College Football Ranking system

Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
11,526
Location
OH
I know I've brought up this subject before, but this season I noticed something about the ranking system that I never noticed before. Final ranking for determining the top 4 doesn't take place until today. Results of the conference championship game results should not be factored into the rankings for determining the top 4. Why? Because the teams playing for the conference championship play a 13 game season, while those that don't play a 12 game season. How can an apples to apples comparison be made between a 12 and a 13 game team? It can't. Therefore, the final ranking for the top 4 should be based only on a 12 game regular season. This year OSU gets in the top 4 because they were only dropped to #5 after the MI loss (they were pummeled in that game and they probably should've been dropped to at least 7 or 8), and one of the teams that was ranked higher lost...come on CFB, you can do better...
 
It's pretty simple and should be this unless the rankings are rigged...
1 Georgia
2 Michigan
3 TCU
4 Ohio State

It doesn't make sense for any other teams to be considered IMO.

Just my $0.02
 
It's pretty simple and should be this unless the rankings are rigged...
1 Georgia
2 Michigan
3 TCU
4 Ohio State

It doesn't make sense for any other teams to be considered IMO.

Just my $0.02
It makes perfect sense because Ohio state got their but handed to them by another team in the top 4 just days ago - so no one - outside of fans of those 2 teams, wants to see that again, nor should they.

So maybe Ohio state is 4, maybe not. I would agree that USC likely doesn't belong at 4 but if you drop below them your into a couple more SEC teams and then into your to Penn state that has also already lost to Michigan.

You could make a great argument that TN and AL are better than better than Ohio state or USC, but no one wants to see that either - except their home fans.

The league is too big to compare it to pro sports where its simply win percentage. There are only 4 slots so they try to follow tradition and make the bowl games as interesting for as many as possible.
 
Last edited:
TCU and USC both lost their conference championship games yesterday. USC got dominated by 20+ points by Utah. TCU lost in OT to Kansas State.

My prediction after yesterday....

1. Georgia
2. Michigan
3. TCU
4. Ohio State

They're not going to let a 2 loss USC or Bama in the playoffs.

#1 Georgia vs #4 Ohio State will be a slugfest that a lot of people want to see.

TCU is in only by luck of USC losing. If USC had won yesterday, they'd be in instead.

I can't wait for the conference champion system to start. It's going to be a 12 team playoff with the top 6 highest ranked conference champions and 6 at-large teams. The top 4 will get a bye into the 2nd round while the remaining 8 slug it out for a spot on the bracket. If that was implemented this year, it would likely be...

#1 Georgia (bye)
#2 Michigan (bye)
#3 Clemson (bye)
#4 Utah (bye)

#5 Kansas State vs #12 Penn State
#6 Tulane vs #11 Tennessee
#7 Ohio State vs #10 Alabama
#8 TCU vs #9 USC
 
I know I've brought up this subject before, but this season I noticed something about the ranking system that I never noticed before. Final ranking for determining the top 4 doesn't take place until today. Results of the conference championship game results should not be factored into the rankings for determining the top 4. Why? Because the teams playing for the conference championship play a 13 game season, while those that don't play a 12 game season. How can an apples to apples comparison be made between a 12 and a 13 game team? It can't. Therefore, the final ranking for the top 4 should be based only on a 12 game regular season. This year OSU gets in the top 4 because they were only dropped to #5 after the MI loss (they were pummeled in that game and they probably should've been dropped to at least 7 or 8), and one of the teams that was ranked higher lost...come on CFB, you can do better...
It's about the best teams (subjective, I know) at the end of the season.
So a team with a lesser record, but wins a championship against a better record team can tease out teams that peaked early and declined vs peaked late.
Not perfect, but the championship games do have merit in determining the contenders for the championship.
 
It's about the best teams (subjective, I know) at the end of the season.
So a team with a lesser record, but wins a championship against a better record team can tease out teams that peaked early and declined vs peaked late.
Not perfect, but the championship games do have merit in determining the contenders for the championship.
One team ends up with a 12-1 record, another ends up at 11-1. Which team has the better record? Record has to be the most important factor in determining team rankings. If not, then why bother keeping track of their records? Things like head-to-head match ups, and strength of schedule should only be a factor for tie breakers...
 
