The final rankings for the 2024 college football season have been released.

On Tuesday morning, the final Associated Press top 25 poll will be released. However, like I have done during the season, I am presenting my AP ballot and providing an explanation for my team rankings.

Here are my last 25 picks for the 2024 campaign.

(My pre-bowl season rankings are in parenthesis.)

Colorado (22), Duke (23), and Marshall (24) were dropped.

It’s hard to weigh bowls. Everyone participates in certain competitive games. Teams vary greatly, and some offer a lot of opt-outs. We will analyze them.

Colorado had Shedeur Sanders and Travis Hunter, and the Buffs lost the Alamo Bowl against BYU. Although the Deion Sanders program had a great year, one could argue that the Buffs’ record lacked any noteworthy victories. Duke lost at Ole Miss 52–20 despite having a backup quarterback. Manny Diaz, the former defensive coordinator of Penn State, had a successful debut season with nine victories. Additionally, Marshall opted out in a somewhat weak manner, not even playing in its bowl game.

25. UNLV (25)

Missouri (NR) is number 24.

23. Memphis (NR)

22. Army (17)

21. Navy (NR)

20. Syracuse (21)

After winning their bowl games and reaching 10, 11, or, in the case of Army, 12 victories, all of these teams concluded well. The Army-Navy outcome favoring the Midshipmen was sufficient to put them ahead, despite the Black Knights winning the AAC. Both programs and quarterbacks, Army’s Bryson Daily and Navy’s Blake Horvath, had outstanding seasons.

Bravo to Syracuse and UNLV, too. The Rebels lost an overtime shootout to Syracuse in October after their starting quarterback defected in the middle of the season, and they only lost to Boise State the rest of the way. Fran Brown, the team’s first-year coach, led Syracuse to just its second 10-win season in the previous 20 years.

See also  Single family residence in Carlisle sells for $250,000

19. Alabama (13)

As you may know from reading my list of the season’s top 25 explainers, I often divide my voting into groups of five or so teams. However, Alabama merits its own unique level.

The Crimson Tide lost to Michigan in an embarrassing manner in the ReliaQuest Bowl following the incessant whining, hypotheticals, and arguments, and after all the SEC mouthpieces yelled that Alabama should be in the CFP. The problem is that almost all of them represented Alabama. The Tide attempted to prevail. Instead, they were unable to move the ball at all against a Michigan defense that was missing a number of important players.

18. South Carolina (15)

17. Illinois (20)

16. Miami (16)

15. Iowa State (18)

14. BYU (19)

13. Ole Miss (14)

Big Ten fans enjoyed a few hours when Illinois defeated South Carolina in the Gator Bowl on the same day as Alabama lost to Michigan. Both teams had fantastic seasons, and with star quarterback LaNorris Sellers, I think the Gamecocks will return to the CFP picture next year.

Kalani Sitake had a fantastic season at BYU, which ended with 11 victories. The Cougs’ November losses against Arizona State and Kansas, which totaled nine points each, were simply mistimed.

Miami lost a thrilling shootout in the Pop-Tarts Bowl, but I didn’t feel too awful about it. I am certain that the Canes would have defeated Iowa State if Cam Ward had been on the field in the second half. However, that did not occur. For the record, if it was decided prior to the game that Ward would not play in the second half, I do not hold that against him. Just a hard look.

See also  iHeart Radio Jingle Ball 2024: Where to buy last-minute tickets

12. SMU (12)

11. Clemson (11).

10. Tennessee (7)

9. Indiana (8)

8. State of Boise (9)

7. Arizona State (10).

No, despite a couple first-round blowouts, I didn’t think about ranking Ole Miss higher than any of the CFP teams. The Rebels had an opportunity to qualify for the 12-team field. Rather, Lane Kiffin sobbed uncontrollably on social media. Avoid losing at home to Kentucky. Let me rest.

Because of the head-to-head outcome in the ACC title game, I have Clemson ahead of SMU. And based on a single, straightforward assumption, I have Indiana placed highest among the first-round losers. The Hoosiers only lost twice to the two teams vying for the national championship, despite all the negativity they received about their poor schedule. Perhaps this was a great year for Indiana. I am aware that’s a crazy idea for SEC homers to consider.

Arizona State and Boise State ought to have been forced to compete in the opening round. One thing the CFP needs to do better is to stop giving conference winners first-round byes. However, the Sun Devils and Broncos, particularly Arizona State, were competitive. It took a lot of courage for Kenny Dillingham’s side to charge back and force Texas into overtime.

6. Texas (4)

5. Georgia (2)

4. The University of Pennsylvania (3)

3. Oregon (1)

2. (5) Notre Dame

1. The University of Ohio (6)

The teams that advanced to the CFP semifinals might easily be ranked in the top four. However, we must consider the season as a whole.

In the Big Ten title game, Oregon defeated Penn State. In the regular season and the SEC championship, Georgia defeated Texas twice. That needs to be taken into account.

See also  Four-bedroom home in Camp Hill sells for $371,000

I even considered giving Oregon a higher ranking than Notre Dame before to the national championship game. The CFP version of Ohio State defeated both teams. Penn State was defeated by both teams. Notre Dame’s CFP victories against Indiana and Georgia are fairly analogous to the Ducks’ regular season victories over Boise State and Ohio State. Additionally, a team like Northern Illinois did not defeat Oregon.

However, I will give Notre Dame credit for winning three games in a row, making it through the CFP, and competing for the national championship. Additionally, I will give the Irish credit for fighting back from a large disadvantage in the second half. However, Ohio State’s costly and skilled roster proved to be too formidable.

Stories by

Johnny McGonigal

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *