Week 11 Anger Index: BYU’s long-standing beef with the CFP committee
-
David Hale
The College Football Playoff committee has released its first top 25 ranking of the season, which is the sport’s version of Walmart opening its doors at midnight on Black Friday. Things are about to get ugly, and someone’s going to end up bloodied while fighting Oklahoma for a spot in the top 12. In other words, it’s the best time of year.
This year, the committee has said it is considering a new “record strength” metric, designed to provide some math-based guidance in the process and to soon replace “game control” as the country’s most hated made-up statistic.
Ten weeks into a season filled with a lot of chaos and few seemingly great teams, however, the committee needs all the help it can get. For example, just eight teams in the country have already beaten more than one of the committee’s current top 25 — and one of those eight teams is NC State. Utah, Iowa, Oregon, Pitt, Washington, Missouri and Tennessee — all ranked this week — are a combined 0-12 against other teams in the committee’s top 25. The ACC doesn’t have a team ranked higher than 14th, and the Group of 5 doesn’t have a team ranked at all, making these rankings less about the coveted top 12 than a need to be in the top 10.
In other words, there’s a lot still in flux as we dive deeper into the final month of the season. But that means our anger toward the committee is just simmering for now, waiting for the rage to boil over in the weeks to come.
Still, a few schools have a pretty good case for outrage already.
In all the hubbub over last year’s final playoff rankings that left a trio of SEC teams out, what went overlooked was that BYU might have had more to be angry about than Alabama, Ole Miss or South Carolina. Two of those teams, at least, had taken a bad loss. Each of those teams had three losses. BYU, on the other hand, checked in on the committee’s final ranking behind each of them despite a 10-2 record and two close losses to solid teams.
So, certainly the committee would feel some compassion for the Cougars this year and consider the Cougars with a bit more optimism, right?
Ah, no.
Let’s take a look at some blind résumés.
Team A: No. 3 strength of record, No. 33 strength of schedule, 4-0 vs. SP+ top-40 opponents, best win vs. No. 11 in the committee’s poll.
Team B: No. 4 strength of record, No. 45 strength of schedule, 3-0 vs. SP+ top-40 opponents, best win vs. No. 13 in the committee’s poll.
Sure, Team A has a slight edge, but the résumés look pretty similar.
Well, Team A is the committee’s No. 1 team, Ohio State. Surely, if another team’s résumé looks more or less the same, that team would be staring down a bye in the first round of the playoff, right?
Nope. Team B is BYU, and the Cougars sit behind three SEC teams with a loss, all three of which are ranked lower in ESPN’s strength of record metric.
Given that BYU has a massive showdown with Texas Tech upcoming, perhaps the committee just punted on any tough decisions on the Cougars for this week. After all, given how much love the committee has shown the Big Ten in these rankings, punting would be a fitting play.
We get it. As a conference, the ACC might, in fact, just be an episode of “Punk’d” that Ashton Kutcher started in 2008, then got distracted and forgot to let everyone know it was a prank. The conference’s train wreck in Week 10 certainly showed up in these rankings — more on that in a moment — but it’s almost as if the committee just threw Louisville into the mix, deciding the Cardinals were guilty by association.
Let’s take another look at some blind résumés, shall we?
Team A: No. 10 strength of record, No. 58 strength of schedule, one win vs. SP+ top 40, best win vs. committee’s No. 13 team, lone loss vs. an unranked team.
Team B: No. 13 strength of record, No. 56 strength of schedule, three wins vs. SP+ top 40, best win vs. committee’s No. 18 team, lone loss to committee’s No. 14 team.
This is basically a coin flip, though given the additional wins vs. high-level opponents and a better loss, it would be hard to argue against Team B, right? Add to that, Team B’s lone loss came in double overtime in a game when it outgained its opponent by 150 yards. Surely, you would be on Team B’s side now, right?
Well, not surprisingly, Team B is Louisville. Team A is Texas Tech, ranked seven spots higher at No. 8.
