The Linked Letters After Dark: Championship Week Edition
Could the Big 12 and ACC get just one team in the playoff between them?
I have two big questions heading into the announcement of the 12 team field for the college football playoff. Will every conference except the SEC and Big Ten be reduced to just zero or one bids? And will the selection committee really pick just one team from between the third and fourth ranked conferences?
I’ll probably continue The Linked Letters After Dark during the college football playoff, perhaps writing a late night column after each round of the playoff that will include updated ratings and game predictions. But for now, let’s go through the updated ratings after the conference championship games and then address the big questions facing the selection committee.
Predictive Ratings
These are forward looking ratings, meaning that they’re intended to evaluate how good a team is and predict its future success, but they don’t evaluate the quality of a team’s achievements earlier in the season. These ratings are based purely on points.
The offense and defense columns refer to each team’s point scoring tendencies instead of the efficiency ratings that some other rating systems use. The overall rating is approximately the sum of a team’s offense and defense ratings. To predict the score of a game for the home team, take the home team’s offense rating, add half of the home advantage, subtract the visiting team’s defense rating, and add the mean score. Predicting the score is similar for the visiting team. Take the visiting team’s offense rating, subtract half of the home advantage, subtract the home team’s defense rating, and add the mean score. Predicting the margin of victory for a game is done by taking the home team’s rating, adding the home advantage, and subtracting the away team’s rating. For neutral site games, the home advantage is set to zero.
The last column here is SOR, which means strength of record. Unlike all the other columns, this is a backward looking rating and evaluates the quality of a team’s wins and losses in comparison to a hypothetical team with a rating 1.5 standard deviations above the FBS mean. Such a hypothetical team would typically be ranked somewhere between #10 and #15. Strength of record is just each team’s actual winning percentage minus the expected winning percentage for that hypothetical team against the same schedule. This is negative for most teams because their record is being compared against the expected record for a pretty good team.
Predictive Ratings
Home advantage: 1.79 points
Mean score: 26.83 points
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
1 90.08 -0.22 Indiana 45.97 44.01 .240
2 86.76 +0.36 Ohio State 38.36 48.39 .154
3 84.78 +0.03 Oregon 43.78 40.89 .177
4 +1 82.83 +1.38 Texas Tech 41.41 41.40 .080
5 -1 82.28 +0.12 Notre Dame 43.33 38.82 .000
6 78.37 +0.16 Utah 42.62 35.69 -.022
7 76.03 -0.03 Miami 34.05 42.01 .005
8 +1 74.13 -0.04 USC 40.24 33.96 -.003
9 -1 73.92 -1.69 Alabama 36.57 37.26 .023
10 +3 73.60 +1.20 Georgia 32.81 40.85 .122
11 73.33 +0.08 Washington 38.22 35.07 -.122
12 72.99 -0.02 Vanderbilt 41.86 31.10 .008
13 +2 72.38 +0.17 Iowa 30.70 41.61 -.066
14 -4 72.27 -1.01 BYU 35.18 36.96 .087
15 -1 72.10 -0.21 Texas A&M 38.47 33.63 .115
16 71.70 -0.16 Oklahoma 29.31 42.47 .050
17 71.50 +0.12 Ole Miss 40.19 31.31 .067
18 70.96 +0.04 Penn State 36.45 34.46 -.218
19 69.68 -0.06 Michigan 33.59 36.15 -.019
20 68.33 +0.01 South Florida 39.41 28.99 -.141
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
21 68.13 +0.11 Texas 32.02 36.19 .008
22 67.29 -0.52 Missouri 32.31 35.01 -.134
23 67.21 -0.26 Tennessee 41.50 25.70 -.148
24 66.53 -0.28 Arizona 32.04 34.50 -.144
25 +1 65.79 +0.04 Florida State 34.02 31.54 -.431
26 +1 65.67 +0.10 Illinois 32.95 32.77 -.074
27 +2 64.61 -0.11 LSU 26.03 38.51 -.181
28 -3 64.50 -1.93 North Texas 41.35 23.14 -.113
29 -1 64.32 -0.69 Auburn 28.81 35.51 -.349
30 63.58 +0.03 Pittsburgh 34.92 28.57 -.174
31 63.49 +0.61 Iowa State 29.75 33.65 -.198
32 62.59 -0.08 Louisville 31.62 31.02 -.209
33 +1 62.07 -0.42 James Madison 29.93 32.19 -.050
34 +1 61.91 -0.07 Florida 27.17 34.72 -.379
35 +1 61.74 +0.13 SMU 30.56 31.16 -.239
36 -3 61.61 -1.03 Virginia 30.64 30.97 -.163
