Started By
Message
Is this a solution for the CFP?
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:48 am
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:48 am
Was listening to sports talk radio here in Houston this morning and a guy called in with this idea; thought it sounded pretty legit:
1. Implement a point system for wins and losses; would have to think this through more for proper weighting, but just as an example:
- 1 point: A win over an FBS team or home win vs. a team NOT in the top 25
- 2 points: A road win over a team NOT in top 25
- 3 points: A home win over a team ranked 11-25
- 4 points: A road win over a team ranked 11-25
- 5 points: A home win over a top 10 team
- 6 points: A road win over a top 10 team
These numbers would be dynamically adjusted as the season went on. For example, Ohio State would've gotten 5 points for win over Texas in Week 1, but this would be reduced to 3 points based on current ranking.
2. There could also be a point system in place for losses. For example:
- A loss to an FBS team is minus 6 points
- A loss to a non-ranked team is minus x points
- A loss to a top 10 team is minus 1 point
Or whatever
3. The final CFP field is based in large part on the total points, with human oversight by a committee comprised of retired coaches, ex-players, and maybe one AD and one journalist (voted on by those coaches and ex-players) just to have that voice in the room. Role of this committee would simply be to review the point-based rankings, discuss any holes or pertinent issues (e.g. Lane Kiffin just left for another school), and then announce the field.
4. This would reward tougher conference schedules, incentivize those in weaker conferences (and Notre Dame) to schedule tougher OOC games, and remove any perceived bias and the need for these "beauty contest" discussions. In other words, it would be purely merit based.
Thoughts?
1. Implement a point system for wins and losses; would have to think this through more for proper weighting, but just as an example:
- 1 point: A win over an FBS team or home win vs. a team NOT in the top 25
- 2 points: A road win over a team NOT in top 25
- 3 points: A home win over a team ranked 11-25
- 4 points: A road win over a team ranked 11-25
- 5 points: A home win over a top 10 team
- 6 points: A road win over a top 10 team
These numbers would be dynamically adjusted as the season went on. For example, Ohio State would've gotten 5 points for win over Texas in Week 1, but this would be reduced to 3 points based on current ranking.
2. There could also be a point system in place for losses. For example:
- A loss to an FBS team is minus 6 points
- A loss to a non-ranked team is minus x points
- A loss to a top 10 team is minus 1 point
Or whatever
3. The final CFP field is based in large part on the total points, with human oversight by a committee comprised of retired coaches, ex-players, and maybe one AD and one journalist (voted on by those coaches and ex-players) just to have that voice in the room. Role of this committee would simply be to review the point-based rankings, discuss any holes or pertinent issues (e.g. Lane Kiffin just left for another school), and then announce the field.
4. This would reward tougher conference schedules, incentivize those in weaker conferences (and Notre Dame) to schedule tougher OOC games, and remove any perceived bias and the need for these "beauty contest" discussions. In other words, it would be purely merit based.
Thoughts?
This post was edited on 12/5/25 at 9:51 am
11
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:51 am to HTX Horn
I'm fine with it but only calculate the points at the end of the year based on the current rankings then.
That way it's still a guessing game until the final rankings shake out.
That way it's still a guessing game until the final rankings shake out.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:53 am to HTX Horn
Whatever keeps ND in playoffs
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:53 am to HTX Horn
Bring back the computers to account for 50% of the equation. Have the same football committee members every year, with no active ties to schools or conferences. For example, the committee head this year was the Baylor AD I believe, and the year FSU was left out, the committee lead was an active AD that helped his conference. Heck, bring in retired NFL coaches to remove bias.
And have a rubric that is public and transparent on what is being considered. Don’t use preseason rankings or preseason SOS if you can just update it the day before selection to justify inclusions or exclusions.
And have a rubric that is public and transparent on what is being considered. Don’t use preseason rankings or preseason SOS if you can just update it the day before selection to justify inclusions or exclusions.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:54 am to forkedintheroad
quote:
I'm fine with it but only calculate the points at the end of the year based on the current rankings then.
That way it's still a guessing game until the final rankings shake out
Right, at the end of the day that's the only thing that'll matter anyway. But of course you're going to have ESPN and others putting out rankings based on points all season because it gives them (and us) something to discuss.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 9:57 am to HTX Horn
The polls highly influence the committee, the AD and coaches. Heck, the whole point of the preseason polls is to push up media favorites in the rankings.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:00 am to JayAg
quote:
Bring back the computers to account for 50% of the equation.
I'd agree that computers could solve a lot of this, but I also remember during the BCS days the Saragin ratings and other models being severely criticized, and people saying the nerds doing the programming didn't know what they were doing.
Also agree that it's ludicrous that any active ADs or coaches are on the committee.
Like you said there has to be more transparency to all this, and a point system of some type would (a) give the SEC a huge edge due to strength of schedule in conference and (b) make the sandbagging teams schedule somebody.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:01 am to HTX Horn
quote:
in the top 25
How is the "top 25" determined, opinion polls?
Are you trying to make subjective opinion polling objective?
It's not going to work. There will be crying.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:01 am to JayAg
Before the season, establish the rules. Have the committee argue about the math then. Publish the math, then play the games.
ESPN lobbied for a committee so they could boost ratings by angry fans hanging on their every word. It worked, thanks Herbie, SVP, Collenwhoever.
ESPN lobbied for a committee so they could boost ratings by angry fans hanging on their every word. It worked, thanks Herbie, SVP, Collenwhoever.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:03 am to 3rdGenTiger
And Heather Dimswitch isa problem too. She talks out of her arse every damn time
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:05 am to HTX Horn
It's a 12 team field, if you don't get in, it's your own fault.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:06 am to Harry Boutte
quote:
How is the "top 25" determined, opinion polls?
Are you trying to make subjective opinion polling objective?
It's not going to work. There will be crying.
Great point. My suggestions would be no official rankings until Oct 1, and then create an official "CFP ranking" based on a combination of AP, Coaches, and Computer, with at least 50% weight applied to the computer.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:06 am to lewis and herschel
It’s a 12 team playoff where being ranked in the Top 12 doesn’t get you in. Mainly do the the auto qualifiers.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:07 am to JayAg
quote:
Heck, the whole point of the preseason polls is to push up media favorites in the rankings.
People always say the preseason ranking does not matter but in some seasons, the preseason ranking is the most important one (besides the season-end rankings)
Rankings should not occur until week 4. In part because of what you pointed out.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:07 am to JayAg
Don't lose multiple games, don't lose to bad teams. it's all very simple.
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:09 am to lewis and herschel
I don’t follow what you are saying. You think an 8-5 Duke winning the ACC championship deserves getting in over a team that didn’t lose multiple games, and didn’t lose to bad teams?
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:10 am to lewis and herschel
quote:
Don't lose multiple games, don't lose to bad teams. it's all very simple.
It is simple, but not all wins are the same, nor are all losses. Adding numbers to the equation levels the playing field between conferences like the SEC versus the Big 12/ACC
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:10 am to HTX Horn
I think what you’re describing is the BCS computer rankings
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:13 am to HTX Horn
quote:
- 2 points: A road win over a team NOT in top 25
- 3 points: A home win over a team ranked 11-25
Beating the 11th ranked team at home is barely better than beating UMass on the road?
Posted on 12/5/25 at 10:14 am to JayAg
quote:
I don’t follow what you are saying.
He's just taking a jab at my Longhorn logo. And yeah, the loss to Florida would calculate to a big point loss in this system. The loss to Ohio State on the road would be less of a point loss, but still a point loss.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News