Time again for an update for the College Football Playoff Committee imitation rankings. As of today, there are eighteen (18) remaining FBS schools which remain in playoff contention. This is the new ranking set.

Before I post the results, my analysis indicates that the CFP committee got most of their ranks wrong.  I base that on the fact that the three criteria they use for the final ranks, strength of schedule, conference championships, and head-to-head results, are premature at this time and so cannot be implemented.  The only two metrics available for an honest appraisal are the strength of opponents up to now, and the scale of the win.  That is, each game can be quantified by matching actual results against what the team’s opponents ordinarily do.  The committee ranked only eight of eighteen contenders within three places of where they should be ranked. One major contender was completely unranked by the committee, and five were ranked more than ten places from where their performance deserved them to be placed.

As a reminder, I took the average scoring offense and scoring defense for the contenders, and subtracted the defense from the offense to get the average scoring range. Then I tracked the games played and noted the difference between points scored and what the opponent normally allows, and what was allowed versus what the opponent normally scores. I then averaged those variances together, added it twice to the scoring range to find a grade. The totals for the eighteen remaining contenders range from 40.43 to 96.03. Here are the results, with variance from CFP positions noted:

1. Baylor (7-0, Big XII) – average margin of victory: 36.0 Offense averages scoring 23.6 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 6.4 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Iowa St (win, net result +14.9), best game is Rice (win, net result is +44.4). Overall rating 96.03 (#6 in CFP, variance of 5 places, #2 in USA and AP polls);


2. Clemson (8-0, ACC Atlantic) - average margin of victory: 23.0 Offense averages scoring 18.6 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 12.5 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Louisville (win, net result is +5.5), best game is Miami (win, net result is +57.4). Overall rating 85.05 (#1 in CFP, variance of 1 place, #5 in USA poll, #3 in AP);


3. Oklahoma (7-1, Big XII ) - average margin of victory: 23.3 Offense averages scoring 12.4 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 11.4 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Texas (loss, net result is -15.8), best game is Kansas State (win, net result is +53.4). Overall rating 70.90 (#15 in CFP, variance of 12 places, #13 in USA poll, #12 in AP);

4. Ohio State (8-0, Big Ten East ) - average margin of victory: 23.4 Offense averages scoring 9.2 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 13.6 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Indiana (win, net result is +2.8), best game is Rutgers (win, net result is +35.9). Overall rating 68.95 (#3 in CFP, variance of 1 place, #1 in USA and AP polls) ;

5. Alabama (7-1, SEC West) - average margin of victory: 17.1 Offense averages scoring 9.4 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 15.3 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Ole Miss (loss, net result is +13.7), best game is Georgia (win, net result is +37.0). Overall rating 66.40 (#4 in CFP, variance of 1 place, #7 in both USA and AP polls);

6. TCU ( 8-0, Big XII) - average margin of victory: 23.5 Offense averages scoring 16.1 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 4.6 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Minnesota (win, net result is +3.2), best game is Texas (win, net result is +34.2). Overall rating is 64.73 (#8 in CFP, variance of 2 places, #3 in USA poll, #5 in AP);

7. Houston (8-0, American West) – average margin of victory: 28.6 Offense averages scoring 11.2 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 6.2 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Louisville (win, net result is +5.5), best game is Texas State (win, net result is +33.2). Overall rating is 63.40 (#25 in CFP, variance of 18 places, #18 in both USA and AP polls);

8. North Carolina (7-1, ACC Coastal) - average margin of victory: 21.7 Offense averages scoring 12.7 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 7.7 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is S Carolina (loss, net result is -10.0), best game is Illinois (win, net result is +34.9). Overall rating 62.45 (only major contender completely unranked by CFP! #21 in both USA and AP polls);


9. Notre Dame (7-1, Independent) – average margin of victory: 15.7 Offense averages scoring 11.5 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 8.3 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Virginia (win, net result is -1.6), best game is Navy (win, net result is +32.1). Overall rating is 55.33 (#5 in CFP, variance of 4 places, #9 in USA poll, #8 in AP);

10.  Florida (7-1, SEC East) – average margin of victory: 15.5 Offense averages scoring 5.2 points more than opponents average allowing. Defense averages allowing 14.2 points less than opponents average scoring. Worst game is Kentucky (win, net result is +0.2), best game is Ole Miss (win, net result is +47.7). Overall rating is 54.18 (#10 in CFP, variance of 0 places, #9 in USA poll, #8 in AP);

11. Oklahoma State (8-0, Big XII) – 54.08 rating (#14 in CFP, variance of 3 places, #10 in USA poll, #12 in AP);
12. Memphis (8-0, American West) – 53.30 rating (#13 in CFP, variance of 1 place, #16 in USA poll, #15 in AP);
13. Iowa (8-0, Big Ten West) – 51.90 rating (#9 in CFP, variance of 4 places, #11 in USA poll, #10 in AP);
14. LSU (7-0, SEC West) – 50.13 rating (#2 in CFP, variance of 12 places, #4 in both USA and AP polls);
15. Stanford (7-1, Pac 12 North) – 49.90 rating (#11 in CFP, variance of 4 places, #8 in USA poll, #9 in AP);
16. Florida State (7-1, ACC Atlantic) – 48.68 rating (#16 in CFP, variance of 0 places, #15 in USA poll, #17 in AP);
17. Utah (7-1, Pac 12 North) – 42.45 rating (#12 in CFP, variance of 5 places, #14 in USA poll, #13 in AP);

18. Michigan State (8-0, Big Ten East) – 40.43 rating (#7 in CFP, variance of 11 places, #6 in both USA and AP polls).

Dropped out: Duke, Toledo, Temple, Pitt

I found it interesting to tally committee bias by conference:

AAC: 2 contenders ranked, ranging from 1 below to 18 below deserved ranks, avg 9.5 below earned position;

ACC: 3 contenders, two ranked within one place of deserved rank but one completely unranked despite top 8 performance, avg 5.7 below earned position;

Big XII: 4 contenders ranked, ranging from 2 below to 12 below deserved ranks, avg 5.5 below earned position;

Big Ten: 3 contenders ranked, ranging from 1 to 11 above deserved ranks, avg 5.3 above earned position;   

Ind.: 1 contender ranked, 4 places above earned position;

Pac 12: 2 contenders ranked, ranging from 4 to 5 places above deserved ranks, avg 4.5 above earned position;

SEC:  3 contenders ranked, ranging from 0 to 12 above deserved ranks, avg 4.3 above earned position.

The bias is obvious, and the partisan nature of the committee can be seen in the prejudicial rankings versus actual results.  The good news is that the season will play itself out, and teams ranked above their quality will be unable to maintain their position.  It is very likely, however, that the national champion will come from outside the top 2 seeds, as the committee should be expected to continue showing the partisan bias identified here.   The wild card here is North Carolina, which was greatly disrespected by the committee in the first poll.  If the Tarheels manage to win the ACC, will the committee give them the same appreciation shown to Clemson or will they continue to deny UNC its due respect?   

Note that this poll only tracks teams still contending for the playoffs, and so some 2+ loss teams may deserve to be ranked on the basis of quality but are not included here, since this is only for actual national championship contenders.