37 61.16 +0.04 TCU 32.07 28.92 -.218
38 60.89 -0.09 Nebraska 31.24 29.62 -.251
39 60.29 +0.16 Kansas State 32.47 27.68 -.313
40 59.61 -0.15 South Carolina 25.54 34.08 -.424
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
41 +1 59.50 +0.07 Georgia Tech 31.37 28.13 -.158
42 +2 59.29 +0.36 Arizona State 24.91 34.28 -.145
43 -2 59.29 -0.19 Cincinnati 31.17 28.13 -.256
44 -1 59.23 +0.05 Clemson 27.93 31.16 -.324
45 58.29 +0.11 Houston 28.47 29.87 -.139
46 58.02 -0.10 East Carolina 28.53 29.43 -.270
47 58.02 -0.07 Toledo 26.65 31.22 -.313
48 57.95 +0.09 NC State 31.25 26.41 -.222
49 +3 57.86 +0.56 Northwestern 23.89 33.94 -.268
50 57.84 +0.12 Arkansas 34.65 22.88 -.578
51 -2 57.79 -0.02 Mississippi State 32.15 25.72 -.374
52 -1 57.46 -0.14 Wisconsin 20.53 36.87 -.282
53 +1 57.20 +0.64 Duke 34.09 23.21 -.307
54 -1 57.08 -0.07 Kentucky 26.33 30.74 -.356
55 56.96 +0.42 Boise State 27.93 29.07 -.201
56 +6 56.80 +1.93 Tulane 25.89 30.80 -.073
57 -1 56.73 +0.24 Kansas 30.02 26.75 -.374
58 -1 56.20 +0.12 Memphis 28.47 27.73 -.287
59 -1 55.58 -0.14 Old Dominion 26.59 28.85 -.153
60 55.20 -0.05 San Diego State 21.86 33.37 -.228
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
61 -2 55.07 -0.20 Wake Forest 23.27 32.00 -.256
62 +1 54.99 +0.28 Michigan State 28.04 26.90 -.421
63 -2 54.97 +0.04 Rutgers 31.83 23.17 -.306
64 54.60 -0.10 Washington State 21.50 33.04 -.361
65 54.57 +0.05 Minnesota 25.64 29.01 -.199
66 53.38 +0.04 Baylor 32.59 20.60 -.427
67 53.34 +0.14 UTSA 30.73 22.54 -.393
68 +2 52.95 +0.31 New Mexico 24.97 27.76 -.191
69 -1 52.69 -0.16 Maryland 24.96 27.69 -.476
70 -1 52.37 -0.39 UNLV 32.55 19.62 -.205
71 +1 51.78 +0.24 UCLA 24.29 27.37 -.409
72 -1 51.77 +0.15 UCF 22.69 28.99 -.432
73 +1 51.50 +0.17 Purdue 24.21 27.18 -.478
74 -1 50.96 -0.41 Utah State 28.29 22.86 -.398
75 50.74 -0.25 Navy 25.89 24.86 -.052
76 49.65 -0.20 Army 18.63 30.94 -.393
77 49.00 -0.25 UConn 27.85 21.17 -.241
78 48.83 -0.26 Virginia Tech 24.51 24.32 -.582
79 48.62 -0.24 Colorado 23.61 25.01 -.573
80 48.39 -0.05 West Virginia 24.19 24.05 -.459
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
81 48.26 +0.07 Stanford 21.21 26.85 -.451
82 48.24 +0.23 Western Michigan 18.61 29.64 -.257
83 47.67 +0.15 Hawai’i 23.18 24.43 -.293
84 47.37 +0.03 Louisiana Tech 21.69 25.52 -.386
85 46.98 +0.09 California 23.01 23.87 -.356
86 46.93 +0.06 Fresno State 21.07 25.86 -.307
87 +1 46.55 +0.19 Texas State 29.81 16.61 -.470
88 -1 46.39 -0.00 Western Kentucky 23.49 22.91 -.298
89 46.04 -0.22 Ohio 23.82 22.36 -.250
90 45.22 -0.85 Miami (OH) 20.71 24.50 -.435
91 45.05 -0.27 Kennesaw State 23.09 22.19 -.151
92 44.90 -0.25 Boston College 24.97 19.91 -.701
93 44.27 +0.18 Temple 24.90 19.11 -.500
94 43.84 +0.09 Air Force 25.00 18.75 -.642
95 43.68 +0.03 North Carolina 17.88 25.71 -.610
96 42.80 +0.12 Syracuse 20.83 21.80 -.549
97 42.74 +0.16 Marshall 25.08 17.65 -.522
98 +4 41.24 +0.74 Troy 18.39 22.88 -.345
99 -1 40.73 -0.11 Wyoming 12.29 28.59 -.603
100 40.63 -0.05 Southern Miss 21.60 19.10 -.407
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
101 -2 40.59 -0.24 Florida International 20.38 20.20 -.374
102 +1 40.43 +0.20 Missouri State 20.47 19.87 -.356
103 -2 40.19 -0.32 Jacksonville State 20.18 19.99 -.378
104 39.99 +0.18 Liberty 19.90 19.87 -.645
105 39.73 -0.02 Central Michigan 17.45 22.13 -.354
106 39.43 +0.01 Tulsa 19.02 20.55 -.638
107 39.07 -0.09 Oregon State 17.62 21.41 -.675
108 38.50 +0.33 Oklahoma State 16.21 22.32 -.704
109 38.09 -0.07 Florida Atlantic 24.56 13.39 -.607
110 37.76 +0.03 Nevada 14.76 23.04 -.689
111 +3 37.31 +0.52 Colorado State 17.49 19.65 -.758
112 -1 37.13 +0.05 Louisiana 19.99 17.10 -.453
113 -1 37.11 +0.15 Arkansas State 16.59 20.35 -.476
114 -1 37.07 +0.24 Georgia Southern 22.58 14.36 -.430
115 36.03 +0.01 Bowling Green 12.96 22.98 -.629
116 +2 35.98 +0.24 San José State 20.13 15.92 -.702
117 35.97 +0.08 Delaware 22.16 13.81 -.487
118 -2 35.82 -0.10 UAB 21.53 14.32 -.589
119 35.63 +0.13 South Alabama 18.94 16.64 -.616
120 35.03 +0.11 App State 17.90 17.10 -.549
Rank Move Rating Change Team Offense Defense SOR
121 34.90 -0.00 Buffalo 15.32 19.75 -.574
122 34.34 -0.37 Rice 14.36 20.00 -.517
123 33.47 -0.11 New Mexico State 13.60 19.84 -.629
124 33.25 -0.08 Northern Illinois 11.52 21.67 -.718
