Playoff Thoughts and Bowl Picks

The college football season is over and the bowls are starting, so let's take a moment to reflect on what was another awesome season.  What obviously made this season special was the inaugural four-team playoff.  Before I talk about the bowls, let's summarize what exactly we learned (or didn't learn) from the first year of the playoff selection process.

Wins over top 25 teams matter
Verdict: TRUE

After seeing TCU drop from third to sixth in the final poll, I took to Facebook in confusion:

In terms of basic football reasoning, my logic is sound.  Yes, Georgia Tech is clearly a better opponent than Iowa State (FSU and TCU's final week opponents, respectively), and this can make it difficult to compare what different teams accomplished in a given week.  That said, we can use tools like the Vegas line or other projections to compare what the teams did versus what we would expect them to do to an opponent of that caliber.  Since TCU destroyed Iowa State, and Florida State collected their seventh one-score victory of the year, it doesn't make sense that Florida State should now be ranked higher.  Of course, what I describe above is what should happen, which is not always what the committee actually does. 

After thinking about this some more, I think I understand the main reason that Florida State ended up leaping TCU in the final week.  That reason is top-25 wins.  With the victory over Georgia Tech, the Seminoles now have three wins against teams that ended up in the final rankings, while TCU has just two.  Arguing that this makes Florida State a better choice breaks down when you realize a few things:

1. Oklahoma fell out of the top-25 in the final week when they lost to Oklahoma State.  Sure, this hurts one of TCU's big wins, but it also helps one of their other wins against Oklahoma State.  It's bizarre that conference games (especially in the conference with a true round robin) can affect the committee's opinion of TCU.

2. Oklahoma should still be ranked anyway (13th in Sagarin, 13th in F/+), but the committee just had to get Minnesota in there, I guess.

In the end, this criterion appears to be one of the main things the committee will base its decisions on.  Teams that beat a lot of top-25 teams are generally going to be among the best teams, but simply compiling total wins against a subset of teams is overly-simplistic and doesn't account for a lot of the oddities that populate college football.

Conference titles matter
Verdict: HALF-TRUE

The most common reaction from pundits after the selection show was that the four playoff participants benefitted from playing in and winning their respective conference title games, while Baylor and TCU just played 12 games.  I think that sentiment is true to a degree, but I also think we should wait more than one year to declare that it's a major advantage for the larger leagues. 

There are a couple of reasons for this.  First, see the previous section.  More than anything else, I think the bump that Florida State and Ohio State saw was more from getting a quality win than winning their conference more definitively than Baylor/TCU.  This just happened to be a year where all of the participants in the titles games were good teams.*  Most other years, we'll probably see a bad team or two that won't benefit the victor in the committee's eyes.  Second, the whole concept of being the one conference without a title game is inherently a bit of a risk/reward.  Sure, there will be years where all of the other conferences submit a worthy champion.  More often than not though, that will not be the case.  Had Georgia Tech made one more play against Florida State, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation right now.  That the winner of the Big 12 avoids the extra game will probably end up benefitting the league most of the time.  Time will tell.

*Historically, most awful division champions are the result of the best team being on probation.  Since there aren't currently any teams on probation, we have a temporary break from that, so that could explain part of it.

The committee is looking for the "best" teams and not the most "deserving" teams
Verdict: HALF-TRUE

Before the season began, there seemed to be some chatter that the committee would be looking for the "best" teams as opposed to the "most deserving."  I've talked about the distinction before; basically, deserverism (as I call it) can be seen as a short-hand for using simple heuristics (head-to-head trumping all, for instance) to evaluate teams instead of doing the hard work to actually figure out who is better.  While there were some indications that the committee thought this way (Florida State falling below some one-loss teams), the previous sections indicate that the committee still heavily weights some deserver arguments.  Baylor finishing ahead of a superior TCU team because of the head-to-head win only further displays the committee's tendencies towards these heuristics.  This deserverism streak shouldn't come as too much of a surprise, as this passage shows up in the committee's charter:

"Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected."

Hey look, the committee uses quotes around deserve just like I do....maybe we're not that different, you and I.  In all seriousness, the line between "best" and "deserving" isn't as black and white as I often make it out to be; like most things, it exists on a spectrum.  While I lean towards 80/20* best/deserve, the committee appears to be something like 50/50.  I hope they come around to my line of thinking at some point, but at least there are signs of an appreciation for picking the "best" teams.

*I say this because a college football season is inherently a small sample.  No metric we create is going to perfectly describe who exactly the best teams are, and the margin of error will typically be larger than the margins between similar teams.  If all else seems reasonably equal, then I have no problem using things like to head-to-head to break ties.

Number of losses trumps most everything else
Verdict: VERY TRUE

This was a concern for me since the first poll came out, when we saw mediocre one-loss teams ranked above superior two-loss teams.  Ever since then, the poll has been ordered by number of losses, with only a few exceptions.  While ordering teams by number of losses often provides a decent ranking, the variances in schedule strength and actual performance make it far from perfect.  The most egregious example in the final poll comes at #8 and 9, with a solid but unspectacular 10-2 Michigan State team ranked above a 9-3 Ole Miss team that is in the top five in many quantitative models.  Ole Miss has clearly had a tougher road (#6 SOS according to Sagarin, compared with Michigan State's 60th), and also has a painstakingly close loss to Auburn that should be counted as a tie for evaluative purposes.  In short, it's difficult to make an argument that Michigan State is better than Ole Miss.  While the committee indicated that it would highly value good strength of schedules, it appears that that only matters between teams with the same record.  I worry that this may lead to teams weakening their non-conference schedules even further so as to increase their odds of being 12-0 or 11-1.  We shall see.

In summation, the selection committee appears to be a little better than the polls, which still have FSU above Oregon.  I will happily take whatever improvements I can.  The committee also appears to be a touch better than its basketball equivalent, as there at least is no dreadful RPI to worry about.  There are legitimate concerns about the metrics the committee is using, the lack of diversity on the committee (in terms of age and experience - almost everyone is a football coaching and/or administrating lifer), and unconscious biases towards the blue bloods of the sport.  That said, we at least have a framework that allows for a more reasonable number of teams to compete for a title, and a methodology for arriving there that most people are at least somewhat happy with.  All in all, I think the first year of the playoff went pretty well, and I'm excited for the future.

