CFP Discussion

[orientalnc]

Just posted this in the Stat/Rankings thread but thought it may be useful in this discussion.
After week 7, Colley's (https://www.colleyrankings.com/currank.html) is starting to converge on a fairly decent alignment with the AP for the top 8 teams. This poll is not predictive but it tends to have very good agreement with the AP by the end of the season.

There is some notable divergence for a few teams that traditionally get the benefit of the doubt in the AP and Coaches.

Team	Colley Rank (W-L only)	AP Rank
Oklahoma	1	6
Washington	2	5
Michigan	3	2
Florida St	4	4
Ohio St	5	3
North Carolina	6	10
Penn St	7	7
Texas	8	8
James Madison	9	NR
Iowa	10	24
Georgie	14	1
GT	66	NR

As much as I hate uga, they are not #14.

 

[roadkill]

As much as I hate uga, they are not #14.

Where would you place them at this point in the season?

 

[orientalnc]

Where would you place them at this point in the season?

With Brock Bowers, #1. Without him, somewhere between #4 and #8. He makes the whole offense better, and it's still not great. But it doesn't have to be.

 

[FredJacket]

With Brock Bowers, #1. Without him, somewhere between #4 and #8. He makes the whole offense better, and it's still not great. But it doesn't have to be.

This is the "great debate" every season. And why any poll (of voters) with arbitrary criteria needs to be scrutinized. When attempting to evaluate teams relative to each other when there is no head to head & limited common opponents... how do you "weigh" resume (results against a team's schedule) & roster talent (how good is a team relative to others).

UGA has played a weak weak schedule so far. It gets a little more difficult going forward... but still won't match the top teams.

I'd place UGA (so far) in a 2nd tier... based on resume & how they've managed their schedule. I think they are 1-5-1 ATS.

Top tier (based on 2023 results):
Oklahoma
Ohio St
FSU
Washington
Michigan
Texas

 

[orientalnc]

This is the "great debate" every season. And why any poll (of voters) with arbitrary criteria needs to be scrutinized. When attempting to evaluate teams relative to each other when there is no head to head & limited common opponents... how do you "weigh" resume (results against a team's schedule) & roster talent (how good is a team relative to others).

UGA has played a weak weak schedule so far. It gets a little more difficult going forward... but still won't match the top teams.

I'd place UGA (so far) in a 2nd tier... based on resume & how they've managed their schedule. I think they are 1-5-1 ATS.

Top tier (based on 2023 results):
Oklahoma
Ohio St
FSU
Washington
Michigan
Texas

Those are all good teams. We'll see soon enough who is best.

 

[orientalnc]

And why any poll (of voters) with arbitrary criteria needs to be scrutinized.

Isn't it the case that every poll of voters has arbitrary criteria? Even the opinions you and I espouse here are based on arbitrary criteria. Mine are secret, so they are not subject to criticism.

 

[g0lftime]

The AP top 25 isn’t out yet, and the CFP rankings don’t come out until October 31.

The AP does a nice job of writing up the CFP and Heisman race here.

At Oregon, Dan Lanning was bold and lost. He often made the calls the analytics point to. Coaches get more criticism for being bold than being meek (which may be why the NFL is so boring to some of us, despite the best of the best athletes). Thank you Dan Lanning for coaching football that’s fun to watch.

Drake Maye at UNC is a long shot in the Heisman race, and Van Dyke is out of it. The Heisman is won in big moments, and Van Dyke’s Heisman moments didn’t materialize.

I feel safe saying Miami and Kentucky are going to fall out of the top 25, and Missouri is going to make their way in, and Notre Dame will be moving up.

The ACC is down to two undefeated teams, and we get a shot at one of them.

UGA finishes the season with Florida (not good), then (probably ranked) Missouri, #13 Ole Miss, #19 Tennessee, then GT. The odds should be in their favor to finish undefeated, but there’s a CHANCE.

Tennessee QB was unimpressive in their win Saturday. He isn't executing their passing offense very well so they are running it. I wouldn't be surprised to see a QB from the portal next year. Ole Miss might have a good shot at beating them. Florida is not likely to beat them. Missouri might give them a game but I don't expect them to win.