125 32.67 -0.20 Eastern Michigan 18.92 13.76 -.652
126 32.31 -0.03 UTEP 16.77 15.54 -.797
127 32.09 -0.04 Akron 15.34 16.62 -.557
128 31.41 -0.23 Coastal Carolina 17.60 13.82 -.446
129 31.24 -0.14 Middle Tennessee 15.52 15.64 -.736
130 29.69 +0.11 Kent State 18.05 11.74 -.443
131 29.32 -0.17 Ball State 12.11 17.21 -.625
132 +1 28.48 +0.24 Charlotte 11.85 16.44 -.801
133 -1 28.45 -0.01 Georgia State 14.84 13.53 -.811
134 25.38 +0.05 UL Monroe 10.39 14.87 -.688
135 24.35 +0.06 Sam Houston 13.11 11.15 -.793
136 12.36 -0.29 Massachusetts 5.50 6.99 -.927Schedule Strength
There are two different measures of schedule strength in this table. The first two columns measure the difficulty a team’s past and future schedules would pose for a team that would be 1.5 standard deviations above the FBS mean. The columns are the team’s expected losing percentage against that schedule, meaning that higher numbers indicate a stronger schedule. This should be somewhat similar to the schedule strength from ESPN’s FPI ratings.
The last two columns are also the past and future schedules, but they’re just the average of the opponents’ predictive ratings with an adjustment for the site of the game. Schedule strength is a factor in deciding which teams belong in the college football playoff, and these two columns aren’t always representative of the schedule strength for a team near the top of the ratings. These ratings should be closer to the schedule strength in Jeff Sagarin’s ratings, which are the rating a team would need to be expected to win exactly 50% of games against that team’s schedule.
There are a few teams besides Army and Navy that have future schedule strength ratings already due to some bowl game matchups already being announced.
Past and Future Schedule Strength
Home advantage: 1.79 points
Mean score: 26.83 points
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
1 Indiana .240 (17) --- 58.70 (17) ---
2 Ohio State .231 (21) --- 58.10 (25) ---
3 Oregon .261 (8) --- 61.19 (5) ---
4 Texas Tech .157 (50) --- 50.45 (65) ---
5 Notre Dame .167 (45) --- 57.77 (30) ---
6 Utah .145 (55) --- 55.59 (41) ---
7 Miami .172 (43) --- 55.59 (40) ---
8 USC .247 (13) --- 60.48 (8) ---
9 Alabama .253 (12) --- 59.39 (13) ---
10 Georgia .199 (34) --- 58.25 (24) ---
11 Washington .211 (28) --- 58.59 (19) ---
12 Vanderbilt .175 (42) --- 55.37 (45) ---
13 Iowa .267 (7) --- 57.04 (33) ---
14 BYU .241 (16) --- 58.64 (18) ---
15 Texas A&M .199 (35) --- 57.58 (32) ---
16 Oklahoma .217 (25) --- 59.34 (14) ---
17 Ole Miss .151 (54) --- 54.64 (48) ---
18 Penn State .282 (5) --- 60.41 (10) ---
19 Michigan .231 (22) --- 61.02 (6) ---
20 South Florida .109 (65) .067 (2) 48.36 (77) 55.58 (2)
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
21 Texas .258 (10) --- 58.55 (20) ---
22 Missouri .199 (33) --- 54.26 (51) ---
23 Tennessee .186 (40) --- 55.06 (47) ---
24 Arizona .106 (68) --- 53.06 (56) ---
25 Florida State .152 (52) --- 53.78 (52) ---
26 Illinois .259 (9) --- 59.51 (12) ---
27 LSU .236 (18) --- 60.51 (7) ---
28 North Texas .041 (107) --- 44.99 (91) ---
29 Auburn .234 (19) --- 57.74 (31) ---
30 Pittsburgh .159 (48) --- 53.43 (53) ---
31 Iowa State .135 (58) --- 55.56 (43) ---
32 Louisville .124 (61) --- 53.14 (55) ---
33 James Madison .026 (121) --- 41.01 (111) ---
34 Florida .287 (4) --- 63.00 (4) ---
35 SMU .094 (72) --- 50.30 (66) ---
36 Virginia .068 (85) --- 50.00 (69) ---
37 TCU .115 (63) --- 55.49 (44) ---
38 Nebraska .165 (46) --- 54.28 (50) ---
39 Kansas State .187 (39) --- 58.07 (26) ---
40 South Carolina .243 (15) --- 59.10 (15) ---
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
41 Georgia Tech .092 (74) --- 51.37 (61) ---
42 Arizona State .189 (38) --- 57.94 (27) ---
43 Cincinnati .160 (47) --- 52.42 (59) ---
44 Clemson .093 (73) --- 51.34 (62) ---
45 Houston .111 (64) --- 51.96 (60) ---
46 East Carolina .063 (88) --- 45.12 (89) ---
47 Toledo .020 (129) --- 38.13 (131) ---
48 NC State .194 (36) --- 56.80 (35) ---
49 Northwestern .232 (20) --- 56.63 (37) ---
50 Arkansas .256 (11) --- 58.90 (16) ---
51 Mississippi State .209 (30) --- 56.21 (38) ---
52 Wisconsin .385 (1) --- 66.39 (2) ---
53 Duke .077 (80) --- 52.65 (58) ---
54 Kentucky .227 (23) --- 60.28 (11) ---
55 Boise State .107 (67) --- 49.17 (72) ---
