# NCAA/College Football Playoff Rankings- rhyme or reason? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [November 25, 2019, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971 "2019-11-25T16:58:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![racepug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@racepug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/racepug)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2019, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/21 "2019-12-04T19:31:21Z")
> [@excavating\_for\_a\_mind](#): > > Huh… I thought we were talking about the teams with the best _ **SEASON** _. So how is that supposed to be measured? I, for one, don’t buy the argument that a team that goes 12 - 0 in a conference like the Mountain West is necessarily better than a one- or even a two-loss team from the S.E.C. or the Big Fourteen. But I can’t say for sure that they AREN’T better than a team from a more well-regarded conference any more than you or anybody else can say that they are. The solution? Have them play against one another to find out. (But not using only one game to determine the national champion for a team like that. I’m all for a team like, say, Boise State’s making it to the national championship game, but _only_ after they’ve knocked off _at least_ 2 and preferably 3 top teams from other conferences to get there (in much the same way that Butler University’s basketball team made it to consecutive national championship games a few years ago). > [@excavating\_for\_a\_mind](#): > > Sure, college schedules can be unbalanced; So are N.F.L. schedules. The difference is that who makes the playoffs in the pros is based very concretely on a team’s record (and sometimes, as I’ve noted elsewhere, on whether or not a team wins its division) while in college it’s based partly on teams’ records but also on the _perception_ of those teams by those who determine who will be invited to participate in the playoff (as the earlier example in this thread of an unbeaten TCU squad being passed over in favor of a one-loss Ohio State team at the end of the season would illustrate). > [@excavating\_for\_a\_mind](#): > > No, the problem is that there IS a playoff. When you create a playoff system, you cheapen the importance of the season. Let’s assume OSU beats Wisconsin. Would there be any question that OSU was the best team in the Big 10? How about if Wisconsin beats OSU? There is no doubt that Wisconsin would be the Big 10 Champs, but many would say that OSU, with the better record, was the better team, despite losing the championship game, which they would say was unfair. After all, the Buckeyes had already beat the Badgers during the season. But, the Badgers get the ring. Buckeyes don’t like it, they can try harder next year (Actually, I suspect the Buckeyes would also get a ring, kind of a “participation trophy”). Now, that is how their conference is structured, so it isn’t all _ **that** _ unfair, but, it does make OSUs performance during the regular season irrelevant. The more teams involved in the playoff, the more irrelevant the regular season becomes. I couldn’t disagree with you more on this. A big reason why we went to a BCS and then to a CFP is because 3 times in 8 seasons (1990, 1991, and 1997) there _was_ no “national champion” in college football. There were _co_-champions. And why was that? It was because those who vote on such things couldn’t come to a consensus in those 3 seasons as to which the better of two very good teams was and because those teams never met on the field. > [@excavating\_for\_a\_mind](#): > > My point, exactly! It’s not fair and you can’t make it more fair by increasing the number of lesser teams involved. Even a one-game playoff to determine a conference champion can be unfair. If Georgia should beat LSU, then the Bulldogs are top dog in the SEC and the Tigers go away, licking their wounds. Don’t like it Tigers? Learn to play as well in Atlanta as you do in Baton Rouge and it won’t be an issue. But giving the Tigers a chance to play for a “National Championship” despite losing to Georgia would not make it “more fair”. > > Here’s an idea. Why not let people knowledgeable about the sport rank the teams? You could have two groups, maybe one made up of the coaches, who know more about what is going on between the teams than anyone else, and another made up of journalists, who follow the teams and report on the results. By comparing the two lists, you could get a pretty good idea who the best teams are, at least who is considered best by people who know more about it than you do. I really don’t understand how you come to the conclusion that a vote is better than having a more inclusive playoff. Voting on the national champion was done for decades and while doing so was great for “water fountain debates” as to which were _truly_ the best teams, to me, people thinking that voting on such things wasn’t really adequate is why the BCS was created. Then people believing that picking only TWO teams to square off for the national title wasn’t really fair, either, so the BCS became the CFP. You see where this is going? If it were up to _me_ I’d make it a **20-team tournament** with seeds 13 through 16 **hosting** seeds 20 through 17 (respectively) in the first round with the Round of 16 and beyond played in regular bowl games (i.e. at neutral sites) and I’d try to keep teams from the same conference apart for as long as possible (I’d make an exception for teams from different divisions of the same conference who didn’t play each other during the regular season that year. Such as Georgia and Alabama or Michigan and Minnesota this year, for example). If I’m not mistaken the **FCS** playoffs involve 20 teams so it’s obviously a workable solution. At the _very_ least I would increase the number of teams to **16** to give the best chance of including any credible claimants to the national title plus the champions of “lesser” conferences. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2019, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/22 "2019-12-04T20:40:47Z")
