A NEW Name and a NEW Approach
Logical College Football Rankings is the new name of this website. This change reflects the decision to rank every college football team and not just the FBS. In order to accomplish such an enormous task, LCFR has begun a project that is expected to take about three years to complete. Beginning with the first year of distinctly American football (1882), LCFR will construct annual rankings that are logically sequential. A computer program will sort the teams based on Initial Ranking (IR), Win-Loss-Tie Record (W-L-T), Strength of Schedule (SOS), Zero Level (ZL), Positive Level (PL), Plus-Minus (+/-), results of games involving Common Opponents, and Head-to-Head results. This undertaking has been designated the Historical College Football Sequential Rankings Project. A new Project tab has been created that can be used to access the updated work on this monumental endeavor.
An 8-Team Playoff For 2015 FBS College Football
An eight-team playoff would have been injurious to major college football in 2015. Anyone who says otherwise is not interested in allowing the results on the gridiron determine the national champion. A quick look at the teams ranked #5-8 by the CFP selection committee will make this clear to the impartial college football observer.
#5 Iowa was well aware of what was at stake when they played Michigan State for the Big Ten Championship. They lost and were therefore rightfully disqualified from national title contention.
#6 Stanford, contrary to popular opinion, was not merely the victim of cannibalism within the PAC-12 Conference. They also lost to arguably the fourth best team in the Big Ten.
#7 Ohio State essentially has the same plight as Iowa. Their defeat at the hands of the Michigan State Spartans cost them the Big Ten title and consequently the opportunity to defend their national crown.
#8 Notre Dame's loss to Stanford logically placed them below the Cardinal and by the Transitive Property justly eliminated them from the playoffs.
All four of the teams listed above were discarded for losing games on the playing field. To allow said teams to play for the national championship would undermine conference championships and the outcomes of the regular season.
The current generation needs to be constantly reminded that the origin of playoffs and the literal definition of the word is a set of one or more games used to identify the champion of an organization in the event that the games of the regular season have failed to do so.
The bottom line is that a larger playoff field places teams on the same level who may be far apart in regular-season success and yet threatens all with the same punishment for postseason failure.
It is disingenuous to argue the equity of a system that disqualifies the 2007 New England Patriots for losing one game and then scream "Injustice!" about a system that rejects a one-loss Ohio State team. And no it does not matter that New England's loss was in the Super Bowl and Ohio State's loss was in the regular season.
Placing more value on contrived "playoff" games than regular season games is a completely arbitrary approach and however large the crowd that promotes its application, it does not refute my thesis.
College football enthusiasts may honestly desire a larger playoff because it adds more excitement in December and January and others may wish for a bloated playoff field because it simultaneously bloats their bank accounts, but the forthright fan will at least admit that it would not make for a more worthy champion in 2015.
The 2015 College Football Playoff Field Is Becoming Self-Evident
If things go as expected in the ACC and SEC championship games this weekend, the CFP selection committee will have a relatively simple job naming the four participants in the 2015 tournament. The winner of the Big Ten championship game is a virtual lock for one spot, as is Big XII champion, Oklahoma. Alabama should easily dispense with the "dead fish" Florida Gators in the SEC title game and the current #1 ranked Clemson Tigers are heavy favorites to defeat a one-loss North Carolina Tar Heel squad that has played the 79th toughest schedule in the FBS.
FBS LOGICAL Football Rankings agreed with the four teams the CFP selection committee chose to participate in the inaugural College Football Playoff of 2014 and this year is shaping up to be one with even less controversy than last year. A four-team playoff appears to have been an excellent decision for major college football. Conference championships are still extremely important and the postseason bracket is not being water-downed with undeserving teams. So far, no undefeated team has been left out and any team with at least one loss can only blame themselves.
If college football fans would embrace the reality that the regular season is part of the playoffs with each conference being a regional bracket and that the regular-season playoffs are essentially a double-elimination scheme for teams that play a challenging schedule and a single-elimination scheme for those teams with a weaker schedule, we could silence the calls for an eight-team playoff. The best system is one that allows for varying numbers of playoff teams each year, but despite the best efforts of FBS LOGICAL Football Rankings, those in power will never consider such an option. The four-team bracket is the optimal method since a standard playoff is the only alternative.
Baylor coach Art Briles publicly complained last year that the system was not fair to his Bears. However, he was the coach when they lost 41-27 to the unranked West Virginia Mountaineers. If your team loses a game, it may be the one that costs you the championship. For those who continue to proclaim that this is unjust, consider the 2007 New England Patriots and the 2015 Kentucky Wildcats' basketball team. Each team only lost one game and yet neither team was crowned champion.