College Football

2011 College Football Rankings – Week 7

by

We have an interloper in the Alabama-LSU-Oklahoma oligarchy in the C Ratings. Boise State picked up right where they left off in the Mountain West, winning their first conference game big over Colorado State. It’s not the conference they thought they were joining, but for this year at least it’ll provide a formidible challenge when they face TCU. If they survive that game and run the table, who’s going to argue against them for the national championship?

Meanwhile, Kansas State has finally put every undefeated team in the Top 25, and Northern Illinois is once again in positive B Points. This week’s rankings don’t include the Sun Belt teams that played Tuesday, or the Thursday night game.

How the C Ratings are tabulated: First, A Ratings are tabulated by multiplying the total score ratio, which is expressed by (points-opponents’ points)/points, by the winning percentage. Score ratio minimizes the effect of running up the score. Next, B Points for each game are tabulated by (margin of victory)/(opponent’s A rating)+/-1 for wins, and -(margin of loss)/(1-opponent’s A Rating)+/-1 for losses. The “+/-” is + for road games and – for home ones. The total number of B Points is multiplied by the A Rating to get the B Rating. Finally, the C Rating is tabulated by taking one-tenth the difference between the team’s B Rating and the average of his opponents’ B Ratings and taking the result off the B Rating. The three ratings go A, B, C across. Click here to see the complete ratings.

1 Alabama SEC BCS Title
7-0 LW: A Rat: .906 B Rating: 44.930 C Rating: 38.779 AP: 2 BCS: 2
Alabama owned a mediocre Ole Miss team, but other teams are creeping closer, and Tennessee is no Ole Miss.
2 LSU SEC ’06 Boise St.
7-0 LW: A Rat: .846 B Rating: 40.859 C Rating: 36.063 AP: 1 BCS: 1
Great job dispatching Tennessee. Suspending key players may be bad, but Auburn is overrated, and it seemed to work for them before.
3 Boise State MWC BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .821 B Rating: 38.907 C Rating: 33.944 AP: 5 BCS: 5
The Broncos started life in their new conference in a big way, blowing out Colorado State on the road. Mediocre Air Force and horrid UNLV will be their preparation for the TCU game.
4 Oklahoma B12 BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .803 B Rating: 35.762 C Rating: 30.918 AP: 3 BCS: 3
OU slips a spot with a concerning score-ratio game against a pretty bad Kansas team. They might want to find areas of improvement before Texas Tech comes to Norman.
5 Stanford P12 BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .873 B Rating: 29.293 C Rating: 24.267 AP: 7 BCS: 8
Big win over Wazzu makes up for last week’s slip, and they want national championship respect. But the Cougars’ rivals will not go away easily.
6 Wisconsin B10 BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .907 B Rating: 29.274 C Rating: 24.044 AP: 4 BCS: 6
Indiana’s A Rating is so horrid that even blowing them out leaves the Badgers open to Boise’s and Stanford’s hard charges. But now comes a big test against Michigan State.
7 Oklahoma State B12 BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .705 B Rating: 23.093 C Rating: 19.701 AP: 6 BCS: 4
People are getting excited over Little Brother in Stillwater, and Bedlam is going to be must-see. Some close calls suppress their ranking vis-a-vis the BCS, but they’re still a force to be reckoned with.
8 Clemson ACC Prncton/Yale
7-0 LW: A Rat: .713 B Rating: 15.960 C Rating: 12.927 AP: 7 BCS: 8
Good win over Maryland, but North Carolina is not to be underestimated, especially with G-Tech and main division challenger Wake Forest ahead.
9 Oregon P12 ’09 Boise St.
5-1 LW: #12 A Rat: .604 B Rating: 14.429 C Rating: 12.700 AP: 9 BCS: 10
Oregon is making a hard charge after the opening loss to one of the best teams in the country, and suddenly they’re the nation’s best one-loss team. Now they travel to hapless Colorado.
10 Michigan B10 BCS Title
6-1 LW: A Rat: .637 B Rating: 13.651 C Rating: 10.966 AP: 18 BCS: 18
Party time in East Lansing, and the Wolverines pick up the pieces. But they’re still a very good team, and they should bounce back against Purdue.
11 Texas A&M B12 Big 12 Title
4-2 LW: #16 A Rat: .443 B Rating: 12.292 C Rating: 10.322 AP: 17 BCS: 17
Baylor came in 4-1 and in the Top 25 both in polls and C Ratings, and A&M blew them out of the water, sending the Aggies shooting up the ratings. Now Iowa State serves as a warm-up for Missouri.
12 Notre Dame   BCS Bowl
4-2 LW: A Rat: .429 B Rating: 9.677 C Rating: 8.054 — —
A drop for idle hands, and Michigan losing doesn’t help. Will they start getting the respect they deserve after beating one-loss USC?
13 Nebraska B10 Big 10 Title
5-1 LW: #18 A Rat: .526 B Rating: 8.335 C Rating: 6.871 AP: 13 BCS: 13
Idle hands work the other way for Nebraska, as Washington gets poll respect and Ohio State beats a good Illinois team.
14 Virginia Tech ACC Big 12 Title
6-1 LW: #33 A Rat: .574 B Rating: 8.098 C Rating: 6.292 AP: 16 BCS: 12
Heading into last week V-Tech was only two spots ahead of Wake Forest, but you wouldn’t know the way they blew them out of the water. Now they’re the big Tech on campus and control their own Coastal destiny.
15 Houston USA C-USA Title
6-0 LW: #20 A Rat: .729 B Rating: 9.345 C Rating: 6.245 AP: 21 BCS: 19
Houston shoots up the rankings without even playing; losses by other teams help, but so does UTEP blowing out Tulane and East Carolina beating Memphis handily.
16 West Virginia BST Big East Title
5-1 LW: #14 A Rat: .587 B Rating: 7.884 C Rating: 5.996 AP: 11 BCS: 15
West Virginia drops for idle hands, as they prep for a showdown in the Carrier Dome.
17 Penn State B10 Big 10 Title
6-1 LW: #19 A Rat: .594 B Rating: 6.828 C Rating: 5.729 Coaches: 22 BCS: 21
Gotta do better than that against mediocre Purdue, but a win is a win. But they better get better against Northwestern before Illinois – and certainly before Nebraska – come to town.
18 Toledo MAC MAC Title
4-3 LW: #26 A Rat: .343 B Rating: 6.160 C Rating: 5.012 — —
Bowling Green is a respectable win, but this climb into the Top 25 is more about other teams losing. Two of their losses were close and on the road and the third was against Boise State. Aren’t they worthy of consideration?
19 Georgia Tech ACC ACC Title
6-1 LW: A Rat: .576 B Rating: 7.067 C Rating: 4.844 AP: 20 BCS: 22
Tight loss to a half-decent Virginia team, but come on. The biggest drop always comes with the first loss.
20 South Carolina SEC SEC Title
6-1 LW: #23 A Rat: .569 B Rating: 6.532 C Rating: 4.347 AP: 14 BCS: 14
Tight win against a mediocre Mississippi State team, but other teams outright lost. Now they catch Tennessee reeling.
21 Arizona State P12 Pac-12 Title
5-2 LW: A Rat: .444 B Rating: 4.593 C Rating: 3.969 AP: 24 Coaches: 25
And the Devils lose every single spot they gained last week after getting blown out by Oregon. They could leave the Top 25 for idle hands, but perhaps a bad Colorado team can get them back on track.
22 Rutgers BST Big East Title
5-1 LW: #15 A Rat: .555 B Rating: 4.199 C Rating: 3.266 — —
A tight pull-out against a mediocre Navy team, and they might as well not have played at all. Now Louisville will serve as prep for a huge clash with West Virginia.
23 Kansas State B12 2010 TCU
6-0 LW: #34 A Rat: .661 B Rating: 4.634 C Rating: 3.133 AP: 12 BCS: 11
You’ll have to pardon me for not believing in a team that beat FCS Eastern Kentucky by 3 and whose only win by more than 7 came against Kent State, but the Cardiac Cats do keep winning, and several teams losing finally put them in the Top 25.
24 TCU MWC MWC Title
4-2 LW: #25 A Rat: .456 B Rating: 5.126 C Rating: 3.078 — —
Other teams losing + Arkansas also on bye = actually gaining a spot. But they better blow New Mexico out of the water.
25 Arkansas SEC SEC Title
5-1 LW: A Rat: .567 B Rating: 4.536 C Rating: 2.534 AP: 10 BCS: 9
Swap places with TCU because New Mexico lost to a mediocre-to-bad Nevada team. Now they’re back in action against Ole Miss.