> [@excavating\_for\_a\_mind](#): > > Any other team in Division I even play 4 top ten teams? I’m not an LSU fan, by any means, but that is a bit more impressive than OSU’s performance. Actually Texas A&M did- we played 2 #1 teams (Clemson, Alabama), a #2 (LSU), a #4 (Georgia), a #8 (Auburn), for a total of five top 10 teams. Granted, we didn’t beat any of them, but we did play Auburn and Georgia pretty well. ---
**Author:** ![racepug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@racepug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/racepug)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2019, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/23 "2019-12-08T17:21:16Z")
This is a proposal for how _I’d_ set things up for a 20-team FBS playoff this season which included all conference champions - First round: Miami of Ohio (Mid-American Conference champions) @ Utah (Pac-12 runners-up) Florida Atlantic (Conference USA champions) @ Notre Dame (Independent) Appalachian State (Sun Belt Conference champions) @ Minnesota (Big Fourteen [at large]) Boise State (Mountain West Conference champions) @ Memphis (American Athletic Conference champions) Round of 16: LSU (SEC champions) vs. Boise State/Memphis winner Ohio State (Big Fourteen champions) vs. Appalachian State/Minnesota winner (note: Ohio State and Minnesota did not play each other this season) Clemson (ACC champions) vs. Florida Atlantic/Notre Dame winner Oklahoma (Big X champions) vs. Miami of Ohio/Utah winner Georgia (SEC runners-up) vs. Oregon (Pac-12 champions) Alabama (SEC [at large]) vs. Baylor (Big X runners-up) Wisconsin (Big Fourteen runners-up) vs. Auburn (SEC [at large]) Penn State (Big Fourteen [at large]) vs. Florida (SEC [at large]) Quarterfinals: LSU/Boise State/Memphis survivor vs. Penn State/Florida winner Ohio State/Appalachian State/Minnesota survivor vs. Alabama/Baylor winner Clemson/Florida Atlantic/Notre Dame survivor vs. Wisconsin/Auburn winner Oklahoma/Miami of Ohio/Utah survivor vs. Georgia/Oregon winner Semifinal match-ups would depend on a variety of factors, such as: end-of-season rankings, how many teams are left from the same conference, and whether or not teams played each other during the regular season (whether from the same conference, or not). ---
**Author:** ![racepug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@racepug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/racepug)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2019, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/24 "2019-12-08T17:32:43Z")
And _this_ is a proposal for how I’d set things up for a 20-team FBS playoff this season which omitted any conference champions _not_ ranked in the end-of-season AP Top 25 - First round: Appalachian State (Sun Belt Conference champions) @ Michigan (Big Fourteen [at large]) Boise State (Mountain West Conference champions) @ Utah (Pac-12 runners-up) Memphis (American Athletic Conference champions) @ Minnesota (Big Fourteen [at large]) Iowa (Big Fourteen [at large]) @ Notre Dame (Independent) Round of 16: LSU (SEC champions) vs. Memphis/Minnesota winner Ohio State (Big Fourteen champions) vs. Iowa/Notre Dame winner (note: Ohio State and Iowa did not play against one another this season) Clemson (ACC champions) vs. Boise State/Utah winner Oklahoma (Big X champions) vs. Appalachian State/Michigan Georgia (SEC runners-up) vs. Oregon (Pac-12 champions) Alabama (SEC [at large]) vs. Baylor (Big X runners-up) Wisconsin (Big Fourteen runners-up) vs. Auburn (SEC [at large]) Penn State (Big Fourteen [at large]) vs. Florida (SEC [at large]) Quarterfinals: LSU/Minnesota/Memphis survivor vs. Penn State/Florida winner Ohio State/Notre Dame/Iowa survivor vs. Alabama/Baylor winner Clemson/Boise State/Utah survivor vs. Wisconsin/Auburn winner Oklahoma/Appalachian State/Michigan survivor vs. Georgia/Oregon winner Semifinal match-ups would depend on a variety of factors, such as: end-of-season rankings, how many teams are left from the same conference, and whether or not teams played each other during the regular season (whether from the same conference, or not). ---
**Author:** ![Zelski](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c67d28/32.png) [@Zelski](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zelski)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2019, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/25 "2019-12-11T23:38:23Z")
> [@racepug](#): > > … I’m all for a team like, say, Boise State’s making it to the national championship game, but _only_ after they’ve knocked off _at least_ 2 and preferably 3 top teams from other conferences to get there (in much the same way that Butler University’s basketball team made it to consecutive national championship games a few years ago). … The problem with this line of thought is that, in general, the Power 5-ish type teams (especially the true powers) refuse to schedule Group of Five teams. Boise State can’t get 2 or 3 of those teams on their schedule because the other schools refuse. On occasions when this is brought up, sometimes a P5 school will agree that they will schedule such a G5 school, but only one game at the P5 stadium, or for three games, two of which have to be at the P5 stadium. This year and last, Central Florida got to face Pitt in a home-and-home series. But Pitt isn’t a superpower right now and the Pitt folk are wondering why the school keeps making a really tough out-of-conference schedule when the team is not rewarded for it. ---
