We’re getting down to crunch time this college football season, so it’s time to bring back the Bubble Watch. This Bubble Watch is simple. By my count, there are 13 teams remaining in contention for the College Football Playoff. As we gear up to watch the Week 11 games, let’s compare the resumes of these teams and see why some teams have easier paths than others to the Playoff.
How this works
Let’s give a quick review of how this works.
I include the rankings in yards per play of each team. On one hand, the resume focuses on which teams you have beaten, so I stick to only identifying the quality of wins and losses and show you each contender’s remaining games. On the other hand, the committee “watches teams play,” which is really not a quantifiable statistic, but something that we can at least try to get a bearing on. Still, it’s hard to find an offensive or defensive metric that accurately represents all teams and styles of play.
Some metrics will over-value “air raid” type offenses while some will prefer more consistent, but less explosive, gameplans. The rank in offensive and defensive yards per play gives a basic metric of how efficient and/or consistent a team is on both sides of the ball.
For the purposes of determining quality wins, things like Top 10 and Top 25 are arbitrary numbers that do more harm than good. There is no reason the gap between No. 25 and No. 26 is considered significantly larger than the gap between 24 and 25. Therefore, to counteract this, I am being very lenient as to who is considered Top 10 or Top 25. Any team in the Top 25 of one of the major polls (CFP, AP, or Coaches’), or in a significant number of the accepted computer rankings, will be considered in the Top 25 for resume purposes. This leads to the awkwardness of having more than 25 “Top 25″ teams, but it presents a more accurate picture of the overall resume.
The selection committee has consistently mentioned “wins over teams with winning records” as an important metric, so I’m going to show that to you. It is a less detailed way to view a win than looking at where each win is ranked, but the committee seems to care about it so we have to. I will not count a win over an FCS team as a +.500 win, regardless of record. Again, even though the metric is a stupid one–there are cupcakes with +.500 records (for example, Hawaii and Nevada)–the committee cares about it, so we have to.
The SOS range is taken from numerous computer rankings. Ranges can be quite large, but they do give a decent picture of the possibilities of how strong the schedule actually is.
BUBBLE WATCH
Controls their own destiny
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP (rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Alabama | 1-0 | 0-0 | 2-0 | 2-0 | 4-0 | 10-45 | 4 | 8.1 (2) | 4.4 (7) |
In another year, this might not be such a strong resume. It doesn’t matter, though. Alabama could have a terrible resume–with how dominant this team has been, the committee won’t care.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over +.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Clemson | 0-0 | 2-0 | 1-0 | 3-0 | 3-0 | 35-50 | 5 | 7.4 (3) | 3.9 (2) |
This is a solid resume, especially for this year, but those metrics at the end really bring things home. Clemson is dominating just about everyone on both sides of the ball. The Tigers get a chance at a third ranked win against Boston College this week.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Notre Dame | 1-0 | 0-0 | 1-0 | 4-0 | 3-0 | 25-45 | 5 | 6.0 (37) | 4.4 (12) |
This resume for the Irish once looked much stronger. That win against Michigan is still huge, of course. But the Stanford win is now barely a Top 40 victory, and the win over Virginia Tech isn’t even that. The Irish get a chance to improve this resume against Syracuse. If Notre Dame loses that game, there are a few one-loss teams who will probably have better resumes.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Georgia | 0-1 | 3-0 | 1-0 | 3-0 | 1-0 | 2-25 | 5 | 6.7 (11) | 4.8 (28) |
That loss to LSU isn’t bad, and four Top 40 wins (the computers really like both South Carolina and Missouri) is really strong. The Bulldogs will need to fix what they did against LSU if they want to win out, but winning out guarantees a Playoff spot–especially with three good games remaining. Not only that, this resume is good enough that with a bit of chaos and a good showing in the SEC Championship Game, Georgia might be able to survive a second loss.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Michigan | 0-1 | 2-0 | 1-0 | 3-0 | 2-0 | 10-20 | 6 | 6.1 (31) | 3.5 (1) |
Don’t ask about what if Georgia, Clemson, and Notre Dame all win out. Just look at this resume. Michigan would also be adding a win over Ohio State and a win in the Big Ten Championship Game, though that might not be a great win. (The odds currently favor Northwestern winning the Big Ten West at 7-5.) Still, this resume will be superior to Alabama’s in that scenario. It was one thing for the committee to put Alabama in over an Ohio State team with a tremendously ugly loss to Iowa. It would be another to leave out a team with a close nonconference loss to another Playoff team. Leaving Michigan out in that case would heavily discourage playing any tough nonconference games. The committee won’t do it.