31 teams total with positive C Rating (none with negative B Rating)

Off Top 25: #30 Texas (was #22), #34 Illinois (was #17), #51 Baylor (was #21)

Watch List: #26 Georgia, #27 Southern Miss, Florida State*, Missouri*, #30 Texas, Washington, Miami (FL)*, #33 Michigan State*

Other Positive B Ratings: #35 USC*, #37 Utah State, #38 Iowa*, #39 Temple*, #41 Ohio*, #42 Northern Illinois (*=Newly Positive)

No Longer Positive: #34 Illinois, #36 North Carolina, #40 Tennessee, #44 Florida International, #48 Wake Forest, #51 Baylor, #61 Pittsburgh, #68 Western Michigan, #76 Duke

Bottom 10: #111 Central Michigan, #112 Buffalo, #113 Idaho, #114 Akron, #115 UNLV, #116 Florida Atlantic, #117 Tulane, #118 New Mexico, #119 UAB, #120 Memphis

Best game of week: Oklahoma State @ Missouri, 9am PT, FX

2011 College Football Rankings – Week 6

by

Who’s the best team in college football: Alabama, LSU, or Oklahoma? It’s hard to argue with Alabama’s score ratio, with two shutouts and at least doubling the score of every opponent they’ve played, including Arkansas and Florida. Most people seem to have Oklahoma a bit behind the two SEC schools, and that might be appropriate; they’ve had two ten-point victories and Florida State hasn’t played up to expectations. It helps that the SEC teams haven’t had a bye already. Of course, one thing you can say about the BCS: if these really are the three best teams, the differences between them will be decided on the field.

All full-rating reports will be in PDF form from now on. I waited all week for an opinion on what to do with the extra spots in the table and didn’t really get one. I’m using the polls this week, but I reserve the right to change it later. As you can see by the fact the rankings match the AP Poll in the top five with only LSU and Alabama flipped at the top, the rankings are starting to fall into place. In fact, we only have one unbeaten team outside the Top 25; lineal title or no, there’s no reason to trust a K-State team that eked out a 10-7 win over FCS Eastern Kentucky, blew out godawful Kent State, then eked out wins over good-but-not-great teams with only scandal-ridden #50 Miami (FL) coming on the road. Thus, the colored area to the right of each team is now active, indicating what each team is playing for.

How the C Ratings are tabulated: First, A Ratings are tabulated by multiplying the total score ratio, which is expressed by (points-opponents’ points)/points, by the winning percentage. Score ratio minimizes the effect of running up the score. Next, B Points for each game are tabulated by (margin of victory)/(opponent’s A rating)+/-1 for wins, and -(margin of loss)/(1-opponent’s A Rating)+/-1 for losses. The “+/-” is + for road games and – for home ones. The total number of B Points is multiplied by the A Rating to get the B Rating. Finally, the C Rating is tabulated by taking one-tenth the difference between the team’s B Rating and the average of his opponents’ B Ratings and taking the result off the B Rating. The three ratings go A, B, C across. Click here to see the complete ratings.

1 Alabama SEC BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .901 B Rating: 43.824 C Rating: 38.240 AP: 2 Coaches: 3
Another week, another big win for the Tide. Ole Miss and Tennessee will be their remaining two warm-ups for the huge clash with LSU.
2 LSU SEC ’06 Boise St.
6-0 LW: A Rat: .836 B Rating: 35.396 C Rating: 38.240 AP: 1 Coaches: 2
It didn’t matter that the punter got a TD called back for taunting the way LSU handled Florida, and now Tennessee and Auburn will be their tune-ups for the clash with Bama.
3 Oklahoma B12 BCS Title
5-0 LW: A Rat: .799 B Rating: 30.465 C Rating: 26.545 AP: 3 Coaches: 1
While people have been forgetting about the preseason favorites as they’re blinded by the SEC’s brilliance, the Sooners have actually been playing closer to expectations recently. The blowout over Texas is their best win yet.
4 Wisconsin B10 BCS Title
5-0 LW: A Rat: .900 B Rating: 25.911 C Rating: 21.614 AP: 4 Coaches: 4
Wisconsin moves into conference pole position without even playing (and without Michigan losing), thanks in part to the Huskers finally getting the first Big Ten win the Badgers denied them.
5 Boise State MWC BCS Title
5-0 LW: A Rat: .806 B Rating: 22.526 C Rating: 19.320 AP: 5 Coaches: 6
The Broncos shoot up the board after putting the hurt on Fresno and finally start Mountain West play. If they play in that league the way they played in the WAC, they’ll pick up right where they left off busting the BCS.
6 Michigan B10 BCS Title
5-0 LW: A Rat: .825 B Rating: 21.762 C Rating: 18.622 AP: 11 Coaches: 10
Northwestern was only the second opponent Michigan had allowed more than 10 points to all year, and they’re no Notre Dame. And while rival Sparty (#53) doesn’t deserve the poll respect they’re getting, neither will they be a pushover.
7 Stanford P12 BCS Title
5-0 LW: A Rat: .879 B Rating: 21.748 C Rating: 17.876 AP: 7 Coaches: 5
Welcome to the Pac-12, Buffaloes: Colorado’s A Rating is so unbelievably pathetic that despite blowing them out, the Cardinal might as well have been off this week.
8 Oklahoma State B12 BCS Title
5-0 LW: A Rat: .714 B Rating: 18.365 C Rating: 15.375 AP: 6 Coaches: 7
The Cowboys made up for the lost time of their bye week, blowing Kansas out of the water. But when it comes to football, Texas – hungry to bounce back from the Sooner loss – is no Kansas.
9 Clemson ACC Prncton/Yale
6-0 LW: A Rat: .732 B Rating: 13.756 C Rating: 11.341 AP: 8 Coaches: 8
Clemson has to blow out a Boston College team as godawful as they are, so after only beating them 36-14, they slip ahead of the clash with Maryland.
10 Notre Dame   BCS Bowl
4-2 LW: A Rat: .429 B Rating: 11.688 C Rating: 10.334 — —
Air Force is mediocre and the Domers weren’t THAT dominant, so why the jump? Well, 26 points is 26 points, and Purdue’s blowout of admittedly-horrible Minnesota helps. Now they wait a week before facing rival USC.
11 Georgia Tech ACC BCS Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .711 B Rating: 11.198 C Rating: 8.850 AP: 12 Coaches: 12
Maryland is way too mediocre-to-bad (fashionably and on the field) for G-Tech to keep them that close. Now they have to go on the road to Virginia.
12 Oregon P12 ’09 Boise St.
4-1 LW: A Rat: .589 B Rating: 9.848 C Rating: 8.417 AP: 9 Coaches: 9
The Ducks blew out a good Cal team, more than making up for a win by only 15 over an Arizona team that’s now without their coach. But now comes a huge clash with Arizona State.
13 Arizona State P12 Pac-12 Title
5-1 LW: #21 A Rat: .559 B Rating: 7.193 C Rating: 6.109 AP: 18 Coaches: 20
Big win over a half-decent Utah team sends the Devils up the rankings, but a road trip to Eugene will be much tougher.
14 West Virginia BST Big East Title
5-1 LW: #14 A Rat: .587 B Rating: 7.558 C Rating: 5.801 AP: 13 Coaches: 16
The Mountaineers blew out a not-so-great UConn team to start conference play on the right foot. Now for an off week before a nationally-televised road trip to a Syracuse team that’s better than the Huskies.
15 Rutgers BST Big East Title
4-1 LW: #20 A Rat: .555 B Rating: 6.056 C Rating: 5.335 — —
A blowout by a good Pitt team sends the Knights up the rankings. Now to host a possible future conference mate in Navy.
16 Texas A&M B12 Big 12 Title
3-2 LW: #18 A Rat: .389 B Rating: 6.683 C Rating: 5.122 AP: 21 Coaches: 23
A&M finally finished a game for once, escaping against rival Texas Tech. Now comes a huge clash against Baylor.
17 Illinois B10 BCS Title
6-0 LW: #19 A Rat: .699 B Rating: 5.981 C Rating: 4.961 AP: 16 Coaches: 15
Blowout win over Indiana, and now a desperate Ohio State team comes to Champaign.
18 Nebraska B10 Big 10 Title
5-1 LW: #12 A Rat: .526 B Rating: 6.419 C Rating: 4.894 AP: 16 Coaches: 15
Nebraska finally gives the realigned teams a conference win against a team once the cream of the conference, but you gotta do better than that against a 3-3 team. Perhaps they will against woeful Minnesota a week from now.
19 Penn State B10 Big 10 Title
5-1 LW: #15 A Rat: .590 B Rating: 5.419 C Rating: 4.688 SBNBlog: 25 Coaches: 25
Relatively pedestrian effort, even against a good Iowa team, causes the Nittany Lions to slip. But Purdue should be easier to beat.
20 Houston USA C-USA Title
6-0 LW: A Rat: .729 B Rating: 6.793 C Rating: 4.061 AP: 25 Coaches: 22
Blowout win over East Carolina just what the doctor ordered to propel the Cougars into the Top 25 after all their other FBS games other than North Texas were close (and even UNT scored 20 more points than the Pirates).
21 Baylor B12 Big 12 Title
4-1 LW: #35 A Rat: .554 B Rating: 4.694 C Rating: 3.336 AP: 20 Coaches: 24
Blowout over a decent Iowa State team bounces the Bears back from the K-State loss and sends them rocketing into the Top 25. But Texas A&M will be dangerous.
22 Texas B12 Big 12 Title
4-1 LW: A Rat: .505 B Rating: 4.669 C Rating: 3.297 AP: 22 Coaches: 21
As good as Oklahoma is, that was absolutely embarassing. But it doesn’t get any easier with Oklahoma State coming to Austin.
23 South Carolina SEC SEC Title
5-1 LW: #17 A Rat: .566 B Rating: 5.441 C Rating: 3.270 AP: 15 Coaches: 13
Kentucky is godawful, so even blowing them out doesn’t help the Gamecocks resist other teams’ hard charges. But with Tennessee losing, is the way clear for the Fighting Spurriers to repeat in the East?
24 Arkansas* SEC SEC Title
5-1 LW: #40 A Rat: .567 B Rating: 3.803 C Rating: 2.849 AP: 10 Coaches: 11
Still don’t trust a team that lets Troy get within ten and whose only impressive win had come over New Mexico, but they proved their bona fides against Auburn. Now they slip for the bye before heading to Mississippi.
25 TCU MWC MWC Title
4-2 LW: #27 A Rat: .456 B Rating: 4.718 C Rating: 2.792 — —
Bounced back from the SMU loss with a big win over San Diego State. But not only will they slip again for the bye, they’re unlikely to get back on right away no matter how badly they beat woeful New Mexico.

