CFB Week 10 Rankings

At this point the Playoff Committee has lost its credibility. The purpose of ranking teams can be looked at in one of two lenses. You either A) view rankings as which teams would beat the teams below them (eye test). Or B) Based on who a team has beaten and lost to deserves to be rated higher than another team (Resumé). Those are the two opposing camps. The CFP Committee has shown they have a specific formula they’re going to use and they don’t have time to watch games. 

I believe there can be a middle ground. I believe you can look at teams from both perspectives, a mixture of resumé and eye test. Below you’ll find my top 25 and my process of deciding where to put each team. I took the top 35(37 this week) teams and labeled them quality teams. When a team beats another team inside the top 35 it’s viewed as a “Quality Win” and when a team loses to them it’s a loss to a top 35 team. I refuse to use the term quality loss. I don’t believe in such a thing. When you lose to a top 35 team it’s a loss. When you lose to a team outside the top 35 it’s a bad loss. Once I had the top 35, I looked at Win-Loss Record, Number of Quality Wins (QW), losses to team in the top 35, losses to teams outside the top 35 (Bad Losses), Strength of Record (SOR), and Game Control (GC). Strength of Record is a metric that reflects the chance that an average Top 25 team would have the same record, or better given the same schedule. Game Control reflects the chance that an average top 25 team would control games from start to end the way the given team did, given the schedule. Personally, I don’t love SOR or GC, but the Playoff Committee uses it so I will too. However, I use it more as a tie breaker than a leading factor. Here we go:

  1. Georgia Bulldogs 9-0 

4 QWs (#18 Auburn, #20 Arkansas, Clemson 6-3, and Kentucky 6-3)

0 Losses to top 35 teams

0 Bad Losses 

SOR: 1 

GC: 1

2. Cincinnati Bearcats 9-0 

1 QW (#8 Notre Dame) 

0 Losses to top 35 teams

0 Bad Losses 

SOR: 4 

GC: 10

3. Oklahoma Sooners 9-0 

1 QW (Kansas State 6-3)

0 Losses to top 35 teams 

0 Bad Losses 

SOR: 2

GC: 29 

4. Oklahoma State Cowboys 8-1 

2 QWs (#13 Baylor and Kansas State 6-3) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#21 Iowa State 6-3) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 5 

GC: 11

5. Oregon Ducks 8-1 

1 QW (#6 Ohio State) 

0 Losses to top 35 teams

1 bad loss (Stanford 3-6) 

SOR: 9 

GC: 12 

6. Ohio State Buckeyes 8-1 

2 QWs (#24 Minnesota and #17 Penn State) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#5 Oregon) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 11 

GC: 5

7. Alabama Crimson Tide 8-1 

1 QW (#15 Ole Miss) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#11 Texas A&M) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 3 

GC: 2 

8. Notre Dame Fighting Irish 8-1 

2 QWs (#19 Wisconsin and #25 Purdue) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#2 Cincinnati) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 6 

GC: 24

9. Michigan State Spartans 8-1 

1 QW (#8 Michigan) 

1 Loss to a top 35 team (#25 Purdue) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 7 

GC: 16

10. Michigan Wolverines 8-1 

1 QW (#19 Wisconsin) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#9 Michigan State) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 8 

GC: 3

11. Texas A&M Aggies 7-2 

2 QWs (#7 Alabama and #18 Auburn) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#20 Arkansas) 

1 Bad Loss (Mississippi State 5-4) 

SOR: 18 

GC: 21 

12. Iowa Hawkeyes 7-2 

2 QWs (#17 Penn State and #21 Iowa State 6-3) 

2 Losses to top 35 teams (#19 Wisconsin and #25 Purdue) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 14 

GC: 27

13. Baylor Bears 7-2 

2 QWs (#14 BYU and #21 Iowa State 6-3) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#4 Oklahoma State) 

1 Bad loss (TCU 4-5) 

SOR: 16 

GC: 18

14. BYU Cougars 7-2 

3 QWs (Virginia 6-3, Arizona State 6-3, and Utah 6-3) 

1 Loss to top 35 team (#13 Baylor) 

1 Bad loss (Boise State 5-4) 

SOR: 20

GC: 17 

15. Ole Miss Rebels 7-2 

1 QW (#20 Arkansas) 

2 Losses to top 35 teams (#7 Alabama and # 18 Auburn) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 12 

GC: 7

16. Wake Forest Demon Deacons 8-1 

QWs 

0 Losses to top 35 teams

Bad Loss (UNC 5-4) 