Now onto the bowls.  As I've done for the past three years, I'll go through all of the bowls and make my picks, attaching a confidence from 1 to 38 (yeah there's 38 bowls now) to each game.  Rather than forcing comments on each bowl, I'll just write about the ones that are the most interesting.  Instead of ordering the bowls by chronology or confidence or something else, I have used Bill Connelly's watchability rankings, which are a novel way to sort out the ever-expanding bowl landscape.  I have also included some basic info about each team at no extra charge.  Next to the team name are three different rankings: The first is the Sagarin pure points rating (I use this since it seems to be the most predictive), the second is the Football Outsiders' F/+ ranking, and the third is the rank from the Massey Composite.  I'm not as high on the composite ratings as the others, namely because it includes a lot of odd-looking ratings that have Florida State #1.  Still, it's a good gut check for the other two ratings: Because it includes so many different inputs, it's unlikely that a team is significantly better or worse than their ranking.  Finally, I have included the Vegas spread (as of December 13), the F/+ spread, and the implied Sagarin spread from the pure points ratings.

#38: Utah State (57,59,47) vs. UTEP (87,94,82)
Sagarin: Utah State by 8
F/+: Utah State by 18
Vegas: Utah State by 10.5
Mike's Pick: Utah State (30 confidence points)

The defending WAC champions have had a nice season in spite of terrible injury luck (they're currently down three quarterbacks and four linebackers).  In theory, this should make it a closer game than the numbers suggest, but save for a blowout loss to a very good Boise team, the Aggies have persevered.

#37: Houston (69,79,75) vs. Pitt (45,39,59)
Sagarin: Pitt by 7.5
F/+: Pitt by 23
Vegas: Pitt by 3
Mike's Pick: Pitt (12 points)

Well, at least Pitt's used to playing with an interim coach.  Soon, you too can be the Panthers' coach.

#36: Nevada (68,64,63) vs. Louisiana-Lafayette (88,86,74)
Sagarin: Nevada by 4.5
F/+: Nevada by 11
Vegas: ULL by 1
Mike's Pick: ULL (11 points)

The Ragin Cajun seniors literally don't know life without a season-ending trip to the New Orleans bowl, so I imagine that that is playing into the Vegas line.  I would call this the actual least exciting bowl matchup, but there have a few exciting versions of this game recently, so you never know.

#35: Illinois (75,78,70) vs. Louisiana Tech (38,48,45)
Sagarin: Louisiana Tech by 11.5
F/+: Louisiana Tech by 15
Vegas: Louisiana Tech by 6
Mike's Pick: Louisiana Tech (23 points)

#34: Miami (35,24,43) vs. South Carolina (36,56,48)
Sagarin: Pick
F/+: Miami by 17
Vegas: Miami by 3
Mike's Pick: Miami (31 points)

This game's excitement ranking is probably a touch low, but South Carolina's defense is so awful that I'm not sure it actually is underrated.  Assuming the Hurricane's late season malaise doesn't carry over, they should be able to roll.

#33: Washington (37,51,35) vs. Oklahoma State (58,68,55)
Sagarin: Washington by 6.5
F/+: Washington by 11
Vegas: Washington by 5.5
Mike's Pick: Washington (32 points)

Even if both of the offenses are awful, this game should be worth watching, mostly because of Shaq Thompson and Hau'oli Kikaha.  Their relentless pass rush was the only thing that kept Chris Peterson's first Huskie squad from being awful (compare the front seven havoc rank (16th) to the DB havoc rank (117th)). 

#32: Navy (67,50,64) vs. San Diego State (76,66,73)
Sagarin: Navy by 2
F/+: Navy by 10
Vegas: San Diego State by 2.5
Mike's Pick: Navy (22 points)

#31: Texas A&M (22,53,31) vs. West Virginia (23,34,30)
Sagarin: Pick
F/+: West Virginia by 13
Vegas: West Virginia by 3.5
Mike's Pick: West Virginia (25 points)

Because of the insane relative strength of the SEC West, computer models had a bit of trouble processing this season's results.  This led to some models that said it was the best division ever, while others were a little more modest.  Texas A&M is the poster child for this, as they are 30 spots higher in Sagarin than in F/+.  While there were signs of life from the young Aggies, I think West Virginia is slightly more complete and has the better chance of victory.

#30: South Alabama (100,93,92) vs. Bowling Green (106,104,94)
Sagarin: South Alabama by 2
F/+: South Alabama by 6
Vegas: South Alabama by 2.5
Mike's Pick: Bowling Green (10 points)

These teams are both awful, so let's go with the team that should have been better this year, in the hopes that they figure it out.  The Jaguars do have the excitement of playing in their first bowl on their side, but I'm not sure that means anything towards picking the game.

#29: Central Michigan (91,77,85) vs. Western Kentucky (73,65,67)
Sagarin: WKU by 5
F/+: WKU by 5
Vegas: WKU by 3
Mike's Pick: Western Kentucky (24 points)

#28: Maryland (51,45,51) vs. Stanford (19,23,28)
Sagarin: Stanford by 11
F/+: Stanford by 13
Vegas: Stanford by 14
Mike's Pick: Stanford (37 points)

#27: Fresno State (90,101,84) vs. Rice (82,95,77)
Sagarin: Rice by 2.5
F/+: Rice by 3
Vegas: Rice by 1
Mike's Pick: Rice (17 points)

#26: Rutgers (80,73,57) vs. UNC (62,74,60)
Sagarin: UNC by 4.5
F/+: Pick
Vegas: UNC by 3
Mike's Pick: Rutgers (4 points)

#25: Toledo (77,63,68) vs. Arkansas State (65,75,79)
Sagarin: Arkansas State by 2.5
F/+: Toledo by 7
Vegas: Toledo by 3
Mike's Pick: Toledo (18 points)

#24: Arkansas (11,20,27) vs. Texas (40,57,42)
Sagarin: Arkansas by 15
F/+: Arkansas by 21
Vegas: Arkansas by 6
Mike's Pick: Arkansas (36 points)

#23: Marshall (30,15,26) vs. NIU (66,72,49)
Sagarin: Marshall by 11.5
F/+: Marshall by 34 (what)
Vegas: Marshall by 10
Mike's Pick: Marshall (38 points)

#22: Boston College (41,29,41) vs. Penn State (53,54,62)
Sagarin: Boston College by 4
F/+: Boston College by 13
Vegas: Boston College by 2.5
Mike's Pick: Boston College (35 points)

This is probably too much confidence to give against a team that's got to be incredibly excited to be in a bowl.  That said, BC has been sneaky good all season, and I have to show confidence in someone.

#21: Iowa (44,55,50) vs. Tennessee (24,43,39)
Sagarin: Tennessee by 8
F/+: Tennessee by 6
Vegas: Tennessee by 3.5
Mike's Pick: Tennessee (19 points)

Very tempted to pick the upset here, but in theory, Tennessee has far too much talent to lose this game.  Here's a good summary of where Iowa football is right now.

