After week 5, 65 teams are still hopeful of a Playoff bid—some with a good shot, others with hardly a prayer even if they win out. Our College Football Playoff Odds chart tells who is the most likely to get to the Playoff given their current status, their quality, and future schedule.
But many undefeated teams don't show up on the chart because their odds of finishing with a good record are poor. Fans, however, like to imagine their team winning out the rest of the way so here, we divide teams into their chance for getting to the Playoff if they win out.
68 teams still have a chance for one of the four slots, with odds ranging from good to nearly zero, even if they win out.
Tier One: Undefeated Power Five conference teams (15): these teams are guaranteed a spot if they win out, plain and simple. What if there are more than four? There won't be. At most five teams can get through conference play undefeated, and Notre Dame makes six. Even four undefeated major-conference teams would be a historic high, especially in the conference championship era. These are the only teams that control their destiny.
- Alabama (4-0)
- Arizona (4-0)
- Auburn (4-0)
- Baylor (4-0)
- Florida St (4-0)
- Georgia Tech (4-0)
- Mississippi (4-0)
- Mississippi St (4-0)
- Nebraska (5-0)
- Notre Dame (4-0)
- Oklahoma (4-0)
- Oregon (4-0)
- TCU (3-0)
- Texas A&M (5-0)
- UCLA (4-0)
Tier Two: Power Five conference teams with one loss (25): any of the following teams that wins out has a good shot at making the playoff, but there is no guarantee. In almost every case at this point, winning out would mean winning the conference, so many of these teams still do control their destiny. But every 1-loss team is at the mercy of the Committee, and their odds will depend on how many undefeated teams there are and who the other 1-loss Power Five teams are.
- Arizona St (3-1)
- California (3-1)
- Duke (4-1)
- Florida (2-1)
- Georgia (3-1)
- Iowa (4-1)
- Kansas St (3-1)
- Kentucky (3-1)
- Louisville (4-1)
- LSU (4-1)
- Maryland (4-1)
- Michigan St (3-1)
- Minnesota (4-1)
- Missouri (4-1)
- North Carolina St (4-1)
- Ohio State (3-1)
- Oklahoma St (3-1)
- Oregon St (3-1)
- Penn State (4-1)
- Rutgers (4-1)
- Southern Cal (3-1)
- Stanford (3-1)
- Utah (3-1)
- Washington (4-1)
- Wisconsin (3-1)
Tier Three: Undefeated "Group of Five" teams (2): We include BYU here even though they aren't in a conference, but they're in the same boat as Marshall. They can finish undefeated, and then their fate is completely up in the air. If there is a shortage of undefeated and 1-loss Power Five teams, they have a decent chance. If not, their odds are poor since their schedules just aren't strong enough. However, any undefeated team is going to be in the discussion, whether that discussion is serious or not.
- BYU (4-0)
- Marshall (4-0)
Tier Four: 2-loss Power Five teams (18): These teams have the most "range" in terms of how they'll be viewed if they win out. Ending up with 2 losses as a power conference team could mean they're in the top five nationally, or they might be ranked #20 in the polls and ignored by the Committee. So the teams here could rank above the Tier Three teams, and even above some Tier Two teams, or they could be below the Tier Five teams. The specifics matter here more than anywhere, but at this stage any of these teams that wins out will be riding a long winning streak and might be a conference champ, so a decent level of destiny-control is still there for some.
- Arkansas (3-2)
- Boston College (3-2)
- Clemson (2-2)
- Illinois (3-2)
- Indiana (2-2)
- Kansas (2-2)
- Miami FL (3-2)
- North Carolina (2-2)
- Northwestern (2-2)
- Pittsburgh (3-2)
- South Carolina (3-2)
- Syracuse (2-2)
- Tennessee (2-2)
- Texas (2-2)
- Texas Tech (2-2)
- Virginia (3-2)
- Virginia Tech (3-2)
- West Virginia (2-2)
Tier Five: Group of Five teams with 1 loss (8): These teams have almost no hope. But if there is a disastrous year like 2007 when almost every team has 2 losses, suddenly 1-loss teams will be in the mix. Their odds of being chosen over the Power Five 2-loss teams is small unless they have a really good case, and already, many of the teams below have a poor case due to who they lost to. But it's still above absolute zero.
