Wisconsin Ends 2017 FBS Season #1


Congratulations to the Wisconsin Badgers (12-0) for ending the 2017 college football regular season as only one (1) of two (2) 0-loss programs and securing the number one ranking in my weekly coaches poll. For those who have asked why Wisconsin, first and foremost, they played twelve (12) FBS programs this season, did not schedule a FCS opponent and they scheduled and played an away game at BYU to play a regular season game. That means they LEFT the comfort of their home and home region to play another FBS opponent. With only two (2) 0-loss programs left at the end of the regular season, I guess this supports my research and findings in my book.

Also, congratulations to the Knights from Central Florida (11-0) for ending the regular season as the other 0-loss FBS program. The Knights had to make schedule maneuvers to accomodate for the start of the 2017 college football season, handled adversity with hurricanes that effected not only one (1) scheduled game, but two (2) scheduled games. This act of God, required Central Florida to re-schedule their confernece game with Memphis later in the season, which makes conference games a requirment to re-schedule over any other non-conference game. Central Florida dropped their FCS game with the Maine Bears to accomodate for the game with Memphis. However, UCF later scheduled Austin Peay, an FCS member. Any FBS team who can handle adversity, remain un-defeated, handle the act of God situation, not once, but twice and finally survive one of the best college football games of the season with South Florida. Central Florida in my book, EARNED the second ranking and a trip to the CFP.

I also believe that Central Florida should be under consideration for the College Football Playoff (CFP). However, I believe that the CFP Committee has specific protocol to follow and that protocol states, that NO Group of Five Conference FBS member is eligible to compete for the College Football Playoff and the National Championship. Eventhough, UFC and the Director of Athletics, Daniel J. White, makes sure that the UCF athletic programs abide by and are compliant with the NCAA Bylaws. The UCF Director of Athletics also, is required to meet NCAA Bylaw 20, then abide by NCAA Bylaw 3.1 thought 3.4. Then congruent with that, UCF must meet and abide by the Title IX rules and regulations which are also inclusive to the NCAA Bylaw 20. If college athletics is being operated under a “business like structure”, then college athletics and the Group of Five Conference Commissioners, Athletic Directors, their FBS programs, Coaches and Players should press the issue and ask for an improved playoff format which is more Utilitarianistic, under the Stuart MIll’s philosophy, which is more “inclusive” then exclusive. If the Group of Five does not see a change under that manner in which is “inclusive”, then they should ban together and file suit against the power brokers under the Sherman Act of 1890 which protects them. Once the Sherman Act of 1890 is started, then the Clayton Act of 1914 protects them in more ways that you can only imagine. I have investigated both and pubished a chapter within my book, with that chapter being called: Chapter 17: The Sherman Act vs. The NCAA and the Power Brokers.

However, its interesting that Central Florida MIGHT be able to compete for one of the New Year’s Day Six Bowl Games (NYDSBG). I call this the “bridesmaid prize”, because UCF needs to meet specific requirements to be considered for the “bridesmaid” prize. That means they need to beat Memphis in the American Athletic Conference Championship Game to just earn the “bridesmaid” prize. Eventhought UCF would be (12-0), they won’t be on the CFP committees radar. If UCF loses the AAC Championship Game, then UCF might not receive that (NYDSBG) bid.  Might want to purchase and read my book. It’s time for an expanded playoff format.

I will now explain how my weekly rankings work. I rank based upon the professional model theory. This means that college athletics generates tripel digits of Millons of dollars annually in revenue, just like the professional levels of sports (i.e. the NFL, the NBA. the NHL, the MLB and the MLS). I do not use subjective assessments, the eye test or biasness to rank. I use dependent variables and categorical variable within those dependent varaibles to rank weekly.  Each variable has a direct relationship and effect on the independent variable. I do not rank FBS programs based upon vested interest or that’s my favorite or that this team need to be ranked higher than this team because they are from this conference. Each FBS team earns their ranking based upon varaibles in which they create and results based. I also examine the non-confernce schedule as a major variable. By examining the non-conference schedule, I can assess and evaluate the non conference schedule based upon number of home games versus number of away games. If any FBS team plays more home games than away games within their non-conference schedule, then I can assess that that specific FBS team does not take ANY risks within their non-conference schedule. If any FBS teams plays more away games in their non-conference schedule and earns a credible record, then they will have a better ranked position over any FBS team who plays more home games in their non-conference schedule. I have read the various peer reviewed research and articles that examined home field advantage in relationship to schedule, more home games and how it impacts your overall record.  NO RISK… NO REWARD. This is just part of how I rank each week of the college football season. There are three (3) chapters within my book that examined the research and I published other results that supports the already pubished peer reviewed research.

