First CFP Ranking Released Nov.5

[MNVCGUY]

I think Indiana is where it is based a lot on margin of victory. Smallest so far has been 14 points.

Yep....their "prove it" game is coming up in a few weeks against Ohio State. That will be their chance to show they truly belong with the top teams and a win over Ohio State probably puts Indiana in the Big Ten championship game against Oregon as well assuming no major upsets happen along the way.

I don't think it will happen but will be interesting if Ohio State beats Indiana convincingly how Indiana is then viewed because they will almost certainly finish at worst 11-1 given their remaining schedule. I agree with Some Guy's take that if Indiana finishes 10-2 somehow they will be out of the playoff picture.

 

[Some guy]

Yeah it’s fair on PSU. Just a little surprised they went so bullish on PSU given they haven’t beaten anyone and it gets harder to move these teams substantially though to try say the committee will use any sensical logic is perhaps foolish on my part

The nice thing for the committee having the assignment of the “best teams” is when they’re stuck they can just say “eye test” and do whatever they want.

That’s also the thing I hate about it.

 

[brock408]

I think that Boise might be a 13-14 ranked team. The committee bumped them up to not deal with the "12 team playoff should be the top 12 teams" crowd.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

The nice thing for the committee having the assignment of the “best teams” is when they’re stuck they can just say “eye test” and do whatever they want.

That’s also the thing I hate about it.

In my opinion, the "eye test" is antithetical to what's supposed to be good about sports. In pro football, it doesn't matter if people like the way you win, think you play the right way, or think that you got lucky and wouldn't win the same number of games if you played the season over. All that matters is if you outcome your opponents enough times in the regular season, and are able to keep doing it in the playoffs.

 

[Some guy]

In my opinion, the "eye test" is antithetical to what's supposed to be good about sports. In pro football, it doesn't matter if people like the way you win, think you play the right way, or think that you got lucky and wouldn't win the same number of games if you played the season over. All that matters is if you outcome your opponents enough times in the regular season, and are able to keep doing it in the playoffs.

This is why, in my opinion the best playoff model would’ve been 12-16 teams

A formulaic ranking system.
BCS
Something different
Etc


Auto bids for conference champions in the top 25 of the objective formula

Other bids are at large
Conference champions not in top 25 have their bid converted to an at large

 

[Pompous Elitist]

was just reading an article about this on The Athletic. the big discussion/debate was over strength of schedule. the author says BYU deserves to be higher.

Boise State has a win over No. 21 Washington State, but its schedule is ranked No. 83 in The Athletic’s strength of schedule metric. Boise State has an excellent loss — 37-34 at the highest-ranked team, Oregon — and a solid win at UNLV. But this feels closer than it should be, considering both the 18-15 BYU win at SMU and the 38-9 rout of Kansas State, which came in No. 19 in the initial rankings.

Also, those two wins should put BYU ahead of No. 8 Indiana. Those two wins should put BYU ahead of No. 4 Miami.

BYU’s strength of schedule is No. 63. That’s better than Miami’s 65 and Indiana’s 83. ESPN has IU at 103. To be clear, those schedule strength numbers are not the same ones used by the committee, which are not shared publicly.

But go with the wins. Miami’s best is a wild 52-45 decision at No. 22 Louisville. Indiana has nothing on the board right now in terms of top-25 teams.

But (BYU) undefeated with a 29-point win over the No. 19 team, plus a road win over No. 13? That’s a top-five resume at this point. And that’s what we’re doing here, right?

Good Lord, that is nonsense. This is one area where the NFL is head and shoulders over CFB.

 

[Some guy]

Good Lord, that is nonsense. This is one area where the NFL is head and shoulders over CFB.

Objective criteria to make it is the only way to grow the game.

What if I told you you could have 4 teams from the SEC and Big ten make it + an objective criteria to make it + have 62 teams remaining with a realistic shot to make the tourney by being an at large or a conference champ.

That would be:
Every conference champ is in (9)
Plus 7 at large bids.

16 team tourney

If 62 teams were still alive then more games matter
If more games matter more people watch
If more people watch you make more money.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

Objective criteria to make it is the only way to grow the game.