- Air Force (3-1)
- Cincinnati (2-1)
- Colorado St (3-1)
- East Carolina (3-1)
- Louisiana-Monroe (3-1)
- Nevada (3-1)
- Northern Illinois (3-1)
- Temple (3-1)
Power Five teams with three losses, and other teams with two losses are not going to make the Playoff; their odds are exactly zero. There are 60 such teams so we won't list them, but by conference here are the number of teams still alive:
- American Athletic: 3 of 11 (Cincinnati, East Carolina, Temple alive)
- ACC: 13 of 14 (Wake Forest gone)
- Big Ten: 12 of 14 (Michigan, Purdue gone)
- Big Twelve: 9 of 10 (Iowa State gone)
- Conference USA: 1 of 13 (Marshall alive)
- Independents: 2 of 4 (BYU, Notre Dame alive, Army, Navy gone)
- MAC: 1 of 13 (Northern Illinois alive)
- Mountain West: 3 of 12 (Air Force, Colorado State, Nevada alive)
- Pac-12: 10 of 12 (Colorado, Washington State gone)
- SEC: 13 of 14 (Vanderbilt gone)
- Sun Belt: 1 of 11 (Louisiana-Monroe alive)
Committee member Barry Alvarez using margin-of-victory based power rating for College Football Playoff
When the new College Football Playoff was announced with great fanfare and a star-studded Committee was introduced, the college football world rejoiced: No more computers! And no more looking at the polls! But it's pretty clear that computers and polls are what the Committee is going to use to make its decisions, which will probably look a lot more like the BCS results than anyone wants to admit.
Let's take the polls. The AP and coaches poll are created by sportswriters and coaches. The Harris poll (used by the BCS) was a mix of former players, coaches, and media members. The College Football Playoff committee has the same makeup—current Athletic Directors mixed with ex-coaches and players. The names may be "bigger" but there's no reason to believe their choices will be more informed than the aggregate of sportswriters or coaches in the AP and USA poll.
Then there's the computers. While the six systems used by the BCS are gone, the Committee has signed up with a service that will provide a variety of statistics. They'll take those into consideration the same way the NCAA basketball selection committee uses the "Nitty-Gritty" report to select its 68 teams in March. The difference is there is no "RPI" equivalent supplied for the football committee.
But should there be? Tons of information with no way to digest it can be used to justify anything. A good power rating provides a way of digesting thousands of points of information. Case in point: Barry Alvarez describes a very basic and important kind of power rating when he talks about criteria he will use:
Hmm, let's see. Comparison of points scored to the opponent's average points yielded? And vice versa? And if we take that through multiple cycles until the numbers don't change? Then you have a margin-of-victory based power rating. Much like our Strength power rating, or Sagarin's predictor, or the SRS from pro-football-reference.com.
ESPN's article makes pains to distance what he's saying from margin of victory, which was verboten in the BCS era:
Which of course is impossible. If you are paying "close attention" to relative offensive and defensive performance, you are ultimately paying close attention to margin of victory. You are just adjusting it for strength of schedule, which is what a power rating does.
And this is what is going to happen as the Committee becomes more versed in how to rank college football teams. There's no doubt the Committee has tons of college football expertise, but there's no indication at all that they have any expertise in ranking college football teams. The two are not nearly the same thing.
Right now their focus is on information, and deciding what information is relevant. Perhaps each member will have "pet" statistics to use. They might each use a different method to decide what "strength of schedule" means, and it's important since that's pretty much all we've heard them talk about since the committee was formed.
Maybe as the committee members think about the problem more—what constitutes quality?—then they will replicate some of the solutions that have already been used to rank teams in the past. Alvarez took the first step in replicating a Strength/Predictor/SRS power rating. Others might come up with MOV-free descriptions. They might have programmers implement some of these systems. If, say, half of the committee members do so, then there will be six computer programs that will be part of the Playoff decision process.
Add those six computer programs to the Harris/USA-like mix of coaches and football players on the decision Committee, and it will be like the BCS never went away!
Reblog (0) |