Here is this weeks, almost final rankings.  There is one more week that needs to be completed before the final rankings. The Sun Belt Confernce FBS programs and Florida State each must play one more game before the FINAL rankings appear. This 2017 College Football FBS Season has been exciting and great for the 37+ MIllion college football fans to watch and enjoy. Many upsets appeared as the season wound down towards the end. Never use a crystal ball to see the future or make predictions, especially in a college athletics. Just let the games play out.

A B C D E F G H
1 WISCONSIN (12-0) (.514) 75 (19-18) (.476) 103 (69-76) (.358) 129 (29-52) (.452) 20 29 7
2 CENTRAL FLORIDA (11-0) (.471) 90 (16-18) (.504) 85 (64-63) (.453) 96 (29-35) (.503) 2 20 8
3 OKLAHOMA (11-1) (.417) 103  (15-21) (.479) 99 (69-75) (.463) 94 (37-43) (.564) 1 19 5
4 GEORGIA (11-1) (.618) 33 (21-13) (.574) 27 (74-55) (.438) 100 (28-36) (.483) 11 26 8
5 CLEMSON (11-1) (.556) 58 (20-16) (.562) 43 (73-57) (.500) 92 (32-32) (.409) 34 31 5
6 ALABAMA (11-1) (.600) 37 (21-14) (.565) 36 (74-57) (.406) 123 (26-38) (.531) 3 31 6
7 MIAMI (FLA) (10-1) (.765) 2 (26-8) (.539) 61 (69-59) (.411) 120 (23-33) (.391) 45 22 4
8 MEMPHIS (10-1) (.485) 85 (16-17) (.476) 102 (60-66) (.453) 97 (29-35) (.513) 6 16 6
9 USC (10-2) (.583) 43 (21-15) (.528) 70 (76-68) (.493) 73 (35-36) (.409) 35 21 2
10 OHIO STATE (10-2) (.686) 10 (24-11) (.538) 62 (77-66) (.407) 122 (33-48) (.519 ) 5 24 8
11 PENN STATE (10-2) (.529) 68 (18-16) (.557) 47 (78-62) (.506) 59 (41-40) (.481) 12 33 7
12 SAN DIEGO STATE (10-2) (.667) 15 (24-12) (.474) 104 (63-70) (.438) 105 (28-36) (.401) 39 21 5
13 TOLEDO (10-2) (.429) 98 (15-20) (.466) 110 (61-70) (.500) 68 (32-32) (.510) 7 21 5
14 WASHINGTON (10-2) (.542) 66 (13-11) (.515) 80 (68-64) (.420) 119 (34-47) (.493) 10 28 8
15 TCU (10-2) (.458) 91 (11-13) (.500) 89 (66-66) (.475) 83 (38-47) (.392) 44 32 4
16 AUBURN (10-2) (.500) 77 (17-17) (.615) 7 (80-50) (.563) 19 (36-28) (.468) 16 28 7
17 TROY (9-2) (.583) 44 (21-15) (.423) 122 (52-71) (.448) 98 (26-32) (.377) 55 21 5
18 SOUTH FLORIDA (9-3) (.222) 129 (8-28) (.377) 130 (49-81) (.422) 118 (27-37) (.438) 22 27 5
19 OKLAHOMA STATE (9-3) (.314) 121 (11-24) (.469) 109 (67-76) (.488) 76 (39-41) (.520) 4 23 5
20 BOISE STATE (9-3) (.583) 45 (28-20) (.542) 60 (78-66) (.547) 29 (35-29) (.377) 54 24 4
21 STANFORD (9-3) (.588) 42 (20-14) (.563) 39 (81-63) (.494) 70 (40-41) (.444) 21 16 2
22 NOTRE DAME (9-3) (.582) 52 (39-28) (.641) 3 (91-51) (.765) 1 (39-12) (.420) 27 20 5
23 NORTHWESTERN (9-3) (.306) 123 (11-25) (.486) 94 (70-74) (.469) 86 (38-43) (.349) 76 23 3
24 MICHIGAN STATE (9-3) (.528) 70 (19-17) (.563) 41 (81-63) (.494) 71 (40-41) (.321) 94 27 2
25 FLORIDA ATLANTIC (9-3) (.686) 12 (24-11) (.546) 54 (71-59) (.492) 74 (31-32) (.497) 9 19 5

ANY FBS team that is in BOLD is an FBS team that scheduled and played an FCS program during the course of the 2017 regular season.