35 teams total with positive C Rating (none with negative B Rating)

2010 TCU title: #34 Kansas State (5-0), .676, 1.804, .603 (only unbeaten team not on Top 25)

Off Top 25: #30 North Carolina (was #25), Tennessee (was #16), Washington (was ), #37 Pittsburgh (was #22), #45 San Diego State (was #23)

Watch List: #26 Toledo, #27 Southern Miss*, Georgia*, Western Michigan, #30 North Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, #33 Virginia Tech, #34 Kansas State, #35 Wake Forest

Other Positive B Ratings: #36 Utah State*, #37 Pittsburgh, #39 Duke, #40 Ohio, #41 Florida International* (*=Newly Positive)

No Longer Positive: #42 Iowa, #43 Florida, #45 San Diego State, #46 Texas Tech, #61 California

Bottom 10: #111 Kentucky, #112 Louisiana-Monroe, #113 UNLV, #114 New Mexico, #115 Florida Atlantic, #116 Idaho, #117 Tulane, #118 Akron, #119 UAB, #120 Memphis

Best game of week: Arizona State @ Oregon, 7:15pm PT, ESPN

2011 College Football Rankings – Week 5

by

An interesting thought based on an oddity of the first five weeks. What poetic justice would it be if every team that changed conferences this year went completely winless in their new conference until the Colorado-Utah game at the end of the year?

Something new this week: The full ratings are now available in PDF form. I can’t guarantee this will be the case every week, as that will depend on where I calculate the ratings, but it should be the case most weeks. The two “extra” slots are showing B Points this week, but I’m not liking it, and I’m running a poll about some other options. If you have another idea, leave it in the comments, and enjoy the chaos of this week’s rankings.

How the C Ratings are tabulated: First, A Ratings are tabulated by multiplying the total score ratio, which is expressed by (points-opponents’ points)/points, by the winning percentage. Score ratio minimizes the effect of running up the score. Next, B Points for each game are tabulated by (margin of victory)/(opponent’s A rating)+/-1 for wins, and -(margin of loss)/(1-opponent’s A Rating)+/-1 for losses. The “+/-” is + for road games and – for home ones. The total number of B Points is multiplied by the A Rating to get the B Rating. Finally, the C Rating is tabulated by taking one-tenth the difference between the team’s B Rating and the average of his opponents’ B Ratings and taking the result off the B Rating. The three ratings go A, B, C across. Click here to see the complete ratings.

1 Alabama SEC SEC Leader
5-0 LW: A Rat: .882 B Points: 40.690 B Rating: 35.869 C Rating: 31.234
Bama leapfrogs LSU with the win over Florida – for now. But with such a huge lead, they might keep it even if LSU beats the Gators.
2 LSU SEC ’06 Boise St.
5-0 LW: A Rat: .830 B Points 29.354 B Rating: 24.368 C Rating: 21.419
The Tigers have a substantial lead as well, though Kentucky wasn’t on par with the others. But now they get the Gators.
3 Michigan B10 Big 10 Lead
5-0 LW: A Rat: .847 B Points: 25.691 B Rating: 21.769 C Rating: 19.298
The impressive win over Minnesota was their best yet – but it was Minnesota, and Northwestern’s not that much better. What will it mean to escape Wisconsin until the conference title game?
4 Wisconsin B10 In Top 25
5-0 LW: A Rat: .900 B Points: 23.298 B Rating: 20.969 C Rating: 18.015
What a performance against the Huskers, proving they deserve the respect they’re getting. But expect them to drop for a bye week.
5 Stanford P12 Pac-12 Lead
4-0 LW: A Rat: .867 B Points: 23.958 B Rating: 20.774 C Rating: 17.629
Big blowout victory over UCLA. Will Colorado share the same fate?
6 Oklahoma B12 Big 12 Lead
4-0 LW: #14 A Rat: .788 B Points: 25.002 B Rating: 19.700 C Rating: 17.043
With early-season volatility, a big blowout, even over Ball State, is just what the doctor ordered. But the Longhorns are no Ball State.
7 Clemson ACC Prncton/Yale
5-0 LW: #18 A Rat: .717 B Points: 21.674 B Rating: 15.535 C Rating: 13.756
Clemson didn’t just defend their title against the Hokies, they blew them out of the water, and now they’re top ten in the polls. Is the way clear to dominate the ACC – and for the ACC to be relevant again?
8 Oklahoma State B12 In Top 25
4-0 LW: A Rat: .692 B Points: 19.114 B Rating: 13.232 C Rating: 11.095
The Cowboys stood pat despite the idle hands, thanks to a blowout win by Tulsa over North Texas.
9 Georgia Tech ACC In Top 25
5-0 LW: A Rat: .730 B Points: 18.116 B Rating: 13.219 C Rating: 11.075
A little too close for comfort against a mediocre NC State team, and now G-Tech has to worry about October 29.
10 Boise State MWC Non-BCS Lead
4-0 LW: A Rat: .772 B Points: 15.505 B Rating: 11.976 C Rating: 9.979
The Broncos got their revenge for last year’s loss. Perhaps they can continue to improve their MoV against another ex-conference mate that will soon be again.
11 Texas B12 In Top 25
4-0 LW: #16 A Rat: .751 B Points: 14.999 B Rating: 11.263 C Rating: 8.670
Blowout win over Iowa State + the Cyclones’ first loss = big jump in the ratings. But Oklahoma is definitely no slouch.
12 Nebraska B10 In Top 25
4-1 LW: A Rat: .510 B Points: 15.030 B Rating: 7.666 C Rating: 6.908
Wisconsin’s sterling A Rating makes the Huskers our first team with a loss. They will bounce back, but watch out with the Buckeyes coming to town.
13 Notre Dame   In Top 25
3-2 LW: #20 A Rat: .376 B Points: 18.151 B Rating: 6.831 C Rating: 6.291
A two-loss team already? Pitt’s win outweighs USF’s loss. A blowout win over Purdue doesn’t mean the Domers are back, but Stanford is the only team on their level the rest of the way.
14 West Virginia* BST Big East Lead
4-1 LW: #59 A Rat: .546 B Points: 13.697 B Rating: 7.480 C Rating: 6.022
From the second page to the conference lead? Blowout win over Bowling Green coupled with a blowout win by Maryland. And they’re only now starting conference play against 2-3 UConn.
15 Penn State B10 In Top 25
4-1 LW: #21 A Rat: .538 B Points: 8.336 B Rating: 4.482 C Rating: 4.189
Why does Penn State move up so much after a tight game against lowly Indiana? Alabama’s blowout win certainly helps, as does a number of losses by teams ahead of them.
16 Tennessee SEC In Top 25
3-1 LW: #17 A Rat: .521 B Points: 10.799 B Rating: 5.630 C Rating: 3.982
Blowout win, but over lowly Buffalo. Losses by teams ahead of them allow them to move up a spot. But Georgia will be more of a challenge, and then comes an onslaught of LSU, Bama, and South Carolina.
17 South Carolina SEC In Top 25
4-1 LW: A Rat: .496 B Points: 8.250 B Rating: 4.093 C Rating: 3.170
The Gamecocks don’t fall as far as other teams that lost because they managed to battle Auburn to the bitter end. Perhaps now they can bounce back against Kentucky.
18 Texas A&M B12 In Top 25
2-2 LW: #12 A Rat: .336 B Points: 13.783 B Rating: 4.633 C Rating: 3.152
Tough loss to Arkansas, but they battled the Razorbacks until the end. Still in the polls, barely. Perhaps they can get back on the winning track against another rival in Texas Tech.
19 Illinois B10 In Top 25
5-0 LW: #23 A Rat: .688 B Points: 5.211 B Rating: 3.584 C Rating: 3.124
Beat Northwestern by only a field goal, so why the relatively large jump? Arizona State got a substantial win that helped Illinois’ strength of schedule but not so much their own C Rating due to Oregon State’s weakness.
20 Rutgers BST In Top 25
3-1 LW: #25 A Rat: .491 B Points: 7.034 B Rating: 3.451 C Rating: 2.911
Wins are wins, and teams ahead of them weren’t that great. But now the team that upset USF comes to town.
21 Arizona State P12 In Top 25
4-1 LW: #19 A Rat: .516 B Points: 6.651 B Rating: 3.431 C Rating: 2.697
Substantial win, it’s just that Oregon State is absolutely atrocious. Will Utah help them more?
22 Pittsburgh* BST In Top 25
3-2 LW: #60 A Rat: .360 B Points: 9.871 B Rating: 3.553 C Rating: 2.484
Pitt didn’t just beat South Florida, they blew them out. This isn’t the team that lost to Iowa and beat Maine by only 6. Now to prove their bona fides against Rutgers.
23 San Diego State MWC In Top 25
3-1 LW: #27 A Rat: .411 B Points: 7.264 B Rating: 2.983 C Rating: 2.424
Michigan continues to be a good team to lose to, Army just got a blowout win over Tulane, and losses by teams above them outweighs idle hands. They’ll settle who’s second-best in the conference with TCU on Saturday.
24 Washington P12 In Top 25
4-1 LW: #33 A Rat: .468 B Points: 5.003 B Rating: 2.342 C Rating: 2.007
Washington has flirted with relevance before, but they’re five games in and Nebraska is their only loss. Colorado will serve as a tuneup for a clash with Stanford that could decide the North.
25 North Carolina ACC In Top 25
4-1 LW: A Rat: .517 B Points: 4.072 B Rating: 2.107 C Rating: 1.657
Big win over East Carolina. The loss to G-Tech will be tough to overcome, but they look to have bounced back from NCAA trouble last year.


