It seems that every year I have a gripe with one of the college football playoff committee's four selections. This year it's Alabama. I don't know anyone who has any problem with the committee's three other picks: The ACC and defending national champion 1-loss Clemson Tigers; the Big XII champion 1-loss Oklahoma Sooners; and the SEC champion 1-loss Georgia Bulldogs. That leaves one spot to be filled. While ESPN and other media outlets seemed to make the debate a black-and-white argument between Alabama and Ohio State, I'm going to add two teams to the mix: Central Florida and USC.
Let's first look at the committee's documented protocol for selecting the four playoff teams. Here's what they allegedly look at when comparing teams:
"1) Championships won
2) Strength of schedule
3) Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
4) Comparative outcomes of common opponents"
Based on that criteria, let's compare the four teams, starting with Alabama.
Alabama Crimson Tide
Record: 11-1 (.917)
2-1 vs. ranked teams (#17 LSU and at #24 Mississippi State)
8 home (8-0), 4 away (3-1) games
8 bowl eligibles (7-1), 6 winning records (5-1)
Outscored opponents 469-138 (averages of 39.1 - 11.5 = 27.6)
Opponents record: 75-70 (.517)
Non-conference opponents record: 22-26 (.458)
Conference championships won: 0 (didn't make the SEC title game)
Central Florida Golden Knights
Record: 12-0 (1.000)
3-0 vs. ranked teams (#20 Memphis twice and #23 South Florida)
6 home (6-0), 5 away (5-0), 1 neutral (1-0)
7 bowl eligibles (7-0), 6 winning records (6-0)
Outscored opponents 593-302 (averages of 49.4 - 25.2 = 24.2)
Opponents record: 70-72 (.493)
Non-conference opponents record: 12-24 (.333)
Conference championships won: 1
Ohio State Buckeyes
Record: 11-2 (.846)
3-1 vs. ranked teams (#9 Penn State, #16 Michigan State, and #6 Wisconsin)
7 home (6-1), 5 away (4-1), 1 neutral (1-0)
7 bowl eligibles (5-2), 7 winning records (5-2)
Outscored opponents 562-248 (averages of 43.2 - 19.1 = 24.1)
Opponents record: 82-67 (.550)
Non-conference opponents record: 25-11 (.694)
Conference championships won: 1
USC Trojans
Record: 11-2 (.846)
2-2 vs. ranked teams (#12 Stanford twice)
7 home (7-0), 5 away (3-2), 1 neutral (1-0)
10 bowl eligibles (8-2), 6 winning records (4-2)
Outscored opponents 449-342 (averages of 34.5 - 26.3 = 8.2)
Opponents record: 85-72 (.541)
Non-conference opponents record: 21-15 (.583)
Conference championships won: 1
Since none of these four teams played each other in the regular season and the only common opponent was Maryland getting blown out by both Ohio State and Central Florida (62-14 at home and 38-10 on the road, respectively), this should have come down to conference championships and strength of schedule. Given the fact Central Florida, Ohio State, and USC won conference championships, whereas Alabama did not, the Crimson Tide would have to make up for that void with an exceptional strength of schedule. Sadly for them, they don't posses that on their resumé.
Alabama's four non-conference opponents went a combined 22-26 this season. Their best non-conference win was against Mountain West runner-up Fresno State, who finished the season 9-4. They also defeated an underachieving Florida State team, Colorado State, and Mercer of the FCS. Even their in-conference schedule was underwhelming. Of the four bowl ineligible SEC teams, the Tide played three of them (Vanderbilt, Arkansas, and Tennessee). As a matter of fact, the two SEC teams Alabama squared off with outside their division went a combined 9-15. So not only did Alabama not win a conference championship, but their overall resumé is not very impressive. Their biggest argument may be that they have a better loss than both Ohio State and USC, as while Alabama fell to in-state rival Auburn on the road by 12, Ohio State and USC got pummeled by Iowa and Notre Dame. I'm sorry, but when a team's loss is their lone argument for being in the playoff discussion, they're not playoff worthy.
In other words, Alabama shouldn't even be in the debate for the #4 spot in the playoffs. The debate should be between unbeaten Central Florida, Big Ten champ Ohio State, and Pac-12 champ USC. USC matched Alabama with wins against ranked opponents, while both Central Florida and Ohio State one-upped the Tide in that category. USC played two more bowl eligible teams than Alabama, while Central Florida and Ohio State played just one fewer.
