A word on the charts and then on schedules:
The first graph is displayed to illustrate that while we do a ranking, the gaps are far from uniform. Depending on whether or not you drop the high and low, either Ohio State or Michigan is #1 and the other is #2 but really, they are effectively tied either way. Then you have a big gap, then PSU/MSU are effectively tied, etc.
The second graph shows a distribution of the votes. You can really see here that from #3 to #11 we really have no consensus at all.
Personally, I think the Schedule/Performance Chart is the most useful thing I have displayed here. Later in the season I rely on it heavily in making my vote. Ie, I believe that a team that is 0-3 with close losses to #1, #2, and #3 should probably be ranked #4 or #5 or possibly even higher if the losses were on the road. On the other hand, a team that is 3-0 with close wins over #14, #13, and #12 should probably be ranked #11 or #10 or possibly even lower if the wins were at home.
One thing that I think people often fail to consider is that HFA is not the same for all teams. What I mean is that if you are one of the top teams, you want the other top teams at home (where you'll get the HFA that you might need to beat them) and the bad teams on the road (because you should beat them no matter where the game is played). Conversely, if you are one of the bottom teams you want the opposite.
If you look at the chart there is a diagonal line of cells with "n/a" in them running from top-left (tOSU/tOSU) to bottom right (RU/RU). What would be theoretically best for each team is to have as many home games as close to that diagonal line as possible.