Honorable Mentioned: All are (9-3); Virginia Tech, North Texas, Fresno State, Washington State, and LSU

Key: A-Rank Order; B- Team and Current Overall Record; C- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Non-Conference Schedule, Rank within that Categorical Variable and the Overall Record; D- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Overall Regular Season Schedule, Rank within that Categorical Variable and the Overall Record; E- Percentage Rate of the ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Conference Schedule, Rank within that Categorical Variable and Overall Record; F- Percentage Rate of your Offensive Efficiency and Ranking within that Categorical Variable (described as: number of offensive and defensive possessions that results in points); G- Defensive Efficiency Rating (described as: number of times that your teams Defense were successful in possessing 3 consecutive stops against your opponent when they possessed the ball and stopped them from scoring (3 consecutive stops equals 1)) and H- Game Control Categorical Variable based upon the three possession score outcome (described as: the end score result that possesses a 21 point differential in final score).

As of this time of the current college football season there are 80 bowl eligible FBS programs with six (6) wins or more, and 3 more waiting in the wings with five (5) wins. Those five (5) win programs are; New Mexico State, Louisiana Lafayette and Florida State. Each have one (1) more regular season game to complete this week. This means that there will be no need to assess any credible (5-7) FBS programs for any open bowl openings, even if there was an expanded playoff format of 8 or 16 FBS programs. If there were a need for any (5-7) FBS programs, these programs would be and should be considered for a bowl game based upon research and number of 1-possession losses. Those programs are: Eastern Michigan with six (6) 1-possession losses, and both Indiana and Tulane with four (4) 1-possession losses.

If you plan on using any of my ideas, thoughts or rankings to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA policies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com


College Football Playoff Field of 16 Mock 2107.4


This is the fourth installment of my MOCK college football playoff field of 16 for the FBS level of play. If only the power brokers of college football could be more open minded to assess and evaluate, how this expanded playoff format would be more beneficial to the the fans of college football and the exponential potential in generating more revenue, then college football would truly possess a real “National Champion”.

If you have followed along with my MOCK field of 16 as I have posted them throughout the course of this FBS season, you can admire the changes from week to week, in how the games have become more interesting as the season winds down. I believe that this type of playoff format would make for better entertainment, excitement and causes confusion amongst the television media on which game to show to the fans who cannot be in attendance. All 8 of these games would make for great television, viewership and media attention.

At this current time ONLY USC at (10-2) is in the clubhouse and has at least secured one (1) of the sixteen (16) seeds within my expanded playoff format for college football. USC’s actual seed placement cannot be determined until the regular season of college football is completed and at least all playoff possibilities are eliminated. This last week of college football is going to be very interesting, exciting and possible upsets.

This is how the field of 16 would be seeded if the season were to have concluded this past weekend and the playoffs starting this following weekend:

16 SEED TOLEDO (9-2) AT 1 SEED WISCONSIN (11-0)

9 SEED MEMPHIS (9-1) AT 8 SEED USC (10-2)

12 BOISE STATE (9-2) AT 5 SEED OKLAHOMA (10-1)

13 SEED OHIO STATE (9-2) AT 4 SEED CENTRAL FLORIDA (10-0)

14 SEED PENN STATE (9-2) AT 3 SEED MIAMI FLA. (9-0)

11 SEED NOTRE DAME (9-2) AT 6 SEED GEORGIA (10-1)

10 SEED SOUTH FLORIDA (9-1) AT 7 SEED CLEMSON (10-1)

15 SEED SAN DIEGO STATE (9-2) AT 2 SEED ALABAMA (11-0)

If you examine the playoff pairings; of these 8 games, everyone has potential for excitement and upset potential. Six (6) of the games would have 6 FBS programs traveling some distance to play the games. However, in today’s scheduling of regualr season games; I don’t think traveling would a problem. With an average of 37+ Million fans that attend collge football games annually, I believe each of these games would be SOLD OUT. Can you imagine how much fun, excitement and media coverage the first weekend of December would be for college football with so much at stake.

The breakdown for this field of 16 based upon conference affiliation, numbers per conference, Power Five Conference and Group of Five Conference is; 10 FBS programs from the Power Five Conferences and 6 FBS programs from the Group of Five Conferences. This is a great demonstration of how balance and parity appears during the college football season. ALL Power Five Conferences would possess representation into this field of 16. Is that not what the power brokers want. The opportunity to be part of the playoffs and not left out because of subectivity. Within this playoff mode and pairings, only the Sun Belt Conference would not be represented in this grouping of playoff caliber programs from the Group of Five Conferences. I believe that ALL the Group of Five Conference programs want is the OPPORTUNITY to compete in the playoffs, compete for the $50 Million dollars on the table, the gold statue and the notoriety which comes along with being called ” National Champion”.

