| Rank | +/- | Team | WinPct | SoS | Off Pts | Def Pts | Pace |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | -- | TCU | 0.9342 | 0.4520 | 28.0 | 9.1 | 80.7 |
| 002 | -- | Boise St. | 0.9333 | 0.4287 | 28.6 | 9.3 | 82.8 |
| 003 | +1 | Alabama | 0.9251 | 0.6464 | 27.8 | 9.5 | 77.7 |
| 004 | -1 | Ohio St. | 0.9103 | 0.5275 | 25.4 | 9.5 | 80.5 |
| 005 | +1 | Oregon | 0.8690 | 0.5691 | 26.0 | 11.8 | 92.3 |
| 006 | +2 | Stanford | 0.8616 | 0.5987 | 29.6 | 13.7 | 80.9 |
| 007 | -- | Oklahoma | 0.8530 | 0.6022 | 23.4 | 11.2 | 91.8 |
| 008 | -3 | Virginia Tech | 0.8484 | 0.5858 | 27.7 | 13.3 | 78.7 |
| 009 | -- | LSU | 0.8368 | 0.6407 | 24.4 | 12.2 | 78.3 |
| 010 | -- | Auburn | 0.8330 | 0.6619 | 29.1 | 14.9 | 83.4 |
| 011 | +2 | Florida | 0.8075 | 0.6583 | 23.9 | 13.2 | 81.7 |
| 012 | +3 | Arkansas | 0.7995 | 0.6583 | 27.2 | 15.2 | 84.2 |
| 013 | -2 | Iowa | 0.7977 | 0.5639 | 21.1 | 11.7 | 80.8 |
| 014 | -- | Wisconsin | 0.7844 | 0.5468 | 28.8 | 16.7 | 78.9 |
| 015 | -3 | Nebraska | 0.7802 | 0.5073 | 22.2 | 13.0 | 80.1 |
| 016 | +2 | Florida St. | 0.7670 | 0.6519 | 25.0 | 15.2 | 81.4 |
| 017 | +4 | Oklahoma St. | 0.7668 | 0.5335 | 24.4 | 14.8 | 89.6 |
| 018 | -1 | Missouri | 0.7592 | 0.5450 | 20.2 | 12.3 | 85.2 |
| 019 | -- | South Carolina | 0.7554 | 0.6837 | 24.1 | 15.0 | 79.2 |
| 020 | -4 | West Virginia | 0.7500 | 0.5367 | 18.9 | 11.9 | 81.4 |
| 021 | +3 | Notre Dame | 0.7326 | 0.5989 | 19.6 | 12.8 | 84.7 |
| 022 | -2 | Utah | 0.7299 | 0.4878 | 21.9 | 14.5 | 81.0 |
| 023 | -- | Georgia | 0.7162 | 0.6161 | 25.0 | 16.9 | 77.2 |
| 024 | +1 | USC | 0.7101 | 0.5908 | 21.9 | 15.1 | 84.0 |
| 025 | -3 | Miami-FL | 0.7045 | 0.6326 | 19.3 | 13.4 | 85.8 |
the TCU Horned Frogs?
New entries: none.
Dropped out: none.
Not only is TCU at the top of the TFG heap, but BCS champion Auburn is barely in the top 10 and behind three teams it defeated (Alabama, Oregon, and LSU). How can that be?
Simple: TFG only looks at points, it doesn't actually look at victories. There's a disconnect between offense and defense, and given that Auburn's offense only averaged 24.7 PPG against the three teams ahead of it -- and gave up 21.0 PPG in those games -- it's not hard to see why the Tigers didn't overwhelm the computers. On top of that, the Tigers needed freak play after freak play to even get where they were, including
- a dropped TD pass by Clemson in OT;
- a last-minute field goal to beat Kentucky;
- three Alabama turnovers inside the Auburn 5;
- four failed attempts by the Ducks to punch it in from the 1 (yet they went 2-for-2 in 2pt conversions);
- a failure of the Ducks to get the easy 3 on a 4th-and-goal from the 1; and
- a tackle that was (correctly) called not-a-tackle in the closing minute of the title game.
So in the end it was entirely fitting that it was not Cam Newton punching through for the winning touchdown on a QB sneak (a play that would have sent the ESPN university into a rabid frenzy), but rather a freak failed tackle and a last-second field goal that gave Auburn the title. To the bitter end, they did it their way.
TCU, on the other hand, only had a close call against Wisconsin. Otherwise the Horned Frogs basically did what they needed to do to by winning and winning convincingly. The Wisconsin offense had been prolific -- albeit against inferior opposition -- and the TCU defense stopped it cold.
What would happen if 14-0 TCU played 14-0 Auburn? TFG says that (1) TCU would defeat (10) Auburn, 35-31, with 74% likelihood. That might be the debate of the offseason, but with TCU going to the Big East that will blunt some of the arguments over how non-AQ teams will get access to BCS bowls and the national championship game.
Let the debates continue, and we'll see you next year.