**Author:** ![racepug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@racepug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/racepug)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2019, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/26 "2019-12-12T20:17:03Z")
> [@Zelski](#): > > The problem with this line of thought is that, in general, the Power 5-ish type teams (especially the true powers) refuse to schedule Group of Five teams. Boise State can’t get 2 or 3 of those teams on their schedule because the other schools refuse. > > On occasions when this is brought up, sometimes a P5 school will agree that they will schedule such a G5 school, but only one game at the P5 stadium, or for three games, two of which have to be at the P5 stadium. > > This year and last, Central Florida got to face Pitt in a home-and-home series. But Pitt isn’t a superpower right now and the Pitt folk are wondering why the school keeps making a really tough out-of-conference schedule when the team is not rewarded for it. Well, that’s what Boise State says. Whatever the reason(s), make 'em play in a tournament after the season and have to face a few top teams from other conferences. If they’re as good as they claim to be then they should make it all the way to the championship game, right? But I sure as Hades wouldn’t just give 'em a spot in the national championship game on the basis of an unblemished record with the level of competition that they usually face. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2019, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/27 "2019-12-12T21:41:29Z")
> [@racepug](#): > > And _this_ is a proposal for how I’d set things up for a 20-team FBS playoff this season I think 20 is too many; while you’d definitely figure out the best team, you’d have the football season run another 3 weeks (or more). I think an eight team playoff would probably suffice. The real question is how do you pick them? The nerd in me says that some sort of computer ranking like the Sagarin rankings, or maybe even an average of several computer rankings would be most impartial. I’m not a fan of polls, especially of sports writers. They tend to be very bandwagon-ey; it’s all about wins vs. losses, without much consideration of strength of schedule or close wins/losses, or wins that were due to big plays or random things. ---
**Author:** ![racepug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@racepug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/racepug)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2019, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/28 "2019-12-12T23:14:09Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I think 20 is too many; while you’d definitely figure out the best team, you’d have the football season run another 3 weeks (or more). > > I think an eight team playoff would probably suffice. The real question is how do you pick them? The nerd in me says that some sort of computer ranking like the Sagarin rankings, or maybe even an average of several computer rankings would be most impartial. > > I’m not a fan of polls, especially of sports writers. They tend to be very bandwagon-ey; it’s all about wins vs. losses, without much consideration of strength of schedule or close wins/losses, or wins that were due to big plays or random things. I can see the argument for 20 being too many. I just think that if it were 20 teams any team in the country that has any sort of argument for being included in such a tournament _would_ be included in such a tournament. At the FCS level 20 teams participate and it seems to work just fine. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2019, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/29 "2019-12-12T23:31:22Z")
My preferred solution would be an eight-team playoff “championship of champions”. The FBS conference champions with the top eight computed ratings would be seeded in that order. I feel that any team that doesn’t win it’s conference has not earned a chance to be in the championship playoffs. The computed ratings could be done in many ways. As long as it doesn’t depend on subjective factors or polling, I think it’d be fine. I’d implement something like Elo ratings, and then seed each champion based on the average of their out-of-conference opponents’ ratings. That is, don’t include in-conference games, since being the conference champion takes those into account already. And no penalty in losing to an out-of-conference opponent. ---
**Author:** ![racepug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@racepug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/racepug)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2019, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971/30 "2019-12-13T18:35:02Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > My preferred solution would be an eight-team playoff “championship of champions”. The FBS conference champions with the top eight computed ratings would be seeded in that order. \*\*I feel that any team that doesn’t win it’s conference has not earned a chance to be in the championship playoffs. \*\* > > The computed ratings could be done in many ways. As long as it doesn’t depend on subjective factors or polling, I think it’d be fine. I’d implement something like Elo ratings, and then seed each champion based on the average of their out-of-conference opponents’ ratings. That is, don’t include in-conference games, since being the conference champion takes those into account already. And no penalty in losing to an out-of-conference opponent. A chance to win a national championship comes to non-conference winners in just about every NCAA sport (matter of fact when it happens during “March Madness” it’s forever referred to as a “Cinderella story”). Why do people have such a problem with the concept when it involves football? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ncaa-college-football-playoff-rankings-rhyme-or-reason/843971.md?page=1)