33 teams total with positive C Rating (none with negative B Rating)

2009 Boise State title: Oregon (3-1), .535, 2.108, 1.202

2010 TCU title: #30 Kansas State (4-0), .684, 1.833, .934

Off Top 25: #26 Florida (was ), #27 TCU (was #22), Oregon (was ), Virginia Tech (was #15), #49 South Florida (was )

Unbeaten teams not on Top 25: Houston, #30 Kansas State, #38 Texas Tech (all in positive B points, Texas Tech not in positive C)

Rest of Watch List: #26 Florida (4-1), #27 TCU (3-2), Oregon (3-1), Virginia Tech (4-1)

Other Positive B Ratings: Western Michigan* (3-2), #33 Toledo* (2-3), #34 Ohio* (4-1), #35 Baylor (3-1), #36 Iowa (3-1), #37 Wake Forest (3-1), #41 California (3-1), #46 Duke (3-2) (*=Newly Positive)

No Longer Positive: #43 Utah, #45 Navy, #49 South Florida, #51 Florida International, #53 Iowa State, #69 Temple, #84 Bowling Green

Bottom 10: #111 Central Michigan, #112 North Texas, #113 Florida Atlantic, #114 Louisiana-Monroe, #115 Idaho, #116 New Mexico, #117 UAB, #118 Tulane, #119 Akron, #120 Memphis

Best game of week: Oklahoma v. Texas, 9am PT, ABC

2011 College Football Rankings – Week 4

by

How much longer will I be doing the college football rankings? They eat up a lot of time at a time of year when I have a bunch of other projects in the pipeline, the last two years at least I didn’t post post-bowl rankings on Da Blog, there’s an increasing feeling we’ll get a plus-one in 2014 (thus sapping much of the reason for having the rankings), last year I didn’t even bother to post full ranking posts, and both this year and last I didn’t start posting rankings when I intended to. Although in this year’s case that’s because I wanted to get to the two posts I pushed through the past couple days first.

I would have released the first rankings Week 3, although there would have been a few teams only connected through USC at that point. You can still read the Week 3 rankings for your convenience. I finally fixed one of the two longstanding problems I’ve had with the rankings this year, concerning the wonky effect conference ranking has on the final rankings. C Ratings are now calculated by subtracting one-tenth the difference between the B Rating and the average of the team’s opponents’ B Ratings. As conferences are thus now unimportant, conference ratings aren’t listed on the RTF, but conferences themselves are still included for completeness and reference. The first round of conference realignment seems an opportune time to push through this change.

(The other change I’d like to make – making I-AA teams equivalent to an A Rating of 0 for B Point purposes win or lose – probably isn’t something the version of Access I have can handle.)

How the C Ratings are tabulated: First, A Ratings are tabulated by multiplying the total score ratio, which is expressed by (points-opponents’ points)/points, by the winning percentage. Score ratio minimizes the effect of running up the score. Next, B Points for each game are tabulated by (margin of victory)/(opponent’s A rating)+/-1 for wins, and -(margin of loss)/(1-opponent’s A Rating)+/-1 for losses. The “+/-” is + for road games and – for home ones. The total number of B Points is multiplied by the A Rating to get the B Rating. Conference Ratings are tabulated by averaging the B Ratings of all teams in the conference. (Independents are counted separately, and Army and Navy are counted as one conference.) Finally, the C Rating is tabulated by taking one-tenth the difference between the team’s B Rating and the average of his opponents’ B Ratings and taking the result off the B Rating. The three ratings go A, B, C across. Click here to see the complete ratings.

