College football thrives on debate and opinion, especially when it comes to rankings. Unlike pro leagues like the NFL or MLB, where standings are all about win-loss records, college football leans heavily on human voters and their Top 25 polls.
This system has sparked endless arguments about which teams are overrated, underrated, or just plain overlooked. But humans aren’t the only ones ranking teams—advanced statistical metrics have found their place too.
Let’s take a look at the differences between human and computer rankings, and see what a consensus Top 25 looks like for Week 3 of the season.
The Human Element in College Football Rankings
College football has always relied on human voters for its Top 25 rankings. The AP Poll and Coaches Poll come out every week, and fans love to argue about them.
The human element brings a level of subjectivity that can be both good and bad. Voters can weigh things like strength of schedule and quality wins, but they’re also prone to biases and inconsistencies. It’s kind of a double-edged sword, honestly.
Debates and Controversies
Debate is baked into the process. Who should be higher? Who got left out?
These questions light up sports talk shows and social media feeds. Sure, the debates may not matter much until the Playoff committee makes its picks, but they definitely add some drama to the season.
The Role of Advanced Metrics
While people love to argue, advanced metrics quietly play a big part in college football rankings too. Systems like Sagarin, Billingsley, Dunkel, and Massey bring a more data-driven perspective.
Then there’s ESPN’s Football Power Index (FPI) and the Fremeau Efficiency Index (FEI)—predictive models that crunch a ton of performance numbers to rank teams.
Computer Rankings Explained
Computer rankings like FPI and FEI look at everything from offensive and defensive efficiency to strength of schedule. The idea is to create a ranking system that’s more objective and less swayed by human opinion.
Still, these models aren’t perfect, especially early in the year when they’re stuck using stats from last season. Sometimes, the numbers just don’t tell the whole story.
Consensus Rankings: Humans vs. Computers
So what happens when you mash human and computer rankings together? You get a consensus ranking that tries to balance the best (and worst) of both worlds.
For this week, we’re using the AP Poll, Coaches Poll, FPI, and FEI to build a combined Top 25 for Week 3.
Top 10 Teams
Here are the top 10 teams in the consensus ranking:
- 1. Ohio State: Ranked 1st in both human polls and FEI, 3rd in FPI.
- 2. Oregon: Ranked 4th and 5th in human polls, 1st in FPI, 2nd in FEI.
- 3. Penn State: Ranked 2nd in both human polls, 7th in FPI, 4th in FEI.
- 4. Georgia: Ranked 6th in AP, 3rd in Coaches, 6th in FPI, 3rd in FEI.
- 5. Texas: Ranked 7th in both human polls, 2nd in FPI, 5th in FEI.
- 6. LSU: Ranked 3rd and 4th in human polls, 15th in FPI, 11th in FEI.
- 7. Notre Dame: Ranked 8th in both human polls, 10th in FPI, 6th in FEI.
- 8. Miami: Ranked 5th and 6th in human polls, 21st in FPI, 14th in FEI.
- 9. Ole Miss: Ranked 17th and 13th in human polls, 8th in FPI, 8th in FEI.
- 10. Tennessee: Ranked 15th in both human polls, 9th in FPI, 10th in FEI.
Biggest Disagreements
One of the most interesting things about mixing human and computer rankings is seeing where they just don’t line up. This week, USC is the big outlier.
USC: A Tale of Two Rankings
USC isn’t ranked in either human poll, but the computers are all over them. FPI puts them 5th, FEI has them at 9th.
That’s mostly because of their strong stats last season, even though they finished 7-6. They were leading in the fourth quarter in five of their six losses—something the computers notice, even if people don’t. If USC keeps winning, you’d expect the humans to come around eventually.
Florida State: The Opposite Case
Florida State is a different story. The Seminoles are 10th in the AP Poll and 12th in the Coaches Poll after a hot start.
But the computers aren’t convinced yet—FEI has them 44th, FPI 26th. They’re still holding last year’s struggles against them. As the season goes on and the models get more current data, those numbers should start to move up—at least, that’s the idea.
Spot-On Agreement
Sometimes, though, the humans and computers actually agree. Georgia and Notre Dame are good examples this week.
Georgia and Notre Dame
Georgia sits at 6th in the AP and FPI, and 3rd in the Coaches and FEI, averaging out to 4th. Notre Dame is 8th in both human polls, 10th in FPI, and 6th in FEI, which lands them at 8th overall.
Both teams have big games coming up—Georgia faces Tennessee, and Notre Dame gets Texas A&M. Plenty of chances to shake things up.
Conclusion
The way human and computer rankings collide in college football is honestly pretty fascinating. Human polls seem to capture the wild swings and dramatic stories of each week.
On the other hand, computer models crunch the numbers and sometimes spot teams that most people overlook. These rankings aren’t set in stone—they shift as the season unfolds, keeping fans arguing and guessing.
If you want to dive deeper, check out the full article on Fansided.
- Schools Covered
- College Football Articles
- Men's College Basketball Articles
- Men's College Soccer Articles
- Women's College Basketball Articles
- Olympic Athlete Articles
- Men's College Baseball Articles
- College Sports Media Professionals Articles
- Hall of Fame Member Articles
- Former College Player Articles
- Game Previews
