clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Midweek Musings - How Would You Rank Teams this Year?

UNC at #5 lol

Photo by Dannie Walls/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

The College Football Playoff committee is going to be faced with a unique challenge this year - how do you put together a ranking of the top 4 teams (as well as the rest of the top 25) when practically no two teams will have the same resume?

In most years, teams play 12 games, with a handful playing 13 as part of conference championship games, before the final rankings are released.

In most years, a team with zero or one loss is all but a shoe-in for the top four. Let’s assume that undefeated teams are still basically all in on the CFP.

Teams normally going 11-1 or 12-1 would have a win percentage of 91.67% or 93.31%.

This isn’t most years.

The ACC is scheduled to play 10 conference games plus one out of conference game. A team from the ACC going 10-1 is now looking at a win percentage of 90.91%.

The SEC is only doing a 10-game conference-only slate. At 9-1, you’re looking at 90% win percentage.

The Big 12 is also doing a 10-game slate, with 9 conference games and one out of conference game.

Then there’s the Big 10, with it’s 9-game schedule. At 8-1, a runner up B1G team is now looking at an 88.89% win percentage.

Lastly, we have the Pac-12, which is doing a 7-game lineup. Even if you add in the conference championship game, the runner up might go 7-1. Will the CFP allow in a team that is just at an 87.5% win percentage?

And that’s not even to mention that a lot of games have already been postponed, with many likely to be canceled. How do you weigh a team like Florida, that could very well end the season at 8-1, while UGA or Alabama could be at 9-2, by virtue of playing an extra game.

How does 8-0 USC look compared to 8-1 PSU?

It’s going to be tough for the committee this year, and if it turns out that there are four undefeated teams at the end of it all, well, that’s probably the simplest answer.

But we all know things are never simple.