One team ends up with a 12-1 record, another ends up at 11-1. Which team has the better record? Record has to be the most important factor in determining team rankings. If not, then why bother keeping track of their records? Things like head-to-head match ups, and strength of schedule should only be a factor for tie breakers...
So you are saying we should have undefeated D3 teams in the mix?
If all the D1 teams have a loss and there is an undefeated D3 team, by your stated logic, they should be the #1 seed.
Extreme example, but let's play out what you suggest here.
 
It makes perfect sense because Ohio state got their but handed to them by another team in the top 4 just days ago - so no one - outside of fans of those 2 teams, wants to see that again, nor should they.

So maybe Ohio state is 4, maybe not. I would agree that USC likely doesn't belong at 4 but if you drop below them your into a couple more SEC teams and then into your to Penn state that has also already lost to Michigan.

You could make a great argument that TN and AL are better than better than Ohio state or USC, but no one wants to see that either - except their home fans.

The league is too big to compare it to pro sports where its simply win percentage. There are only 4 slots so they try to follow tradition and make the bowl games as interesting for as many as possible.

As a Michigan fan I don't want OSU anywhere near the playoff! I simple looked at the top teams and sorted out that TCU lost in OT so they should keep their ranking IMO. I feel like USC was embarrassed in their bowl game and should drop allowing the #5 team in. I'd like to see TN in the mix but it's just too much of a stretch for me with OSU being a 1 loss team in 5th. The one thing I am certain about is Bama does not even deserve a mention this year...

just my $0.02
 
#1 Georgia
#2 Michigan
#3 & #4- could throw about 8 teams into a hat & pick two! TCU, USC, Ohio St., Tennessee, even Alabama, Utah, Clemson, and probably a few others all have valid arguments. Guarantee there’s some back room $$$ being passed around right now!
 
So you are saying we should have undefeated D3 teams in the mix?
If all the D1 teams have a loss and there is an undefeated D3 team, by your stated logic, they should be the #1 seed.
Extreme example, but let's play out what you suggest here.
My scenario includes a 16 team play-off. Win or go home, division wouldn't matter...
 
As a Michigan fan I don't want OSU anywhere near the playoff! I simple looked at the top teams and sorted out that TCU lost in OT so they should keep their ranking IMO. I feel like USC was embarrassed in their bowl game and should drop allowing the #5 team in. I'd like to see TN in the mix but it's just too much of a stretch for me with OSU being a 1 loss team in 5th. The one thing I am certain about is Bama does not even deserve a mention this year...

just my $0.02
OSU will be gone after GA gets done with them...
 
My scenario includes a 16 team play-off. Win or go home, division wouldn't matter...
I think you missed my point. Downplaying Strength of Schedule means distinctions between D1 and D3 are not necessary.
That was an Reductio ad Absurdum, or taking your assertion regarding strength of schedule to an absurd form.

Of course strength of schedule matters.
Of course, the 16 team playoff helps reduce the chance a great team in a less strong conference has a chance to make it to the national championship game.

The reality is I went to a D3 school and I think my High School team would have handily beat my Alma Mater :)
But conversely, few of that same team would have been admitted to the school.
 
My scenario includes a 16 team play-off. Win or go home, division wouldn't matter...

Not gonna get 16-, but a 12-team playoff, in 2024, a couple years earlier than originally planned (when the current TV deal was set to expire). But they're not going to leave (more) money on the table.

College football is equal parts rabid fandom, popularity contest, and game.

Logic is only perhipheral to those things, but they make it wildly popular.

And since the bowl system is pure gravy for the conferences and schools, plus good business for TV, there are (too) many bowls, and a dogfight to get into the top one$.

At least with 12, there will be a better sample drawn, and real chances to prove their mettle on the field, not a ballot from voters who may not even watch the games.
 
Back
Top