There seems to be a desire to write Miami off because of two losses in the past three games and given the strife the team seems to be enduring on offense, perhaps that’s wise.
But two things are supposed to be true of the committee’s evaluation process. One, the committee is not supposed to care when wins and losses happen. Losing in September isn’t better than losing in November. A loss is a loss. Second, the committee is not supposed to make assumptions about the future. Sure, Miami’s offense is a mess at the moment, but assuming that will result in future losses isn’t part of the deal.
And yet, putting Miami at No. 18 — eight full spots behind another two-loss team the Canes beat head-to-head — can only be explained by the vibes. Notre Dame’s season is rolling right along now. Miami has hit some stumbling blocks. Never mind the Canes are two late Carson Beck interceptions away from still being undefeated. Never mind that Miami has four wins vs. FPI top-35 teams, twice as many as any other two-loss team except Oklahoma. Never mind that Miami has that head-to-head against the No. 10 team in the committee’s rankings or that it walloped a Florida team that took No. 5 Georgia to the wire and actually beat No. 11 Texas. Never mind that Miami beat a then-ranked USF by 37.
Instead, the committee has assigned Miami to the scrap heap now — which is a shame because Miami would probably have done this to itself anyway, and it’s so much funnier when it happens in the last game of the season.
4. The Group of 5
A year ago, Boise State found its way into a first-round bye ahead of the champion of a Power 4 league, which was probably pretty embarrassing for that Power 4 league except that the ACC embarrasses itself often enough to be pretty well immune to shame.
The rules have changed this year. The top four conference champs aren’t guaranteed a first-round bye now. But that doesn’t seem to have stopped the committee from stacking the deck anyway, just to be safe.
Not one team outside the Power 4 found its way into these initial rankings, though the committee notes that Memphis currently is in the lead for the long Group of 5 playoff bid.
So, surely the Group of 5 should be pretty upset, right?
Yes, but not about being snubbed from the top-25 party. None of the leaders in the Group of 5 have a great case — certainly none like Boise State had a year ago. But Memphis? Really? The same team that lost by a touchdown to a UAB team had just fired its coach?
In the committee’s new guidance to consider record strength, there is an assumption that really bad losses are weighted heavily, but that certainly hasn’t been the case this time around.
North Texas has one loss to SP+ No. 27.
James Madison has one loss to SP+ No. 16 (and the No. 15 team in the committee’s rankings).
San Diego State has one loss to SP+ No. 73 has one loss to SP+ No. 119.
Memphis has one loss to SP+ No. 119.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the Tigers weren’t punished at all for a terrible loss.
5. The SEC
The latter half of the committee’s top 25 is usually the equivalent of the phone lines for a Finebaum episode — just a place where a lot of mediocre SEC folks hang out, patiently waiting for their turn. But this time, the committee has stuffed the bottom of the rankings with Big Ten teams — No. 19 USC, No. 20 Iowa, No. 21 Michigan and No. 23 Washington — and that might actually matter in the long run.
One of the committee’s favored metrics is wins over ranked opponents. We’re dubious about how many Big Ten teams deserve a little number next to their name. The league still has four teams that have yet to win a conference game, and the bottom third is a complete dumpster fire. It’s easy to rack up some wins when half your conference schedule has already been embarrassed by UCLA’s interim coaching staff.
But the SEC — that’s where the real depth is. Nearly half the SEC’s conference games this season have been one-possession affairs. Mississippi State, a team that had gone nearly two years without an SEC win, already knocked off last year’s Big 12 champ. LSU, a team that fired its coach, has a win over last year’s ACC champ. Florida beat Texas. Putting a bunch of undeserving teams at the bottom of the rankings only serves to prop up the résumés of teams such as Oregon, which hasn’t beaten anyone of consequence. And frankly, the committee is supposed to do that for the SEC, not the Big Ten.
Also angry: Virginia Cavaliers (8-1, No. 14, behind four two-loss teams), USF Bulls (6-2, unranked), Arizona State Sun Devils (6-3, unranked), Cincinnati Bearcats (7-2, unranked), Brian Kelly (just angry for other reasons).
