2
Started By
Message
re: AP vs CFP Polls
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:04 pm to 3down10
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:04 pm to 3down10
Ok please give me the comprehensive list of metrics in order of importance to the cfp since as you say “you do know”
And why hasn’t anyone else that has spoken about the process and trying to figure out the cfp selection able to figure out what you have and I’m not talking about the average message board fan
And why hasn’t anyone else that has spoken about the process and trying to figure out the cfp selection able to figure out what you have and I’m not talking about the average message board fan
This post was edited on 11/4/26 at 1:13 pm
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:05 pm to Landmass
The BCS is the best that ever was.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:11 pm to Bill Parker?
quote:
The BCS is the best that ever was.
The BCS was bullshite.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:14 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
I use my eyes and watch them play.
so you spend over 200 hours a week watching football games?
Or do you mean you watch a couple of games, some highlights and then decided 95% of college football teams suck so you can cherry pick a few games as having meaning to make it easy for yourself?
quote:
Read that again, and then think about the fact that you yourself called this a "quality win".
Michigan is #35 in FEI, #31 in F+, which probably puts them about #26 in SP+(I'm not paying for it).
Yes, that is a quality win even if you are too ignorant to understand why.
quote:
Would you trade schedules with them? I would in a heartbeat.
They've played a more difficult schedule than you have.
You talk about Michigan and yet you lost to Auburn @ Home. Auburn is #36 in FEI, just below Michigan.
You would have Ohio St instead of Alabama. Ohio St at the time being seen as a tougher opponent.
Nebraska or Northwestern instead of Florida.
And after that, your schedule is complete dogshit. Who you banking on? Vandy? Arkansas? Tenn St? Western Kentucky? The Oklahoma team who lost to the Michigan team you already shite on?
Where is your next big win?
In the end, Georgia's SoS is #34 and Indiana is #29.
This post was edited on 11/4/26 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:36 pm to ThePoo
quote:
Ok please give me the comprehensive list of metrics in order of importance to the cfp since as you say “you do know”
And why hasn’t anyone else that has spoken about the process and trying to figure out the cfp selection able to figure out what you have and I’m not talking about the average message board fan
Step 1: Get an accurate power rating for a team. If you want to talk about how to make your own, I can go into more detail. I use F+ or FEI.
Step 2: Assign points or whatever to games based on the power rating of their opponent - all games. AKA beating Georgia or LSU should be worth more points than beating most other teams. Likewise losing to these teams should be the least amount of points lost for the same reason. In simple terms, beat Georgia = +100 points. losing to Georgia = -20 points or something like that. Beating a team like Northern Illinois = +5 points, losing to them = -100 points.
I personally go further than that and give points to MOV and where the game is played. AKA winning at home isn't worth as much as winning on the road, winning by 30 is worth more than winning by 1.
Now you have a consistent way of judging teams.
Step 3: Add up the points, and there is your resume ranking.
Step 4: Add in power rankings for about 20% of the ranking so that you account for some teams looking better and being better in their wins.
And you'll have a pretty good overall ranking doing that.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:38 pm to ThePoo
quote:
Ok please give me the comprehensive list of metrics in order of importance to the cfp since as you say “you do know”
And why hasn’t anyone else that has spoken about the process and trying to figure out the cfp selection able to figure out what you have and I’m not talking about the average message board fan
There is no order, as it contradicts itself multiple times.
3down10 is simply looking at the poll and working backwards to explain it. He picks and chooses metrics to make excuses for the final result.
He'll use F+ wins for one team, SOS for another, for example.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:43 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
There is no order, as it contradicts itself multiple times.
3down10 is simply looking at the poll and working backwards to explain it. He picks and chooses metrics to make excuses for the final result.
He'll use F+ wins for one team, SOS for another, for example.
Except I have my own model and metrics.
And I can break down any teams schedule with the push of a button to show the logic and reason behind it.
Here is LSU.
This is Alabama, etc.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 1:52 pm to Landmass
Good graphic! Thanks for posting!
Just an observation, even with some significant movement, none of the AP Top 12 fell below 12.