56 Tulane .081 (77) --- 50.18 (68) ---
57 Kansas .210 (29) --- 55.63 (39) ---
58 Memphis .046 (104) --- 44.00 (94) ---
59 Old Dominion .097 (71) .315 (1) 41.91 (106) 68.33 (1)
60 San Diego State .022 (128) --- 42.84 (101) ---
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
61 Wake Forest .078 (79) --- 49.94 (70) ---
62 Michigan State .245 (14) --- 60.46 (9) ---
63 Rutgers .278 (6) --- 58.48 (22) ---
64 Washington State .139 (57) --- 53.38 (54) ---
65 Minnesota .218 (24) --- 54.45 (49) ---
66 Baylor .156 (51) --- 55.20 (46) ---
67 UTSA .107 (66) --- 48.90 (75) ---
68 New Mexico .059 (97) --- 47.23 (81) ---
69 Maryland .191 (37) --- 55.58 (42) ---
70 UNLV .026 (124) --- 45.23 (87) ---
71 UCLA .341 (3) --- 67.11 (1) ---
72 UCF .151 (53) --- 50.66 (63) ---
73 Purdue .355 (2) --- 64.47 (3) ---
74 Utah State .102 (70) --- 47.49 (80) ---
75 Navy .130 (60) .024 (4) 45.68 (86) 49.65 (4)
76 Army .062 (91) .030 (3) 49.06 (73) 50.74 (3)
77 UConn .009 (135) --- 37.92 (133) ---
78 Virginia Tech .168 (44) --- 57.79 (29) ---
79 Colorado .177 (41) --- 58.39 (23) ---
80 West Virginia .208 (31) --- 56.95 (34) ---
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
81 Stanford .216 (26) --- 58.54 (21) ---
82 Western Michigan .051 (100) --- 42.90 (99) ---
83 Hawai’i .040 (109) .010 (6) 42.63 (103) 45.18 (6)
84 Louisiana Tech .031 (117) --- 41.08 (110) ---
85 California .061 (94) .023 (5) 48.84 (76) 49.46 (5)
86 Fresno State .026 (123) --- 40.87 (112) ---
87 Texas State .030 (118) --- 40.68 (115) ---
88 Western Kentucky .035 (114) --- 39.38 (124) ---
89 Ohio .083 (75) --- 40.35 (117) ---
90 Miami (OH) .027 (120) --- 42.10 (105) ---
91 Kennesaw State .080 (78) --- 41.79 (107) ---
92 Boston College .132 (59) --- 52.68 (57) ---
93 Temple .083 (76) --- 45.91 (85) ---
94 Air Force .025 (125) --- 44.36 (93) ---
95 North Carolina .057 (98) --- 48.96 (74) ---
96 Syracuse .201 (32) --- 56.72 (36) ---
97 Marshall .061 (93) --- 42.11 (104) ---
98 Troy .040 (110) --- 41.66 (108) ---
99 Wyoming .064 (87) --- 45.07 (90) ---
100 Southern Miss .010 (133) --- 38.09 (132) ---
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
101 Florida International .043 (105) --- 39.17 (127) ---
102 Missouri State .060 (95) .001 (8) 42.95 (98) 37.11 (8)
103 Jacksonville State .007 (136) --- 37.31 (134) ---
104 Liberty .022 (127) --- 40.75 (114) ---
105 Central Michigan .063 (89) --- 38.69 (130) ---
106 Tulsa .029 (119) --- 44.81 (92) ---
107 Oregon State .158 (49) --- 50.20 (67) ---
108 Oklahoma State .213 (27) --- 57.80 (28) ---
109 Florida Atlantic .060 (96) --- 45.20 (88) ---
110 Nevada .061 (92) --- 48.11 (78) ---
111 Colorado State .076 (82) --- 49.70 (71) ---
112 Louisiana .047 (103) --- 40.30 (118) ---
113 Arkansas State .024 (126) .003 (7) 40.08 (120) 40.43 (7)
114 Georgia Southern .070 (84) --- 42.85 (100) ---
115 Bowling Green .038 (111) --- 39.20 (125) ---
116 San José State .048 (102) --- 46.98 (82) ---
117 Delaware .013 (132) --- 39.18 (126) ---
118 UAB .077 (81) --- 47.84 (79) ---
119 South Alabama .050 (101) --- 39.95 (121) ---
120 App State .034 (115) --- 39.79 (123) ---
Rank Team SOS Future OppRtg Future
121 Buffalo .010 (134) --- 34.33 (136) ---
122 Rice .067 (86) --- 46.40 (83) ---
123 New Mexico State .037 (112) --- 39.93 (122) ---
124 Northern Illinois .032 (116) --- 40.61 (116) ---
125 Eastern Michigan .014 (130) --- 39.09 (129) ---
126 UTEP .037 (113) --- 39.16 (128) ---
127 Akron .026 (122) --- 36.60 (135) ---
128 Coastal Carolina .054 (99) --- 43.23 (97) ---
129 Middle Tennessee .014 (131) --- 40.20 (119) ---
130 Kent State .141 (56) --- 42.75 (102) ---
131 Ball State .042 (106) --- 43.29 (96) ---
132 Charlotte .115 (62) --- 50.63 (64) ---
133 Georgia State .106 (69) --- 46.34 (84) ---
134 UL Monroe .062 (90) --- 40.82 (113) ---
135 Sam Houston .040 (108) --- 43.94 (95) ---
136 Massachusetts .073 (83) --- 41.36 (109) --- Conference Ratings
To rate the overall quality of conferences, I calculate the expected outcome if each team in a conference were to play every FBS team at a neutral site. The Win% column is the average probability of winning for all of the possible games and for all the teams in the conference. It’s similar to the average rating of all the teams in the conference, but it should be less skewed by outliers.
