The CFP Rankings are a Joke.
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS POST IS NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT MICHIGAN NOT BEING IN. THIS POST IS CRITICIZING THE RANKINGS AS A WHOLE.
WHY THE CFP RANKINGS SUCK
The CFP Committee has stated that strength of schedule is used to compare teams.
UCF is 8-0 and ranked #18, with a ridiculously easy schedule and only one quality win against Memphis, another team that hasn't played anybody. So clearly a good W/L record is more important in the CFP rankings than quality wins and strength of schedule, right?
Wrong.
The comittee ranks Iowa and Northwestern, both 3-loss teams, #20 and #25 because of their quality wins. So it is apparent that the committee thinks that a team with many losses can be ranked as long as they have enough quality wins, right?
Wrong.
NC State is #23 with two "quality losses", one bad loss, and no quality wins. LSU is #24 with two bad losses, one "quality loss", and one quality win. I've figured it out now. The rankings are just a clusterfuck of bias, hype, and "quality losses", right?
Right.
SOME TEAMS LEFT OUT OF THE RANKINGS
USF (8-1): One bad loss, zero quality wins
Arizona (6-3): Two bad losses, one "quality loss", one quality win, and 4-1 in last 5 games with their breakout QB Khalil Tate.
West Virginia (6-3): Three "quality losses", one quality win.
Toledo (8-1): One "quality loss", zero quality wins.
Boise State (7-2): One "quality loss", one bad loss, and one quality win.
Troy (7-2): One "quality loss", one bad loss, and one quality win (vs. LSU)
Michigan (7-2): One "quality loss", one bad loss, and zero quality wins.
It is ridiculous that this comittee follows such an inconsistent system for ranking teams. There should be a detailed step by step process in which a team is given a total amount of points, then the teams are ranked based on point totals. I also think the rankings would make more sense to everyone if the committee ranked teams without watching any games at all.
Fin.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:33 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:45 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 11:23 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:52 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:14 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 11:15 PM ^
Hate this too. It should be if you aren't first everything else sucks.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:15 PM ^
LSU at any ranking is beyond stupid.
how many losses does an SEC team need to be dropped from the top 25?
i'm so looking forward to Saban's retirement - then bama will stink again and SEC "dominance" will be over
November 7th, 2017 at 11:31 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:23 PM ^
biased perspective- Michigan is the only 7-2 team to not be in the CFP rankings. Maybe it's just because we tend to be historically overrated, but its a weird feeling to be kinda flying under the radar.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:38 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:49 PM ^
Will make wins vs Wiscy and Penn State feel even better.
Ped Staee is not on this years schedule anymore. That game has been decided. Let's move the ball forward.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:58 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:14 AM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:25 PM ^
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, but maybe they take all of things you mentioned into account and try to balance all of those factors out into a blended rating, insead of focusing on only one metric. Crazy, I know.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:33 PM ^
Anything short of that is a sham.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:37 PM ^
There will be some serious chaos in the coming weeks...
November 8th, 2017 at 6:28 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 9:32 AM ^
And Gruden won't shut his turkey hole.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:38 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:37 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 10:47 AM ^
Exactly, NW has wins over MSU and Iowa that have gained stature.
And our SOS is decent, but we haven't played the two toughest teams on our schedule yet.
Our wins are against a bunch of nobodies. I don't think any of these teams are bowl teams.
UF 3-5
Cinci 3-6
USAFA 4-5
Purdue 4-5
IU 3-6
Rutgers 4-5
Minnesota 4-5
Our Losses are against teams with a pulse, and we looked like shit in both of them.
MSU 7-2
PSU 7-2
Outstanding Games
Maryland 4-5
Wisconsin 9-0
OSU 7-2
November 7th, 2017 at 10:42 PM ^
You also ignore the fact that those G5 teams, outside of their one “quality” win, have wins against terrible teams. Whereas a P5 team like NC St has wins against okay-bad teams.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:07 PM ^
because NC State is kind of baffling. They have zero wins over a P5 opponent with a record above 0.500. They have one win against a G5 oppenent with a winning record. S&P+ sees them as the #33 team in the country. The only other teams they've played with a pulse have been losses.
For reference, S&P+ has the following rankings compared to the CFP commitee's selections (CFP), teams underranked by CFP are in bold, teams overranked are in italics. S&P+ ranking is the number to the left, CFP to the right -
- Alabama (2)
- Ohio State (13)
- Washington (9)
- Georgia (1)
- Central Florida (18)
- Wisconsin (8)
- Notre Dame (3)
- TCU (6)
- Penn State (14)
- Auburn (10)
- Miami (7)
- Clemson (4)
- Oklahoma St (15)
- Oklahoma (5)
- South Florida (NR)
- Mississippi St (16)
- USC (11)
- Virginia Tech (17)
- Toledo (NR)
- Washington St (19)
- Michigan (NR)
- Michigan St (12)
- Arkansas St (NR)
- Florida Atlantic (NR)
- Boise State (NR)
Missing above in CFP rankings, S&P+ to the right this time -
20. Iowa (35)
21. Iowa State (37)
22. Memphis (30)
23. NC State (33)
24. LSU (29)
25. Northwestern (64)
November 7th, 2017 at 11:15 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 3:59 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 6:28 AM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:50 PM ^
You do realize when looking at multiple variables that everyone weighs differently you are not going to come up with a linear order of teams from 1-25 that makes sense. Who cares about the rankings? They will play out by the end of the year and for the most part teams will be about where they should be.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:50 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:44 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 6:40 AM ^
Yet, here we are. Michigan is running through its easy part of the schedule with ease and a 3rd string QB, but can’t get any respect.