#20: East Carolina (61,58,56) vs. Florida (18,41,34)
Sagarin: Florida by 14.5
F/+: Florida by 10
Vegas: Florida by 7
Mike's Pick: Florida (33 points)

#19: Notre Dame (32,36,36) vs. LSU (12,18,18)
Sagarin: LSU by 11.5
F/+: LSU by 12
Vegas: LSU by 7.5
Mike's Pick: LSU (28 points)

The impulse here is to ready for a beatdown, but with LSU plod-tastic offense, and a few Irish defenders returning from injury, there is a chance of respectability here.  That said, that probably won't happen, and I will quite luckily be in a car for the duration of the game.

#18: Cincinnati (49,46,40) vs. Virginia Tech (47,32,54)
Sagarin: Virginia Tech by 1
F/+: Virginia Tech by 10
Vegas: Cincinnati by 3
Mike's Pick: Cincinnati (3 points)

This is a bit of a toss-up, so we'll go with the team that got better over the course of the year.  Which means Tech will probably win by three scores.

#17: NC State (55,49,52) vs. UCF (56,52,46)
Sagarin: NC State by 1
F/+: NC State by 2
Vegas: UCF by 2
Mike's Pick: UCF (6 points)

#16: Utah (33,38,29) vs. Colorado State (52,30,33)
Sagarin: Utah by 6
F/+: Colorado State by 4
Vegas: Utah by 4.5
Mike's Pick: Colorado State (15 points)

This is one of my favorite matchups of bowl season, with Utah's insane defensive line going up against the dynamic Ram offense.  Utah's offense minus Dres Anderson was so painful to watch that I just can't pick them against a team that can score.  Be sure to enjoy Garrett Grayson before he gets drafted preposterously high next May (looking at you, Bears).

#15: Georgia (6,7,10) vs. Louisville (25,16,24)
Sagarin: Georgia by 12.5
F/+: Georgia by 10
Vegas: Georgia by 7
Mike's Pick: Louisville (2 points)

I have to go against the grain somewhere.  Hutson Mason against a terrifying defense (9th in havoc) makes this a decent bet for an upset.

#14: Oregon (5,3,2) vs. Florida State (17,8,6)
Sagarin: Oregon by 10.5
F/+: Oregon by 11
Vegas: Oregon by 9
Mike's Pick: Oregon (29 points)

The injury to Ifo Ekpre-Olomu* hurts, as FSU's Rashard Greene-heavy offense matches up poorly against teams with elite corners, but the Ducks are still a lot better than the Noles.  If nothing else, this will be a beautifully uniformed game.

*We're at the point of the season where I didn't even have to look up the spelling.

#13: WMU (71,47,72) vs. Air Force (84,44,53)
Sagarin: WMU by 3
F/+: Air Force by 1
Vegas: WMU by 1
Mike's Pick: Air Force (5 points)

You might be asking why this bowl is ranked one spot above one of the national semi-finals.  I would too, but it's actually a pretty good game when you examine more closely.  Both teams made huge strides over poor 2013s, so there's a certain amount of excitement on each side.  It also should be a pretty even matchup, with none of the above spreads wider than 3 points.  Finally, PJ Fleck will be there.  In the end, I'll take the Falcons to wear down the Broncos, much like NIU did to end the regular season.

#12: Kansas State (14,21,12) vs. UCLA (20,19,14)
Sagarin: Kansas State by 5.5
F/+: UCLA by 2
Vegas: Kansas State by 1.5
Mike's Pick: Kansas State (14 points)

#11: Arizona State (29,26,19) vs. Duke (42,28,38)
Sagarin: Arizona State by 5.5
F/+: Arizona State by 3
Vegas: Arizona State by 8
Mike's Pick: Arizona State (21 points)

#10: Missouri (26,31,17) vs. Minnesota (34,35,32)
Sagarin: Missouri by 4.5
F/+: Missouri by 1
Vegas: Missouri by 5.5
Mike's Pick: Minnesota (9 points)

Sure, Missouri is a decent team, but their biggest strength is rushing the passer.  Since Minnesota doesn't like to pass if they don't have to, I think they'll be able to neutralize that.  This should be one of the more enjoyable minor bowls, provided that the offenses don't completely embarrass themselves.

#9: Auburn (8,12,11) vs. Wisconsin (27,17,16)
Sagarin: Auburn by 12
F/+: Auburn by 5
Vegas: Auburn by 6.5
Mike's Pick: Auburn (34 points)

I know shouldn't overweight the Badger's performance against Ohio State.  That said, it's really hard not to swap out uniforms and see Auburn doing the same exact thing.

#8: Boise State (39,25,20) vs. Arizona (31,33,15)
Sagarin: Arizona by 2
F/+: Boise State by 5
Vegas: Arizona by 3
Mike's Pick: Arizona (1 point)

This might be my biggest toss-up of bowl season, largely because I have no idea just how good Arizona is.  There's a lot to like in Tucson, and Anu Solomon clearly improved over the course of the season, but there's too much variability in the Wildcats' results to have any idea what's going to happen here.

#7: Nebraska (28,27,25) vs. USC (16,22,22)
Sagarin: USC by 3.5
F/+: USC by 3
Vegas: USC by 6.5
Mike's Pick: USC (20 points)

Word of warning: USC was also a 6 1/2 point favorite over my other team, and that didn't turn out well. Not that that means anything, BUT IT TOTALLY DOES.

#6: BYU (50,42,44) vs. Memphis (43,40,37)
Sagarin: Memphis by 2.5
F/+: Memphis by 2
Vegas: Memphis by 1
Mike's Pick: Memphis (7 points)

The tightness of the matchup, the quality of the teams, and the novelty of seeing a vastly-improved Memphis in a bowl make this a surprisingly good game.  That said, there's a little bit of the now-injured Taysom Hill baked into BYU's metrics, so I don't think it will be quite as close as the numbers indicate.

#5: Michigan State (10,11,9) vs. Baylor (9,9,5)
Sagarin: Baylor by 1
F/+: Baylor by 5
Vegas: Baylor by 3
Mike's Pick: Baylor (16 points)

Art Briles in FU mode should be fun.

