Valero Alamo Bowl Projection:
| Projection Week 14 | Big 12 | Pac-12 |
| NCAAF Oracle | TCU | Washington |
We consider the NCAAF Oracle Ranking below to determine which teams would be selected for the Valero Alamo Bowl. Find out more about how the Oracle works and subscribe to our weekly newsletter
Bowl season is just around the corner, and Oracle’s latest Valero Alamo Bowl projection is keeping things exciting. After four-straight weeks as the Pac-12 pick, (18) Washington State has been usurped by its in-state rival. There are so many ways to describe what the (13) Washington Huskies did to the (18) Washington State Cougars: embarrassing, demolishing, humiliating, gut-wrenching, heartbreaking…take your pick, and it seems fitting and appropriate. The 2017 Apple Cup was hardly riveting in the sense that this game was only close when the referee conducted the coin flip, as the only points the Cougars scored came with two touchdowns in garbage time, hardly doing much for posterity in comparison to the Huskies 41 points.
Not to be outdone, (14) Texas Christian did (13) Washington one better, or technically four, thanks to their 45 points against (128) Baylor. Granted, the Horned Frogs were playing the third worst team (which does take a certain degree of skill to be that bad) while the Huskies had to play an actual threat. Whereas the Pac-12 has remained relatively heated of late, (14) Texas Christian had recently developed a small bit of security in the second position of the Big 12, helping them come up as the Big 12 projected representative in the Valero Alamo Bowl.
While (13) Washington is not scheduled to play this upcoming weekend, (14) Texas Christian will have to face the powerhouse (5) Oklahoma Sooners, to whom the Horned Frogs lost to 38-20 on November 11, although that game was on the road, whereas Saturday’s game will be home.
Check out the updated standings for the respective conferences below, based off the Oracle rankings:
Pac-12 North: (13) Washington, (17) Stanford, (18) Washington State, (51) Oregon, (85) California, and (127) Oregon State
Pac-12 South: (11) Southern California, (40) Arizona State, (52) Arizona, (60) UCLA, (71) Utah, and (93) Colorado
Big 12: (5) Oklahoma, (14) Texas Christian, (28) Oklahoma State, (42) Iowa State, (53) Kansas State, (59) West Virginia, (68) Texas Tech, (72) Texas, (126) Kansas, and (128) Baylor
NCAAF Oracle – Week 13
| Rank | Team | Record | Trending |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Clemson | (11-1) | ▲ 2 |
| 2 | Wisconsin | (12-0) | -- |
| 3 | Georgia | (11-1) | ▲ 1 |
| 4 | Alabama | (11-1) | ▼ 3 |
| 5 | Oklahoma | (11-1) | ▲ 3 |
| 6 | Central Florida | (11-0) | ▲ 3 |
| 7 | Auburn | (10-2) | ▲ 6 |
| 8 | Miami FL_ | (10-1) | ▼ 3 |
| 9 | Ohio State | (10-2) | ▲ 2 |
| 10 | Penn State | (10-2) | -- |
| 11 | Southern California | (10-2) | ▼ 5 |
| 12 | Notre Dame | (9-3) | ▼ 5 |