 

[GTJackets]

Tennessee QB was unimpressive in their win Saturday. He isn't executing their passing offense very well so they are running it. I wouldn't be surprised to see a QB from the portal next year. Ole Miss might have a good shot at beating them. Florida is not likely to beat them. Missouri might give them a game but I don't expect them to win.

From knowing a few UTenn fans over here in the Charleston area, all you hear about is how far he can throw the ball and how string his arm is. And that is absolutely true. I guess they're finding out that's not the primary factor. But at least Heupel seems willing to modify to what he does best.

 

[roadkill]

Isn't it the case that every poll of voters has arbitrary criteria? Even the opinions you and I espouse here are based on arbitrary criteria. Mine are secret, so they are not subject to criticism.

Colley's doesn't use any arbitrary criteria - that's why I thought its current ranking was interesting.

Georgia hasn't beaten anyone of note, and aside from unranked Kentucky, they haven't really dominated the teams they've beaten. Several of their wins required come-from-behind second-half rallies. Their current #1 ranking is strictly based on momentum from the past 2 seasons. Personally, I think they may be top ten, but certainly haven't been playing like a #1 team.

 

[Shaun Boatwright]

.

 

[GTJackets]

Didn't warrant a new thread and it seemed to be on-topic enough for some of the conversation in this thread.

This weekend I found myself amongst a group of UTenn and USC(e) fans while on a weekend backpacking trip. The topic of a 24-team "super-conference" with relegation came up. They were rattling off teams that would "of course' make the super-conference when one of the UTenn fans threw out an unexpected (especially from this group) "Duke."

The others looked at him in shock. He replied "they've looked good this year." The immediate reply from a USC(e) fan was "yeah...against the ACC." I asked "do we need to review what the overall record is between the ACC and the SEC for this season?" Some chuckled while a realistic UTenn fan chimed in "he's not wrong. They have looked better against us this year." (Currently 4-2 with 4 more games left: Clem-USCe, Fla-FSU, uga-GT and UK-Lou)

Then came a USC(e) fan reply: "You can't count anything that happens in the first three weeks." So, now we're just ignoring the first third of the season. Which is of course when most inter-conference matchups occur.

 

[roadkill]

Didn't warrant a new thread and it seemed to be on-topic enough for some of the conversation in this thread.

This weekend I found myself amongst a group of UTenn and USC(e) fans while on a weekend backpacking trip. The topic of a 24-team "super-conference" with relegation came up. They were rattling off teams that would "of course' make the super-conference when one of the UTenn fans threw out an unexpected (especially from this group) "Duke."

The others looked at him in shock. He replied "they've looked good this year." The immediate reply from a USC(e) fan was "yeah...against the ACC." I asked "do we need to review what the overall record is between the ACC and the SEC for this season?" Some chuckled while a realistic UTenn fan chimed in "he's not wrong. They have looked better against us this year." (Currently 4-2 with 4 more games left: Clem-USCe, Fla-FSU, uga-GT and UK-Lou)

Then came a USC(e) fan reply: "You can't count anything that happens in the first three weeks." So, now we're just ignoring the first third of the season. Which is of course when most inter-conference matchups occur.

Extra points to you for throwing this into the discussion.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Seriously, ask yourself who could beat uga. There are two answers.

1. Nobody on the their current schedule.

2. FSU, UNC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, Oregon, Washington.

And, on the right day, Alabama, Louisville, Michigan, and (before Tech broke them) Miami.

Yep, that’s what I think of the current uga team. Problem is, they have a glide path to another national championship. Not having been tested, they only have to play over their heads and out of their minds once or twice, given how they would be seeded based on their record and reputation.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

In the past, when they’ve won early season matchups against the ACC, it meant everything while they said late games, especially bowl games, didn’t mean anything.

I wish the SEC could tell us ahead of time when a matchup is going to mean something and when it isn’t. It changes every year. If we said something similar the ridicule, scorn and laughter would register on the Richter scale.