#4: Oklahoma (13,13,23) vs. Clemson (21,14,21)
Sagarin: Oklahoma by 6
F/+: Oklahoma by 2
Vegas: No Line
Mike's Pick: Oklahoma (27 points)

My predictions for the season may not have been particularly great*, but I absolutely nailed Oklahoma being overrated as the pre-season #3 team.  Interestingly, the committee seems to have over-corrected, as the Sooners are not even ranked in the season-ending poll.  It's looking more and more like Trevor Knight is going to play (and Deshaun Watson won't), so I'm liking Oklahoma to win.

*I did get three of the playoff participants correct, but so did everyone else.

#3: Mississippi State (7,6,8) vs. Georgia Tech (15,10,13)
Sagarin: Mississippi State by 8.5
F/+: Mississippi State by 3
Vegas: Mississippi State by 7
Mike's Pick: Mississippi State (26 points)

Paul Johnson has finally crafted one of the best offenses in the nation (#1 in offensive F/+), but his defense is so bad, that I'm going to pick the team with more balance to pull off the win.  If you're betting on who is the mostly likely to pile up 200 yards in a bowl game, you couldn't go wrong with Josh Robinson against the 96th ranked rushing defense by S&P+.

#2: Alabama (1,1,1) vs. Ohio State (4,2,4)
Sagarin: Alabama by 4.5
F/+: Alabama by 3
Vegas: Alabama by 9.5
Mike's Pick: Alabama (13 points)

The spread on this game feels a touch high, and the main reason for that discrepancy seems to be people giving Nick Saban credit for being extra awesome with the extra time to prepare.  While he has had some impressive showings in bowls, it's important to remember two things.  One, he's had some bad showings, too (see last year).  Two, Urban Meyer has been pretty good himself.  I'm still siding with the Tide in this one, but the Buckeyes are good enough across the board to potentially pull the upset.

#1: Ole Miss (3,4,7) vs. TCU (2,5,3)
Sagarin: TCU by 1.5
F/+: Ole Miss by 1
Vegas: TCU by 3.5
Mike's Pick: TCU (8 points)

When the bowl announcements came out, this was the bowl I was most excited for.  That it ends up as the #1 bowl on this list confirms that the methodology behind this ordering is at least pretty good.  The month off will likely help the banged-up Rebels, but I still like the dynamism of TCU's offense to be able to secure the win.

Top TV of 2014

As 2014 comes to an end, it is once again time to reflect on everything I've watched over the course of the year.  I can confirm that even if the "golden age" of the aughts is dead, television still has a lot, if not more, to offer.  For the second year, I am doing a massive write-up of my top 25 shows, primarily because I can.  While there are certainly some similarities to last year's post, this is most certainly not a repeat.  Of the top 11 shows from last year's list, only one remains in the top 25 (six are no longer on the air, three fell off of the list, and one took the year off).  This not only gives me an opportunity to write about a bunch of new shows, but it also gives me the chance to take a slightly different angle on a bunch of returning favorites.  As you might expect, I try to balance between that which I find both objectively and subjectively* great about various programs, so I would hope that this list has some value for others, while still being true to what I like.

*If you want to read more about the philosophy behind such a practice, this is great defense of how rankings like this are inherently personal.

A list of one's best shows is semi-meaningless without an idea of what precisely the writer has watched, so let's go through the runners-up.  If a show isn't mentioned at some point in this post, that means I didn't watch it.  Yes, I know there's some good stuff out there I missed, but such is life.

Shows that took the year off

I'm looking forward to 2015, when we'll get new seasons of shows that have made my list in the past: It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Children's Hospital, and The Returned.  We're also getting some more Top of the Lake at some point, so that is cool, even if the original run ended at about the perfect point.

Shows that weren't close to making the list

Top Chef is still among the class of the reality/competition world, but due largely to its age and the accompanying feeling that we've already seen all this before, no longer feels as essential as it once did.  How I Met Your Mother was great when the mother was involved (particularly in one of the show's best-ever eps "How Your Mother Met Me").  The rest was...not so great (although I don't think the ending was as bad as others do).  The Red Road squandered both a potentially interesting story and Jason Momoa.  Martin Henderson's turn as a police officer might have been the most boring and meaningless character/actor pairing of the year.

The first couple episodes of Blackish seemed nice enough, but there wasn't enough there for me to keep watching.  Archer and The League continued to do their respective things well, but weren't really close to the comedies that ended up on the list.  24 returned to the air pretty much like it never left.  The shorter season was clearly a help, and there legitimately great moments, but it fell into a lot of the same traps that the lesser seasons of the show succumbed to.  Finally, The Bridge opened its second season to a great deal of acclaim, but never really worked for me.  The overall idea of the show (The Wire on the border) was worthy of praise, but none of the execution came together as it has in other prestige dramas.  I could write a much longer blurb on my specific complaints about the show, but I'd rather spend my time talking about what I liked.

Shows that were close to making the list

2014 was a banner year for comedy on television.  As a result, some really good shows ended up on the cutting floor of this post.  Girls had some great episodes in its third season (particularly the ones that focused on Hannah, such as "Flo"), but some characters' stories/journeys were a little thin, leading to a less fulfilling whole than previous years.  New Girl emerged from its creative funk in season three to be the same wacky show we once knew.  Brooklyn 99 grew up a bit plot-wise and avoided some of the tropes that hurt the show in the early going.  While it still might get there, it's not nearly as funny or charming as its older sister, Parks and Recreation (there's also the issue of completely glossing over any real-world issues, which I think Parks handled better).  Married got off to a rocky start, but ended up as a nice meditation on being an adult.  Also, Paul Reiser is awesome.

It was also an amazing year for drama, so some other great shows got left out as well.  Game of Thrones continued to be the spectacle that it's always been, for better or worse.  Continuing my minor criticism of season three, the sheer number of characters and storylines stretched the show a little beyond its storytelling means.  The Affair used its dual perspectives in a lot of interesting ways, but in the end didn't seem as significant as its framing device would lead one to believe.  The Honorable Woman was a nicely reserved look at the war-torn Middle East that almost never resorted to simple answers about a clearly complex issue.  The debut season of Penny Dreadful was a tough nugget to pin down, but featured an amazing performance by Eva Green that made up for any shortcomings.  Orphan Black was similar in that Tatiana Maslany continued to shine, even as the show around her got spread a little thin due to its overly-complicated plot.  Finally, Manhattan was a nice take on both the personal and societal effects of trying to create a weapon that will supposedly and paradoxically end war (It was also the rare historical drama that didn't become obsessed with pointing out the ridiculous practices/beliefs of the past, so points for that as well).