-
Bradford Doolittle
ORLANDO, Fla. — There were a number of ironies surrounding the results of the contemporary baseball era committee’s Hall of Fame ballot, announced Sunday night at MLB’s winter meetings.
Perhaps the most poignant is this: If not for Barry Bonds, Jeff Kent — the only one of the eight players under consideration selected Sunday — might not be bound for Cooperstown. While Kent is the all-time home run hitter among second basemen, he was on the same ballot as Bonds — who hit more homers than anyone, at any position.
During a post-announcement news conference, Kent recalled the way he and Bonds used to push, prod and sometimes annoy each other during their six seasons as teammates on the San Francisco Giants. Those were Kent’s best seasons, a fairly late-career peak that ran from 1997 to 2002, during which Kent posted 31.6 of his 55.4 career bWAR.
The crescendo was 2000, when Kent enjoyed his career season at age 32, hitting .334 with a 1.021 OPS, hammering 33 homers with 125 RBIs and compiling a career-best 7.2 bWAR. Hitting fourth behind Bonds and his .440 OBP, Kent hit .382 with runners on base and .449 with a runner on first base.
During Kent’s six years in San Francisco, he was one of five players in baseball to go to the plate with at least one runner on base at least 2,000 times, and the other four all played at least 48 more games than he did. Turns out, hitting behind Bonds is a pretty good career move.
To be clear, Kent was an outstanding player and the numbers he compiled were his, and his alone. When you see how the news of election impacts players, it’s a special thing. I am happy Jeff Kent is now a Hall of Famer.
But I am less happy with the Hall of Fame itself. While Kent’s overwhelming support — he was named on 14 of the 16 ballots, two more than the minimum needed for induction — caught me more than a little off guard, what didn’t surprise me was the overall voting results. In what amounted to fine print, there was this mention in the Hall’s official news release: “Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Gary Sheffield and Fernando Valenzuela each received less than five votes.”
By the new guidelines the Hall enacted for its ever-evolving era committee process — guidelines that went into effect with this ballot — Bonds, Clemens, Sheffield and Valenzuela aren’t eligible in 2028, the next time the contemporary era is considered. They can be nominated in 2031, and if they are, that’s probably it. If they don’t get onto at least five ballots then, they are done. And there is no reason to believe they will get more support the next time.
I thought that the makeup of this committee was stacked against the PED-associated players, but that’s a subjective assessment. And who knows what goes on in those deliberations. With so many players from the 1970s and 1980s in the group, it seemed to bode well for Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy. But they were both listed on just six ballots. Carlos Delgado had the second most support, at nine.
Why? Beats me. I’ve given up trying to interpret the veterans committee/era committee processes that have existed over the years. But the latest guidelines seem perfectly designed to ensure that for the next six years, there’s no reason to wail about Bonds and Clemens being excluded. Then in 2031, that’s it.
Meanwhile, the classic era will be up for consideration again in 2027, when Pete Rose can and likely will be nominated. Perhaps Shoeless Joe Jackson as well. What happens then is anybody’s guess, but by the second week of December 2031, we could be looking at a Hall of Fame roster that includes the long ineligible (but no more) Rose and maybe Jackson but permanently excludes the never-ineligible Bonds and Clemens — perhaps the best hitter and pitcher, respectively, who ever played.
If and when it happens, another kind of symbolic banishment will take place: The Hall will have consigned itself, with these revised guidelines, to always being less than it should be. And the considerable shadows of Bonds and Clemens will continue to loom, larger and larger over time, just as they happened with Rose and Jackson.
Ironic, isn’t it?
WASHINGTON — The Washington Capitals placed goaltender Charlie Lindgren and forward Ryan Leonard on injured reserve Sunday night before their game against the Columbus Blue Jackets.
Washington recalled forward Bogdan Trineyev and goaltender Clay Stevenson from Hershey of the American Hockey League.
Lindgren (upper body) was a late scratch Friday night before a 4-3 shootout loss at Anaheim. Leonard (upper body) didn’t return after his face was bloodied on an unpenalized first-period check from Jacob Trouba.
