the tournament and what their seed will be. I'd rather play a tough schedule and have more losses than play a weak schedule and finish 25-5. We'll be more prepared for success in the tournament. But if you prefer we play a weaker schedule and have fewer losses, that's your prerogative.

The fact that we played an extremely tough schedule tells analytical sites like kenpom & BPI that we're really a better team than our record indicates. Does it justify losing or make excuses for the losses? No. It does suggest, however, that we're more likely to play Kansas or TCU closer and have a better chance of beating them than a typical 10 win team would.

Sites like kenpom allow those who are interested (clearly you're not) the opportunity to compare teams on the basis of something other than wins and losses. Frankly, comparing teams solely on the basis of wins and losses is severely inadequate since teams do play such different schedules. But if you prefer to compare teams strictly on the basis of wins and losses, it certainly simplifies that comparison.

 

[oudna]

Our schedule wasn't tough enough to where we win only 10 or 11 games. It takes a lot of sucking to win only 10-11 games. We stunk this year. No two ways around it. No making excuses about it. We lost to terrible teams in and out of conference and didn't deserve to be an NCAA caliber team this year.

Terrible season

Doesn't change the fact of your stupid post from last month

 

[BCSooners]

At the end of the day, All i care about is literally wins and losses.. so ya let's talk about kenpom lol

Some try to justify losing.. some just want to win. I don't care how tough schedules were.. we routinely blew games we shouldn't have. Period.

So you'd rather weaken the schedule to get cheap wins? That's what TCU did last year and look how it turned out in conference play.

 

[TINY]

So you'd rather weaken the schedule to get cheap wins? That's what TCU did last year and look how it turned out in conference play.

If there was ever a year to do this, it would have been this year imo. The tough schedule we played non-conference has not translated into conference wins, so we might as well beat up on some cream puffs to pad the win column and gain confidence.

 

[stormspencer]

If there was ever a year to do this, it would have been this year imo. The tough schedule we played non-conference has not translated into conference wins, so we might as well beat up on some cream puffs to pad the win column and gain confidence.

I can see both Chuck and Austin's perspective. I think we are much better than our record would indicate (as this is borne out by most of the advanced analytics sites), however that isn't much consolation when translated into the "win/loss" output.....and especially with the way that we have let several games get away from us in the last minutes.

But like you, if there was ever a year where a "creampuff" schedule would have benefited a group, this would have been the year....not only from a "win/loss" perspective, but also from a mental/confidence standpoint. The good news is that, even with all the gut-wrenching, kick-in-the-balls losses that this team has experienced, they continue to fight and haven't quit on the season. And in a non-conventional way, they appear to actually be gaining some confidence.....at least it appears that way to me.

 

[pnkranger]

For all of you jokers that jumped on my original post as if it were some sort of apology for our record, you need to read the entire post before you click reply. I said this VERY CLEARLY at the bottom.

"This year sucked, but I think it's going to pay huge dividends for the future."

I was not making excuses for our record but simply saying that the strength of our schedule and the tight games we played will help us over the long haul.

 

[sdcloud9]

I totally agree with the schedule's toughness, it was very challenging.

Unfortunately, it is a results driven business. Fortunately, this season appears to be just a hiccup.