As for the breakdown for each conference;  the Power Five Conference breakdown is led by The Big 10, who would possess 3 seeds, the ACC and the SEC would each hold 2 seeds and concluding with the Pac 12 and the Big 12 with 1 representation. Notre Dame would be the only Independent program represented in the playoffs. In addition to those 10 FBS programs, the Group of Five Conferences would be represneted with 3 FBS programs from the American Athletic Conference (AAC), 2 FBS program from the Mountain West Conference (MWC) and 1 from the Mid-American Conference (MAC).

At the conclusion of this weeks games, I willhopefully have enough data and information to publish the final pairings of my MOCK field of 16 for college football. In addition to the final posting, I will even post how the playoffs would be played out in the month long tournament.

If you plan in using any of my ideas, thoughts or ranking to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA policies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com


Wisconsin Still Number #1


College football is the one of the most exciting amateur sports, that 37+ Million fans attend each year, during the last quarter of the calender year. There is excitement, great plays, upsets, and all performed by student athletes. The most challenging aspect of college football is rewarding those FBS programs the opportunity to be ranked within the college football polls as the best Top 25, at that moment in time, during that week. Those FBS programs who can sustain excellence with a high level of competition and attentional focus, will always be ranked with the better ranking. Wisconsin (11-0) from the Big 10 Conference has sustained their attentional focus and are still one (1) of only four (4) FBS programs with 0-losses this season. The key question is, can Wisconsin sustain that for one more week of their regular season and then receive one (1) of the four CFP playoff spots? In a field of 16 Wisconsin is already in even if they lost their last regualr season game to Minnesota.

For the past weeks from mid-October to this last part of rivalry weekend, there have been many upsets and great games played. This weekend coming will be the most entertaining weekend of all. There are at least 20+ games that will effect the rankings, the playoff picture, my field of 16, and how many 0-loss programs will remain. Wisconsin plays Minnesota on the road, Alabama plays Auburn on the road, Miami (Fla.) hosts Pittsburgh and Central Florida host South Florida. Who will remain standing at the end of the regular season with 0-losses. I believe that there will be 2 FBS programs ending the season at 0-losses.

Ranking teams, programs and individuals is not the easiest concept, but witholding a bias against or for each item you rank is key. Ranking should be based upon the current season’s work and how they accumulate their overall record in relationship to their overall schedule, non-conference schedule and conference schedule. Credibility is based upon how you perform against your schedule during the course of the season. All FBS programs that are associated or a member of a conference, each possesses has NO control over their conference schedule, but they do have COMPLETE control over their non-conference schedule. However, that non-conference schedule is developed with contracts signed years in advance with the pre-determination that the FBS program you are sheduling those non conference games minimally 2+ years in advance. All under the premise that the FBS program you scheudle will be successful, viable and competitive. If a FBS program schedules an FCS program (i.e. Mercer), your credibility should possess a negative effect. Research supports that when an FBS program schedules and plays an FCS program during the regular season at any point in time of that regular season and ALWAYS at home against the FCS program; FBS programs win 90+% of the time and by 4+ possessions or more (meaning by at least 28 Points or more), then that game should not count in your win total and held negatively against you. However, thew win and loss does count but not held in any negative aspect when subjectively assessing.

The review of this weeks rankings shows no changes in the Top 8 ranked placements from my previous week. The only aspects that does change within the weekly rankings are the data points and which data points I use to demonstarte a more descriptive ranking system with no bias. Here is this weeks rankings for college football at the FBS level.

 

