This is a metric you here a lot of talk about at the end of the season - it is based on results not projections like FPI. The description is - "Reflects the chance that an average Top 25 team would have team's record or better, given the schedule"

https://www.espn.com/college-football/fpi/_/view/resume

For those not willing to click on an ESPN link the highlights are:

1. Texas A&M
2. Miami
3. Ohio St.
4. Oregon
5. Ole Miss
6. Oklahoma
7. Indiana
8. Texas Tech
9. Illinois
10. Alabama
.........
55. sips

Ohio State at #3 is just silly. They currently have 3 ranked teams on their schedule.

tu at #1, now fallen out of the rankings altogether.
#19 Illinois, who lost 63-10 to Indiana
#15 Michigan

normaleagle05 said:

---

Ohio State at #3 is just silly. They currently have 3 ranked teams on their schedule.

tu at #1, now fallen out of the rankings altogether.
#19 Illinois, who lost 63-10 to Indiana
#15 Michigan

---

Read OP's comments a little slower

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

normaleagle05 said:

---

Ohio State at #3 is just silly. They currently have 3 ranked teams on their schedule.

tu at #1, now fallen out of the rankings altogether.
#19 Illinois, who lost 63-10 to Indiana
#15 Michigan

---

Yeah but to be fair, Oregon, may be a team that competes for a national title. I think either Oregon or Ohio St makes it to the final

normaleagle05 said:

---

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

---

It's strength of RECORD - meaning things that have already been recorded. Why would it consider opponents not yet played?

If Ags stay undefeated and are not voted #1 or #2 by CFP committee, something will be seriously wrong. I could give credit to Ole Miss as #1 if they remain undefeated too. But dont think any other team in college would be able to match strength of schedule at that point while also being undefeated. Knock on wood.

BTKAG97 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

---

It's strength of RECORD - meaning things that have already been recorded. Why would it consider opponents not yet played?

---

Alabama beat Wisconsin, Georgia, and Vanderbilt. Why are they #10 on the list way behind Ohio State? Because of Grambling and Ohio?

normaleagle05 said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

---

It's strength of RECORD - meaning things that have already been recorded. Why would it consider opponents not yet played?

---

Alabama beat Wisconsin, Georgia, and Vanderbilt. Why are they #10 on the list way behind Ohio State? Because of Grambling and Ohio?

---

Because they lost to Florida St. Strength of RECORD. Not strength of wins.

normaleagle05 said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

---

It's strength of RECORD - meaning things that have already been recorded. Why would it consider opponents not yet played?

---

Alabama beat Wisconsin, Georgia, and Vanderbilt. Why are they #10 on the list way behind Ohio State? Because of Grambling and Ohio?

---

i'm guessing you haven't been paying attention to Wisconsin. They aren't good.

normaleagle05 said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

---

It's strength of RECORD - meaning things that have already been recorded. Why would it consider opponents not yet played?

---

Alabama beat Wisconsin, Georgia, and Vanderbilt. Why are they #10 on the list way behind Ohio State? Because of Grambling and Ohio?

---

We'd have to see the formula, but the loss to (3-2) Florida State (36 SoR, 10 SoS) is a larger contributing factor than the 30 place difference between current SoS (33 OSU vs 3 Alabama).

Oregon's and Ohio State's strength of schedules are way overstated because they are built on the assumptions that Texas and Penn State are good.

Aggie Dad 26 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

Ohio State at #3 is just silly. They currently have 3 ranked teams on their schedule.

tu at #1, now fallen out of the rankings altogether.
#19 Illinois, who lost 63-10 to Indiana
#15 Michigan

---

Yeah but to be fair, Oregon, may be a team that competes for a national title. I think either Oregon or Ohio St makes it to the final

---

too bad for cfb when teams can like tOSU and nikeU make it that far by merely feasting on pure *****

AggieOO said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

Kinda my point. It gets even worse when you exclude the little actual competition that they haven't even played against yet.

---

It's strength of RECORD - meaning things that have already been recorded. Why would it consider opponents not yet played?

---

Alabama beat Wisconsin, Georgia, and Vanderbilt. Why are they #10 on the list way behind Ohio State? Because of Grambling and Ohio?

---

i'm guessing you haven't been paying attention to Wisconsin. They aren't good.

---

The only team Ohio State has beat was Texas back when Texas was back.