Penn State football ranks number 1 in my first 2022 college football poll. Penn State possesses a very strong strength of schedule ahead of the rest of the FBS teams. Penn State’s true test will be with both Michigan and Ohio State coming up within the next 3 weeks. With wins on the road at Purdue and at Auburn. They have more than earned the number one ranking in my weekly poll. It will be up to Penn State as the season continues to hold on to the number one ranking. Rounding out the Top 5 in my weekly rankings are Ohio State, USC, Michigan and Kansas. If Vanderbilt were (5-0) the AP, Coaches who rank and ESPN would be promoting Vanderbilt in ways that would be like pancakes dripping with syrup. The coaches and student athletes have earned this (5-0) record, they should be rewarded for their efforts. Giving Kansas the needed believability that mainstream college sports media personalities, also known as ESPN, does not give when any FBS program achieves success outside of the SEC. The SEC is ranked in my Top 25 rankings. Four SEC teams are ranked in my Top 16 with two more SEC teams rounding out my Top 25.
Penn State possess a stronger strength of schedule when examining, non-conference overall record, non-conference only records games, overall record of all FBS games scheduled and conference record. Rankings are based upon many variables which includes, current overall record, scheduled or not scheduled games versus FCS programs, non-conference games scheduled and where they are scheduled, plus the reviewing of the variables above and how they possess a direct relationship and correlation to strength of schedule. My Top 25 rankings need explanation so that the college football fan can understand my process.
Definitions of Variables:
Overall Record– Speaks for itself. The overall record is what defines any teams no matter what sport. My rankings are not based upon vested interests, favoritisms or ranking bias. I review the overall record and how the record relates to non-conference and conference scheduling.
FCS Games– By scheduling an FCS program, this decreases the strength of schedule of the FBS program. Furthermore, the current FBS record versus FCS programs this 2022 FBS season is (101-8 at .930) Historically FBS programs win games versus FCS programs by an average of 28 points or more. It’s a very predictable that FBS teams will win those games. If FBS programs are as good or more impressive that they espouse, why are we scheduling a non-conference game versus a far less superior opponent. All for a $500-750K pay day to the FCS program, padding statistics and persuading AP, Coaches and ESPN who possess vested interests in specific FBS conferences and programs.
Non-Conference Overall Record– This recordable variable is based upon the overall record of those games scheduled versus non-conference opponents. For example, Penn State’s Non-conference opponents’ records includes: Ohio, Central Michigan and Auburn. If those programs keep winning or become bowl eligible, then this gives credibility to Penn State’s non-conference schedule.
Non-Conference Only Record– This recordable variable is based upon the win-loss records that are played within the non-conference schedule ONLY. This variable assists in determining the value of FBS teams ability to schedule competitive non-conference games. Yes, non-conference games are planned years in advance. However, the current seasons records assist’s in determining if the decisions years ago were a good, calculated risk.
Overall Records- This recordable variable is based upon the cumulative records on every FBS team’s schedule. Every opponent scheduled on the FBS teams schedule, excluding any FCS program, is accounted for. This validates the strength of your overall schedule in relationship to your overall record. This means if I am currently (5-0) and my overall opponent’s record possess less wins than losses, then your strength of schedule possesses no value. However, if your overall opponent’s schedule possesses more wins than losses, then your strength of schedule possesses value.
Conference Record– This recordable variable is based upon only games scheduled within your conference. Yes, if you are in a two-division conference, you already have a set list of conference games that are required to play. If your conference divisional credibility is not good, then your conference strength of schedule will place less value on the FBS program and the conferences credibility. Conference scheduling is planned well in advance and is very repetitive. However, there are scheduling concepts that can be implemented by Athletic Directors to increase the viability of the conference schedule, rather than follow the historic practices. More than likely, FBS programs with credible 0-loss or 1-loss records will possess conference strength of schedules slightly above .500.