A B C D E F G
1 WISCONSIN (11-0) (.500) 80 (.481) 99 (.361) 130 (.449) 22 26
2 ALABAMA (11-0) (.576) 48 (.562) 42 (.393) 123 (.556) 2 30
3 MIAMI FLA. (10-0) (.774) 2 (.538) 67 (.392) 124 (.412) 33 22
4 CENTRAL FLORIDA (10-0) (.484) 87 (.509) 84 (.446) 101 (.560) 18 18
5 OKLAHOMA (10-1) (.412) 109 (.481) 100 (.465) 92 (.551) 3 18
6 GEORGIA (10-1) (.645) 22 (.593) 19 (.510) 56 (.471) 13 24
7 CLEMSON (10-1) (.576) 49 (.563) 40 (.492) 74 (.406) 38 28
8 USC (10-2) (.636) 24 (.545) 59 (.438) 106 (.408) 37 21
9 MEMPHIS (9-1) (.500) 81 (.487) 96 (.464) 95 (.490) 9 14
10 SOUTH FLORIDA (9-1) (.206) 129 (.367) 130 (.411) 119 (.438) 25 24
11 NOTRE DAME (9-2) (.574) 56 (.641) 3 (.787) 1 (.430) 27 19
12 BOISE STATE (9-2) (.591) 44 (.541) 66 (.544) 34 (.452) 21 23
13 OHIO STATE (9-2) (.697) 10 (.553) 55 (.417) 114 (.531) 4 22
14 PENN STATE (9-2) (.516) 73 (.563) 41 (.514) 55 (.462) 19 29
15 SAN DIEGO STATE (9-2) (.667) 17 (.467) 107 (.421) 112 (.400) 43 16
16 TOLEDO (9-2) (.452) 99 (.479) 102 (.518) 52 (.503) 8 19
17 WASHINGTON (9-2) (.545) 59 (.512) 81 (.411) 115 (.489) 10 25
18 TCU (9-2) (.455) 92 (.504) 87 (.479) 86 (.384) 49 29
19 AUBURN (9-2) (.484) 88 (.622) 10 (.579) 16 (.469) 15 26
20 WASHINGTON STATE (9-2) (.500) 82 (.549) 56 (.473) 88 (.400) 44 27
21 TROY (8-2) (.545) 60 (.404) 126 (.442) 103 (.344) 76 18
22 OKLAHOMA STATE (8-3) (.313) 122 (.473) 105 (.493) 73 (.506) 7 20
23 STANFORD (8-3) (.613) 34 (.564) 39 (.479) 85 (.446) 23 15
24 NORTHEWESTERN (8-3) (.273) 126 (.477) 103 (.458) 97 (.347) 75 19
25 MICHIGAN STATE (8-3) (.576) 50 (.583) 25 (.500) 63 (.292) 108 25

Honorable Mentioned: Michigan, Virginia Tech, Florida Atlantic, North Texas, Army, Northern Illinois, Ohio, Fresno State, LSU, Mississippi State and South Carolina all are (8-3).

Key: A-Rank Order; B- Team and Current Overall Record; C- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Non-Conference Schedule and Rank within that Categorical Variable; D- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Overall Regular Season Schedule and Rank within that Categorical Variable; E- Percentage Rate of the ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Conference Schedule and Rank, F- Percentage Rate of your Offensive Efficiency and Ranking within that Categorical Variable (described as: number of offensive and defensive possessions that results in points). G- Defensive Efficiency Rating (described as: number of times that your teams Defense were successful in possessing 3 consecutive stops against your opponent when they possessed the ball and stopped them from scoring (3 consecutive stops equals 1)).

As of this time of the current college football season there are 70 bowl eligible FBS programs with six (6) wins or more, and 18 more waiting in the wings with five (5) wins. At the four (4) win level and now with only two (2) opportunities to become bowl eligible; there are two (2) four (4) win FBS programs that can still earn bowl eligibility. There are only two (2) weeks remaining in the season; It’s going to be exciting, fun and heart breaking for some of these FBS programs.

If you plan on using any of my ideas, thoughts or rankings to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA policies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com


CFP Playoff Field of 16 Mock 2017.3


This is the third installment of my MOCK college football playoff field of 16 for the FBS level of play. If only the power brokers of college football could see how this expanded playoff format would be more beneficial to the the fans of college football, then we woudl truly possess a real “National Champion”.

If you have followed along with my MOCK field of 16 as I have posted them throughout the course of this FBS season, you can admire the changes from week to week, in how the games have become more interesting as the season winds down. I believe that this type of playoff format would make for better entertainment and causes confusion amongst the television media on which game to show to the fans who cannot be in attendance. All 8 of these games would make for great television, viewership and media attention.

This is how the field of 16 would be seeded if the season were to have concluded this past weekend and the playoffs starting this following weekend:

16 SEED OHIO STATE (8-2) AT 1 SEED WISCONSIN (10-0)

9 SEED WASHINGTON STATE (9-2) AT 8 SEED USC (9-2)

12 SEED OKLAHOMA STATE (8-2) ST 5 SEED OKLAHOMA (9-1)

13 SEED NOTRE DAME (8-2) AT 4 SEED CENTRAL FLORIDA (9-0)

14 SEED BOISE STATE (8-2) AT 3 SEED MIAMI FLA. (9-0)

11 SEED SOUTH FLORIDA (8-1) AT 6 SEED GEORGIA (9-1)

10 SEED MEMPHIS AT 7 SEED CLEMSON (9-1)

15 SEED MICHIGAN AT 2 SEED ALABAMA (10-0)

If you examine the playoff pairings; of these 8 games, 3 of the games would be conference bragging rights or rematches between top programs. Three (3) of the games would have 3 FBS programs traveling some distance to play the games. However, in today’s scheduling of regualr season games; I don’t think traveling would a problem. With an average of 37+ Million fans that attend collge football games annually, I believe each of these games would be SOLD OUT. Can you imagine how much fun, excitement and media coverage the first weekend of December would be for college football with so much at stake.