Last, but certainly not least, are the two shows that were the toughest omissions.  Coincidentally, both used to be highly ranked, but suffered through seasons that weren't quite up to the standards of years past.  Homeland struggled through the early part of the season, falling into a lot of the same traps as the terrible third season.  Then, nearly miraculously, it recovered a lot of its goodwill with a string of episodes that, like the first season, actually addressed real, modern-day issues with the war on terror.  Most notably, Carrie and Saul's struggle to negotiate with a terrorist they failed to kill in a drone strike, showed how our present day scenario leaves us with no good choices.

Whereas the fourth season of Homeland was a return to form of sorts, the fifth season of Justified was a bit of a freefall following a creative peak.  There was a bit of a built-in excuse for the decline, with one of the most interesting new characters asking to be written off halfway through.  Even so, the story of the Crowes was a bit derivative and inferior to the villains of past seasons.  In spite of this, Justified was still worth watching, as Timothy Olyphant and Walton Goggins' performances continued to be enjoyable as hell.  Thankfully, the last couple episodes set up the upcoming final season as a final showdown between Raylan and Boyd.  I can't wait.

#25 - Community (NBC)

The re-Harmonized fifth season of Community was a walking conundrum.  On one hand, many of the episodes (such as "Cooperative Polygraphy") were every bit as unique and hilarious as the best episodes of years past.  On the other hand, the driving purpose of continuing the show post-graduation was oftentimes muddled, and this showed in the weaker episodes near the end of the season.  In spite of these imperfections, Community is still mostly the show I once loved.  The wacky antics of Greendale continue to not just be funny, but also serve the higher purpose of showing the importance of, well, a community.  Thankfully, the show's upcoming sixth season on Yahoo indicates that we won't be perishing by way of asteroid anytime soon.

#24 - Enlisted (FOX)

In a year loaded with great new comedy, Enlisted was not the funniest new program.  Nor was it the zaniest, most original, or most insightful.  The purpose of saying this, of course, is not to rag on the show....it was after all, one of my favorite shows of the year, and was very good in all of the aforementioned aspects.  The purpose instead, is to highlight what made the show special, which is its heart.  The antics of Rear D were delightful enough when taken at face value.  But when viewed through the prism of Pete's relationship with his brothers and his re-orientation to non-combat life, the show takes on an air of earnest poignancy, which is sometimes difficult to find in the era of sarcasm and irony.  It's a shame we'll only see 13 episodes of this show, but at least it went out on a high note.

#23 - Shameless (Showtime)

The lack of guidelines on the differences between Emmy categories has long led to silly situations.  Perhaps none have better shone the light on the ridiculousness of the process than the fourth season of Shameless.  The show turned in its best and most dramatic season to date, largely because it started taking its characters' problems more seriously.  In spite of this, the creators decided to start submitting the show in the comedy categories (the show does still retains much of its humor, but I would say it definitely falls on the drama side of the spectrum now).  While that gambit didn't result in an Emmy haul, it doesn't really matter as the Gallagher's tale of poverty-stricken perseverance is a fantastic story regardless.   Fiona's fall from grace, Lip's balancing of school with the sense of responsibility he feels for his family, and Ian's struggle to be himself all made for one of the most diverse and real dramas of 2014.  While the show can be rough around the edges (like its protagonists), it's got a uniqueness and tenderness that make it worthy of its place on this list.

#22 - Masters of Sex (Showtime)

Of all the shows that appear in both this list and last year's list, Masters of Sex is the one show where last year's capsule could be lifted nearly verbatim.  Sure, the show did some things differently in its second season, most notably leaping forward a few years through the midseason episode "Asterion."  That said, the same dichotomy remains: While the parts of the show focusing on the study and the relationship of Bill and Virginia* are among the best on TV, the other plot lines range from interesting but strained (Libby's transformation into a civil rights activist) to just plain dull (the whole Cal-o-Metric plot).  Whereas the superior Mad Men has typically let the pertinent issues of the time reveal themselves naturally through the actions of its characters**, Masters of Sex oftentimes feels like it's doing the opposite, and letting the idea of the plot drive the story.  Given all that creator Michelle Ashford has on her plate, Masters is still quite the accomplishment (this interview nicely summarizes both the internal pressures of staying true to the story as well as the external pressures of writing and shooting on a tight timeline).  Here's hoping that future seasons focus more on the strengths and trim the weaknesses.

*The third episode of the season "The Fight" is one of the best episodes of anything this year, largely because it's a so-called bottle episode that focuses on the main characters.

**Besides being more honest to the characters, this also acts as a more sly and subtle commentary on the issues.  The civil rights movement is largely in the background for the characters of Mad Men, which is to me more insightful than pushing it to the forefront in Masters of Sex.

#21 - Parks and Recreation (NBC)

Parks and Recreation remains one of the funniest and warmest programs on television.  If you've watched five minutes of the show, you already know this.  What's even more remarkable is how it is able to remain so fundamentally nice and yet subvert expectations all at the same time.  The main subversion in the back half of season six (the only episodes that aired in 2014) concerned the news that Leslie was pregnant with triplets, and the subsequent worry by some that this would come to fully define her character.  Because the show is above silly worries like that, it took just one week for that idea to be squashed, with the fantastic flash forward at the end of the finale showing Leslie, pardon the cliché, "having it all."  This isn't to say we shouldn't examine the themes present in the show, but time and time again the show has proven to be adept at treating its characters with dignity and respect.  Well, except for Jerry.

#20 - Orange is the New Black (Netflix)

The second season of OITNB was a bit of a sprawling mess, but I mean that in the best possible way.  While most shows focus on a smaller set of characters in a less precarious situation, OITNB is obviously very different.  In light of that, the seemingly chaotic nature of the show fits its mission well.  What elevates the chaos to greatness is how the show is still able to focus on individual characters and give them stories worth caring about.  When we see the difficult situations that Taystee and Poussey and Caputo (among others) find themselves in, we fully understand the weight of the decisions they have to make, largely because of the precise detail put into the backstories of the characters.  That that level of detail works across such a large ensemble is a testament to the quality of the show and the vision of creator Jenji Kohan.  That the details of the prison are unrealistic is mostly irrelevant; what's actually important is how the show is able to portray the fundamental goodness of humanity in a way that few other works are.

#19 - Louie (FX)

When it was announced that the fourth season of Louie wouldn't premiere until 2014 (putting almost two years between air dates), it seemed like a good idea.  Since Louis CK basically does everything that goes into making the show, it made a lot of sense that slight downturn in quality of season three was a result of some degree of burnout.  The question then is, did this strategy work?  I would answer with an inconclusive "sort of."