What if I told you you could have 4 teams from the SEC and Big ten make it + an objective criteria to make it + have 62 teams remaining with a realistic shot to make the tourney by being an at large or a conference champ.

That would be:
Every conference champ is in (9)
Plus 7 at large bids.

16 team tourney

If 62 teams were still alive then more games matter
If more games matter more people watch
If more people watch you make more money.

I always hated the argument that the smaller field (and even the two team BCS championship) made the games matter more. Florida State played 13 games that didn't matter last year.

 

[upnorthkid]

I always hated the argument that the smaller field (and even the two team BCS championship) made the games matter more. Florida State played 13 games that didn't matter last year.

It does at a certain point. With this field, in about 2 weeks games will stop mattering for Oregon. You could make an extremely good argument to sit guys for their final game vs Washington to ensure health for the Big Ten Championship game given the autobid and bye is going to go to whoever wins that game. Same for Miami and BYU. And additionally, I think people liked the concept of the plunky underdog who could effectively end your year. In the 4 team playoff, Bama is already done because of that loss to Vandy. Right now they’re trying to find that sweet spot. 12 is fine but honestly I don’t need to watch the top 4 B10 teams all make it. Think the question will be if they ever institute a cap on how many can make it from one conference (they won’t as they know who makes them money) because if you keep expanding, you’re just going to add more from the B10 and SEC. No one is going to go for every CC is in in the power conferences. The G5 is a bid stealer to any of the P4 and now you’re going to tell them to give away 5 spots? The numbers yes are the exact same as they are right now, but that’s not how they’ll view expansion in playing additional games and how they’re splitting the CFP revenue pot (no tv exec is paying more because more of the G5 make the playoff).

 

[upnorthkid]

Objective criteria to make it is the only way to grow the game.

What if I told you you could have 4 teams from the SEC and Big ten make it + an objective criteria to make it + have 62 teams remaining with a realistic shot to make the tourney by being an at large or a conference champ.

That would be:
Every conference champ is in (9)
Plus 7 at large bids.

16 team tourney

If 62 teams were still alive then more games matter
If more games matter more people watch
If more people watch you make more money.

The bids for the major schools are the same. No one is watching mid season MACtion for playoff implications. The TV execs don’t care at all about the lower tier conferences (look at the TV ratings for them on their premier night games where they’re the only thing on). It’s not going to change the dollar pot so the P4 isn’t going to go for that to add more mouths to their tv deal

Do completely agree though selection criteria need to be objective

 

[Ope3]

Objective criteria to make it is the only way to grow the game.

What if I told you you could have 4 teams from the SEC and Big ten make it + an objective criteria to make it + have 62 teams remaining with a realistic shot to make the tourney by being an at large or a conference champ.

That would be:
Every conference champ is in (9)
Plus 7 at large bids.

16 team tourney

If 62 teams were still alive then more games matter
If more games matter more people watch
If more people watch you make more money.

Perhaps the folks running the College Football Playoff embrace the subjectivity angle, akin to Bracketology for the NCAA Basketball Tournament?

Just a thought. The whole "selection" process does create programing, talkers and clicks.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Objective criteria to make it is the only way to grow the game.

What if I told you you could have 4 teams from the SEC and Big ten make it + an objective criteria to make it + have 62 teams remaining with a realistic shot to make the tourney by being an at large or a conference champ.

That would be:
Every conference champ is in (9)
Plus 7 at large bids.

16 team tourney

If 62 teams were still alive then more games matter
If more games matter more people watch
If more people watch you make more money.

The way FBS is currently set up makes it difficult in any totally objective way. If/when the P2 split away that allows a cleaner tournament free of the craziness in that Athletic article.

If/when the players are allowed to collectively bargain that changes incentives on a longer season and larger field.

 

[Wally]

Do completely agree though selection criteria need to be objective

It will be objective.

The objective is to get the most viewers....