The breakdown for the field of 16 based upon conference affiliation, numbers per conference, Power Five Conference and Group of Five Conference is; 12 FBS programs from the Power Five Conferences and 5 FBS programs from the Group of Five Conferences. ALL Power Five Connferences would possess representation into this field of 16. Is that not what the power brokers want. The opportunity to be part of the playoffs and not left out because of subectivity. The remaining 4 playoff spots would be secured by the Group of Five Conferences. I believe that ALL the Group of Five Conference programs want is the OPPORTUNITY to compete in the playoffs, compete for the $50 Million dollars on the table, the gold statue and the notoriety which comes along with being called ” National Champion”.

As for the breakdown for each conference;  the Power Five Conference breakdown is led by The Big 10, who would possess 3 seeds, the ACC, the Big 12, the Pac 12 and the SEC would each hold 2 seeds. Notre Dame would be the only Independent program represented in the playoffs. In addition to those 12 FBS programs, the Group of Five Conferences would be represneted with 3 FBS programs from the American Athletic Conference (AAC) and 1 FBS program from the Mountain West Conference (MWC).

In about two (2) weeks, I will publish the final pairings of my MOCK field of 16 for college football. In addition to the final posting I will even post how the playoffs would be played out in the month long tournament.

If you plan in using any of my ideas, thoughts or ranking to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA policies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com


Wisconsin Remains #1 As The Unexpected Continues


From the Big 10 Conference, Wisconsin remains number one in my weekly poll for the fourth week in a row. Looking below Wisconsin in my college football poll, it seems there is constant movement of musical chairs being played as the college football season winds down in the home stretch. The upsets and unexpected outcomes of college football keeps happening. What many media members fail to understand is towards the end of the college football season, normalcy does not exist, but the unexpected seems to rear its ugly head. This causes a shake up with everyones polls, rankings, confidence levels, cognitive thoughts and the facing of the reality of how college football changes on a week to week basis. These types of changes are great for the sport of college football and those fans who enjoy the games, in addition to the possibility of expanding the playoffs.

With three (3) weeks remaining in the college football season, their are only four (4) 0-loss programs remaining. Of those 0-loss programs, Central Florida from the American Athletic Conference (AAC) is not receiving the credit or just due ranking either in the coaches poll or CFP polls, for their successful season in which they have earned, not given. I am the only one who ranks Central Florida in the Top Five (5). Central Florida ranks first in Offensive Efficiency with my rating system in which I designed and created. Central Florida’s Offensive Efficiency Rating (OER) is at (.580). This means Central Florida’s scoring efficiency is based upon number of total game possessions both offensively and defensively, and turning those possession into points, at 58% of the time. Moreover, Central Florida ranks in the Top Half of all FBS programs in cumulative records within their non-conference scheduled opponents at a rate of (.536). I guess the CFP committee does not use all data points to give credit in ranking, where credit is due.

As we head into the final stretch run of college football, there are still MANY great games to be played with many more upsets to come. Here is my weekly Top Twenty-Five rankings:

A B C D E F
1 WISCONSIN (10-0) (.484) 86 (.488) 98 (.365) 128 (.467) 14
2 ALABAMA (10-0) (.533) 66 (.555) 54 (.388) 125 (.558) 3
3 MIAMI FLA. (9-0) (.750) 5 (.528) 70 (.400) 120 (.405) 41
4 CENTRAL FLORIDA (9-0) (.536) 64 (.533) 69 (.460) 92 (.580) 1
5 OKLAHOMA (9-1) (.387) 113 (.479) 103 (.468) 86 (.561) 2
6 GEORGIA (9-1) (.655) 22 (.593) 22 (.426) 111 (.464) 16
7 CLEMSON (9-1) (.567) 52 (.556) 53 (.491) 79 (.373) 61
8 USC (9-2) (.633) 25 (.557) 50 (.455) 99 (.415) 38
9 WASHINGTON STATE (9-2) (.500) 77 (.554) 55 (.470) 85 (.400) 42
10 MEMPHIS (8-1) (.536) 65 (.505) 88 (.460) 93 (.469) 13
11 SOUTH FLORIDA (8-1) (.194) 129 (.367) 130 (.408) 117 (.447) 24
12 OKLAHOMA STATE (8-2) (.345) 119 (.479) 105 (.484) 81 (.514) 6
13 NOTRE DAME (8-2) (.564) 57 (.639) 3 (.786) 1 (.426) 30
14 BOISE STATE (8-2) (.619) 33 (.553) 56 (.551) 29 (.427) 29
15 MICHIGAN (8-2) (.345) 118 (.538) 67 (.524) 49 (.353) 70
16 OHIO STATE (8-2) (.700) 12 (.567) 40 (.429) 108 (.530) 5
17 PENN STATE (8-2) (.517) 73 (.573) 36 (.524) 48 (.447) 23
18 SAN DIEGO STATE (8-2) (.633) 26 (.459) 108 (.429) 109 (.393) 47
19 ARMY (8-2) (.484) 87 (.418) 123 (.392) 124 (.444) 25
20 TOLEDO (8-2) (.464) 94 (.481) 102 (.521) 53 (.477) 10
21 OHIO (8-2) (.267) 125 (.382) 129 (.458) 98 (.475) 11
22 WASHINGTON (8-2) (.550) 58 (.518) 80 (.409) 116 (.479) 8
23 TCU (8-2) (.500) 78 (.518) 79 (.487) 79 (.381) 57
24 TROY (8-2) (.533) 67 (.394) 126 (.422) 114 (.344) 77
25 AUBURN (8-2) (.464) 95 (.604) 14 (.560) 24 (.474) 12