Just an observation, even with some significant movement, none of the AP Top 12 fell below 12.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:28 pm to 3down10
Cool. Next Tuesday, give us the rankings before they’re revealed
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:31 pm to 3down10
quote:
Except I have my own model and metrics.
quote:
And I can break down any teams schedule with the push of a button to show the logic and reason behind it.
Except we aren't discussing your rankings; we're discussing the CFP's. Heck, even your model varies wildly from their rankings.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:33 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Except we aren't discussing your rankings; we're discussing the CFP's. Heck, even your model varies wildly from their rankings.
A few spots here and there is not varying wildly.
Also, those are resume only. I haven't factored in power scores with those final rankings. Kentucky for example is up high based on resume, but they would drop a bit if I added in the power rating part, and Georgia would increase etc.
What I'm saying is there is justification for the rankings. You accused me of working back.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:34 pm to Porter Osborne Jr
quote:
Cool. Next Tuesday, give us the rankings before they’re revealed
I think I can maybe find some time this weekend to add in the power rating part and get something pretty close.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:38 pm to 3down10
quote:
A few spots here and there is not varying wildly.
4-5 spots difference is varying wildly within the top 10.
quote:
What I'm saying is there is justification for the rankings. You accused me of working back.
Sure. Anyone can justify a specific result if they try hard enough. Especially when there is no set criteria, which is the real problem here.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:43 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
4-5 spots difference is varying wildly within the top 10.
No it's not. There is a large group of teams with 1 and 2 losses and many of them still have some of their most difficult games left.
It's after week 9 rankings. Things will shake out over the next few weeks as always.
quote:
Sure. Anyone can justify a specific result if they try hard enough. Especially when there is no set criteria, which is the real problem here.
Or they can be like you and argue from a place of nothing simply because you don't like some of the results.
There is a standard criteria. It's clearly being used as SoS is making a difference here compared to the AP.
Tell me which teams should be above Alabama.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:45 pm to 3down10
quote:
No it's not.
Okay.
quote:
Or they can be like you and argue from a place of nothing simply because you don't like some of the results.
There is a standard criteria. It's clearly being used as SoS is making a difference here compared to the AP.
Tell me which teams should be above Alabama.
If SoS were "the standard criteria", higher SoS teams with the same record would be ranked above lower SoS teams with the same record. Which seems to be the case, except when it's not.
For instance, UCLA would be above Utah if that were the case.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:48 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
If SoS were "the standard criteria", higher SoS teams with the same record would be ranked above lower SoS teams with the same record. Which seems to be the case, except when it's not.
For instance, UCLA would be above Utah if that were the case.
If you can't process more than a single metric, then that's your fault.
I already explained it above, there is more than one metric at work. Hell you can't even determine a SoS until you have a power rating of some kind.
And then it's not even a matter of applying SoS x record, which wouldn't bring good results because you need to look at WHO a team beat an WHO they lost too. Additionally, the manner in which they won and where the game was played is also a factor.
You basically want to make the rankings worse so your dumb arse can understand them, as if that's a problem for football instead of you.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:50 pm to 3down10
quote:
If you can't process more than a single metric, then that's your fault.
I already explained it above, there is more than one metric at work. Hell you can't even determine a SoS until you have a power rating of some kind.
And then it's not even a matter of applying SoS x record, which wouldn't bring good results because you need to look at WHO a team beat an WHO they lost too. Additionally, the manner in which they won and where the game was played is also a factor.
You basically want to make the rankings worse so your dumb arse can understand them, as if that's a problem for football instead of you.
So explain it to me, make the case for Utah over UCLA.
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:51 pm to CelticTiger
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:55 pm to 3down10
quote:
AP does not.
then why is undefeated UCLA #5 and 1 loss Wake Forest #14 in the AP Poll?
Posted on 11/4/26 at 2:59 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
So explain it to me, make the case for Utah over UCLA.
Utah is #9 in FEI while UCLA is #16 is my best guess. Similiar in F+ And the difference in SoS is minor(they are both shitty schedules).
I have them about even, with UCLA barely above. Here's how their games are rated:
Utah:
UCLA:
UCLA has the better overall win, but Utah has a bunch of better mid quality wins.
I think if either of them gets a single loss, they'll drop like a rock.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News