Here’s how College Football Playoff selection committee rankings actually face scrutiny from Ian Miller
Criticism of the rankings
The committee’s poll has prompted controversy since its release, with fans and analysts disputing several team placements. Miller says the committee’s priorities appear to differ from those of other observers.
Committee chair Hunter Yurachek has discussed the rankings in post-release interviews. Miller argues that his explanations have not clarified the committee’s reasoning and may have intensified questions about its decisions.
A blended comparison
ESPN analyst Bill Connelly developed a system that combines résumé measures with ratings focused on team performance. The approach assigns 80 percent of its weight to résumé rankings, strength of record and the football power index.
The remaining 20 percent comes from forward-looking ratings. These measures adjust for opponents and emphasize efficiency on offense, defense and special teams.
What the metrics assess
The blended approach gives greater weight to what teams have achieved than to projections about how they might perform. Its efficiency measures are intended to help assess performance going forward.
Miller notes that wins and losses can be affected by unpredictable outcomes. The article says only one team in the playoff top 25 matched its position in the combined résumé and efficiency ranking, but it does not identify that team or provide the full rankings.
Key points
- The playoff rankings have faced criticism for two weeks.
- Hunter Yurachek’s explanations have not resolved questions about the committee’s reasoning, Miller argues.
- Bill Connelly’s blended system puts 80 percent of its weight on résumé measures.
- Only one playoff top-25 team matched its position in the blended ranking.