The fourth season of Louie didn't break many new grounds comedically.  The best laughs from the series still reside in the first season (although fake hurricane news reports are pretty funny, too).  I also think that the most emotionally resonant half-hours come from past episodes like "Eddie" and "Duckling" in the second season.  Where season four was unique and fascinating was in its structure, particularly with the six-part "Elevator."  In that saga (or what passes for a saga in the Louie universe), the show interweaved the complex topics of raising children and forming relationships by focusing on the central role than communication plays in almost all human endeavors.  And of course, it was still quite funny, with Charles Grodin's world-weary physician providing most of the laughs.  Not everything from this season worked (in particular, the embiggined "In the Woods" about Louie's childhood seemed a touch overlong and empty), but regardless, Louis CK continues to push the boundaries of what great television can be.

#18 - You're the Worst (FXX)

The idea of a show featuring terrible people is far from novel in today's TV.  Seinfeld and It's Always Sunny are the modern exemplars of such programming, but one can trace DNA from those shows back to earlier hits like All in the Family and beyond.  What is relatively novel is taking the time to break these terrible people down into the complex beings they are, and then raising some questions: Could these people possibly be meant for each other?  Are they really even "terrible" people, or just people who need others to become who they want to bea?  In its debut season, You're the Worst did all of this with aplomb.  The show helped to redefine relationships on TV by creating a likable but flawed pairing in Jimmy and Gretchen that, while sometimes exaggerated for comedic effect, felt more real than most couples we've seen before.  Add in legitimately compelling sidekicks with real stories of their own*, and you have yourself one of the most refreshingly honest (and hilarious!) shows to debut in some time.

*Between Pete on Enlisted and Edgar on this show, it was a good year for subtle, realistic depictions of PTSD in television comedies.

#17 - Looking (HBO)

This capsule is a touch spoilery, so just go watch the show first.  It'll be worth it.

Through seven episodes of the freshman series Looking, I quite enjoyed the glimpse into the lives of three friends, but didn't think much else of it.  The finale was a different animal, bringing all of the characters' storylines to a tipping point, yet in a reserved fashion befitting of the way life actually occurs.  In particular, Patrick's story comes to a bittersweet end, with Richie breaking up with him on his apartment steps (the way Jonathan Groff appears sad yet secretly relieved - in light of his fling with his boss - is fantastic).  All of this payoff clearly signals the presence of an overall vision behind Looking, and that the creators know how to craft a story that serves its characters, rather than the other way around.

#16 - Veep (HBO)

A lot happened this season on Veep.  Selina had an affair with her personal trainer (Chris Meloni) and briefly included him on her staff.  Jonah started his own Washington insider blog, and of course, it didn't go well.  Oh, and Selina's going to become president (get excited!)   What makes Veep great though, is that none of that really matters.  I say that because no matter what's happening in the world of the show, it manages to consistently nail its hilarious take on the cynical, mile-a-minute world of politics, which is what I'm assuming most of the audience watches the show for.  As long as Selina and her team have any sort of power in Washington, I see no reason that Veep won't continue to be one of the funniest shows on television.


#15 - The Leftovers (HBO)

Unlike many others I've talked with, I've never had a problem falling asleep directly after watching something scary or disturbing.  I can watch a particularly bloody episode of Hannibal and go right to bed (I rarely dream about recent happenings, so that helps).  This all changed when I watched "Two Boats and a Helicopter," the bottle-ish third episode of The Leftovers.  The episode in question focused on the town reverend, and his journey following the mysterious disappearance of 2% of the world's population.  While the story piles the dramatic misfortune on a little heavy, the core theme of despair the hour cuts through like a knife, as the reverend's faith in his God and his community are met with apathy and outright malice.

Why did this, of all things, keep me up after watching it?  In short, it's because the show succeeds at being an unrelenting portrait of depression by creating an all-encompassing aura of despair that's impossible to ignore.  While this was too much for some critics, I found that it avoided being pure emotional torture porn by striking just the right balance.  Perhaps the best example of this was one of 2014's best episodes from any show, "Guest".*  In it, Carrie Coon's character takes a journey to New York to attend a conference related to the departure.  Over the course of the hour, we grow to understand her frustration and sadness at losing her family, and how it leads to her current inability to fully function in the world.  And yet, the end of the episode provides a glimmer of hope that there are other people in the world who care and want her to be better.  This same pattern plays out in other character's stories as well, showing the show's belief that the ultimate solution to sadness is the knowledge that others are in the same predicament, and that true loving connections are possible, even in the face of grief and loss.

*For giggles, here's a quick top five episodes of the year:
1. "Guest" - The Leftovers
2. "Mizumono" - Hannibal
3. "The Fight" - Masters of Sex
4. "The Strategy" - Mad Men
5. "Alive Day" - Enlisted

#14 - Silicon Valley (HBO)

Like most comedies on this list, Silicon Valley is absolutely hilarious.  Between the late Christopher Evan Welch's performance as eccentric investor Peter Gregory, or the members of Pied Piper figuring out the best way to....let's say "stimulate" an auditorium full of men, Silicon Valley might have had as many laugh out loud minutes as any show in 2014.  That said, what raises the show a level (and ultimately puts it this high on my list) is the story's commitment to verisimilitude.  Sure, there are a lot of wacky, exaggerated antics, but at its heart, Silicon Valley is a show that tackles head-on all of the struggles of starting a new venture in a cutthroat industry.  The problems that Pied Piper faces are rarely easily explained away, and are only ultimately resolved in the finale when Thomas Middleditch's character does the hard work to make their algorithm superior.  The show even went as far as to work with a Stanford professor to create a brand new metric for evaluating the effectiveness of said algorithm.  This commitment to a real plot in an area rarely examined on television makes Silicon Valley one of my favorite new shows of the year.

#13 - True Detective (HBO)

Even thought there were ten whole months after the finale for something to surpass it, no show in 2014 came anywhere close to inciting the same level of debate and disagreement* as did True Detective.  While some were captivated by the mystery and the foreboding sense of doom, others decried the show's misogyny.  Others still, liked the show overall, but were let down by an ending that was a little more straightforward than one might have expected.  In the end, a show as big and with as many things to say as True Detective is going to indubitably be about many different things.  While the show is absolutely worthy of the lengthy discussion of its many aspects in that link, I wanted to focus on a slightly different aspect of the "good vs. evil" aspect that MZS highlights first.  Beware: spoilers ahead.

*The best part of the debate is that I can totally understand and agree with where both "sides" are coming from.  I found both praises and pans to be well-reasoned and enlighenting.  No show this year did more to demonstrate the subjectivity of how one enjoys TV.