Given all of the data, here's how the playoff committee should have ranked the #4 through #7 teams, in descending order:
7. Alabama: No conference championship; weren't even involved in the SEC title game; had an unimpressive schedule in- and out-of-conference; and their key win was against LSU, who lost to Troy.
6. Ohio State: I'm fine with the loss to Oklahoma. If that had been their lone setback, I'd give them more consideration for the #4 seed. That 31-point loss to 7-5 Iowa is difficult to ignore, however. If the Bucks had fallen by 7 points, that would have been one thing, but losing to an unranked and offensively inept at times Iowa Hawkeyes team by 31 points is quite another.
5. USC: Like Ohio State, USC had one excusable defeat, as they fell to #18 Washington State on the road in a Friday night game by a field goal. Also like Ohio State, the Trojans suffered an embarrassing defeat, as Notre Dame walloped them 49-14. The reason why I think the Trojans' losses aren't as bad as the Buckeyes' is the fact they were in the former of the two defeats (Ohio State wasn't), and the latter of their two defeats came at the hands of a team which was in the playoff discussion until the final couple of weeks. In addition to this, of USC's 13 opponents, 10, count them 10, are bowl eligible. As a matter of fact, we were two games away from saying the Trojans played 12 bowl eligible teams, as both California and Colorado finished 5-7.
4. Central Florida: The Golden Knights won their conference championship, defeated just as many or more ranked opponents as the three before-mentioned teams, and are the only undefeated team in the country.
I don't care about the so-called "eye-test." Eyes are biased and our declarations based on what we see are subjective. So I couldn't care less what my biased eyes tell me. I care about what the unbiased numbers tell me. The SEC is anything but dominant this year. They had a poorer record against the Power 5 and Notre Dame than both the Big Ten and Pac-12, finishing 7-9 in such games, while the other two conferences finished 7-6 and 7-3, respectively. Not only that, Central Florida is the only undefeated team left in all of college football. They've passed all the requirements set forth by the playoff committee, yet are left behind because of who they are, and that's the only reason Alabama was selected to join Clemson, Oklahoma, and Georgia in the playoff, because of who they are. They didn't win a conference championship. They didn't have a strong strength of schedule. They're Alabama, though, and unfortunately, that's all that matters to some.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/documents/2017/10/20//CFP_Selection_Committee_Protocol.pdf?id=23
Let's first look at the committee's documented protocol for selecting the four playoff teams. Here's what they allegedly look at when comparing teams:
"1) Championships won
2) Strength of schedule
3) Head-to-head competition (if it occurred)
4) Comparative outcomes of common opponents"
Based on that criteria, let's compare the four teams, starting with Alabama.
Alabama Crimson Tide
Record: 11-1 (.917)
2-1 vs. ranked teams (#17 LSU and at #24 Mississippi State)
8 home (8-0), 4 away (3-1) games
8 bowl eligibles (7-1), 6 winning records (5-1)
Outscored opponents 469-138 (averages of 39.1 - 11.5 = 27.6)
Opponents record: 75-70 (.517)
Non-conference opponents record: 22-26 (.458)
Conference championships won: 0 (didn't make the SEC title game)
Central Florida Golden Knights
Record: 12-0 (1.000)
3-0 vs. ranked teams (#20 Memphis twice and #23 South Florida)
6 home (6-0), 5 away (5-0), 1 neutral (1-0)
7 bowl eligibles (7-0), 6 winning records (6-0)
Outscored opponents 593-302 (averages of 49.4 - 25.2 = 24.2)
Opponents record: 70-72 (.493)
Non-conference opponents record: 12-24 (.333)
Conference championships won: 1
Ohio State Buckeyes
Record: 11-2 (.846)
3-1 vs. ranked teams (#9 Penn State, #16 Michigan State, and #6 Wisconsin)
7 home (6-1), 5 away (4-1), 1 neutral (1-0)
7 bowl eligibles (5-2), 7 winning records (5-2)
Outscored opponents 562-248 (averages of 43.2 - 19.1 = 24.1)
Opponents record: 82-67 (.550)
Non-conference opponents record: 25-11 (.694)
Conference championships won: 1
USC Trojans
Record: 11-2 (.846)
2-2 vs. ranked teams (#12 Stanford twice)
7 home (7-0), 5 away (3-2), 1 neutral (1-0)
10 bowl eligibles (8-2), 6 winning records (4-2)
Outscored opponents 449-342 (averages of 34.5 - 26.3 = 8.2)
Opponents record: 85-72 (.541)
Non-conference opponents record: 21-15 (.583)
Conference championships won: 1
Since none of these four teams played each other in the regular season and the only common opponent was Maryland getting blown out by both Ohio State and Central Florida (62-14 at home and 38-10 on the road, respectively), this should have come down to conference championships and strength of schedule. Given the fact Central Florida, Ohio State, and USC won conference championships, whereas Alabama did not, the Crimson Tide would have to make up for that void with an exceptional strength of schedule. Sadly for them, they don't posses that on their resumé.