1 LSU SEC ’06 Boise St.
4-0 LW: A Rat: .812 B Rating: 19.778 C Rating: 17.760 — —
All three I-A teams they’ve faced so far are/were Top 25 in the polls, and the closest any of them came was 13 points. Is it any wonder the polls and C Ratings agree who’s No. 1? Imagine how scary they’ll be when Jordan Jefferson comes back.
2 Alabama SEC In Top 25
4-0 LW: #15 A Rat: .884 B Rating: 20.664 C Rating: 17.643 — —
Only Penn State has gotten within 20 points. If they can get past Florida, November 5th will be a heck of a game.
3 Michigan B10 Big 10 Lead
4-0 LW: A Rat: .809 B Rating: 15.349 C Rating: 13.569 — —
What Wisconsin-Nebraska game? Only Notre Dame got within three touchdowns. Have the Wolverines finally shaken their recent doldrums? Might they even beat the Buckeyes?
4 South Florida BST Big East Lead
4-0 LW: A Rat: .779 B Rating: 13.611 C Rating: 12.058 — —
Obviously they’ll fall after losing to Pitt, but before then only Notre Dame had gotten within four touchdowns. Looks like the apple doesn’t fall far from the coaching tree.
5 Nebraska B10 In Top 25
4-0 LW: #18 A Rat: .752 B Rating: 12.842 C Rating: 11.296 — —
Looks like the polls were right about the Huskers coming into their new conference with guns ablazin’. No one has gotten within 13 points. Look out, Badgers.
6 Stanford P12 Pac-12 Lead
3-0 LW: A Rat: .893 B Rating: 13.570 C Rating: 11.083 — —
Oregon’s national championship overshadowed Stanford’s great year, but the Cardinal seem to have picked up right where they left off.
7 Georgia Tech ACC ACC Leader
4-0 LW: A Rat: .759 B Rating: 11.881 C Rating: 10.166 — —
With only North Carolina getting within four touchdowns, might the Yellowjackets attract national attention to the ACC?
8 Oklahoma State B12 Big 12 Lead
4-0 LW: A Rat: .692 B Rating: 11.619 C Rating: 9.812 — —
Oklahoma State is auditioning for the Pac-16. Only A&M got within three touchdowns. Don’t look ahead to the Texas game against the Jayhawks.
9 Florida SEC In Top 25
4-0 LW: #52 A Rat: .877 B Rating: 10.754 C Rating: 7.895 — —
Great job blowing Kentucky out of the water. But watch out: now Bama comes into the Swamp.
10 Wisconsin B10 In Top 25
4-0 LW: A Rat: .919 B Rating: 9.878 C Rating: 7.768 — —
Never scored or won by less than 35 or allowed more than 17 = fantastic score ratio. But expect that to change when Nebraska comes into Camp Randall.
11 South Carolina SEC In Top 25
4-0 LW: #33 A Rat: .673 B Rating: 7.979 C Rating: 6.885 — —
Big win over a decent Vanderbilt team. Now, can the Gamecocks prove they deserve their Top 10 poll ranking against the defending national champions?
12 Texas A&M B12 In Top 25
2-1 LW: A Rat: .497 B Rating: 7.913 C Rating: 6.068 — —
The Aggies are trying to leave the Big 12 with a bang. Big wins in their first two games and a one-point loss to Oklahoma State make them the top-ranked one-loss team. Big test coming against rival Arkansas.
13 Boise State MWC Non-BCS Lead
3-0 LW: A Rat: .752 B Rating: 7.102 C Rating: 5.696 — —
Boise State is off to a rollicking start their first year in the Mountain West – and once and future conference mate Nevada is starting off rockily.
14 Oklahoma B12 In Top 25
3-0 LW: A Rat: .733 B Rating: 6.621 C Rating: 5.470 — —
Ten-point wins over Florida State and Missouri, neither in positive B Points, suggest maybe the Sooners aren’t quite the national championship favorites everyone thought they’d be. But they’re still a force to be reckoned with.
15 Virginia Tech ACC In Top 25
4-0 LW: #23 A Rat: .826 B Rating: 6.824 C Rating: 4.877 — —
The battle of the Techs could be huge this year – but the clash with Clemson for the Princeton-Yale belt may be the biggest early season clash in the ACC.
16 Texas B12 In Top 25
3-0 LW: #14 A Rat: .730 B Rating: 6.618 C Rating: 4.846 — —
The Longhorn Network has painted a target on the Longhorns’ backs for the whole Big 12 to aim at, but the Horns seem to have bounced back from last year’s doldrums.
17 Tennessee SEC In Top 25
2-1 LW: #16 A Rat: .422 B Rating: 4.555 C Rating: 4.569 — —
No shame in losing to Florida after two wins by at least three touchdowns to start the year.
18 Clemson ACC Prncton/Yale
4-0 LW: #27 A Rat: .662 B Rating: 4.947 C Rating: 3.962 — —
Wins over Florida State and I-AA Wofford just a little too close for comfort. But how huge is the showdown with V-Tech for determining the direction of the ACC?
19 Arizona State* P12 In Top 25
3-1 LW: #44 A Rat: .470 B Rating: 3.367 C Rating: 3.064 — —
Big win over a USC team ranked in the AP poll, but admittedly not bowl-eligible, proved their bona fides. Even better? Divisional arrangement means they skate Stanford until conference title game – and their division title may not come with a USC asterisk like some thought.
20 Notre Dame   In Top 25
2-2 LW: A Rat: .283 B Rating: 2.723 C Rating: 3.003 — —
Once upon a time, the Domers would be the top-ranked two-loss team because of the effect of not having a conference to dilute their rating. Now it’s because their two losses were close to teams ahead of them, while their wins aren’t to slouches either. What Brian Kelly hot seat?
21 Penn State B10 In Top 25
3-1 LW: #35 A Rat: .501 B Rating: 2.874 C Rating: 2.929 — —
Blowing out Eastern Michigan just what the doctor ordered entering Big Ten play.
22 TCU MWC In Top 25
3-1 LW: #22 A Rat: .537 B Rating: 4.653 C Rating: 2.748 — —
Whaddaya know, it’s the two teams that stayed in non-BCS conferences that top the Utah schools in the rankings. TCU has bounced back from the Baylor loss with consistent blowout performances.
23 Illinois B10 In Top 25
4-0 LW: #26 A Rat: .724 B Rating: 2.913 C Rating: 2.581 — —
Arizona State and Western Michigan wins too close for comfort, and Arkansas State only other I-A foe faced, but wins are wins. A good win over rival Northwestern should prove their bona fides.
24 Oregon P12 ’09 Boise St.
3-1 LW: #21 A Rat: .534 B Rating: 3.484 C Rating: 2.542 — —
Blowout win over Arizona, but Arizona stinks. California will provide a much bigger test, but Arizona State looms after that.
25 Rutgers BST In Top 25
2-1 LW: #36 A Rat: .470 B Rating: 2.614 C Rating: 2.362 — —
When’s the last time we talked about Rutgers? 48-0 drubbing of NC Central and double-digit win over Ohio overcomes NC Central being I-A and a narrow loss to North Carolina.

35 teams total with positive C Rating (none with negative B Rating)

2010 TCU title: #30 Baylor (3-0), .747, 1.283, .890

Off Top 25: #27 San Diego State (was ), North Carolina (was #20), #35 Florida International (was #17), #37 California (was #25), #41 USC (was #12), #49 Ohio (was ), #59 West Virginia (was #19) (yes, freakin’ Florida International would have been Top 20 last week!)

Unbeaten teams not on Top 25: Houston, Kansas State, #30 Baylor*, Iowa State, #61 Texas Tech (all in positive B points, Texas Tech not in positive C)

Rest of Watch List: #26 Utah (2-1), #27 San Diego State (3-1), North Carolina (3-1)

Other Positive B Ratings (all 3-1 unless otherwise noted): #33 Washington*, #34 Temple*, #35 Florida International, #36 Wake Forest (2-1), #37 California, #38 Iowa, #40 Navy (2-1), #42 Bowling Green, #44 Duke* (2-2) (*=Newly Positive)

No Longer Positive: #41 USC, #43 Miami (FL), #45 Missouri, #46 Louisville, #49 Ohio, #55 Wyoming, #56 Vanderbilt, #58 Florida State, #59 West Virginia, #60 Pittsburgh, #68 Washington State

Bottom 10: #111 Army, #112 Florida Atlantic, #113 Tulane, #114 Idaho, #115 New Mexico, #116 UAB, #117 Louisiana-Monroe, #118 Central Michigan, #119 Akron, #120 Memphis

Best game of week: Alabama @ Florida, 5pm PT, CBS

A modest proposal for college football

by

So earlier today I posted that college football needed to reconcile its desire to keep making money with its desire to maintain the notion of amateurism. College football could go all-in and become an explicitly for-profit enterprise, or it could take some drastic steps to reclaim the notion of amateurism, but it couldn’t continue to have it both ways.

One of my ideas for what college football could do to keep making money was to completely divorce itself from the NCAA, preventing an all-sports split by the big-name schools, allowing the NCAA to focus on lesser sports, and most relevantly to this discussion, allowing conference realignment to proceed without affecting the lesser sports. With that in mind, I propose this fairly radical idea for conference realignment in a post-NCAA college football universe.

This idea can be summed up in three words: Promotion and relegation.

Fans of European club soccer, whether newcomers or old standbys, inevitably become fascinated by and enamored of the promotion and relegation system. Newcomers wonder what would happen if it were applied to American sports; old standbys insist that America’s own soccer league, MLS, adopt it. In both cases, they wildly underestimate the deep philosophical differences between American and European sports that explain the existence of the promotion and relegation system.

Europe places more emphasis on the individual teams as the bedrock of the league, as opposed to American sports where the teams’ power ultimately derives from the league. By the same token, Europe isn’t as obsessed with parity as the United States, and the assumption of the promotion and relegation system is that the teams at the bottom are substantially worse than the teams at the top. You couldn’t have a player draft in a promotion and relegation system, nor would team owners be likely to accept the possibility of being moved up and down every year, with the millions of dollars at stake. If baseball adopted pro/rel, the Yankees and Red Sox would become even more powerful than everyone else.

But guess what one American sport the above doesn’t apply to? College football’s power, as has been proved time and again, derives from its individual teams, not from any central source, and ultimately could care less about parity. A promotion and relegation system would give the lesser teams a bigger slice of the college football pie, create better matchups throughout the season, and ultimately solve college football’s championship problem, while surprisingly keeping much that makes the sport great.

Here’s how I could see it playing out. The big schools start making noise about separating from the NCAA, while their 16-team superconference dreams start coming to fruition and they start making noise about a de facto playoff. The schools left threaten to, or actually do, sue the big schools for monopolizing the college football pie. The big schools reach an agreement with the small schools and the NCAA that theoretically allows any school in the country, even NAIA Podunk U, to some day compete with the big boys at the top level of the sport, but effectively ensconces the power of the big schools at the top of the sport, while creating a better experience for the fans. Everyone wins.

What would this system look like? At the top level, I see two 12-team conferences composed of the biggest-name, best programs in the country – call them the SEC and Big 10. These add up to 24 teams, very close to the “Top 25” we’re so used to. Unlike current 12-team conferences, every team plays every other team one time, with no divisional arrangement. Under the current schedule, that leaves one game for a team to schedule a cupcake or a cross-conference or interlevel rival, preserving most rivalries between teams of comparable power while creating a far more exciting season full of big matchups. The champions of the two 12-team conferences then meet in a single game at the end of the season to determine college football’s national champion, solving the championship problem while preserving the sanctity of the bowls (for example, second place in each league could play each other as well).

The top four levels are important in this plan, as those levels are the ones that can tell recruits that, at least theoretically, they can someday play at that top level. Thus, the next few levels are arranged so that the top four levels total 120, same as Division I-A today. I see another two 12-team conferences at the second level (the ACC and Pac-12), then three conferences each at the third (Big East, Mountain West, Conference USA) and fourth (WAC, MAC, Sun Belt) levels. (These names are just for show, and to indicate the general geographic area each conference would cover.) The fifth level, where I-AA would essentially start, would then consist of four conferences, and so on down the line.