 

[GoDucks349]

It does at a certain point. With this field, in about 2 weeks games will stop mattering for Oregon. You could make an extremely good argument to sit guys for their final game vs Washington to ensure health for the Big Ten Championship game given the autobid and bye is going to go to whoever wins that game. Same for Miami and BYU. And additionally, I think people liked the concept of the plunky underdog who could effectively end your year. In the 4 team playoff, Bama is already done because of that loss to Vandy. Right now they’re trying to find that sweet spot. 12 is fine but honestly I don’t need to watch the top 4 B10 teams all make it. Think the question will be if they ever institute a cap on how many can make it from one conference (they won’t as they know who makes them money) because if you keep expanding, you’re just going to add more from the B10 and SEC. No one is going to go for every CC is in in the power conferences. The G5 is a bid stealer to any of the P4 and now you’re going to tell them to give away 5 spots? The numbers yes are the exact same as they are right now, but that’s not how they’ll view expansion in playing additional games and how they’re splitting the CFP revenue pot (no tv exec is paying more because more of the G5 make the playoff).

Oregon sitting a healthy player in a rivalry game against UDub just isn't going to happen.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

Oregon sitting a healthy player in a rivalry game against UDub just isn't going to happen.

But if a player is dinged up a little and would benefit by sitting the week before the big game instead of playing vs UDub, I would bet Lanning sits him.

 

[Some guy]

Perhaps the folks running the College Football Playoff embrace the subjectivity angle, akin to Bracketology for the NCAA Basketball Tournament?

Just a thought. The whole "selection" process does create programing, talkers and clicks.

The ncaa tourney is the least subjective tournament in the world.
99% of the country can win a national title by winning enough games in a row going into the final two weeks of the season

The at largest being subjective isn’t a problem is there is objective way in

 

[Some guy]

The way FBS is currently set up makes it difficult in any totally objective way. If/when the P2 split away that allows a cleaner tournament free of the craziness in that Athletic article.

If/when the players are allowed to collectively bargain that changes incentives on a longer season and larger field.

A formula that is kicked before the season would be objective
Auto bids would be objective

I disagree with your analysis

 

[Ope3]

The ncaa tourney is the least subjective tournament in the world.
99% of the country can win a national title by winning enough games in a row going into the final two weeks of the season

The at largest being subjective isn’t a problem is there is objective way in

I don't disagree with any of that, but perhaps CFP & Broadcast partner (ESPN) wants to make money off the subjective selection process itself by creating programing, talkers and clicks.

Purely speculating.

I'm not saying I am in favor of that approach either, but without a doubt the entity funding the whole operation gets a large say in the format.

 

[Some guy]

I don't disagree with any of that, but perhaps CFP & Broadcast partner (ESPN) wants to make money off the subjective selection process itself by creating programing, talkers and clicks.

Purely speculating.

I'm not saying I am in favor of that approach either, but without a doubt the entity funding the whole operation gets a large say in the format.

I am not arguing who is deciding things

 

[upnorthkid]

Oregon sitting a healthy player in a rivalry game against UDub just isn't going to happen.

I didn’t say what he would or wouldn’t do, just that you could make a pretty valid argument for it. That game (provided they win the next 2) provides nothing for their ranking metrics and if let’s say someone like Dylan Gabriel breaks a collarbone during it, I’m sure it would be a question that is asked. Not saying I advocate for or against it

 

[Pompous Elitist]

A formula that is kicked before the season would be objective
Auto bids would be objective

I disagree with your analysis

It would depend on the formula. Recruiting rankings, “strength of schedule”, height/weight, coach “it” factor, past performance, scoring margin, game control, or anything put out by Eastern Bloc mathematicians or statisticians are an automatic no/nyet.

Win/loss, tiebreaker hierarchy, conference or division champs, fine and good.

 

[Some guy]

It would depend on the formula. Recruiting rankings, “strength of schedule”, height/weight, coach “it” factor, past performance, scoring margin, game control, or anything put out by Eastern Bloc mathematicians or statisticians are an automatic no/nyet.

Win/loss, tiebreaker hierarchy, conference or division champs, fine and good.

I know people hate it,
But I personally like RPI


I don’t like efficiency ratings. I don’t care about a predictive measure. I care more about what you have done than what you hypothetically would do.