I hope this offers some explanation to how my rankings differ than the AP, ESPN, Coaches Polls, which possess vested interest biases. They rank based upon favoritism and who they are associated with. I have been tracking the AP and Coaches polls for years now. There are biases and vested interests to promote specific conferences and specific programs within those conferences an added advantage in ranking with inside track to being significantly considered for the CFP 4-team playoff.
Below is WEEK 1 of my CFB weekly rankings:
| FBS TEAM | RECORD | FCS | NC OP OVERALL | NC OP ONLY | OVERALL RECORD | CONF. RECORD |
| 1 PENN ST | (5-0) | 0 | (6-9) | (5-6) | (36-24) | (9-8) |
| 2 OHIO ST | (5-0) | 0 | (7-7) | (4-6) | (35-24) | (8-10) |
| 3 USC | (5-0) | 0 | (6-7) | (4-7) | (30-27) | (7-12) |
| 4 MICHIGAN | (5-0) | 0 | (3-12) | (2-12) | (34-26) | (9-9) |
| 5 KANSAS | (5-0) | 1 | (6-4) | (5-3) | (35-18) | (7-9) |
| 6 MISSISSIPPI | (5-0) | 1 | (7-8) | (5-5) | (36-19) | (9-7) |
| 7 ALABAMA | (5-0) | 1 | (6-9) | (4-6) | (35-19) | (8-6) |
| 8 GEORGIA | (5-0) | 1 | (8-7) | (4-6) | (33-20) | (4-10) |
| 9 SYRACUSE | (5-0) | 1 | (7-8) | (4-7) | (33-22) | (8-11) |
| 10 CLEMSON | (5-0) | 1 | (6-7) | (5-5) | (31-23) | (8-9) |
| 11 UCLA | (5-0) | 1 | (6-4) | (4-4) | (31-23) | (10-10) |
| 12 COASTAL CARO | (5-0) | 1 | (5-9) | (3-6) | (25-27) | (5-5) |
| 13 TENNESSEE | (4-0) | 1 | (6-9) | (5-6) | (37-18) | (9-6) |
| 14 TCU | (4-0) | 1 | (2-7) | (2-5) | (32-21) | (8-9) |
| 15 OKLAHOMA ST | (4-0) | 1 | (2-8) | (2-5) | (32-22) | (8-9) |
| 16 JAMES MADISON | (4-0) | 1 | (5-5) | (5-1) | (26-24) | (5-6) |
| 17 MARYLAND | (4-1) | 0 | (5-10) | (3-8) | (34-26) | (9-9) |
| 18 LSU | (4-1) | 1 | (8-6) | (6-2) | (37-15) | (8-7) |
| 19 MISSISSIPPI ST | (4-1) | 1 | (9-6) | (5-5) | (41-14) | (11-5) |
| 20 WAKE FOREST | (4-1) | 1 | (8-6) | (7-4) | (38-16) | (10-8) |
| 21 FLORIDA STATE | (4-1) | 1 | (8-6) | (6-2) | (34-19) | (8-8) |
| 22 OREGON | (4-1) | 1 | (9-1) | (6-1) | (36-18) | (8-11) |
| 23 KANSAS STATE | (4-1) | 1 | (6-4) | (5-2) | (36-17) | (7-9) |
| 24 BYU | (4-1) | 1 | (14-11) | (9-4) | (28-26) | (6-5) |
| 25 NO CAROLINA ST | (4-1) | 1 | (8-6) | (5-6) | (36-20) | (11-9) |
Those FBS programs receiving consideration that almost made the Top 25: Utah, Cincinnati and Tulane.
These are my subjective rankings based upon many variables. Rankings each week will change, however my rankings use variables that are not used by other media personalities.
Please keep your comments civil and if you possess any questions or comments please do not hesitate to reach out to me via Twitter: cfbpoexpert or comment on the page.
Furthermore, this webpage is copyright protected. In the event you recite or use any of my intellectual property, please follow APA/MLA citations. Giving the author of the article credit for their hard work.
Week 2 will be posted next week, hopefully sooner than Tuesday.