| Rank | Team | FPI Rank | POFF Prob | Change |
| 1 | Baylor | 1 | 54.704% | 9.5% |
| 2 | Ohio State | 8 | 53.268% | 0.2% |
| 3 | Texas Christian | 3 | 38.077% | 11.8% |
| 4 | Oklahoma | 6 | 27.936% | 11.8% |
| 5 | Clemson | 13 | 27.670% | 15.8% |
| 6 | Texas A&M | 7 | 20.441% | 10.3% |
| 7 | Florida | 14 | 19.265% | 16.9% |
| 8 | Iowa | 38 | 19.032% | 10.6% |
| 9 | Michigan State | 25 | 13.982% | -2.0% |
| 10 | Utah | 19 | 12.405% | 2.6% |
| 11 | Southern California | 2 | 11.951% | 3.9% |
| 12 | Louisiana State | 9 | 11.486% | -6.4% |
| 13 | Notre Dame | 10 | 10.565% | -20.4% |
| 14 | Stanford | 11 | 10.402% | 6.1% |
| 15 | Florida State | 18 | 10.376% | -1.7% |
| 16 | Mississippi | 5 | 8.508% | -29.1% |
| 17 | Alabama | 4 | 7.438% | 4.5% |
| 18 | Northwestern | 34 | 7.299% | 4.6% |
| 19 | Michigan | 20 | 6.032% | 2.3% |
| 20 | Georgia | 12 | 5.067% | -20.4% |
| 21 | North Carolina | 27 | 4.682% | 3.8% |
| 22 | Oklahoma State | 26 | 3.817% | 0.7% |
| 23 | Toledo | 46 | 3.753% | 1.5% |
| 24 | California | 28 | 1.659% | -1.3% |
| 25 | West Virginia | 16 | 1.564% | -6.2% |
| 26 | UCLA | 17 | 1.483% | -13.9% |
| 27 | Duke | 44 | 1.241% | -0.1% |
| 28 | North Carolina State | 32 | 1.031% | -6.8% |
| 29 | Houston | 57 | 1.021% | 0.5% |
| 30 | Brigham Young | 48 | 0.977% | -0.2% |
| 31 | Temple | 49 | 0.614% | 0.3% |
| 32 | Wisconsin | 30 | 0.611% | -6.0% |
| 33 | Kansas State | 33 | 0.199% | -0.2% |
| 34 | Miami (FL) | 40 | 0.177% | -1.6% |
| 35 | Memphis | 53 | 0.173% | 0.1% |
| 36 | Pittsburgh | 42 | 0.167% | 0.1% |
| 37 | Indiana | 66 | 0.133% | 0.1% |
| 38 | Illinois | 54 | 0.126% | 0.1% |
| 39 | Penn State | 52 | 0.107% | -0.1% |
| 40 | Texas Tech | 29 | 0.102% | -0.5% |
| 41 | Mississippi State | 24 | 0.102% | -0.4% |
| 42 | Kentucky | 55 | 0.095% | 0.0% |
| 43 | Arizona State | 39 | 0.082% | 0.1% |
| 44 | Navy | 62 | 0.076% | 0.1% |
| 45 | Missouri | 47 | 0.053% | 0.0% |
| 46 | Oregon | 31 | 0.034% | 0.0% |
| 47 | Syracuse | 68 | 0.007% | 0.0% |
| 48 | Arizona | 51 | 0.006% | -0.2% |
| 49 | Auburn | 35 | 0.003% | 0.0% |
| 50 | Washington | 50 | 0.001% | 0.0% |
| 51 | Boston College | 65 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
| 52 | Minnesota | 69 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
| 53 | Washington State | 80 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
| 54 | Colorado | 72 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
| 55 | Oregon State | 84 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
| 56 | Rutgers | 85 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
| 57 | Iowa State | 67 | 0.000% | 0.0% |
1. All five non-major undefeated teams remained so this weekend. Thus, all of the teams that fell off the rankings were Power Five members. Say goodnight to Georgia Tech, Tennessee, Maryland, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, and poor, poor Nebraska. Tennessee represents the "best" team eliminated yet, as they are ranked 15th in FPI. What's really goofy is that three three-loss teams (Arkansas and Georgia Tech being the others) show up in FPI before any two-loss teams. Which is to say that the current crop of two-loss teams shouldn't be scaring anyone.
