Week 1 CFP Implications: Ranked Teams Dilemma and the Big 12 Disaster

First of all, I would like to thank the great people here at All Sports Discussion for hosting my column for the time being. 2020 is a crazy time for lots of people, including writers. While I am currently unable to write at my usual outlets, I am more than happy to discuss everything CFP-related here–and I’ll try to focus on the ACC more, too.

There are two main issues to focus on coming out of the first (quasi-)full weekend of college football play. The first, which I will discuss second, is the fact that the Big 12 had a horrendous weekend. It’s hard to overstate just how bad the weekend was, so I won’t try. But I’ll be clear: It was really, really bad. The second, which I want to spend the bulk of my time on, is the issue with how to deal with ranked teams. To start that, though, we have to discuss a little math.

The Ranked Teams Dilemma

The number everyone cares about when it comes to rankings is Top 25. Why and how that developed is a history lesson for another time, but there’s solid current math behind it. There are 65 Power Five teams in college football (including Notre Dame). Every year we’ll see, on average, somewhere from one to four non-Power Five teams in the rankings. With the current rise of the AAC and an improving Sun Belt, we might expect to be towards the high end, but these things ebb and flow. Either way, let’s take a low number and assume that only one Group of Five team earns a ranking in a random year. That means that 24 of the 65 Power Five teams will be ranked.

The 24th-best Power Five team would be in the 67th percentile of Power Five teams. In such a year, we would expect the tail end of the rankings to be a bit more mediocre than average. Still, that team is nine teams better than the average Power Five team, which should mean about an 8-4 record overall, with mostly losses to ranked teams. It’s the standard profile of a fringe Top 25 team in a standard year. We all know it, we all know that it’s a solid win, but nothing of supreme quality. Go any further than Top 25, though, and you’re really stretching the definition of “quality win” in such a year. In some years, with a stronger Group of Five, a win of solid quality might extend to the Top 30ish.

What will happen this year, though? As of this writing, there will only be 39 Power Five teams playing football this fall. That means that even if we can somehow squeeze six Group of Five teams into the rankings–say, BYU, three AAC, and two Sun Belt teams–we will be ranking 19 Power Five teams. (Remember, with no Mountain West, always-reliable Boise State won’t be here to take a ranking spot, nor will usually-reliable San Diego State. Air Force, which ended last year ranked, will only play two games.) Ranking 19 of the 39 Power Five teams means that the No. 25 team in the nation will be just one spot better than average. In this scenario, every single above-average Power Five team will be in the Top 25. With only one nonconference game for ACC and Big 12 teams, and with none for SEC teams, expect that No. 25 team to be no better than 6-5.

And, of course, that’s assuming we can find six Group of Five teams to rank late in the season. If we see some attrition in the Sun Belt and the AAC, those spots go away. Then we’re looking at a below-average Power Five team to round out the rankings.

This matters, of course, because the College Football Playoff selection committee looks at wins over ranked teams to determine “quality wins.” And while it is only supposed to refer to its own rankings, I have documented from its very first year that it will refer to early-season rankings of others. So, what happens if the committee starts treating rankings this year like a normal season? We end up with a very watered-down Top 25, and a very skewed perception of what constitutes a quality win.

Now, if the Big Ten decides to play this fall and is eligible for the CFP and its rankings, that alleviates things somewhat. Still, if there are only 53 Power Five teams playing (or fewer, depending on what strategy Big Ten schools end up with) we are still stuck–by simple numbers–with a tail end of the Top 25 that’s weaker than in a normal year. Will the committee recognize and respond to this? How? I don’t know, but how they do could be very important, especially if we’re splitting hairs between close teams at the top.

Big 12 Disaster

The major on-field takeaway for the weekend dovetails nicely with the above off-field issue–because, in its crazy and unique ways, everything in college football is related. Even before the weekend started, things went poorly. Baylor, one of the better teams in the conference, had its game against Louisiana Tech canceled. Louisiana Tech was a strong team last year and looked like a potential solid win this year. The same, to a lesser extent, is true of TCU’s canceled game against SMU. Of course, given what actually happened in the conference’s games this year, maybe expecting good performances is too much.

Seven Big 12 teams were in action this weekend. One played a decent-quality opponent. The other six did not. Iowa State lost its game against Louisiana, and two more conference teams lost to weak opponents. Kansas picking up an awful loss is expected nowadays, but Kansas State losing to Arkansas State is not. Texas Tech, meanwhile, barely hung on to beat Houston Baptist, a below-average FCS team.

This is honestly devastating for the conference. With no other nonconference games to pad their win-loss records, the median team in the conference is now expected to end at 5-5. The Big 12 should only expect, if everything follows chalk, four teams with winning records this year. If we see an upset or two or some parity in the middle of the conference, we could very well only have three. That means that if none of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, or Texas runs the table this year, the conference champion will have a serious lack of quality wins and a potentially painful loss. If Kansas or Kansas State upsets any team this year, it’s a huge drain on the entire conference’s resume.

Of course, if the Big Ten doesn’t play this year, that might not matter much. There is a severe dearth of teams available to pick as Playoff contenders currently, so a one-loss Oklahoma or Texas will like its chances of getting in anyway. But it wouldn’t be on resume–it will be on a lack of other options.

Also, remember this about the Big 12 and what we said above about ranked teams. This is how bad the bottom of the Big 12 is. Being above average in the Big 12 isn’t saying much, especially when compared to a normal Top 25 team. And yet, being above average in the Big 12 this year will put a team on the edge of the Top 25. Either that or we’ll see nine or more ranked teams from the ACC or SEC. Either way, none of those are options we expect, or what we want to see. No one wants to see the ninth-place SEC team with a number by their name late in the year. And yet, if the Big Ten doesn’t play and things don’t shape up in the Big 12, that’s exactly what we’ll have.

Make you follow the All Sports Discussion Twitter account at @AllSportsDACC and please like our Facebook Page