When Rust tells Marty that "the light is winning" in the final scene of the finale, it may seem like a rather corny line*, but it just about perfectly sums up the journey that those characters have taken.  Throughout the show, they have encountered darkness in their lives and projected it back out onto those around them.  In many ways, that recycling of anger is perhaps not quite necessary, but is at least somewhat inevitable.  We need detectives to do their jobs in order to help protect us.  At the same time, it isn't easy for most people to process the vileness encountered in such a line of work in a healthy and reasonable manner.  In that way, the struggle between light and dark gets at one of the most fascinating themes of the show to me:  That we as a society need people to dedicate their lives to working towards the common good in spite of the toll it will take on those individuals.  The payoff for their work may not be absolute and immediate (after all "The Yellow King" was just one evil force in a world full of them), but if we can recognize the gradual progress of society over time, then we can fully appreciate all the good that is done by imperfect beings like Rust and Marty.  When you cut through the occult mythology and everything else in True Detective, you end up with a simple story that is rarely told in this manner.

*Corniness/earnestness actually fits pretty well with Rust's character, so it actually works pretty well

#12 - The Knick (Cinemax)

Much like Manhattan and Masters of Sex, The Knick is about the thrill of discovery and the toll it takes on those involved.  I welcome the fact that these shows have chosen to focus on the pursuit of knowledge, as I find it quite fascinating.  That said, these shows all struggle a bit when focusing on the other parts of their character's lives, which keeps them from being ranked higher.  There are certainly still other strengths: Manhattan is probably the best of the three at creating fully realized characters, and the central relationship of Masters drives the show to emotional heights surpassing the other shows.  Where The Knick excels, and what ultimately pushes it higher on the list, is the integration of its superior construction and its devotion to a seemingly exaggerated past.  The first part of that pair is reasonably obvious, with Oscar-winning Steven Soderbergh doing some of the best work of 2014 on any screen, small or large.

The second part (the treatment of the past) is a little more interesting, and deviates a bit from other period shows.  It's commonly said that setting something in the past allows one to deal with pertinent modern issues (racism, misogyny) from a comfortable distance.  This approach often leads to situations where something outrageous happens to emphasize the point being made.  In general, I prefer works that avoid such black and white treatments.  However, The Knick actually makes such tactics interesting by being so brazen in the depiction of its 1900, that the self awareness of the show is on full display.  By shoving our faces in the questionable ethics of, among other things, the medical practices of the time, the show forces the viewer to confront how a basically decent human race could do such things.  Whereas the typical reactions to such things on lesser shows is along the lines of "boy, people were overtly racist back then," The Knick encourages a deeper rumination through its exquisitely constructed universe.

#11 - Bob's Burgers (Fox)

Here's an entry on the list that is such a well-oiled institution, that I'm not sure what there is left to say about it (other than "it's awesome").  While Bob's Burgers is ever-so-slightly removed from its creative peak, it's still one of the warmest, funniest half-hours on television.  The Belchers remain a wonderfully odd clan, surrounded by a beach-side community that only one-ups them in terms of wackiness.  I would normally worry about a show in its fifth season running out of ideas, but when you come up with ideas as ridiculous as a Die Hard/Working Girl smash-up musical (aptly titled "Work Hard or Die Trying, Girl"), then there are truly no limits on how long the show can run at a high level of quality.

#10 - Olive Kitteridge (HBO)

I mentioned a couple of great performances from leading women in the honorable mention section.  As good as those were, I don't think anyone, man or woman, surpassed Frances McDormand's work as the title character of Olive Kitteridge.*  In the hands of a lesser actress, it would be easy to dismiss the part as too much of a one note domestic villain (it would actually be surprisingly easy to transform the script into a sitcom, without making too many changes).  Instead, McDormand is able to imbue the character with a sense of regret and sadness over those who she has wronged, which paints Olive as more sympathetic than one would observe at first blush.  Because of that, I see Olive Kitteridge as a bit of a welcome antidote to the wave of unapologetic anti-heroes that have populated the screen in the past fifteen years.  If we're looking to nitpick, then one could argue that the mini-series format didn't best serve the material, but I mostly disagree.  Each supporting character in Olive's life got just enough screen time to portray their story and the effect Olive had on it without removing the focus from our main character.  In total, Olive Kitteridge was a well-observed story of a life lived well, but with regret; that is to say, a normal life.

*And here's my top performances of the year
1. Frances McDormand - Olive Kitteridge
2. Eva Green - Penny Dreadful
3. Tatiana Maslany - Orphan Black
4. Matthew McConaughey - True Detective
5. Jeffrey Tambor - Transparent

#9 - Mad Men (AMC)

The common complaint concerning the previous season of Mad Men was that it seemed a bit repetitive and boring.  I disagree with that line of thinking overall, but can at least understand the sentiment; Don's problems with his second marriage and issues at work resembled many of the same beats from earlier seasons.  The good news for people of all opinions is that the machinations of the back half of the series paid off in droves in the excellent seventh season, which was among the best work the show has done.  Don's journey to a dark place resulted in legitimate change in the character, as he accepted his failures and worked to better himself and become an actual decent human being.  Nowhere was this self-improvement (and its positive affect on those around him) more apparent than in his support of Peggy as she led the successful Burger Chef campaign in the wonderful episodes "The Strategy" and "Waterloo."  By crafting a real and meaningful redemption ark for Don, Matthew Weiner is closing out the anti-hero era of drama in a unique way.  In paralleling the societal change of the sixties with the personal change of our main character, Mad Men is showing us just what such transformations can mean to the world and those that occupy it.

#8 - The Americans (FX)

When I placed the debut season of The Americans in the middle of last year's list, I basically wrote that I liked but didn't love the show.  While I included some reasons for this, the true reason didn't become clear until the fantastic second season premiere.  In that episode, we are introduced to a fellow family of espionage that might as well be a clone of the Jennings.  When three-quarters of that family is killed following a job, Philip and Elizabeth rightfully panic, wondering if the same thing can happen to them.  This imbues their actions for the remainder of the season with a sense of personal dread; the cost of failure is no longer just the downfall of their cause, but the downfall of their lives.  This acts to further personalize the conflict of the Cold War to a even higher degree than the first season.  The Americans made a true leap to greatness in its second season and I can't wait to see what comes next.

