Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

I did this quickly in my head, so there could be an error, but the combined records of the Pats' opponents to date is about 39-42.

In their non-Pats games, that makes then 39-33.

"Who have they beaten?" has some good answers now -- starting with, in some order, the Colts and Cowboys, who are currently both consensus top-four teams in the league.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Pats have beaten 3 or 4 potential playoff teams; Boys, Colts, Bolts and Browns.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

The Pats have beaten six teams with winning records.

Only two other teams (Denver and Philadelphia) have even played that many, and neither of them won more than two.

(Pittsburgh has won 4 games against teams with winning records, which is the second most in the NFL)

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Strength of schedule

To Date

Patriots 39-42 (verses 6 teams with winning records, 6-0)
Colts 47-34 (verses 5 teams with winning records, 3-2)
Steelers 37-44 (verses 4 teams including Browns twice, with winning records, 4-0)

Remaining games

Patriots 27-36 (verses 3 teams with winning records)
Colts 29-34 (verses 2 teams with winning records)
Steelers 24-39 (verses 2 teams with winning records)

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Do not forget the Brownies. That offense can really move the ball and put up points. Braylon Edwards is a monster.

The only hesitation I have about them is that Anderson seems to be uncomfortable in the role of dink and dunk when facing deep coverage. That's kinda odd, but he's got such a gun and he's so used to going down the field, I guess he's locked into a habit.

The Browns make the playoffs, I think.

So do the Chargers, although in a sort of back-door manner in a bizarre division.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

I know someone pointed this out before, but the Jets and Dolphins skew the stats so far it's sad, and we play them twice, each.
The Pats have played teams with better offenses, the Colts have played some teams with better defenses, but anemic offenses.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Good point. Whether a bad team is 3-6 or 0-9, they are still dead meat anyway. Best indication of their ability is 6-0 against teams that have, or otherwise would have, winning records.

I believe the only difference now between the Pats and Steelers against decent opponents is that the Steelers have beaten the Browns on the road (both won at home and both beat the Bills), while the Pats have beaten Indy and Dallas on the road, plus Washington and San Diego at home.

Not even close.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Find me another team that has beaten an 8-1 team and a 7-2 team in their houses.

EDIT: Ok, let's look at the 2 most impressive victories for the rest of the NFL's "elite":

Dallas - swept the 6-3 Giants (a team that's only beaten up tomato cans all year)
GB- @ 6-3 NY Giants, vs. 5-4 SD (couple of can-beaters)
Indy - @ 6-3 Jax, @ 6-3 Ten (only impressive win these teams have is against each other)
Pit - swept the 5-4 Browns (who haven't beaten anybody of note)

Funny, none of the other 7-2 or better teams has beaten another team with such a record.

The Pats are really flying high above the rest.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Bills also have a winning record so thats another team the Pats have beaten that have a winning record.

Re: Pats' strength of schedule so far
 

Regardless of who else is on the schedule, we play Indy, Pittsburgh and Dallas. Those are the three best teams in the NFL outside of the Patriots. If we beat those three teams, the "strength of schedule" argument is moot. We could play all cellar dwellers outside that, it doesn't matter.

Dallas is the only team with a comparable schedule, they play the Giants twice, New England and Green Bay. They've beat the Giants twice, but lost to New England.

The Giants only losses are to Dallas and Green Bay, but their 6 wins come against teams with a combined record of 15-39. Washington being their only victory against a team over .500.

.