However, the idea of the “best” conference is subjective, and another way to judge the quality of a conference is to consider how many of its teams are among the best in the FBS. What if instead of playing every team in the FBS, each conference opponent just plays a hypothetical opponent with a rating that’s 1.5 standard deviations above the FBS mean? In this case, the quality of a conference is determined by how its teams would be expected to perform against a hypothetical opponent ranked somewhere around #10 to #15 in the FBS. This is what I’ve done with the HighWin% column. It’s analogous to how I calculate strength of record, and each conference’s rating is impacted more when the conference has more highly rated teams.
Conference Ratings
Rank Win% Conference HighWin% Rating Offense Defense OffDef
1 .755 SEC .283 (3) 66.35 32.86 33.48 -0.62 (7)
2 .717 Big Ten .308 (2) 65.80 31.94 33.84 -1.90 (9)
3 .688 FBS Independents .379 (1) 65.64 35.59 30.00 5.60 (1)
4 .634 Big 12 .192 (4) 59.95 29.96 29.92 0.04 (5)
5 .575 ACC .119 (5) 56.22 28.01 28.15 -0.15 (6)
6 .436 American Athletic .064 (6) 48.43 25.37 23.02 2.35 (2)
7 .402 Pac-12 .030 (7) 46.84 19.56 27.22 -7.67 (11)
8 .396 Mountain West .025 (8) 46.55 22.46 24.08 -1.62 (8)
9 .280 Sun Belt .019 (9) 39.71 20.73 18.93 1.80 (3)
10 .249 Conference USA .004 (11) 38.11 19.20 18.88 0.32 (4)
11 .244 Mid-American .011 (10) 36.73 16.69 20.04 -3.36 (10)Playoff Ratings
Here are the four components of the playoff ratings:
The cumulative distribution function of the team’s strength of record for a hypothetical team 1.5 standard deviations above the FBS average. (SOR; 55%)
The cumulative distribution function of the team’s predictive rating (Fwd; 30%)
The team’s winning percentage (Win%; 10%)
The cumulative distribution function of the team’s strength of schedule for a hypothetical team 1.5 standard deviations above the FBS average. (SOS; 5%)
Unlike my predictive ratings, these are based heavily on strength of record, meaning that they give more weight to a team’s past accomplishments than what they’re expected to do in the future.
Playoff Ratings
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
1 .9891 +.0099 Indiana .991 .907 1.000 .995
2 .9755 +.0001 Oregon .983 .940 .917 .986
3 .9723 -.0013 Ohio State .979 .888 .923 .990
4 +4 .9460 +.0135 Texas Tech .958 .646 .923 .981
5 +2 .9447 +.0114 Georgia .971 .803 .923 .926
6 -1 .9384 -.0014 Texas A&M .970 .802 .917 .911
7 -3 .9322 -.0086 BYU .961 .908 .846 .913
8 +1 .9183 -.0028 Oklahoma .946 .854 .833 .907
9 +2 .9182 +.0023 Ole Miss .953 .618 .917 .904
10 .9172 +.0006 Notre Dame .920 .686 .833 .979
11 -5 .9151 -.0207 Alabama .933 .930 .769 .929
12 .9103 +.0007 Miami .923 .707 .833 .947
13 +1 .9050 +.0011 USC .918 .919 .750 .931
14 -1 .9037 -.0036 Vanderbilt .924 .717 .833 .920
15 .8994 +.0017 Utah .905 .592 .833 .962
16 .8879 +.0021 Texas .924 .936 .750 .859
17 .8827 +.0008 Michigan .907 .888 .750 .881
18 .8673 +.0019 Iowa .871 .948 .667 .914
19 +1 .8348 +.0018 Washington .816 .839 .667 .924
20 +1 .8345 +.0024 Illinois .864 .939 .667 .818
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
21 +2 .8092 +.0005 James Madison .884 .132 .923 .747
22 .8025 -.0067 Missouri .803 .804 .667 .846
23 +1 .7923 -.0027 South Florida .795 .429 .750 .862
24 +1 .7911 -.0016 Tennessee .788 .758 .667 .845
25 -6 .7869 -.0487 North Texas .827 .171 .846 .797
26 +1 .7811 -.0006 Arizona .791 .415 .750 .834
27 +6 .7617 +.0309 Tulane .865 .309 .846 .620
28 .7529 -.0037 LSU .746 .898 .583 .799
29 .7498 +.0028 Penn State .695 .964 .500 .898
30 .7480 +.0019 Pittsburgh .755 .655 .667 .779
31 .7450 +.0075 Arizona State .791 .769 .667 .683
32 -6 .7338 -.0499 Virginia .769 .259 .769 .737
33 +1 .7332 +.0051 Houston .798 .440 .750 .658
34 -2 .7309 -.0044 Navy .883 .524 .818 .458