#7 - Rectify (Sundance)

The first season of Rectify was a beautiful six episode journey through the first steps of Daniel Holden's reintroduction to society.  Upon a re-watch* prior to the start of season two, I had legitimate concerns about where the continuation of the story would take us, and if it was necessary to its central themes.  Boy, was that silly.  The lengthier second season picks up where it left off, which allows time for Daniel's subconscious to reflect on the events that led him here, and also helps build out the supporting cast's story to create a world worth exploring.  Whether the show is following Daniel through his encounters with increasingly odd yet enlightening strangers or showing us his family trying to return to some semblance of normalcy, Rectify paints a non-judgmental picture of small town life that isn't often seen on television.  A mixture of profound serenity and the cruelty of real life combine to make Rectify one of the best things on the air.

*It's on Netflix.  It's just six episodes.  Watch it now.

#6 - Broad City (Comedy Central)

As you can probably tell by now, there were a lot of great comedy premieres in 2014.  While Broad City wasn't quite my favorite of the list (so close though!), it's almost certainly the most fresh and welcome voice.  In a way, it's the spiritual sibling of Looking, in that both shows feature people from groups other than your typical set of straight white males, without belittling or stereotyping its leads in the slightest.  Of course, it's also completely different in that its often zany, sometimes non-sequitir-laden comedy creates a semi-surreal world that is just delightful.  Whether Ilana is blowing off work to blow off another job to hang out with Judith Light the dog, or Abbi is busy cleaning up an unprecented pube situation in her gym's bathroom, Broad City is never short on genuinely unique hilarity.

#5 - Last Week Tonight (HBO)

When Last Week Tonight was first announced, it seemed a bit like overkill.  Sure, John Oliver was fantastic as a summer replacement on The Daily Show, but did we really need another show in the same vein?  As it turns out, it took all of one episode for us to realize that we most certainly did.  Whereas the opening segment on The Daily Show typically leaves the viewer with a faint sense that reason in our political discourse is doomed, Last Week Tonight providers a faint shimmer of hope with its (admittedly silly) calls to action.  Combining those hints of activism with a half hour of content that is more well researched than many academic papers creates a truly unique outlet that is perhaps the most vital viewing experience on the air today.  That may seem strange to say considering the show has had bits on space geckos and a fake political commercial involving a lot of flaccid elderly penis.  But if the only way to fight the silliness of modern times is with more silliness, then Last Week Tonight is quite the weapon.

#4 - Fargo (FX)

The first season of the anthology series Fargo is a bit of a different beast from most of the dramas on this list.  Instead of being primarily concerned with a particular theme and then constructing a mood/feel based on that (Hannibal is probably the best example of this), Fargo is explicitly based on the Coen Brother's oeuvre.  This isn't to say that there aren't weighty themes running through the show: the ideas of fate and consequences to one's actions haunt the series as much as the cold, barren landscape.  That said, what I'll remember most about this fantastic season are the various ways creator Noah Hawley took the work of others and made it his own.  The gorgeous cinematography, the dark humor, the way each episode seemingly crept into existence rather than simply beginning:  These were all hallmarks of a show that felt familiar, but also had a unique voice worth listening to.

#3 - Transparent (Amazon)

Transparent is, on its surface, a story about a transgender woman transitioning late in life (I mean, it's right there in the title after all).  That part of the show is fantastically done, telling a story that is both sympathetic to the struggle of such a process while also not letting Maura off the hook for her shortcomings.*  What elevates this to a truly great show is that it is so much more than that one thing, though.  The tribulations of each member of the fully realized Pfefferman clan touch on almost every aspect of modern life.  Family dynamics color every interaction between the main cast, showing how past experiences shape new ones.  The character's problems with intimacy (both too much and too little) highlight the difficulty of making and maintaining relationships.  And finally (circling back to Maura's transition), the inability of the characters to fully admit and understand who and what they are underscores the main themes of the show perfectly:  While there are interpersonal and societal issues aplenty in our world, the fundamental issue for many is simply not understanding themselves.  By examining the gradual process of self-actualization between this group of dynamically different yet clearly related people, Transparent is able to achieve so much, and with such a deft touch.

*Making Maura a real person, with all of the warts that come with that, makes this a far more enlightening show than if she were painted as some sort of transgender superhero.  

#2 - Hannibal (NBC)

At first blush, it would be easy to write off Hannibal as just another entry in the anthology of ultra-violence propagated on modern television.  However, doing so would be very, very wrong.  The visceral, gory, yet beautiful way violent acts are depicted,* as well as the consistent mastery of tone, are signs of far superior quality over dreck like Stalker or The Following, but the reasons for Hannibal's brilliance go beyond that.  What makes it one of the best shows on television is the very way it treats its subject matter.  Rather than playing violent acts as cheap thrills or tone-deaf plot points, Hannibal uses its antagonist's transgressions (as well as the side tale of the Vergers) as a portal into the very nature of how evil shapes humanity.  Hannibal's second season elevated this to new heights, as the quest to capture Hannibal ensnared every character, leading to an unforgettable conclusion.  Add in continually great acting from Hugh Dancy and Mads Mikkelsen (among others), and a compelling season-long plot, and you have yourself the best drama of 2014.

*There is constant fascination by fans of the show that this exists on network television.  I actually think that working within those constraints makes the show stronger, as it needs to convey some of things which it can't show through the character's reactions (ie. Mason Verger's face)

#1 - Review (Comedy Central)

"Life.  It's literally all we have.  But is it any good?" - Forrest MacNeil

Review takes the top spot on my list in large part because it is damn funny.  When the show isn't challenging itself to pixelate as much of the screen as possible during an orgy, it's forcing our protagonist to drown his sorrow in a table full of pancakes.  Whether Forrest was taking his father-in-law on a fateful mission to space, becoming an overt racist, or simply saying nothing but "there all is aching," there was never a shortage of amazing laughs.  Whatever part of our society Andy Daly and friends felt like lampooning in a given week was taken to task in the most enjoyable manner possible.

All that said, mere hilarity (even of the highest order) isn't enough to ascend to the peak of television in 2014.  What makes Review the very best television has to offer is the way it uses its concept not just for humor, but to tie together the endeavor into a whole that is greater than its parts.  A show about someone dedicating himself to certain things each week is funny; a show about the journey of that man throughout his conquest to effectively review his life is brilliant.  Such a construct allows for subtle commentary on not only the fickle nature of evaluating things, but the very impetus behind work and life itself.  The end of the season can be seen as the intersection of those two themes, as leading an overly-examined life takes Forrest to a place of some enlightenment such that he rejects the occupation that literally tells him what to do with his life.  It's probably a fundamentally silly exercise to over-analyze and ascribe too much to a comedy show, but as the very subject of the show itself is over-analyzation, I think it's entirely appropriate.  In the end, that very interplay between the absurd and the profound is what makes Review the finest show of the year.