Get used to it. Everyone outside of UM fan base hates Harbaugh...unless he was coaching their team.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:05 PM ^
What are you talking about?
Ohio State beat Penn State (AKA somebody!) and is overall 7-2. They aren't getting severely punished because their losses are to Oklahoma (top 10 who may not be as good as ranking but they are a brand name program who has only lost once to a not bad team)
...and Iowa is a team with two good wins (OSU and Iowa State) without a bad loss (Penn State by 2, Michigan State by 7, Northwestern by 7).
Michigan hasn't beaten a team that is even bowl eligible! And even if it was close with Iowa and Michigan they would look at common opponents and say well Penn State kicked the shit out of Michigan and Iowa lost to them by 2. Michigan State would be dead even for both teams and we obviously didn't play Northwestern.
November 7th, 2017 at 10:54 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 10:55 PM ^
The easy solution that will happen someday is....
8 conf
must win conf championship to qualify - doesn't matter record (no OSU bullshit like last year)
so winners of 8 conf champs play New Years bowls
then you have final 4 in two games
then championship
November 7th, 2017 at 11:18 PM ^
CPF ranking is worse than the old BCS ranking. Since it is decided by a small group of people and the process and their merit system has never been transparent. I prefer an 8 team playoff with a ranking system similar to BCS ranking, but minus coach poll. the coaches never have time to watch other games, and they are usually a bunch of bias folks. They should not be qualified for vote. just use more weight to the computer rankings such as 66.7% plus AP poll (33.3%) to decide the to top 8 team.
the four highest rank Conf champs can host the first round in their home field.semi final and final can be the same format as what we have now.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:22 PM ^
Should be a 16 team playoff and less regular season games. Get rid of a conference and stupid early season game. First two games of playoffs are home field advantage to the higher ranked team. Watch those fucking yuppies from out west and down south bitch and cry then to have to come to Ann Arbor in late November/early December. That would be frickin awesome.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:16 PM ^
November 7th, 2017 at 11:31 PM ^
I see why winning the B1G and Rose Bowl were the goals in the past. Was always a bunch of shit when it game to rankings and playing for the title. Those guys just got to the point where they said to hell with it. Why even waste your time thinking about the bullshit and the morons that run it? This all makes me want to go pay for a table dance.
November 8th, 2017 at 6:56 AM ^
The current obsession with winning it makes college football less fun.
I've posted elsewhere I think the playoff is going to destroy college football as we know it.
There's an all-out arms war right now to be in the "top four" conversation. If you're an outlier team that has a great season, it's quite possible in the current system to be left out. Again: all-out arms war to be a team that is considered a "playoff worthy" program.
Wisconsin is my test case to prove my point. If they win out, go 12-0, win the B1G, and yet don't go to the playoffs, then it suggests *a* good season is not enough; one must have consistently good seasons to be in the discussion. The only way to do that is spend on coaches, facilities, and whatever else is required. Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State ... they're all doing this. But some programs can't -- or won't -- and will eventually throw up their hands and be content with playing football for the fans and alumni ... or will give up completely and shutter football.
Pessimistic? You bet. But that's what I see happening.
(By the way, as much as it pains me to say this ... Michigan is currently one of those teams on the outside of the discussion. After RR and Hoke and all the poor years, these committees are looking to see if Michigan deserves to be considered. Gotta win ballgames to do that, and it takes a fair investment to get a program on the rails to do that. Thankfully Michigan is engaging the arms race.)
November 8th, 2017 at 10:55 AM ^
There is no way that a 13-0 Big ten champ gets left out.
November 8th, 2017 at 4:01 PM ^
I would like to think so. But let's say Alabama and Georgia go 12-0 into the SEC championship, and it's a close, well-fought game. The committee can't knock either team, so they both go. Notre Dame and Clemson win out. They go. There's your four.
It'll be a sad day in college football if an undefeated B1G team gets left out. But right now, it could happen.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:30 PM ^
At this point Bama and Georgia are locks. ND if they win over Miami is a lock. So it take your pick of Clemson, Oklahoma, TCU, or possibly Miami.
And please don’t tell me that Wisconsin is better than these teams.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:24 AM ^
Wisconsin might not be better, but if they defeat Iowa, Michigan and say OSU in the championship game, they can make a strong case to be included, especially over a team like Georgia who didn't even win their conference (assuming they lose to Bama).
November 8th, 2017 at 2:30 AM ^
It’s the 4 “best” teams, not the 4 teams with the best records. Your putting too much on “wins and losses” and not enough on “can this team hang with the others”.
November 8th, 2017 at 7:18 AM ^
can this team hang with the others
We saw how that worked out last year ... Clemson 31, Ohio State 0.
Based on the Rose Bowl, a Penn State / Clemson matchup may have been better.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:31 PM ^
As soon as I saw the first screen of rankings I knew Michigan wasn't ranked. Seems to me the best solution would be a combination of the BCS computer system and playoff without the committee. Take the old BCS system but make it the top 4 instead of top 2. There is no logic to a group of people having closed-door meetings. At least with a computer there is a formula. And this is coming from a guy who absolutely hated the BCS.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:22 AM ^
Except the formula was in large part based on the voters. That was one of the problems, was still a popularity contest.
November 7th, 2017 at 11:50 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:13 AM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:58 AM ^
The committee will raise us to #25 and only drop WI down to #10. I suppose I don't really care where they rank us. I would care if we were undefeated and they kept us out of the top 4. I could see this happening in the future and that is why we should expand the playoffs to 8 teams.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:19 AM ^