2. Following the first "real" week of the season, we start to gain a little clarity in the rankings. Instead of the majority of movement happening because of shifting in ratings, most teams that rose/fell in the rankings did so because of big wins or tough losses. Sure, Baylor and Ohio State switched spots because of the contrast in their performances, and LSU and Michigan State tumbled a bit after sleepwalking against lesser opponents. Still, we're to the point of the season where winning and losing is just about everything.
3. With West Virginia losing its claim as a serious challenger to the top three in the Big 12, the chance of two of the "Big Three" from the conference making the playoff begins to become more of a possibility. At the same time, blows to Ole Miss and Georgia (previously the two highest ranked SEC teams) starts to hint at the potential of an SEC shut-out. In spite of that, there are still six teams that can make a strong playoff case should they finish strong and win the conference, so I wouldn't bet against them yet. Notre Dame takes a hit with the painful loss, but stays comfortably ahead of the MAC, so there's that.
| Conference | Exp Playoff Teams |
| Big 12 | 1.264 |
| Big 10 | 1.006 |
| SEC | 0.725 |
| ACC | 0.454 |
| Pac 12 | 0.380 |
| Independent | 0.115 |
| MAC | 0.038 |
| American | 0.019 |
4. 2007 Kansas Watch: I didn't say this explicitly in my introduction post, but due to the simplicity of my model (which only looks at number of losses and conference membership), I was a little worried about outliers screwing everything up. There were two particular archetypes I was worried about. One of these was the 2007 Kansas Jayhawks, who were one of only two one-loss power conference teams that season, but beat a grand total of zero ranked teams. My model would have considered them extremely likely to make the playoff, when it's relatively clear that their terrible schedule and lack of even a division championship would have put them in poor standing with the committee. Given that this squad is the only such example of this quandary in the 17 years of the BCS/Playoff era, I wasn't too worried. But now that Iowa has vaulted into the top then, there's a little reason for panic. FPI still has the Hawkeyes as underdogs in two games (at NW, at Nebraska), so 12-0 is unlikely. But, if we get another 2007 with every good team taking a couple of losses, an 11-1 Iowa could make the model look pretty dumb. That I'm actually sort of rooting for that is why college football is great.
5. 2014 Florida State Watch: The other archetype that scares me is the merely decent team that wins a bunch of close games en route to attaining a misleading undefeated record. While the committee didn't punish Florida State greatly for doing this last year, they clearly did notice the Noles' imperfection. Should a team do this again, but perhaps drop a game or not win their conference, it might have a greater effect on their eventual inclusion. While there isn't a prime example of this yet, the internet has offered up this year's defending champs, Ohio State, as a potential candidate. The Buckeyes have had a couple of close calls thus far, but there's one big problem in the comparison: Whereas Florida State had to play six top-50 opponents in their final six games, Ohio State probably won't be seriously challenged again until Michigan State on November 21*. Sure, if the Buckeyes struggle with Rutgers or Penn State or someone like that, they will likely drop. But as underwhelming as they've been, I don't really think something like that will happen. We shall see.
*Ohio State's biggest chance of losing before then is at Illinois the week before (17.5%). 2014 Florida State, on the other hand, had several coin flips in their stretch run.
Week 6 Preview
| Home | Away | Home Win Prob | Playoff Teams Lost |
| Clemson | Georgia Tech | 66.46% | 0.031 |
| Kansas State | TCU | 22.80% | 0.030 |
| Michigan | Northwestern | 72.54% | 0.026 |
| Iowa | Illinois | 69.84% | 0.020 |
| Missouri | Florida | 27.76% | 0.018 |
| Utah | California | 67.52% | 0.017 |
| Tennessee | Georgia | 52.13% | 0.013 |
| West Virginia | Oklahoma State | 66.99% | 0.011 |
| Oklahoma | Texas | 89.30% | 0.010 |
| Florida State | Miami (FL) | 75.08% | 0.009 |
Week 6 is a pretty big step down from the previous week, but it still has far superior depth when compared to any weekend in September. That said, the #1 game involves a team that has already been eliminated from playoff contention. Clemson-GT is still a big game, as it represents what might be the Tigers' biggest threat to running the table. The Big Ten places two games in the top four without involving Michigan State or Ohio State, so that's something. The Tennessee-Georgia tilt that the preseason model pegged as the best game in October has suffered quite a bit, but should still be a good elimination game in the East. Finally, the Gameday game (Utah-Cal) coming in sixth seems a bit odd at first, but when you remember that Utah was almost outgained by Fresno State and Cal almost lost to Texas, it starts to make a bit more sense.
No comments:
Post a Comment