Two weeks into the college football playoff season, the debate over how the selection committee ranks teams has moved from grumbling to measurement. An opinion column by Ian Miller, carried by Fox News's OutKick, holds the committee's poll against a blended efficiency-and-resume ranking built by ESPN's Bill Connelly, and finds the two disagree on nearly every team. The question it raises is an old one in sport: whether reputation, conference prestige and the weight of past results should outrank what a team's play actually shows, and whether those who judge can see their own leanings clearly e
Ian Miller Argues the CFP Committee's Rankings Favor the SEC and Miss Boise State, Miami, and Ohio State
Only one team sits in the same spot in both rankings.
Mark
Why does a ranking comparison matter so much this early?
Mimi
Because the committee's poll feeds directly into who gets into the playoff. The column says only Georgia sits in the same spot in both lists, so the gaps are everywhere.
Mark
Miami seems to be the headline case.
Mimi
Yes. Connelly's blend has them No. 2, five spots above the committee, and they dropped six after losing to Notre Dame.
Luke
Worth saying that's one analyst's blend, not a neutral truth. The column itself admits other rankings come out differently.
Mark
What's in the blend?
Mimi
Eighty percent resume measures, including strength of record and FPI, and twenty percent forward-looking ratings. It's opponent-adjusted and efficiency-focused.
Luke
And efficiency models have blind spots. The column notes they don't know about Julian Sayin's injury and react slowly to losses, which is why Ohio State and LSU, both 6-3, jump eight spots.
Mark
So the model flatters some teams too.
Mimi
It does, and Miller acknowledges that. His main point is the SEC pattern: seven of nine ranked SEC teams sit higher than the blend would put them.
Luke
The 2.5-spot average is his calculation, and the claim about why, marketing and deference, is his argument, not something the data shows. The committee hasn't answered in this piece.
Mark
So what's solid?
Luke
The gaps between the two lists. The motive behind them is opinion.
Il Polso
- Only one team, Georgia, sits in the same spot in the committee's poll and the outside blended ranking, so the two systems are at odds almost everywhere.
- Miami's six-spot fall after its loss to Notre Dame is treated as the sharpest injustice, with the efficiency model placing the Hurricanes at No. 2.
- Kentucky and South Carolina sit far below where the efficiency numbers put them, and the column blames their SEC membership for the inflated standing.
- The argument is tightening around the SEC: seven of its nine ranked teams are judged higher than performance supports, and the column predicts loud resistance if the committee changes course.
- The next committee release is the test, and it remains unclear whether the panel will move toward efficiency measures or hold its ground.
Two weeks into the college football playoff season, the debate over how the selection committee ranks teams has moved from grumbling to measurement. An opinion column by Ian Miller, carried by Fox News's OutKick, holds the committee's poll against a blended efficiency-and-resume ranking built by ESPN's Bill Connelly, and finds the two disagree on nearly every team. The question it raises is an old one in sport: whether reputation, conference prestige and the weight of past results should outrank what a team's play actually shows, and whether those who judge can see their own leanings clearly enough to correct them.
Two weeks into the College Football Playoff committee's rankings, the argument over them has not cooled. A column by Ian Miller for Fox News's OutKick takes the complaint a step further, setting the committee's poll against a blended ranking from ESPN's Bill Connelly. Connelly's formula leans mostly on resume measures and partly on opponent-adjusted efficiency in offense, defense and special teams, which the column treats as a steadier guide to future results than wins and losses that can turn on luck.
The disagreements are sharp. Miami, also 8-1, is the column's main grievance: the committee has it well down the list, while Connelly's blend puts the Hurricanes at No. 2. Boise State, Wake Forest, Indiana and Notre Dame all climb in the efficiency view, Boise State most of all, which Miller ties to the committee's supposed blind spot for results outside the SEC. Kentucky and South Carolina fall furthest, and Miller says both get generous credit for their conference.