35 +1 .7251 +.0053 Georgia Tech .775 .355 .750 .688
36 -1 .7246 +.0034 Iowa State .723 .549 .667 .777
37 .7082 -.0011 Louisville .708 .500 .667 .758
38 .7000 -.0012 Old Dominion .781 .378 .750 .588
39 .6897 +.0009 TCU .695 .459 .667 .727
40 +5 .6730 +.0202 Boise State .719 .421 .692 .624
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
41 +1 .6721 +.0022 SMU .664 .366 .667 .740
42 -1 .6713 +.0013 NC State .688 .788 .583 .650
43 .6663 +.0029 Minnesota .721 .857 .583 .561
44 .6633 +.0020 Nebraska .645 .680 .583 .721
45 +1 .6469 -.0014 Cincinnati .638 .660 .583 .683
46 +1 .6442 +.0039 New Mexico .732 .227 .750 .517
47 +2 .6298 +.0076 Northwestern .620 .891 .500 .647
48 .6282 +.0016 San Diego State .680 .120 .750 .578
49 -9 .6263 -.0480 UNLV .713 .130 .769 .502
50 +1 .6162 +.0080 Kennesaw State .783 .305 .769 .311
51 -1 .6130 +.0008 East Carolina .616 .242 .667 .651
52 .6051 -.0009 Wake Forest .639 .296 .667 .575
53 .6032 -.0023 Wisconsin .598 .999 .333 .637
54 +1 .6014 +.0071 Kansas State .548 .763 .500 .707
55 -1 .5932 -.0059 Auburn .489 .895 .417 .793
56 .5818 +.0042 Memphis .590 .187 .667 .605
57 .5725 +.0025 Clemson .530 .360 .583 .681
58 +7 .5721 +.0468 Duke .557 .296 .615 .631
59 +1 .5690 +.0032 Rutgers .560 .960 .417 .572
60 -2 .5689 +.0006 Toledo .547 .117 .667 .651
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
61 -2 .5661 -.0001 UConn .660 .093 .750 .411
62 -1 .5468 +.0035 Florida .440 .969 .333 .743
63 +1 .5467 +.0210 Western Michigan .637 .200 .692 .391
64 -2 .5393 -.0000 Ohio .648 .320 .667 .335
65 -2 .5362 +.0022 Kentucky .477 .879 .417 .627
66 +1 .5234 +.0033 Mississippi State .448 .833 .417 .646
67 -1 .5159 -.0052 Florida State .358 .624 .417 .821
68 +1 .5159 +.0056 Kansas .449 .835 .417 .618
69 +1 .5065 +.0016 Hawai’i .579 .167 .667 .376
70 -2 .5054 -.0070 Washington State .470 .567 .500 .562
71 +1 .4921 +.0010 Western Kentucky .572 .154 .667 .344
72 -1 .4894 -.0059 South Carolina .370 .912 .333 .691
73 .4869 +.0027 Fresno State .557 .131 .667 .357
74 .4598 -.0017 UTSA .419 .423 .500 .528
75 .4562 +.0034 Michigan State .373 .917 .333 .573
76 +1 .4403 +.0013 California .478 .234 .583 .358
77 +3 .4361 +.0051 UCLA .392 .993 .250 .486
78 .4346 -.0026 Utah State .410 .400 .500 .464
79 .4330 +.0011 Baylor .364 .643 .417 .529
80 +1 .4251 -.0008 Army .419 .238 .545 .428
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
81 +2 .4145 +.0024 UCF .357 .621 .417 .486
82 +2 .4125 +.0012 Louisiana Tech .430 .144 .583 .369
83 -7 .4103 -.0312 Troy .496 .167 .615 .226
84 +2 .3954 +.0025 Missouri State .477 .233 .583 .210
85 +2 .3937 +.0010 Central Michigan .481 .240 .583 .196
86 +2 .3859 +.0000 Maryland .292 .776 .333 .510
87 +2 .3778 -.0003 Florida International .449 .176 .583 .213
88 +2 .3737 -.0022 Stanford .328 .851 .333 .391
89 -7 .3706 -.0515 Jacksonville State .442 .089 .615 .205
90 +1 .3690 +.0039 Purdue .289 .996 .167 .478
91 +1 .3674 +.0028 West Virginia .317 .830 .333 .395
92 +1 .3495 +.0001 Arkansas .168 .933 .167 .647
93 -8 .3488 -.0490 Miami (OH) .353 .133 .538 .315
94 .3447 +.0012 Southern Miss .396 .095 .583 .213
95 .3267 +.0028 Texas State .301 .140 .500 .348
96 .3061 +.0011 Georgia Southern .360 .267 .500 .150
97 .2878 -.0008 Temple .259 .319 .417 .292
98 .2836 -.0006 Louisiana .325 .189 .500 .151
99 +2 .2764 +.0031 Kent State .341 .574 .417 .062
100 -1 .2761 -.0018 Colorado .172 .724 .250 .401
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
101 -1 .2714 -.0029 Virginia Tech .163 .692 .250 .407
102 .2679 -.0023 Coastal Carolina .335 .209 .500 .078
103 .2619 +.0030 Arkansas State .292 .125 .500 .151
104 .2574 +.0041 Marshall .230 .234 .417 .258
105 .2523 +.0016 Syracuse .199 .809 .250 .259
106 .2475 +.0011 Delaware .277 .102 .500 .133
107 .2183 -.0034 Rice .238 .255 .417 .111
108 .2033 +.0006 North Carolina .137 .221 .333 .279