Key: A-Rank Order; B- Team and Current Overall Record; C- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Non-Conference Schedule and Rank within that Categorical Variable; D- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Overall Regular Season Schedule and Rank within that Categorical Variable; E- Percentage Rate of the ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Conference Schedule and Rank; and F- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Offensive Efficiency and Rank within that Categorical Variable.

As of this time of the current college football season there are 59 bowl eligible FBS programs with six (6) wins or more, and 21 more waiting in the wings with five (5) wins. There are three (3) weeks remaining in the season; there are plenty of opportunities for the 21 four (4) win FBS programs to earn bowl eligibility. Time is running out on some. Who will earn those bowl bids? How many FBS programs will become bowl eligible? We will find out soon.

If you plan in reciting any of my ideas, thoughts or rankings to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA polocies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com


Wisconsin Remains #1 in Weekly Poll


Even thought the primary ranking groups of the; CFP Committee, the Amway Coaches Poll, and the AP Media Poll weekly college football rankings, do not have Wisconsin ranked as Number 1, I do. It was said, on an ESPN late night radio show from the Freddie and Fitz show, and I will be paraphasing from Ian Fitzimmons based out of the ESPN-Dallas area and when a caller from Arizona commented about the College Football Playoff ranking of the Top 4. The callers question was “why not just rank the 0-loss programs as the top four seeds because they are un-defeated”. Ian Fitzsimmons commented to the caller ” we are not handing out participation trophies here, its about selecting the best four football programs” (Fitzsimmons, 2017). Interesting that Wisconsin football team is a 0-loss program and on the outside looking in for the College Football Playoff. I have them ranked number one in my polls th the last few weeks over the popular 0-loss programs of Georgia and Alabama.

What the sports media “experts” and the CFP Committee, fail to understand is that numbers and data do not lie. The sports media can manipulate the image in what we see and do their best to forget about the numbers and data. I am purely opposite, I use the professional model theory to support my rankings and other variables to account for why and how I rank one (1) through twenty-five (25). Ranking programs is more than just an eye test, and media promotion of what they believe is the best college football programs. Games are played by the players, coaches coach the game, each make cognitive decisions to make the best play and each effort by both coaches and players is only measured by play outcomes both good or bad. The ranking numbers by the media possesses vested interest, where as I rank based upon specific data points, not vested interest. Ranked positions are earned not given. The rankings should not be based upon who you are, which conference you represent or who the sports media supports.

There are so many more great games to be played during the remaining 3+ weeks of the college football season. With many more upsets to occur and more great finishes to watch as the top teams go head to head to create more controversy of who will make the publicized playoffs. I believe we are at the “top of turn four” of the college football season. Its going to be an exciting, remaining, last few weeks as many will root for the upsets and more great games. Here are my weekly rankings for college football.