The bottom one or two teams in each top-level conference are relegated, with the champions and possibly runners-up in each second-level conference promoted. Perhaps the 11th-place teams in each conference could hold a play-off to determine who gets relegated, while the second-place teams at the second level hold their own, similar game to determine who gets promoted. Similarly, the last-place teams in each second-level conference are relegated, with a play-off between the 11th-place teams, while the champions of the three third-level conferences promoted.

What would these conferences look like at the top level? Here’s one way they might be arranged, with reference to Stewart Mandel’s 2007 column on college football’s “kings” and recent on-the-field success:

The Southeastern Conference

  1. Alabama
  2. Auburn
  3. Florida
  4. Florida State
  5. Georgia
  6. LSU
  7. Oklahoma
  8. South Carolina
  9. Texas
  10. TCU
  11. Virginia Tech
  12. West Virginia

The Northern and Western Conference (aka the “Big 12”)

  1. Boise State
  2. BYU
  3. Michigan
  4. Nebraska
  5. Notre Dame
  6. Ohio State
  7. Oregon
  8. Penn State
  9. Pittsburgh
  10. USC
  11. Utah
  12. Wisconsin

Look at all the rivalries that are preserved. Michigan/Ohio State, Oklahoma/Texas, Auburn/Alabama, Florida/Florida State, USC/Notre Dame, and so on down the line. There are even some new rivalries like Penn State/Pittsburgh, on top of all the other great games created with these top-notch programs. The extra game for inter-conference rivalries also allows us to preserve such games as Florida State/Miami (FL), Michigan/Michigan State, USC/UCLA, Oregon/Oregon State, Oklahoma/Oklahoma State, Texas/Texas A&M, South Carolina/Clemson, Georgia/Georgia Tech, and Virginia/Virginia Tech. The other thing to note is that, unlike in today’s conferences and even in European soccer, most if not all of these teams have large, devoted followings in their own right, large enough to merit their own per-school TV contracts with the networks and ESPN. There are no Longhorn Network controversies with this group. And some superb teams and programs will be relegated to the second tier at the end of the year.

What of the second tier? What do those conferences look like?

The Atlantic Conference

  1. Arizona State
  2. Arkansas
  3. Cincinnati
  4. Clemson
  5. Connecticut
  6. Georgia Tech
  7. Iowa
  8. Miami (FL)
  9. Michigan State
  10. Mississippi
  11. Texas A&M
  12. Texas Tech

The Pacific Conference

  1. Air Force
  2. Arizona
  3. Arizona State
  4. California
  5. Colorado
  6. Missouri
  7. Nevada
  8. Oklahoma State
  9. Oregon State
  10. Stanford
  11. UCLA
  12. Washington

Here are a bunch of lesser powers that could probably carry a pair of conference-wide contracts with ESPN2 and a considerable audience despite not being top-tier. That’s four conferences’ worth of great teams and great matchups on two tiers. For completeness’ sake, here’s what the third tier would look like:

Big East Conference

  1. Army
  2. Boston College
  3. Illinois
  4. Louisville
  5. Maryland
  6. Navy
  7. Northern Illinois
  8. Northwestern
  9. Ohio
  10. Purdue
  11. Rutgers
  12. Temple

Conference USA

  1. Central Florida
  2. East Carolina
  3. Kentucky
  4. Mississippi State
  5. North Carolina
  6. NC State
  7. South Florida
  8. Southern Miss
  9. Tennessee
  10. Troy
  11. Vanderbilt
  12. Virginia

Mountain West Conference

  1. Baylor
  2. Fresno State
  3. Hawaii
  4. Houston
  5. Idaho
  6. Kansas
  7. Kansas State
  8. Minnesota
  9. San Diego State
  10. SMU
  11. Tulsa
  12. UTEP

These conferences aren’t quite of the caliber of the previous tiers, with only a few teams able to carry their weight in TV contracts for the occasional ESPNU game, hence why there are three of them in more compact geographic areas. (Washington State, Iowa State, and Syracuse have some claim to being in this group. Most of the remaining I-A schools are on the fourth tier, with Appalachian State, Montana, and one or two more I-AA interlopers replacing some weak Sun Belt schools.)

A showcase for all the best teams in the country to play each other week after week, competing for national glory and to stay in that brutal competition. Opportunity for any team to rise to the top. No more cupcakes and a college football national championship everyone can agree on. Now, isn’t this a far better picture for college football than franken-conferences and the BCS?

First college football rankings should be coming later today.

College football’s moment of truth

by

College football needs to make a conscious decision about what it wants to be, a decision it should have made a long time ago. It can attempt to reclaim the notion of showcasing students who happen to play football, or it can embrace its current popularity and become the NFL’s developmental league, with teams effectively selling their naming rights for a fanbase, probably adopting some sort of playoff system. It can be popular, or it can be college, but it can’t be both.

One of the glories of college football in the pre-ESPN, pre-BCS era was that the results didn’t really matter. Yes, good teams went to bowls at the end of the season and rivals wanted to beat each other, but the real heart of college football was everything surrounding the game – all the pageantry that purists like to talk up. Polls crowned a national champion at the end of the year, but few people really cared. In the words of Ed Guenther, whose series on the college football playoff debate informed my own series on the same debate two years ago, college football was a sport “played regionally on Saturdays”, whereas now it’s “played nationally for four months”.

The BCS is the biggest proximate reason for this change, but it is itself a result of the increasing television attention focused on college football, which began with the birth of ESPN in 1979 and the court case that stripped the NCAA of control over the TV rights to regular-season college football. Once conferences began selling their own TV rights, it became possible to follow college football on a national basis over the course of the whole season. It’s no coincidence that the rise of conference TV contracts coincided with the rise of attempts to provide some sort of “national championship game”. As the national championship became more important, and as the bowls started coming into more and more money as more and more people across the nation became interested in them, the focus shifted away from the overall college football experience, and wins and losses became more important, even all-consuming.

Combine the influx of money into the sport with the increased stakes for getting the best players, and the result is a dog-eat-dog recruiting world. It’s no wonder the college football landscape has been rocked by scandal in recent years, scandal that has, in all likelihood, only scraped the surface of the corruption and under-the-table “extra benefits” trading hands in college football. The ongoing scandal at Miami (FL) is only the worst that has come to light.

The notion of amateurism – once thought to be the bedrock of college sports – now seems quaint to almost everyone outside the NCAA offices, even exploitative when one looks at the amount of money these players provide to their schools and the NCAA while seemingly getting little to nothing in return. The idea of paying players has started to look rather appealing, with the major obstacle being the practical matter of paying participants in non-revenue sports; I believe someone on ESPN (maybe during their Blueprint for Change series?) pointed out that sports are the only collegiate activity that isn’t paid.

Of course, sports aren’t like other collegiate activities. The school band or the student newspaper doesn’t have the whole school coming out to support all of their activities, nor are they broadcast on national television for a tenth to a fifth of the country to see. The school band or student newspaper don’t rack in millions of dollars for their universities, nor do they engage in high-stakes recruiting battles with other schools for the best trombonist or the best reporter. Paying players would only exacerbate a trend that has been growing for the last few decades: players as mercenaries taking their talents to whatever school they feel would best prepare them for the NFL or NBA, or in this case, selling their services to the highest bidder, with no real connection to their schools, and turning college football into a de facto developmental league for the NFL, or college basketball into the NBA’s de facto developmental league, with teams simply selling their naming rights to schools for a fanbase.

College football’s gatekeepers need to figure out whether they want to keep making money hand over fist, or reclaim the notion of amateurism once thought to be at the heart of collegiate athletics. I don’t think the latter can withstand the continuation of the former. The pay-players movement has too much momentum, and lawsuits will be filed if things continue as they are. But college football needs to definitively choose one or the other; they can’t have it both ways. Either approach, however, would involve some hard choices and some decisions college football’s gatekeepers don’t want to make.

If the decision is made to go all-in and turn college football into a money-making developmental league for the NFL, the first thing that should be done is to divorce college football from the NCAA, ASAP. The NCAA has its origins in an effort to clean up college football shortly before World War I, but football is now the sport the NCAA has the least connection to. Cutting off college football from the NCAA at all levels would save the NCAA from an all-sports defection from the big-name football schools that would probably cripple it permanently, allow conference realignment to proceed to 16-team superconferences (and the potential playoff that comes with it) without screwing up the conferences for other sports, and depending on how such a split would be interpreted through the lens of Title IX, save lesser collegiate sports from being sunk by the requirements imposed by the need to pay players. And make no mistake: unless the NCAA and college football’s gatekeepers take steps to reclaim the notion of amateurism in collegiate athletics immediately, they will have to pay players. Hell, it’s already happening under the table and everyone knows it.

The new collegiate football association would then be able to impose the sorts of rules and regulations necessary to create a fairly stable status quo, one that brings the current black market into the light, that could propel what was left of college football into the future without the NCAA’s unnecessary bloat – possibly including a playoff, but such a divorce would open up another approach, which I’ll get to in a later post.