Alabama's four non-conference opponents went a combined 22-26 this season. Their best non-conference win was against Mountain West runner-up Fresno State, who finished the season 9-4. They also defeated an underachieving Florida State team, Colorado State, and Mercer of the FCS. Even their in-conference schedule was underwhelming. Of the four bowl ineligible SEC teams, the Tide played three of them (Vanderbilt, Arkansas, and Tennessee). As a matter of fact, the two SEC teams Alabama squared off with outside their division went a combined 9-15. So not only did Alabama not win a conference championship, but their overall resumé is not very impressive. Their biggest argument may be that they have a better loss than both Ohio State and USC, as while Alabama fell to in-state rival Auburn on the road by 12, Ohio State and USC got pummeled by Iowa and Notre Dame. I'm sorry, but when a team's loss is their lone argument for being in the playoff discussion, they're not playoff worthy.
In other words, Alabama shouldn't even be in the debate for the #4 spot in the playoffs. The debate should be between unbeaten Central Florida, Big Ten champ Ohio State, and Pac-12 champ USC. USC matched Alabama with wins against ranked opponents, while both Central Florida and Ohio State one-upped the Tide in that category. USC played two more bowl eligible teams than Alabama, while Central Florida and Ohio State played just one fewer.
Given all of the data, here's how the playoff committee should have ranked the #4 through #7 teams, in descending order:
7. Alabama: No conference championship; weren't even involved in the SEC title game; had an unimpressive schedule in- and out-of-conference; and their key win was against LSU, who lost to Troy.
6. Ohio State: I'm fine with the loss to Oklahoma. If that had been their lone setback, I'd give them more consideration for the #4 seed. That 31-point loss to 7-5 Iowa is difficult to ignore, however. If the Bucks had fallen by 7 points, that would have been one thing, but losing to an unranked and offensively inept at times Iowa Hawkeyes team by 31 points is quite another.
5. USC: Like Ohio State, USC had one excusable defeat, as they fell to #18 Washington State on the road in a Friday night game by a field goal. Also like Ohio State, the Trojans suffered an embarrassing defeat, as Notre Dame walloped them 49-14. The reason why I think the Trojans' losses aren't as bad as the Buckeyes' is the fact they were in the former of the two defeats (Ohio State wasn't), and the latter of their two defeats came at the hands of a team which was in the playoff discussion until the final couple of weeks. In addition to this, of USC's 13 opponents, 10, count them 10, are bowl eligible. As a matter of fact, we were two games away from saying the Trojans played 12 bowl eligible teams, as both California and Colorado finished 5-7.
4. Central Florida: The Golden Knights won their conference championship, defeated just as many or more ranked opponents as the three before-mentioned teams, and are the only undefeated team in the country.
I don't care about the so-called "eye-test." Eyes are biased and our declarations based on what we see are subjective. So I couldn't care less what my biased eyes tell me. I care about what the unbiased numbers tell me. The SEC is anything but dominant this year. They had a poorer record against the Power 5 and Notre Dame than both the Big Ten and Pac-12, finishing 7-9 in such games, while the other two conferences finished 7-6 and 7-3, respectively. Not only that, Central Florida is the only undefeated team left in all of college football. They've passed all the requirements set forth by the playoff committee, yet are left behind because of who they are, and that's the only reason Alabama was selected to join Clemson, Oklahoma, and Georgia in the playoff, because of who they are. They didn't win a conference championship. They didn't have a strong strength of schedule. They're Alabama, though, and unfortunately, that's all that matters to some.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/documents/2017/10/20//CFP_Selection_Committee_Protocol.pdf?id=23
Comments
Post a Comment