109 .1942 +.0009 App State .198 .151 .417 .120
110 .1890 +.0002 Wyoming .143 .245 .333 .215
111 .1848 +.0011 Air Force .110 .127 .333 .282
112 .1778 +.0003 Akron .190 .131 .417 .084
113 +2 .1763 +.0007 Buffalo .172 .095 .417 .118
114 .1744 -.0012 Boston College .071 .534 .167 .307
115 -2 .1732 -.0029 UAB .156 .296 .333 .131
116 .1717 +.0015 Florida Atlantic .140 .232 .333 .167
117 .1598 +.0013 Tulsa .113 .138 .333 .191
118 .1589 +.0012 Liberty .108 .121 .333 .201
119 .1538 -.0017 South Alabama .131 .199 .333 .128
120 .1518 +.0010 Oregon State .086 .650 .167 .184
Rank Move Rating Change Team SOR SOS Win% Fwd
121 .1478 +.0002 Bowling Green .120 .161 .333 .134
122 .1409 +.0033 Oklahoma State .070 .845 .083 .174
123 .1373 -.0001 New Mexico State .120 .160 .333 .100
124 +1 .1280 +.0006 Nevada .078 .235 .250 .161
125 -1 .1278 -.0010 Ball State .124 .174 .333 .059
126 .1219 -.0003 Eastern Michigan .102 .104 .333 .091
127 .1135 +.0014 San José State .071 .193 .250 .133
128 .1018 +.0029 Colorado State .045 .290 .167 .154
129 .0955 -.0001 Northern Illinois .062 .145 .250 .097
130 .0901 -.0016 UL Monroe .079 .239 .250 .033
131 .0822 -.0002 Middle Tennessee .053 .103 .250 .076
132 .0679 +.0000 UTEP .031 .158 .167 .087
133 .0636 +.0010 Charlotte .030 .459 .083 .053
134 .0599 -.0003 Georgia State .027 .415 .083 .052
135 .0514 +.0002 Sam Houston .032 .167 .167 .029
136 .0195 -.0004 Massachusetts .008 .278 .000 .003Predicting the Playoff
With the exception of the top five ranked conference champions, conference affiliation does not entitle a team to a spot in the college football playoff. When I mentioned the third and fourth ranked conferences in my introduction, I was, of course, referring to the Big 12 and ACC. Between them, only Texas Tech is guaranteed to be in the playoff. No, teams in these conferences shouldn’t be guaranteed playoff bids just because they play in the Big 12 and ACC. However, it is a problem if deserving teams from these conferences are being passed over in favor of less deserving teams from other conferences. It’s also a problem if there appear to be inconsistencies in how the selection committee evaluates teams.
It’s virtually certain that the five conference champions in the playoff will be Indiana, Georgia, Texas Tech, Tulane, and James Madison. Ohio State, Oregon, Texas A&M, and Ole Miss each have one loss and should be viewed as locks to reach the playoff. That leaves three remaining at-large spots, and many teams that have arguments that they deserve one of these three spots. Here’s my list of those teams: Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Miami, BYU, Alabama, Texas, Utah, Vanderbilt, USC, and Michigan. I’ll also add Duke because they’re the ACC champion. Here’s a table with various rankings of those teams and the teams I consider locks:
Playoff SOS SOR Fwd FPI FPI_SOS FPI_SOR W L
Indiana 1 17 1 1 1 27 1 13 0
Georgia 5 34 4 10 6 15 2 12 1
Texas Tech 4 50 7 4 5 53 7 12 1
Ohio State 3 21 3 2 2 30 5 12 1
Oregon 2 8 2 3 4 17 4 11 1
Texas A&M 6 35 5 15 10 16 3 11 1
Ole Miss 9 54 8 17 12 41 6 11 1
Tulane 27 77 21 56 54 77 19 11 2
James Madison 21 121 18 33 28 123 18 12 1
Playoff SOS SOR Fwd FPI FPI_SOS FPI_SOR W L
Duke 58 80 62 53 46 74 54 8 5
Oklahoma 8 25 9 16 15 12 8 10 2
Notre Dame 10 45 14 5 3 44 13 10 2
Miami 12 43 13 7 7 45 14 10 2
BYU 7 16 6 14 16 22 9 11 2
Alabama 11 12 10 9 8 6 10 10 3
Texas 16 10 12 21 13 8 12 9 3
Utah 15 55 17 6 9 58 15 10 2
Vanderbilt 14 42 11 12 14 24 11 10 2
USC 13 13 15 8 11 29 17 9 3
Michigan 17 22 16 19 19 28 16 9 3Playoff, SOS, SOR, and Fwd are my playoff, schedule strength, strength of record, and predictive ranks for each team, respectively. FPI, FPI_SOS, and FPI_SOR are the ESPN FPI rank, FPI schedule strength, and FPI strength of record, respectively. Finally, W and L are wins and losses, respectively.