If the NCAA decides that, ultimately, the money isn’t worth losing the soul of college football, then some drastic actions will need to be taken to reclaim it. The first thing will involve putting pressure on the NFL to start its own developmental league (whether from scratch or by absorbing the UFL) and allow potential players to declare for the NFL draft right out of high school without necessarily changing the age limits for the big league, a step absolutely necessary to give people who only see college as a stepping stone to the pros an alternative, similar to the college baseball model.

Then the NCAA needs to impose some drastic, top-to-bottom reforms to, possibly, put the toothpaste back in the tube, completely remaking the rulebook, getting tough on corruption and the Nevin Shapiros of the world, beefing up the enforcement staff and making clear that the age of Michael Wilbon comparing the NCAA to “Barney Fife” is over. It’s possible that ending athletic scholarships and recruiting entirely may be necessary, or at least severely restricting them.

If – and it’s a big if – these moves are successful at bringing the stakes in college football and college sports in general back down to earth (besides potentially keeping the stakes high, the NFL could balk at starting its own developmental league and the big schools could decide they want to keep making money and secede from the NCAA), it’s going to start another major shake-up in college sports. Conferences that were formed for reasons of money will shatter in an instant, with the return of regional rivalries possible but a big long-shot (more likely, conferences remain capped at 12 teams). The BCS could collapse, not necessarily replaced with a playoff as opposed to the old bowl system, and probably half the bowls shut their doors immediately. The result would be a long period of uncertainty, and maybe – maybe – a return to a more idyllic time in college football at the end of it.

I can’t guarantee that any of that would actually happen. It’s possible it’s too late for anyone to save the ideals at the heart of college football. But college football needs to make that decision on its future soon, lest it collapse under the weight of its own scandal and corruption.

Some housekeeping notes, and a Week 17 playoff watch

by

The lineal titles are, belatedly, updated, and I think I’m somewhat lucky that none of the college titles are being defended until after the new year.

The Golden Bowl tournament, however, is probably not going to happen this year, and maybe ever. Somehow it has always managed to monopolize a lot of my time during every winter break, and the process of selection chews up a lot of time and brainpower just as the fall quarter at school starts ramping up towards finals. Perhaps once I’m finally out of school I’ll start it up again – heaven knows we’ll probably be no closer to a playoff then. I do want to say a few things about how the bracket would have shaken out:

The top six teams in the RPI are all from the SEC or Big 12, with attendant effects on selection, including Oklahoma probably getting a top-three seed, a possible third SEC at-large in Alabama, and all other conferences getting squeezed out of at-larges, including Stanford and Ohio State. Had I decided to cap at-larges at 2 per conference, they and Michigan State would have been key contenders.

Thanks in part to my Rose Bowl Semifinal rule, Oregon is hard-pressed to even get a first-round home game; the Pac-10 was weak this year. Wisconsin barely stood out among a field of Oregon, TCU, Boise, and V-Tech.

Finally, Connecticut actually barely got edged by UCF for the 13 seed, so the 3 would be a lot less valuable than the 2 this year, and the 4 substantially more valuable than the 5.

For the Playoff Pictures, anything that’s not self-explanatory is in the notes. Thick borders cannot be crossed, and I didn’t bother to research common-games tiebreakers for playoff positioning.

AFC Playoff Picture
DIVISION
LEADERS		 WILD CARD NOTES
SOUTH
49-6		 511-4 ONLY AFC SOUTH
CONTENDERS
HAVE NOT CLINCHED
PLAYOFF SPOT
8-7
WEST
310-5		 610-5
CLINCHED
NORTH
211-4		 STILL POSSIBLE:
11-4 511-5
EAST
113-2		 611-5
CLINCHED
NFC Playoff Picture
DIVISION
LEADERS		 WILD CARD NOTES
WEST
47-8		 511-4 PACKERS BEAT
GIANTS AND WIN
COMMON GAMES
OVER BUCS
6-9
EAST
310-5		 69-6
9-6
NORTH
211-4		 9-6
CLINCHED 9-6
SOUTH
112-3
11-4
OUT ON TIEBREAKERS CLINCHED PLAYOFF SPOT

Who SHOULD Be Going to Which Bowls?

by

The bowls if selections were based on my C Ratings. Bowl tie-ins often reflect my attempt to synthesize the (often not entirely in agreement) bowl selection orders given by Wikipedia and CBS Sports, although the role of the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl in the WAC selection process, given how uncertain Wikipedia remains about it and the WAC selection rules seemingly being written before its involvement, remains perplexing. Teams in parenthesis are the teams that would be selected with Auburn and Oregon still going to the national championship game. (It’s always been a problem that strength of schedule takes the form strictly of opponents’ A Rating which itself doesn’t take into account strength of schedule, allowing inflated ratings from weak conferences, but it became really apparent this year.)

Despite its role in preventing a playoff, I actually feel a little sentimental towards the Rose Bowl’s Big 10/Pac-10 matchup this year; of all the years the Rose Bowl would be forced to pick a non-BCS team, it would be a year where the Pac-10 had a very, very strong second choice in Stanford! This isn’t a year like 2007 where the Rose Bowl would have blindly chosen an Illinois team markedly inferior to its alternatives.

For reasons I’ve covered before, don’t expect the Golden Bowl selections until late in the week at best. For the record, the non-BCS bowls in order of ideal prestige are now: Capitol One, Cotton, Outback, Alamo, Chick-fil-A, Gator, Champs Sports/Insight, Holiday, Sun/Texas, MAACO/Meineke Car Care, Music City, Liberty, Poinsettia, Independence, and so on. With Arizona State likely not bowl-eligible for playing two FCS opponents and finishing 6-6, Tennessee is the only bowl-eligible team not going to a bowl.

All times Eastern.

New Mexico Bowl

Albuquerque, NM

MWC

WAC (#3?)

December 18 

BYU

Western Michigan

2 PM 

ESPN 

uDrove Humanitarian Bowl

Boise, ID

MAC

WAC (#2?)

December 18

Miami (OH)

Fresno State

5:30

ESPN

R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl

New Orleans, LA

C-USA

Sun Belt

December 18

SMU

Florida International

9 PM

ESPN

Beef ‘O’ Brady’s St. Petersburg Bowl

St. Petersburg, FL

BE /SB

C-USA

December 21

Syracuse/USF

Southern Miss

8 PM

ESPN

MAACO Bowl Las Vegas

Las Vegas, NV

MWC

Pac-10

December 22

Air Force

Toledo

8 PM

ESPN

Poinsettia Bowl

San Diego, CA

MWC

Navy/WAC

December 23

San Diego State

Navy

8 PM

ESPN

Sheraton Hawaii Bowl

Honolulu, HI

C-USA ?

Hawaii/WAC ?

December 24

Ohio

Hawaii

8 PM

ESPN

Little Caesars Bowl

Detroit, MI

B10 /SB

MAC

December 26

Middle Tenn. St.

Northern Illinois

8:30

ESPN

AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl

Shreveport, LA

ACC /SB

MWC /SB

December 27

Maryland

Utah

5 PM

ESPN2

Champs Sports Bowl

Orlando, FL

ACC

Big East /ND

December 28

NC State

West Virginia

6:30

ESPN

Insight Bowl

Tempe, AZ

Big 12

Big 10

December 28

Nebraska

Michigan

10 PM

ESPN

Military Bowl

Washington, DC

ACC /MAC

C-USA

December 29

Boston College

East Carolina

2:30

ESPN

Texas Bowl

Houston, TX

Big 12

Big 10

December 29

Kansas State

Penn State

6 PM

ESPN

Valero Alamo Bowl

San Antonio, TX

Big 12

Pac-10

December 29

Missouri

Arizona

9:15

ESPN

Bell Helicopter Armed Forces Bowl

Dallas, TX

C-USA

Army/MWC

December 30

Tulsa

Army

Noon

ESPN

New Era Pinstripe Bowl

New York, NY

Big 12

Big East

December 30

Baylor

Louisville/Pittsburgh

3:20

ESPN

Music City Bowl

Nashville, TN

ACC

SEC ?

December 30

North Carolina

Florida

6:40

ESPN

Bridgepoint Education Holiday Bowl

San Diego, CA

Big 12

Pac-10

December 30

Texas A&M

Wash/Arizona St

10 PM

ESPN

Meineke Car Care Bowl

Charlotte, NC

ACC

Big East

December 31

Clemson

Pittsburgh/ND

Noon

ESPN

Hyundai Sun Bowl

El Paso, TX

ACC

Pac-10

December 31

Miami (FL)

ND/Washington

2 PM

CBS

AutoZone Liberty Bowl

Memphis, TN

C-USA

SEC ?

