Yesterday, Fox Sports analyst Joel Klatt was on The Herd with Colin Cowherd. He laid out his theory on the inconsistent, sometimes head-scratching, criteria of the CFP Selection Committee’s rankings. As I watched it, it occurred to me that Klatt’s analysis perfectly encompassed Big 12 fan’s confusion and frustration with the first two week’s of rankings.
Klatt makes several good points while citing statistics along the way. One being that the Committee’s version of good wins or bad losses is flawed and biased based on the type of offense a team runs. Moreover he touches on a point that Big 12’ers have been screaming for years, and that’s comparing teams that run “traditional” offenses as opposed to spread offenses on traditional criteria. It’s not apples-to-apples. Far from it. Time and time again advanced stats have proven to be much more telling of a team’s actual strength.
Also, props to Chris Ross for putting together the “heat map” below. This is a great snapshot of what the committee supposedly sees as a priority for a ranking in the top four. It’s hard to miss that the first three teams rank the lowest on defensive points per possession. At the same time it should really confuse you given where they have some teams placed based on their own criteria. Specifically how Baylor and Ohio State compare to each other, along with Oklahoma State and Iowa.
— LandGrant Gauntlet (@the_LGG) November 11, 2015
Big 12 followers have been told, on many occasions, that “they’ll get their chance”. That’s very nice of the powers that be, but hopefully after considering the above, you can at least see why we’re a little put off in the meantime. Whether you agree or disagree, we’d love to get your thoughts in the comments below.