On the Bubble
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Oklahoma | 0-0 | 1-1 | 2-0 | 2-0 | 3-0 | 20-30 | 4 | 8.7 (1) | 5.2 (44) |
Those SOS numbers are good, and that offensive stat might push the Sooners in the Playoff. Everyone will wonder if maybe this is the team that can stick with Alabama. No one else has even come close. The loss to Texas isn’t so bad, though it got worse the past few weeks. Add in two more wins over West Virginia to this resume, and it’s probably Playoff-worthy in an average year. We’ll have to see what happens elsewhere before Oklahoma can get in, though.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| West Virginia | 0-0 | 1-1 | 1-0 | 2-0 | 3-0 | 35-60 | 3 | 6.9 (9) | 5.3 (48) |
The SOS numbers will improve, but the Mountaineers are losing out because of that canceled game against N.C. State. If you add in two wins over Oklahoma to this resume, it gets pretty strong.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Ohio State | 0-0 | 1-0 | 0-1 | 3-0 | 4-0 | 45-95 | 1 | 6.6 (12) | 5.6 (70) |
Not only do the Buckeyes no longer control their own destiny, but I have them third on the bubble right now. Those defensive numbers are ugly, the SOS numbers are ugly, and there is only one win (Penn State) of any value at all here. Even leaving aside Ohio State’s obvious troubles on the field, this resume is weak. Games against Michigan State, Maryland, and Michigan will drastically improve this (depending on if Maryland can avoid a total collapse in the wake of everything that happened there). We’ll have to re-judge this resume if the Buckeyes can win all three of those games. As of now, though, this is very mediocre, even for this year’s bubble.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Washington State | 0-0 | 1-0 | 1-0 | 2-1 | 4-0 | 50-100 | 4 | 6.3 (19) | 4.7 (25) |
I thought it would be hard to find a bubble resume weaker than Ohio State’s, but it wasn’t. Yeah, there are some better wins overall, but there’s no real value here either, plus some weaker SOS numbers. Also, while Ohio State closes the season very strong, the Cougars only have one remaining game against a good team–the Apple Cup in three weeks. They are the only bubble team with top 25 numbers in both offense and defense, though, which should be worth something.
Outside looking in
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Boston College | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 3-0 | 4-0 | 50-80 | 3 | 5.4 (73) | 4.7 (24) |
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| Syracuse | 0-1 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 5-0 | 60-80 | 2 | 5.7 (49) | 5.9 (91) |
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| N.C. State | 0-1 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 2-0 | 3-0 | 35-50 | 3 | 6.2 (23) | 5.7 (74) |
This ACC trio is only here in case we see some real chaos. It’s convoluted, but Boston College and Syracuse can still win the ACC, plus they each have a chance to pick up a huge win. (Boston College plays Clemson this week while Syracuse faces Notre Dame next week.) N.C. State’s resume, meanwhile, will plummet as it faces four bad teams to close the season. Honestly, I should have eliminated N.C. State already. I’ll rectify that this weekend, no matter what happens.
| Team | vs 1-10 | vs 11-25 | vs 26-40 | vs 41-80 | vs 81+ | SOS Range | Wins over
+.500 |
Off YPP
(rank) |
Def YPP
(rank) |
| UCF | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 3-0 | 5-0 | 90-125 | 3 | 7.1 (5) | 5.4 (53) |
I don’t know what to do with UCF. Last year I was very sympathetic to the Knights. They had a solid resume and got no respect for it. This year I feel the opposite. Look at this resume. What in here says “Playoff team,” at all? The numbers will get a little better after facing Cincinnati and USF, but not by too much. The AAC is weaker this year than last year. I don’t really know what else to say. I wish that I thought that UCF deserves a Playoff spot. I really do. But I can’t look at this resume and think about anything other than the fact that every single team on the bubble would probably have dominated this schedule in more impressive fashion. We’ll see what happens the next few weeks, but it’s hard to back UCF at the moment.