| 13 | Washington | (10-2) | ▲ 4 |
| 14 | Texas Christian | (10-2) | ▲ 1 |
| 15 | Memphis | (10-1) | ▲ 1 |
| 16 | San Diego State | (10-2) | ▲ 2 |
| 17 | Stanford | (9-3) | ▲ 5 |
| 18 | Washington State | (9-3) | ▼ 6 |
| 19 | Toledo | (10-2) | ▲ 1 |
| 20 | Michigan State | (9-3) | ▼ 1 |
| 21 | Boise State | (9-3) | ▼ 7 |
| 22 | Louisiana State | (9-3) | ▲ 2 |
| 23 | Florida Atlantic | (9-3) | ▼ 2 |
| 24 | Virginia Tech | (9-3) | ▲ 5 |
| 25 | Northwestern | (9-3) | -- |
| 26 | Fresno State | (9-3) | ▲ 9 |
| 27 | North Texas | (9-3) | -- |
| 28 | Oklahoma State | (9-3) | -- |
| 29 | Troy | (9-2) | ▲ 3 |
| 30 | North Carolina State | (8-4) | ▲ 4 |
| 31 | Mississippi State | (8-4) | ▼ 8 |
| 32 | South Carolina | (8-4) | ▼ 6 |
| 33 | Louisville | (8-4) | ▲ 10 |
| 34 | South Florida | (9-2) | ▼ 3 |
| 35 | Michigan | (8-4) | ▼ 5 |
| 36 | Wake Forest | (7-5) | ▼ 3 |
| 37 | Iowa | (7-5) | ▲ 5 |
| 38 | Boston College | (7-5) | ▲ 7 |
| 39 | Central Michigan | (8-4) | ▲ 7 |
| 40 | Arizona State | (7-5) | ▲ 13 |
| 41 | Ohio | (8-4) | ▼ 5 |
| 42 | Iowa State | (7-5) | ▼ 5 |
| 43 | Army | (8-3) | ▼ 3 |
| 44 | Houston | (7-4) | ▲ 8 |
| 45 | Northern Illinois | (8-4) | ▼ 7 |
| 46 | Kentucky | (7-5) | ▼ 7 |
| 47 | Alabama-Birmingham | (8-4) | ▲ 2 |
| 48 | Texas A&M | (7-5) | ▼ 7 |
| 49 | Southern Methodist | (7-5) | ▲ 7 |
| 50 | Southern Mississippi | (8-4) | ▲ 7 |
| 51 | Oregon | (7-5) | -- |
| 52 | Arizona | (7-5) | ▼ 8 |
| 53 | Kansas State | (7-5) | ▲ 12 |
| 54 | Florida International | (7-4) | ▲ 8 |
| 55 | Akron | (7-5) | ▲ 3 |
| 56 | Missouri | (7-5) | ▲ 4 |
| 57 | Marshall | (7-5) | ▼ 9 |
| 58 | Wyoming | (7-5) | ▼ 11 |
| 59 | West Virginia | (7-5) | ▼ 9 |
| 60 | UCLA | (6-6) | ▲ 3 |
| 61 | Mississippi | (6-6) | ▲ 8 |
| 62 | Purdue | (6-6) | ▲ 2 |
| 63 | Navy | (6-5) | ▼ 8 |
| 64 | Appalachian State | (7-4) | ▲ 9 |
| 65 | Virginia | (6-6) | ▼ 11 |
| 66 | Duke | (6-6) | ▲ 10 |
| 67 | Arkansas State | (7-3) | ▲ 3 |
| 68 | Texas Tech | (6-6) | ▲ 12 |
| 69 | Buffalo | (6-6) | ▲ 12 |
| 70 | Colorado State | (7-5) | ▼ 11 |
| 71 | Utah | (6-6) | ▲ 8 |
| 72 | Texas | (6-6) | ▼ 11 |
| 73 | Temple | (6-6) | ▲ 5 |
| 74 | Western Michigan | (6-6) | ▼ 8 |
| 75 | Utah State | (6-6) | ▼ 7 |
| 76 | Georgia Tech | (5-6) | ▼ 9 |
| 77 | Pittsburgh | (5-7) | ▲ 22 |
| 78 | Middle Tennessee State | (6-6) | ▲ 12 |
| 79 | Louisiana Tech | (6-6) | ▲ 12 |
| 80 | Florida State | (5-6) | ▲ 13 |
| 81 | Tulane | (5-7) | ▼ 10 |
| 82 | Georgia State | (6-4) | ▼ 10 |
| 83 | Miami OH_ | (5-7) | ▲ 12 |
| 84 | Western Kentucky | (6-6) | ▼ 10 |
| 85 | California | (5-7) | ▼ 10 |
| 86 | Vanderbilt | (5-7) | ▲ 12 |
| 87 | Air Force | (5-7) | ▲ 13 |
| 88 | Syracuse | (4-8) | ▼ 6 |
| 89 | Texas-San Antonio | (6-5) | ▼ 12 |
| 90 | Nevada-Las Vegas | (5-7) | ▼ 7 |
| 91 | Minnesota | (5-7) | ▼ 6 |
| 92 | Louisiana-Lafayette | (5-6) | ▼ 6 |
| 93 | Colorado | (5-7) | ▼ 9 |
| 94 | Old Dominion | (5-7) | ▼ 6 |