SOR: 13 

GC: 6

17. Penn State Nittany Lions 6-3 

2 QWs (#18 Auburn and #19 Wisconsin)

2 Losses to top 35 teams (#12 Iowa and #6 Ohio State) 

1 Bad loss (Illinois 4-6)

SOR: 25

GC: 4

18. Auburn Tigers 6-3 

2 QWs (#20 Arkansas and #15 Ole Miss) 

3 Losses to top 35 teams (#1 Georgia, #16 PSU, and #11 Texas A&M) 

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 15 

GC: 34 

19. Wisconsin Badgers 6-3 

2 QWs (#12 Iowa and #25 Purdue) 

3 Losses to top 35 teams (#17 Penn State, #8 Notre Dame, and #10 Michigan)

0 Bad Losses 

SOR: 28 

GC: 8

20. Arkansas Razorbacks 6-3 

1 QW (#11 Texas A&M) 

3 Losses to top 35 teams (#1 Georgia, #18 Auburn, #15 Ole Miss)

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 21 

GC: 15

21. Iowa State Cyclones 6-3

2 QWs (#4 Oklahoma State and Kansas State 6-3) 

2 Losses to top 35 teams (#13 Baylor and #12 Iowa) 

1 Bad Loss (WVU 4-5) 

SOR: 30 

GC: 28

22. UTSA Roadrunners 9-0 

0 QW

0 Losses to top 35 teams

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 10 

GC: 31 

23. NC State Wolfpack 7-2

1 QW (Clemson 6-3) 

0 Losses to top 35 teams

2 Bad Losses (Mississippi State 5-4 and Miami 5-4)

SOR: 17

GC: 22

24. Minnesota Golden Gophers 6-3

1 QW. (#25 Purdue)

1 Loss to top 35 team (#6 Ohio State) 

2 Bad Losses (Bowling Green 3-6 and Illinois 4-6)

SOR: 43

GC: 32

25. Purdue Boilermakers 6-3

2 QWs (#12 Iowa and #9 Michigan State)

3 Losses to top 35 teams (#8 Notre Dame, #19 Wisconsin, and #24 Minnesota)

0 Bad Losses

SOR: 26

GC: 23 

The first thing that jumped out to me about these was the lack of G5 teams. Only 2 are ranked and they are both undefeated, #2 Cincinnati and #22 UTSA. I only include G5 teams that have 1 or 0 losses because the teams with multiple losses with a G5 schedule have shown to me that with a P5 schedule they would have just as many if not more losses. 

Comparing my rankings to the Playoff Committee’s Rankings: 

Included in mine: Minnesota, Iowa State, Penn State, 

Excluded from mine: Utah, San Diego State, Pittsburgh

The biggest difference is Minnesota, Iowa State, and Penn State have all beat 1 or more teams in the top 25. Whereas Utah, SDSU, or Pitt have not. Meaning the first three teams are being punished for playing a better schedule and tougher competition.

There are also quite a few differences in where specific teams are. Iowa is 8 spots higher in my rankings because the CFP is punishing for recent results, which I understand, they have lost 2 out of their last 3 and looked bad doing it. I would be fine putting Iowa at 16 below Wake Forest, but not below Penn State, a team they beat. NC State is 7 spots lower in mine due to lack of QWs and losing two games to 5-4 teams. However, as the committee has shown multiple times, they are far more forgiving of losses than I am. Three teams have a 6-spot differential, OU, Oklahoma State, and Purdue. I think Purdue is given a boost in the CFP because of recent wins vs Iowa and Michigan State, but I also choose to remember they lost to Minnesota as well. Oklahoma State gets a large boost for the win against Iowa State, who I have ranked #21, but the Committee doesn’t have ranked at all. OU has gotten no respect from the Committee because of the way they have won games. It’s almost like they have been punished more for winning close than some teams have for losing outright. However, when you look at a common opponent in Nebraska OU won by 7, Michigan and Michigan State each won by 3, and Ohio State won by 9. Lastly was Arkansas, with a 5-spot difference. CFP snuck them in at 25, I have them at 20 due to their QW vs Texas A&M. 

            Leave comments below on what you agree/disagree with and check this out next week! 

Hudson Senter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s