“He’s going to miss an extended period of time,” Capitals coach Spencer Carbery said about Leonard, the rookie who has seven goals and 11 assists after having two each Wednesday night in a 7-1 win at San Jose.
Lindgren is 5-3 with a 3.11 goals-against average in his 10th NHL season and fifth with Washington.
“We’ll see once he gets back on the ice,” Carbery said. “But [we] put him on the IR, so he’s going to miss, what is it, seven days at the bare minimum. And then we’ll see just how he progresses.”
-
Bradford Doolittle
ORLANDO, Fla. — Jeff Kent, who holds the record for home runs by a second baseman, was elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame on Sunday.
Kent, 57, was named on 14 of 16 ballots by the contemporary baseball era committee, two more than he needed for induction.
Just as noteworthy as Kent’s selection were the names of those who didn’t garner enough support, which included all-time home run leader Barry Bonds, 354-game winner Roger Clemens, two MVPs from the 1980s, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy, and Gary Sheffield, who slugged 509 career homers.
Bonds, Clemens, Sheffield and Dodgers great Fernando Valenzuela were named on fewer than five ballots. According to a new protocol introduced by the Hall of Fame that went into effect with this ballot, players drawing five or fewer votes won’t be eligible the next time their era is considered. They can be nominated again in a subsequent cycle, but if they fall short of five votes again, they will not be eligible for future consideration.
The candidacies of Bonds and Clemens have long been among the most hotly debated among Hall of Fame aficionados because of their association with PEDs. With Sunday’s results, they moved one step closer to what will ostensibly be permanent exclusion from the sport’s highest honor.
If Bonds, Clemens, Sheffield and Valenzuela are nominated when their era comes around in 2031 and fall short of five votes again, it will be their last shot at enshrinement under the current guidelines.
Kent, whose best seasons were with the San Francisco Giants as Bonds’ teammate, continued his longstanding neutral stance on Bonds’ candidacy, declining to offer an opinion on whether or not he believes Bonds should get in.
“Barry was a good teammate of mine,” Kent said. “He was a guy that I motivated and pushed. We knocked heads a little bit. He was a guy that motivated me at times, in frustration, in love, at times both.
“Barry was one of the best players I ever saw play the game, amazing. For me, I’ve always said that. I’ve always avoided the specific answer you’re looking for, because I don’t have one. I don’t. I’m not a voter.”
Kent played 17 seasons in the majors for six different franchises and grew emotional at times as he recollected the different stops in a now-Hall of Fame career that ended in 2008. He remained on the BBWAA ballot for all 10 years of his eligibility after retiring, but topped out at 46.5% in 2023, his last year.
“The time had gone by, and you just leave it alone, and I left it alone,” Kent said. “I loved the game, and everything I gave to the game I left there on the field. This moment today, over the last few days, I was absolutely unprepared. Emotionally unstable.”
A five-time All-Star, Kent was named NL MVP in 2000 as a member of the Giants, who he set a career high with a .334 average while posting 33 homers and 125 RBIs. Kent hit 377 career homers, 351 as a second baseman, a record for the position.
Kent is the 62nd player elected to the Hall who played for the Giants. He also played for Toronto, the New York Mets, Cleveland, Houston and the Dodgers. Now, he’ll play symbolically for baseball’s most exclusive team — those with plaques hanging in Cooperstown, New York.
“I have not walked through the halls of the Hall of Fame,” Kent said. “And that’s going to be overwhelming once I get in there.”
Carlos Delgado was named on nine ballots, the second-highest total among the eight under consideration. Mattingly and Murphy received six votes apiece. All three are eligible to be nominated again when the contemporary era is next considered in 2028.
Next up on the Hall calendar is voting by the BBWAA on this year’s primary Hall of Fame ballot. Those results will be announced on Jan. 20.
Anyone selected through that process will join Kent in being inducted on July 26, 2026, on the grounds of the Clark Sports Center in Cooperstown.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024