December 31

Central Florida

Mississippi State

3:30

ESPN

Chick-fil-A Bowl

Atlanta, GA

ACC

SEC

December 31

Florida State

LSU

7:30

ESPN

TicketCity Bowl

Dallas, TX

Big 12

Big 10

January 1

Texas Tech

Northwestern

Noon

ESPNU

Outback Bowl

Tampa, FL

Big 10

SEC /4 (East)

January 1

Michigan State

South Carolina

1 PM

ABC

Capitol One Bowl

Orlando, FL

Big 10

SEC

January 1

Iowa

Alabama

1 PM

ESPN

Gator Bowl

Jacksonville, FL

Big 10

SEC

January 1

Illinois

Georgia

1:30

ESPN2

Rose Bowl Game pres. by VIZIO

Pasadena, CA

Big 10 /BCS

Pac-10 /BCS

January 1

Ohio State

Oregon (Boise/Stan)

5 PM

ESPN

Tostitos Fiesta Bowl

Glendale, AZ

Big 12 /BCS

BCS

January 1

Oklahoma

Connecticut

8:30

ESPN

Discover Orange Bowl

Miami, FL

ACC /BCS

BCS

January 3

Virginia Tech

Wisconsin

8:30

ESPN

Allstate Sugar Bowl

New Orleans, LA

SEC /BCS

BCS

January 4

Auburn (TCU)

Stanford (Boise St)

8:30

ESPN

GoDaddy.com Bowl

Mobile, AL

MAC

Sun Belt

January 6

Temple

Troy

8 PM

ESPN

AT&T Cotton Bowl

Arlington, TX

Big 12

SEC /4 (West)

January 7

Oklahoma State

Arkansas

8 PM

FOX

BBVA Compass Bowl

Birmingham, AL

Big East

SEC /SB

January 8

USF/Louisville

Kentucky

Noon

ESPN

Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl

San Francisco, CA

P10 /ACC

WAC (#1?)/ACC

January 9

Georgia Tech

Nevada

9 PM

ESPN

BCS National Championship Game

Glendale, AZ

BCS

BCS

January 10

Boise St (Auburn)

TCU (Oregon)

8:30

ESPN

2010 College Football Rankings – Week 13

by

As usual, people are quick to overreact to a single loss. Boise State’s loss to #16 Nevada was an OT loss on the road to a good team, so they don’t slip much. Enough to fall back behind TCU, but not any further.

It did, however, greatly clear up the national championship picture. TCU is now the only potential interlocutor or fly in the ointment for a Oregon-#7 Auburn national championship game. Funnily, Auburn may have a greater chance of being left out of the National Championship Game if they lose in the SEC Title Game than if they had lost in the Iron Bowl, and not because of the opponent or the time in and of itself, but because the polls would balk at sending Auburn to the National Title Game without winning their conference. 2005, anyone? If Auburn does go to the national championship game without winning their conference, it will be one more point of the non-BCS conferences against the BCS… but TCU will probably be told, “Take your whining and stick it in your bag and carry it with you to the Big East.”

Me, I’m just rooting for Auburn to lose and TCU to make the National Title Game just so Stanford can go to the Rose Bowl…

Other notes on this week’s C Ratings:

  • This week’s ratings reflect corrections to my database for no fewer than three games I had attributed to the wrong team, affecting, among others, the ratings for Oklahoma, #15 Arkansas, #18 Iowa, and the Big Ten in general. (One of the games was the Iowa State-Oklahoma game being recorded as an Iowa-Oklahoma game.) This will be the last post in this format; next week’s ratings will be published alongside my annual “Who SHOULD Go To Which Bowls?” post.
  • Wisconsin is really determined to prove they deserve to win the Big Ten. They’re now ahead of Auburn and only two spots behind Ohio State. Meanwhile, Ohio State is now up to fifth in the BCS with Boise’s loss, and could well go to a BCS bowl, if not the Rose.
  • South Carolina missed tying the Big 12 Title Game for Game of the Week by .145 in the C Ratings behind #12 Missouri. Underrated (or properly rated but ignored) teams to look for in the non-BCS bowls: a possible #14 Alabama-Iowa or Michigan State Capitol One Bowl matchup, plus Oklahoma State, Missouri, South Carolina, Arkansas, #23 Texas A&M. #18 LSU is barely worth mentioning.
  • Iowa now outranks #22 Michigan State. That game held very much true to form in retrospect.
  • Suddenly Louisville isn’t far behind Pitt in the rankings. #19 West Virginia may have one of the highest ratings for a Big East team this season, but they need help to get the Big East BCS bid. But that help is a very real possibility. USF is ahead of Connecticut in the C Ratings.
  • In the past there have been problems with the ACC having so much parity that teams out of the title game hunt have been leading the conference while the teams in the title game struggle to make the Top 25. Not this year. The conference’s two best teams will play in the title game. In fact, every BCS conference title game pits the two best teams in their respective conferences regardless of division.
  • Northern Illinois has been a MAC mainstay in the Other Positive B Points in past years, to the point where I wondered if something about their schedule or style of play guaranteed them positive B Points late in the year regardless of how well they were actually doing. Well, this year they could win the conference title.

Best game of week: Oklahoma v. Nebraska in Arlington, 8pm ET, ABC
Complete C Ratings

The realignment wheel keeps on turning…

by

I have to say, I’m disappointed and a little confused to hear of TCU’s move to the Big East, a move that effectively ends any chance of changing or breaking the hegemony of the Big Six conferences over college football. Admittedly, adding Boise State isn’t quite an equal trade-off for losing Utah and BYU, but a conference with both TCU and Boise State wouldn’t fall that far from the Mountain West’s former heights. The timing of the announcement is especially auspicious considering how soon it came after Nevada’s upset win over Boise, suggesting another program approaching the same level was moving to the Mountain West with the Broncos.

I understand why the Big East gets out of the deal – access to the fertile recruiting grounds of Texas – but I’m having a hard time understanding what TCU gets, especially having to travel so far to play all their games in all sports. Sure, they join an AQ conference (as has for some reason become the new Orwellian term for what we used to call “BCS conferences”), but what does that really mean? All it really means is an automatic trip to a BCS bowl if they win the conference, which I guess is kinda a good thing, but it’s de facto the same thing they were getting in the Mountain West, only there going undefeated was a prerequisite. The Big East is, to put it bluntly, the laughingstock of the BCS conferences. While there have been years when it’s been strong and even a year or two when it’s produced national championship contenders, there have been far too many years like this one, when it’s struggled to get even a single team in the Top 25. TCU is probably as likely to go undefeated in the Big East as they were in the Mountain West, and more importantly, as likely to play for a national championship, that is, hardly. Pollsters are a bit smarter than they’re given credit for, and don’t automatically value “BCS conferences”, but rather particular conferences like the SEC perceived to have more good teams.

And while the Big East does get a foothold in Texas, the conference as a whole is becoming increasingly unwieldy – already stretched thin at 16 teams, it now just gets ridiculous at 17, pushed even further towards a split of the football and non-football schools at the same time that prospect becomes increasingly unlikely with the football side adding a team that’s Christian but not Catholic while encouraging Villanova to jump up to FBS (straight to a BCS conference, even!) for no other reason than it’s already associated with the conference. Sure, they recently won ONE FCS championship, but still, who wants to bet Villanova will prove to be as bad a fit in the Big East football conference as Temple was? I’m getting increasingly despondent at the after-effects of the ongoing realignment and the Franken-conferences it’s producing in the non-BCS; apparently the WAC’s big idea for saving itself after losing three of its best teams is to add the likes of… drum roll please… Texas State! (On the plus side, with so many FCS teams moving up to FBS, it creates more room for the NCAA to add more pointless bowl games, after raising the specter of a 5-7 bowl team with this year’s additions!)

The big loser in this is Boise State. Boise thought they were creating a non-BCS superconference with too many good teams for the BCS to ignore and not give AQ status to, and they might have had the Big 12 not stopped Texas from bolting to the Pac-10. Now they find themselves in a situation not that different from where they were in the WAC, especially with rumors the Mountain West was considering adding Hawaii, a situation basically equivalent to the WAC adding Air Force – only with arguably a worse TV contract, especially if the Mountain West sticks to form and shoves its few known-before-the-season marquee games to CBS College Sports or the mtn., but that’s an entirely different rant. Had they known this would happen, they might have just stayed in the WAC.

But what makes Boise’s situation even worse, as well as the situation of all the other non-BCS schools and BCS opponents, is that (not counting BYU) they are now the only non-BCS school that matters. The plight of the non-BCS schools has effectively been reset to the status quo before 2005. Undefeated non-BCS schools may still go to BCS bowl games, but they will likely be fewer in number and, except for Boise themselves, treated much like Hawaii in 2007, not as legitimate national championship contenders; don’t expect any non-BCS team to be in the preseason polls ever again. Boise probably knows this and is chomping at the bit to leave the Mountain West for likely independence at the next opportunity, unless that experiment fails for BYU. Without the pressure from the non-BCS schools, there will be much less pressure for a playoff and the BCS status quo could last for far longer than its opponents have heretofore anticipated.

Unless, of course, TCU going undefeated in the Big East but passed over for the national championship by a 1-loss team from a better conference creates more pressure for a playoff than ever before…but it may be more likely that the BCS simply pushes TCU through, no matter how weak, and simply closes its ears to the complaints from the increasingly empty non-BCS room.