 

[yeti92]

In the past, when they’ve won early season matchups against the ACC, it meant everything while they said late games, especially bowl games, didn’t mean anything.

I wish the SEC could tell us ahead of time when a matchup is going to mean something and when it isn’t. It changes every year. If we said something similar the ridicule, scorn and laughter would register on the Richter scale.

It just means more (excuses).

 

[FredJacket]

Isn't it the case that every poll of voters has arbitrary criteria? Even the opinions you and I espouse here are based on arbitrary criteria. Mine are secret, so they are not subject to criticism.

Yes. The difference is nobody that matters cares (or reacts) to our opinions. The AP poll gets entirely too much run & weight. I could not care less what 60+ journalists think about who's good at football. It's "interesting" info ... equally as interesting as the "opinions" folks who post here.

Colley's doesn't use any arbitrary criteria - that's why I thought its current ranking was interesting.

Georgia hasn't beaten anyone of note, and aside from unranked Kentucky, they haven't really dominated the teams they've beaten. Several of their wins required come-from-behind second-half rallies. Their current #1 ranking is strictly based on momentum from the past 2 seasons. Personally, I think they may be top ten, but certainly haven't been playing like a #1 team.

Correct. Computer algorithms/calculations can & do ... do a better job figuring out which teams are better than the next. Not perfectly... which is quite alright, but way better than a guy/girl trying to parse which team should be 14th or 23rd.

Even the CFB playoff committee claims to use statistical models to inform their rankings. The AP poll doesn't have any criteria applied to it as far as I know.

Imagine a world where no rankings are referenced or calculated or voted on before 6 weekends of football. How would we know which games are "marquee" ... How would GameDay figure out where to set up their show? People would be lost.

 

[orientalnc]

Yes. The difference is nobody that matters cares (or reacts) to our opinions. The AP poll gets entirely too much run & weight. I could not care less what 60+ journalists think about who's good at football. It's "interesting" info ... equally as interesting as the "opinions" folks who post here.


Correct. Computer algorithms/calculations can & do ... do a better job figuring out which teams are better than the next. Not perfectly... which is quite alright, but way better than a guy/girl trying to parse which team should be 14th or 23rd.

Even the CFB playoff committee claims to use statistical models to inform their rankings. The AP poll doesn't have any criteria applied to it as far as I know.

Imagine a world where no rankings are referenced or calculated or voted on before 6 weekends of football. How would we know which games are "marquee" ... How would GameDay figure out where to set up their show? People would be lost.

Here is where I differ. Even the computer models begin with a bias. Even if they say every team is equal before the season starts. And, the algorithms have bias. You may agree with the bias and some years it may appear to be accurate. But the bias is there.

 

[roadkill]

Here is where I differ. Even the computer models begin with a bias. Even if they say every team is equal before the season starts. And, the algorithms have bias. You may agree with the bias and some years it may appear to be accurate. But the bias is there.

That's not how Colley's ranking works. In his first week's ranking, you can see that all teams start at 0.500, except for a handful that played early games. But if you can explain how his has a bias, I'm listening. Otherwise, I adhere to it being bias-free as stated. Its also why his ranking is pretty useless until well into the season.

 

[orientalnc]

That's not how Colley's ranking works. In his first week's ranking, you can see that all teams start at 0.500, except for a handful that played early games. But if you can explain how his has a bias, I'm listening. Otherwise, I adhere to it being bias-free as stated. Its also why his ranking is pretty useless until well into the season.

OK. A victory over Vanderbilt on opening day is not better than a loss to uga that day. If the model assumes Vandy and uga are equal at the beginning of the season, it has a bias.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

OK. A victory over Vanderbilt on opening day is not better than a loss to uga that day. If the model assumes Vandy and uga are equal at the beginning of the season, it has a bias.

Let me play devil’s advocate.

Wouldn’t the computer model correct for that by the time you are 3 games into the season? Sure, they all START at .500 but you have more data later on what those earlier wins and losses meant. Right? What am I missing?