The College Football Playoff claims that the selection committee “starts from scratch” every week, judging each team and each resume like new each week. The committee’s rankings the past two weeks, though, show that’s not what it is doing. The selection committee came up with its first rankings two weeks ago. That set of rankings seemed to be based on resume more than what the human polls usually do. Since then, though, the committee has very clearly just been sticking to those rankings–moving down teams that lose, and maybe giving a team a bonus for a big win.
How do I know this? It’s simple. If the committee really started from scratch each week, you would see shifts in the rankings. A team would jump a team for seemingly no reason. But it’s not no reason, as resumes change every week. For example, Ohio State’s season opponents went 6-3 on the week, and all three of those losses came to teams that Ohio State also played. The Buckeyes have a stronger resume this week than last week, even though all the Buckeyes themselves did was play Rutgers. These types of things should cause small shifts in the rankings week to week. That’s not happening, which means that the committee is relying on what they thought last week, not starting from scratch every week.
There were only ten real changes in the rankings this week. Minnesota, Baylor, and Auburn all dropped a bit for picking up losses to other good teams. Iowa gained three spots for beating Top 10 Minnesota. Cincinnati slipped a spot (and lost a second spot to Iowa’s jump) after struggling with a weak opponent for the second time in three weeks. Texas, Navy, and Kansas State all fell out with losses. Iowa State and USC both jumped Appalachian State–which makes sense, since the Mountaineers don’t have any resume worthy of being in the rankings in the first place.
None of these are examples of looking at the whole season and starting from scratch. Every single one of these ranking changes is a direct reaction to what happened on the field this week. Hopefully the committee will start from scratch when the all-important final rankings come out in three weeks, but the committee’s outlook the past two weeks has not been encouraging.
Next…The Penn State and Alabama problems
The Penn State problem
There was only one real explanation for Penn State falling so far last week. The Nittany Lions had one of the best one-loss resumes in the country last week, whether you judge by strength of schedule, quality wins, or advance metrics. Very clearly, the committee wanted to keep Penn State behind a Minnesota team that just beat it. The committee also did not want to jump Minnesota so high, apparently. So Penn State was stuck behind the Golden Gophers.
This week, that changed. With Minnesota’s loss to Iowa, the committee obviously felt that Penn State’s superior resume was worth breaking the head-to-head result for. (Note, importantly, that this is the first time this season that the committee has ignored a head-to-head result when teams have the same number of losses. That could matter as the season goes on.)
However, Penn State only moved up one spot. The Nittany Lions jumped Minnesota, who slid from No. 8 to No. 10, but did not jump any higher. Quite frankly, this makes very little sense. Penn State’s resume is superior to that of every one-loss team, except maybe Georgia. Penn State has lost one game this year–by five points against a Top 10 team that it statistically dominated. That loss is better than Oregon’s and Utah’s, and just a drop worse than Alabama’s. The Nittany Lions have two ranked wins (Michigan and Iowa)–which is more than Alabama, Oregon, and Utah have combined. Penn State has, additionally, beaten two more Power 5 teams with seven wins (Pitt and Indiana). That gives the Nittany Lions four such wins–again more than Alabama, Oregon, and Utah have combined (Alabama has beaten Texas A&M and Group of 5 Southern Miss, while Oregon has beaten USC).
The Alabama issue
I’m not even going to start talking about the Tua Tagovailoa injury. Instead, I’m pointing out that Alabama just has no resume. The Crimson Tide have one somewhat-meaningful win so far. That’s it. Alabama has beaten a Texas A&M team that has yet to beat a bowl team. Texas A&M’s resume, entirely, is based on the fact that it has three good losses. In fact, that is likely the reason that the committee hasn’t ranked Texas A&M yet, even with its 7-3 record. Alabama also has a win over a good Conference-USA team in Southern Miss.
Every single other team that Alabama has beat is, at best, 5-5. Alabama will be lucky if it ends the season having beaten three Power 5 bowl teams (that includes Auburn, who Alabama has not yet played). That’s just not a resume. Alabama is living off the strong benefit of the doubt it has earned this decade, as well as the fact that it has blown out most teams. At some point, though, that is not enough.
Next…The Big 12 and Pac 12
Don’t overreact to Oklahoma
Everyone seems to think, at the moment, that Oklahoma or Baylor needs a lot of help to get into the top four. However, it’s still too early to say that. The committee has very clearly not been enamored with the top Big 12 teams, and understandably so. This committee seems to love blowouts, and Oklahoma and Baylor have both struggled to blow teams out. There is plenty of time left in the season for those teams to make good impressions. As I said above, the committee clearly is sticking with its previous rankings, but nothing is obviously set in stone.
There is some bad news for the Big 12, though, as both Texas and Kansas State fell out of the rankings. Iowa State moved in, and has a chance to stay there, but Texas won’t get back in unless it beats Baylor, so the Longhorns won’t be a quality win moving forward without seriously hurting the Big 12 overall. Oklahoma State might stay ranked, even with a loss to Oklahoma, but the Big 12 should start to be concerned that there will only be three ranked teams for the conference.
Oregon and Utah
The Ducks and the Utes are an interesting case for the selection committee. Utah has been winning by a consistently better margin than the Ducks, which the committee seems to appreciate. On the other hand, Oregon has a much better strength of schedule and has beaten the team that beat Utah. The committee has gone with that over any sort of “game control” metric so far. And, ultimately, it won’t really matter. If either of those teams lose, it will be out of the Playoff conversation. If both win out, then they will meet in the Pac 12 Championship Game, and the winner will obviously be ranked ahead.
It is noteworthy how high these two teams are ranked. They are impressive, sure, but on pure resume there is no reason for them to be ahead of Penn State. There is little reason for them to be ahead of Oklahoma. It will likely work its way out eventually, but the committee hasn’t given any indication why those two teams are ahead of the other teams.
Next…The bottom of the rankings
The bottom matters
The committee has a history and a tendency to not be as particular with the bottom of the rankings than it is at the top. The best evidence of this is Appalachian State. The Mountaineers are having a strong season, but have nothing anywhere near a Playoff resume. Their best win is 4-7 South Carolina (maybe Louisiana is better, barely). They have an awful strength of schedule and a bad loss. It was a mistake to put Appalachian State in last week, and that mistake was repeated this week.
As I said a few times this week, there is a huge gap between the top 17 teams and the bottom eight. 17 teams have clearly locked themselves into their top spots in the rankings. Who makes their way into the bottom will matter, though, and can seriously influence the rankings at the top.
No ACC teams made their way into the bottom of the rankings, though Pitt, Virginia, and Virginia Tech can’t be far off. One Pac 12 team did, which is big for Oregon’s and Utah’s resumes. If Washington can also work its way into the Top 25 by season’s end, it would be a strong point for both of those top Pac 12 teams. Then again, with the upcoming AAC schedule, it is possible that only one additional spot opens up as the year goes on. ACC and Pac 12 teams are going to be rooting against Appalachian State and Boise State moving forward, because someone likely needs to drop out to let new teams in.