Based on strength of record, which is a backward looking rating that measures what a team has accomplished based on its schedule and record, the top three teams that aren’t locks are BYU, Oklahoma, and Alabama. After that are Vanderbilt and Texas. Miami and Notre Dame are next, though the order is different depending on whether it’s my strength of record ranking or the FPI strength of record.
FPI and my predictive rating are forward looking ratings, meaning that they estimate a team’s quality and future performance, not what a team has accomplished to date. The top teams using this approach would be Notre Dame, Miami, and then either Utah or Alabama. After that would be USC and Vanderbilt.
If Oklahoma can reasonably be considered a lock based on the selection committee’s ranking, then why not BYU? Their overall profiles are actually fairly comparable based on these rankings, and the case for both teams deserving to be in the playoff is based primarily on strength of record. This is a backward looking rating, meaning that it’s intended to provide guidance about which teams have accomplished the most based on their schedule and record. However,I don’t expect BYU to get serious consideration from the committee, but BYU has a strong case that they belong.
Notre Dame and Miami also have very similar profiles. If Notre Dame gets in, why not Miami? Neither has a particularly compelling argument based on strength of record, but they’re probably the bubble teams that would have the best chances of making a run in the playoff.
Alabama’s case is interesting. They’re right on the bubble both in forward and backward looking ratings, either the last team that would make the cut or the first team out. If the goal is to put the best teams in the playoff, as in the teams that have the best chances to win playoff games, then the last three teams should probably be Notre Dame, Miami, and Alabama. If the goal is to include the teams that are most deserving based on their record, the final three teams should probably be BYU, Oklahoma, and Alabama.
The remaining teams like Utah, Texas, Vanderbilt, USC, and Michigan have fairly strong profiles but don’t quite measure up. As for Duke, they have a similar profile to Tulane in terms of schedule strength and their forward looking rating. But they have a far weaker strength of record than any of the other teams in the table.
There is a real possibility that the final three teams will be Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and Alabama. Those are the final three teams in ESPN’s bowl projections. That would leave the Big 12 and ACC with just one playoff team between the two conferences, but it also makes no sense. In that scenario, the committee isn’t choosing the best remaining teams, but they’re also not choosing the teams that have accomplished the most over their schedule. Although I believe strength of record should be prioritized over picking the teams that have the best forward looking ratings, there also needs to be clarity about the selection committee’s expectations. It also doesn’t make sense why the committee seems to have consistently underrated BYU despite a very good strength of record.
I expect the 12 playoff teams will actually be Indiana, Georgia, Ohio State, Texas Tech, Oregon, Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Miami, Tulane, and James Madison. And I expect the first teams out will be Alabama, Texas, Vanderbilt, BYU, and Utah. I’m making this prediction with the expectation that the committee will be inclined to move Alabama down due to losing to Georgia in a blowout even if the metrics don’t really make a strong case for doing so. I expect the committee will also drop BYU’s ranking, but they’ll probably remain ahead of Utah because both have two losses, and BYU won the head to head matchup during the season.
Week 16 Prediction
There’s one regular season game left, the annual Army-Navy game, so I’ll include a prediction for it. And here’s the standard text about how to interpret predictions, or in this case, the one prediction on my list.
Upcoming games are ranked based on the projected quality. This factors in the overall strength of the two teams and the potential for a competitive game. Game quality ratings are not directly comparable between college football and the NFL. NFL games are typically decided by smaller margins than college games, the teams are more balanced in their quality, and there’s just not as much scoring in the NFL. Of course, there’s only one game to rank here, so it’s automatically #1. Thresholds for close games and blowouts are also different between college and the NFL for the same reasons.
Beside each team, there are two numbers in parentheses. One is the predicted margin of victory (positive) or defeat (negative), the other is the probability of winning. These margins are sometimes larger than what’s indicated by the predicted score. That’s because there’s nothing in the math that prevents a prediction of negative points with a sufficiently lopsided matchup. This is, of course, impossible, so the score is set to zero in those instances. There’s no cap on how many points a team can be projected to score, though.
#1: Army (-1.09, 46.52%) vs. Navy (1.09, 53.48%)
Estimated score: 20.60 - 21.78, Total: 42.39
Quality: 94.03%, Team quality: 91.27%, Competitiveness: 99.80%
Blowout probability (margin >= 29.0 pts): 2.10%
Close game probability (margin <= 7.0 pts): 42.26%
High scoring probability (total >= 68.0 pts): 26.24%
Low scoring probability (total <= 39.0 pts): 46.65%The playoff bracket will be released in just a few hours. However, I’ll wait on final rankings and bowl projections at least until all of the matchups are announced before posting another article. For now, I actually plan to get back to posting more about baseball. There’s a baseball article that’s queued up right now and will be posted in just a few hours. The article is an analysis of the economic inequality in the sport and how much of a problem it really is for MLB. And for one more time in 2025, we’re just minutes away from lights out and away we go. The Abu Dhabi Grand Prix in this morning, which is the end of the Formula 1 season and also the end of an era with completely new power unit regulations taking effect in 2026. Thanks for reading!
The computer ratings in this article are based on data from collegefootballdata.com.