Anger index
1. Clemson Tigers (No. 8)
Let's do a little blind résumé review here.
Team A: 10-1, No. 6 strength of record, No. 56 strength of schedule, three wins by a TD or more over teams ranked in the top half of FBS, two wins vs. currently ranked teams, loss to a top-15 opponent.
Team B: 10-1, No. 9 strength of record, No. 58 strength of schedule, one win by a TD or more over teams ranked in the top half of FBS, two wins vs. currently ranked teams, loss to a top-15 opponent.
Extremely similar profiles, but you'd give Team A the slight edge, right? Well, Team A is Clemson. Team B is USC, ranked two spots higher and far better positioned to make the playoff if the status quo largely holds.
Why is Clemson dinged in a way the Trojans aren't? Well, USC lost by a point to Utah, which was ranked at the time. Clemson lost by 21 to a Notre Dame team that was not ranked at the time. Context matters.
Here's some additional context: Clemson surrendered 21 points to Notre Dame on two turnovers and a blocked punt. USC was actually +1 in turnover margin against Utah (though it didn't turn into points). There's a genuine skill involved in turnover margin, but there's also a lot of luck and situational differences involved, too. Play a game free of turnovers and basically Clemson played Notre Dame about the same way USC played Utah. But, of course, those turnovers happened, and a 21-point loss is still worse than a one-point defeat. But if we're splitting hairs here, it's worth considering all the context, not just the surface-level metrics.
Of course, there's another issue with Clemson that pundits have discussed: The Tigers aren't doing anything particularly well. USC's offense is astounding, even if the defense is a mess. Clemson is ... fine. There's very little to get excited about -- even if there's nothing to specifically critique either.
So let's look at another comparison:
Team A: 10-1, 5-1 vs. FPI top 50, 36.5 points per game and 19.7 points per game allowed vs. FBS foes, 48.7% offensive success rate vs. FBS, 62.7% defensive success rate, five wins by more than a touchdown.
Team B: 10-1, 5-1 vs. FPI top 50, 34.7 points per game and 20.8 points per game allowed vs. FBS foes, 47.2% offensive success rate vs. FBS, 62.6% defensive success rate, seven wins by more than a touchdown
Who's been the more impressive team? Maybe a slight edge for Team A, but both pretty evenly matched, right? Well, Team B is this year's Clemson team. Team A is Clemson through 11 games in 2016, when the Tigers went on to win a national championship.
Clemson might not be great at anything at the moment, but it's pretty good at nearly everything. And Clemson's loss might look ugly, but when the Tigers have avoided turnovers, they've handled their competition with ease.
And yet, here they are, ranked No. 8 -- a ranking that seems to come with a message from the committee. Clemson will not only need to win out, but it needs to have a lot of other things go right if it wants to make the playoff. No team ranked outside the top seven at this point has ever made the final four.
CFP rankings takeaways: What we learned and what it means for Rivalry Week
LSU could find itself as the second SEC team in the College Football Playoff, while Notre Dame-USC looms large for Pac-12 and Big Ten hopes.
