Ballot Type: Hybrid
Submitted: Nov. 11, 2024, 5:38 p.m.
Overall Rationale: Week 12 notes: Deservedness keeping highly-rated 2-loss teams such as Alabama and Texas A&M behind 0-loss Army; UNLV can be ranked over Army due to loss allowance. General notes: FIRST layer (computer portion): SP+, opponents’ SP+, opponents’ opponents’ SP+, opponents’ win %, opponents’ opponents’ win %. SECOND layer (human portion): home/field/away, key injuries, P5/G5 status, watched game factors (ex: offensive/defensive line domination, rush yards after contact, average point of first contact, defensive penetration on non-inside screens, missed tackles, quarterback throwing release speed, overall turnovers, average starting field position, etc). THIRD layer (human portion): wins/losses vs higher-/lower-/non-ranked teams, recency of those results. FOURTH layer (computer portion): Deservedness = Team A cannot be ranked over Team B that has 2+ fewer losses (ex: 9-3 LSU can be ranked over 10-2 Missouri, but 9-3 LSU cannot be ranked over 11-1 Tulane even if LSU beat Tulane heads up, rankings have LSU over Tulane, and/or I think LSU is better than Tulane) unless Team B is giving a X loss allowance to Team A due to significantly fewer P4 games played. Loss allowances come into play when: P5 teams play 2 fewer P5 games than another P5 team (ex: 9-3 Arizona plays 10 P5 games, 11-1 Syracuse plays 8 P5 games, 10-8=2, 9-3 Arizona can be ranked over 11-1 Syracuse); P5 teams play 6 fewer P5 games than a G5 team (11-1 Syracuse plays 8 P5 teams, 9-3 Charlotte plays 2 P5 teams, 8-2=6, 9-3 Charlotte can be ranked over 11-1 Syracuse); G5 teams play 10 fewer P5 teams than a P5 team (ex: 9-3 Arizona plays 10 P5 games, 11-1 Liberty plays 0 P5 games, 10-0=0, 9-3 Arizona can be ranked over 11-1 Liberty); or G5 teams play 2 fewer P5 games than another G5 team (ex: 9-3 Charlotte plays 2 P5 games, 11-1 Liberty plays 0 P5 games, 2-0=2, 9-3 Charlotte can be ranked over 11-1 Liberty). If the game differential exceeds more than 2/6/10/2 in those scenarios, add another loss allowance for each additional P5 game played difference in that scenario.
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
+0. Would be the #1 playoff seed in this scenario, playing the winner of #8 Tennessee/#9 Notre Dame in the Rose Bowl |
2 |
![]() |
+0. Would be the #5 playoff seed in this scenario, hosting #12 UNLV in the first round |
3 |
![]() |
+1. Would be the #6 playoff seed in this scenario, hosting #11 Boise State in the first round |
4 |
![]() |
+1. Would be the #7 playoff seed in this scenario, hosting #10 Miami in the first round |
5 |
![]() |
+2. Would be the #2 playoff seed in this scenario, playing the winner of #7 Indiana/#10 Miami in the Sugar Bowl |
6 |
![]() |
+2. Would be the #8 playoff seed in this scenario, hosting #9 Notre Dame in the first round |
7 |
![]() |
+2. Would be the #3 playoff seed in this scenario, playing the winner of #6 Penn State/#11 Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl |
8 |
![]() |
+2. Would be the #9 playoff seed in this scenario, playing at #8 Tennessee in the first round |
9 |
![]() |
+2. Would be the #4 playoff seed in this scenario, playing the winner of #5 Ohio State/#12 UNLV in the Cotton Bowl |
10 |
![]() |
-7. Would be the #10 playoff seed in this scenario, playing at #8 Indiana in the first round |
11 |
![]() |
+3. Would be the #11 playoff seed in this scenario, playing at #6 Penn State in the first round. Deservedness blocking highly-rated 2-loss teams with no loss allowances over Army such as Alabama from being ranked ahead of Army |
12 |
![]() |
+3. Would be the #12 playoff seed in this scenario, playing at #5 Ohio State in the first round. Deservedness blocking highly-rated 2-loss teams with no loss allowances over Army such as Alabama from being ranked ahead of Army |
13 |
![]() |
+3. Deservedness blocking highly-rated 2-loss teams with no loss allowances over Army such as Alabama from being ranked ahead of Army |
14 |
![]() |
+3. Lowest-rated 0-loss team |
15 |
![]() |
+5. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
16 |
![]() |
+2. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
17 |
![]() |
+5. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
18 |
![]() |
-12. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
19 |
![]() |
+2. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
20 |
![]() |
+3. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
21 |
![]() |
+3. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
22 |
![]() |
-10. Deservedness blocking them from being ranked higher |
23 |
![]() |
NEW |
24 |
![]() |
+1 |
25 |
![]() |
-12. Next 5: Tulane, Louisiana (lowest-rated 1-loss team), Louisville, LSU, South Carolina |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
0.00 |
2 |
![]() |
0.00 |
3 |
![]() |
0.65 |
4 |
![]() |
0.00 |
5 |
![]() |
0.00 |
6 |
![]() |
0.00 |
7 |
![]() |
0.00 |
8 |
![]() |
0.00 |
9 |
![]() |
0.00 |
10 |
![]() |
0.00 |
11 |
![]() |
0.00 |
12 |
![]() |
12.90 |
13 |
![]() |
0.75 |
14 |
![]() |
0.00 |
15 |
![]() |
-0.70 |
16 |
![]() |
0.00 |
17 |
![]() |
-1.18 |
18 |
![]() |
-1.00 |
19 |
![]() |
0.00 |
20 |
![]() |
0.00 |
21 |
![]() |
0.00 |
22 |
![]() |
0.01 |
23 |
![]() |
0.62 |
24 |
![]() |
0.00 |
25 |
![]() |
0.00 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
![]() |
0.37 |
![]() |
0.47 |
![]() |
0.33 |
![]() |
0.15 |
Total Score: 19.11