A B C D E
1 WISCONSIN (9-0) (.448) 95 (.482) 100 (.352) 129
2 GEORGIA (9-0) (.654) 3 (.598) 21 (.413) 117
3 ALABAMA (9-0) (.556) 56 (.566) 46 (.395) 123
4 MIAMI FLA. (8-0) (.840) 1 (.568) 44 (.436) 105
5 CENTRAL FLORIDA (8-0) (.560) 55 (.552) 59 (.477) 84
6 NOTRE DAME (8-1) (.540) 67 (.626) 1 (.784) 1
7 OKLAHOMA (8-1) (.357) 117 (.477) 102 (.472) 94
8 TOLEDO (8-1) (.423) 102 (.469) 104 (.525) 47
9 CLEMSON (8-1) (.556) 57 (.557) 54 (.489) 76
10 TCU (8-1) (.556) 58 (.525) 77 (.472) 93
11 WASHINGTON (8-1) (.556) 59 (.524) 79 (.407) 120
12 MEMPHIS (8-1) (.500) 78 (.495) 96 (.455) 98
13 SOUTH FLORIDA (8-1) (.179) 129 (.360) 130 (.395) 124
14 USC (8-2) (.630) 27 (.559) 52 (.448) 100
15 SAN DIEGO STATE (8-2) (.630) 28 (.460) 111 (.419) 114
16 WASHINGTON STATE (8-2) (.444) 97 (.553) 57 (.475) 92
17 BOISE STATE (7-2) (.605) 43 (.549) 63 (.545) 38
18 OKLAHOMA STATE (8-2) (.333) 118 (.481) 101 (.491) 74
19 MICHIGAN STATE (7-2) (.630) 29 (.602) 20 (.481) 82
20 MICHIGAN (7-2) (.385) 113 (.551) 61 (.519) 52
21 OHIO STATE (7-2) (.704) 2 (.583) 32 (.444) 101
22 PENN STATE (7-2) (.538) 68 (.590) 27 (.537) 42
23 ARMY (7-2) (.464) 90 (.404) 124 (.380) 127
24 TROY (7-2) (.556) 60 (.400) 125 (.421) 113
25 OHIO (7-2) (.259) 127 (.384) 129 (.475) 91

Honorable Mentioned: Mississippi State, Auburn and Virginia Tech all are (7-2).

Key: A-Rank Order; B- Team and Current Overall Record; C- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Non-Conference Schedule and Rank within that Categorical Variable; D- Percentage Rate of ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Overall Regular Season Schedule and Rank within that Categorical Variable; E- Percentage Rate of the ranked teams Opponents Cumulative Record from their Conference Schedule and Rank.

As of this time of the current college football season there are 50 bowl eligible FBS programs wth six (6) wins or more, and 21 more waiting in the wings with five (5) wins. At the four (4) win level and only 3 or 4 opportunities to become bowl eligible. There are three (3) + weeks remaining in the season; It’s going to be exciting, fun and heart breaking.

If you plan on using any of my ideas, thoughts or rankings to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA policies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com

Coleman, Freddie and Ian Fitzsimmons (2017). ESPN Radio. Evening Time Slot. “Discussing the current college football playoff rankings, taking listener calls and questions.”. Talk Radio. ESPN-Bristol and ESPN- Dallas. ESPN Studios.


CFP Playoffs Field of 16 Mock 2017.2


How the games that are played during the regular season can change the field of 16 in a matter of moments. If you think last weeks field of 16 had some great games, this weeks field of 16 has even better games and rematches. This mock field of 16 for a future college football playoff format,  is what the media won’t speak about yet, but internally want this more than ever. I believe that their are a group of college football coaches at the FBS level who would embrace the college football playoff being expanded. Their thoughts are concurrent with mine. However, my research in my book supports and proves that an expanded field of 16 can be implimented into the FBS level of college football, under the NCAA blue logo, allowing all FBS football programs equal, fair and just opportunity to compete for the National Championship and exponentially generate more revenue for the college athletics.

Here is the second edition of the Mock 2017.2 Field of 16:

Seed 16 Washington State (8-2) at Seed 1 Wisconsin (9-0)

Seed 9 Clemson (8-1) at Seed 8 Toledo (8-1)

Seed 12 Memphis (8-1) at Seed 5 Central Florida (8-0)

Seed 13 South Florida (8-1) at Seed 4 Miami (Fla.) (8-0)

Seed 14 USC (8-2) at Seed 3 Alabama (9-0)

Seed 11 Washington at Seed 6 Notre Dame (8-1)

Seed 10 TCU (8-1) at Seed 7 Oklahoma (8-1)

Seed 15 San Diego State at Seed 2 Georgia (9-0)

This field is well represented by ALL Power Five Conference, Independents and three (3) of the Group of Five Conferenes. The Pac 12 and AAC earned three (3) berths, the SEC, ACC, and the Big 12 earned two (2) berths, and the Big 10, the MAC, the MWC and Notre Dame earned one (1) berth. This is what could be and possibly will be in the future. Please rememebr, each week this will change until the FINAL FIELD of 16.

Each week prior to the final Mock 2017 Field of 16 for college football I will post a new bracket. Once any FBS program earns at least a berth into my Field of 16, but not the exact seeding placement; I will place them in BOLD.  This will notify anyone who reads this blog post that, that FBS program has earned a berth to my field of 16.

If you plan in using any of my ideas, thoughts or ranking to disucss publically in print, web based media postings or on air debates either in television or radio; please adhere to the APA/MLA polocies and procedures when citing sources.

My book “College Football In The BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2016); is the published research, The book is available at lulu.com