16 team playoff.
Conference champs auto in if top 25 in RPI get auto bid.

I used to have a website I went to for RPI but they haven’t done it this ywae

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I'm not saying I am in favor of that approach either, but without a doubt the entity funding the whole operation gets a large say in the format.

Grandmas forced to pay for ESPN by our favorite media/fun park/merch/cruise and hotel conglomerate

Maybe somebody should look into that.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

I know people hate it,
But I personally like RPI


I don’t like efficiency ratings. I don’t care about a predictive measure. I care more about what you have done than what you hypothetically would do.

16 team playoff.
Conference champs auto in if top 25 in RPI get auto bid.

I used to have a website I went to for RPI but they haven’t done it this ywae

I also like RPI. I think the hockey PWR is good. Agree with you on predictive measures. I think the model should bot be impacted by score differential or any in game stats, other than whether you won or lost, maybe home or away, and opponent.

 

[WAGopher]

The ncaa tourney is the least subjective tournament in the world.
99% of the country can win a national title by winning enough games in a row going into the final two weeks of the season

The at largest being subjective isn’t a problem is there is objective way in

That’s why it is good that there are at least auto bids for the conference champions. The next 7 or 8 teams are up for grabs.

 

[Some guy]

That’s why it is good that there are at least auto bids for the conference champions. The next 7 or 8 teams are up for grabs.

I do wish there was a stipulation where all conference champs in the top 20’or top 25 made it.
I would rather see an 12-1 Louisiana than a 10-2 or 9-3 4th place big ten school.

I get why you wouldn’t put Mac champ in this year. I think auto bids for conference champs in top 25 would be really fun. Won’t happen.

 

[WAGopher]

I do wish there was a stipulation where all conference champs in the top 20’or top 25 made it.
I would rather see an 12-1 Louisiana than a 10-2 or 9-3 4th place big ten school.

I get why you wouldn’t put Mac champ in this year. I think auto bids for conference champs in top 25 would be really fun. Won’t happen.

I agree. All ranked conference champs should get in. How they’re seeded is another thing.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

I agree. All ranked conference champs should get in. How they’re seeded is another thing.

Id support all conference champs being in. If one of them is really uncooperative, then a home game against that seed is a pretty nice consolation prize to the 5th seed who missed out on a bye by one spot.

 

[SeaBee_Gopher]

I agree with a lot of you that top 25 conference champs should be in. Does this actually make financial sense for the TV networks? Most of us don’t care if the third or fourth place B1G or SEC teams get in. If you lose two or more games, you should be out of contention! Bye bye Alabama! How hilarious would it be to see their fans’ reactions if they were already out of the CFP? It’s more interesting (less boring) if the blue bloods don’t get in even during their “bad” years.

Let some David’s get in vs. the Goliaths. That will drive viewership, allowing more areas of the country to have hope they can occasionally get in will expand reach and TV dollars, right? Isn’t that part of the value in the college basketball tournament?

Maybe that would decrease the chances of a mid-level B1G team like the Gophers getting in, but a part of me just thinks it would be fun to see more variety. And some of those teams will actually have a chance to win a game on occasion with the portal leveling things out a bit.

 

[Some guy]

I agree with a lot of you that top 25 conference champs should be in. Does this actually make financial sense for the TV networks? Most of us don’t care if the third or fourth place B1G or SEC teams get in. If you lose two or more games, you should be out of contention! Bye bye Alabama! How hilarious would it be to see their fans’ reactions if they were already out of the CFP? It’s more interesting (less boring) if the blue bloods don’t get in even during their “bad” years.

Let some David’s get in vs. the Goliaths. That will drive viewership, allowing more areas of the country to have hope they can occasionally get in will expand reach and TV dollars, right? Isn’t that part of the value in the college basketball tournament?

Maybe that would decrease the chances of a mid-level B1G team like the Gophers getting in, but a part of me just thinks it would be fun to see more variety. And some of those teams will actually have a chance to win a game on occasion with the portal leveling things out a bit.

More conference champs getting in also is good for the sport generally as it encourages smaller conferences