Miller's larger target is the SEC. Seven of its nine ranked teams sit higher in the poll than performance suggests, and he puts the average overrating at about 2.5 spots. He also faults committee chair Hunter Yurachek, whose post-release explanations, in Miller's view, muddied the picture. He argues that years of conference marketing have shaped how the sport sees itself, and that much money and many jobs ride on these rankings.
Miller admits this is one set of numbers, and that other models would tell different stories. What bears watching is whether the committee's next release moves toward efficiency-based thinking, and how SEC supporters respond if it does.
Two weeks into the College Football Playoff committee's rankings, the argument over them has not cooled. A column by Ian Miller for Fox News's OutKick, published November 13, takes the dispute a step past the usual complaining and sets the committee's poll against an outside yardstick: a blended ranking built by ESPN's Bill Connelly. It is an opinion piece, and it reads like one, but it is built on a specific comparison.
Connelly's formula is weighted 80/20. The larger share draws on resume-style measures: resume rankings, strength of record and ESPN's Football Power Index. The smaller share is forward-looking ratings. These are opponent-adjusted and lean on underlying efficiency in offense, defense and special teams, which the column describes as a better predictor of future performance than raw wins and losses, since those can turn on fluky outcomes.
Miller lists 25 teams and shows how far each sits from its committee slot in Connelly's version. Only one team lands in the same place: Georgia, at 8-1. Miami, also 8-1, is the column's central grievance. Connelly's blend has the Hurricanes at No. 2, five spots above the committee. Miller calls the six-spot drop Miami took after losing to Notre Dame even more absurd in light of that. Notre Dame (8-1) moves up two, Indiana (8-1) up three, and Wake Forest (8-1) up four. Boise State (8-1) shows the largest upward move, nine spots, which Miller attributes to the committee's inability to appreciate results against teams outside the SEC.
Going the other way, Kentucky (7-2) is the biggest miss, ten spots lower in the efficiency ranking, and South Carolina (6-3) is eight spots lower. Miller says both get heavy credit for playing in the SEC. Alabama (7-2) falls two spots. BYU (7-2) drops six and Houston (7-2) drops four. Utah and UCLA, both 9-0, fall two and three spots respectively.
Ohio State and LSU, both 6-3, are the surprise. Each rises eight spots in Connelly's version. Miller explains that efficiency systems react more slowly to losses against good teams than people do, and that the computer-driven metrics do not account for Julian Sayin's injury. The Buckeyes' three losses came against Texas, USC and Oregon, while their win over Indiana and lopsided results against opponents like Iowa keep them in the top 15. LSU is credited for playing well in its losses to Ole Miss and Kentucky.
The column's broader claim is about the SEC. Nine of its teams are in the committee's top 25, and seven of those sit higher than the objective ranking would put them. Missouri is No. 22 in the poll and No. 28 in Connelly's list. Even counting LSU's eight-spot deficit, Miller says the average SEC team is 2.5 spots higher than its performance-based ranking.
Miller also faults committee chair Hunter Yurachek, saying his explanations in the post-release interview made matters worse instead of clarifying the committee's thinking. He argues that the SEC's years of marketing have shaped how the people running the sport see it, and that tens of millions of dollars and many jobs depend on the rankings. If the committee did correct course, he predicts SEC fans, boosters and commissioner Greg Sankey would protest relentlessly.
Miller concedes the limits of his evidence: this is one set of rankings, not a definitive one, and others produce different results. What to watch is whether the committee's next release moves toward measures like these, and how the SEC's stakeholders react if it does.
Citazioni salienti
The SEC average sits about 2.5 spots higher than its performance-based ranking, even counting LSU's eight-spot gap.— Ian Miller, OutKick/Fox News
Chair Hunter Yurachek's post-release explanations made things worse rather than clarifying the committee's reasoning.— Ian Miller, OutKick/Fox News (paraphrase)
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su Fox News ↗