| 95 | Indiana | (5-7) | ▼ 8 |
| 96 | Florida | (4-7) | ▼ 7 |
| 97 | South Alabama | (4-7) | ▼ 5 |
| 98 | Eastern Michigan | (5-7) | ▲ 7 |
| 99 | Tennessee | (4-8) | ▼ 5 |
| 100 | Nebraska | (4-8) | ▼ 3 |
| 101 | New Mexico State | (5-6) | ▲ 5 |
| 102 | Maryland | (4-8) | ▼ 6 |
| 103 | Arkansas | (4-8) | -- |
| 104 | Louisiana-Monroe | (4-7) | ▼ 2 |
| 105 | Massachusetts | (4-7) | ▼ 1 |
| 106 | Rutgers | (4-8) | ▼ 5 |
| 107 | Cincinnati | (4-8) | ▲ 1 |
| 108 | Brigham Young | (4-9) | ▲ 5 |
| 109 | Idaho | (3-8) | ▼ 2 |
| 110 | North Carolina | (3-9) | -- |
| 111 | Connecticut | (3-9) | ▼ 2 |
| 112 | East Carolina | (3-9) | ▼ 1 |
| 113 | New Mexico | (3-9) | ▼ 1 |
| 114 | Nevada | (3-9) | ▲ 8 |
| 115 | Hawaii | (3-9) | ▼ 1 |
| 116 | Tulsa | (2-10) | ▼ 1 |
| 117 | Kent State | (2-10) | ▼ 1 |
| 118 | Ball State | (2-10) | ▼ 1 |
| 119 | San Jose State | (2-11) | ▲ 8 |
| 120 | Georgia Southern | (2-9) | ▲ 6 |
| 121 | Coastal Carolina | (2-9) | ▼ 2 |
| 122 | Bowling Green State | (2-10) | ▼ 2 |
| 123 | Illinois | (2-10) | ▼ 5 |
| 124 | Texas State | (2-10) | ▼ 3 |
| 125 | Charlotte | (1-11) | ▼ 2 |
| 126 | Kansas | (1-11) | -- |
| 127 | Oregon State | (1-11) | ▼ 1 |
| 128 | Baylor | (1-11) | -- |
| 129 | Rice | (1-11) | -- |
| 130 | Texas-El Paso | (0-12) | -- |
We’ve contained ourselves as long as possible, but now it’s impossible to make it any longer. Guess what? Of the teams currently listed in the top-10, two dropped positions from a week ago. Guess who? (4) Alabama and (8) Miami_FL. Ask yourself the last time you saw (4) next to Alabama. There were two additional teams that actually fell out of the top-10 last week: (11) Southern California, who did not play and consequently fell (-5), and (12) Notre Dame, who did play and also fell (-5) after (17) Stanford came back with a vengeance in the fourth quarter, scoring 21 points to cruise to a comfortable 38-20 win.
Okay, that was one sentence devoted to teams other than (4) Alabama and (8) Miami_FL, but now we’re going to return to all the fun associated with those two programs by turning our attention to the College Football Playoff projections.
Below, get a hold of Oracle’s newest component for NCAAF, the projections for the top-10 teams’ chances of making the 2017 College Football Playoff:
NCAAF Oracle – Chances to make the CFP
| Rank | Team | Record | Chances |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Clemson | (11-1) | 99.99% |
| 2 | Wisconsin | (12-0) | 98.61% |
| 3 | Georgia | (11-1) | 59.48% |
| 4 | Oklahoma | (11-1) | 49.97% |
| 5 | Auburn | (10-2) | 48.58% |
| 6 | Miami FL_ | (10-1) | 27.88% |
| 7 | Ohio State | (10-2) | 9.29% |
| 8 | Alabama | (11-1) | 5.13% |
| 9 | Southern California | (10-2) | 1.08% |
| 10 | Stanford | (9-3) | 0.00% |
Just so you understand how crazy things got, check this out: last week, (4) Alabama had a 94.76% of making the College Football Playoff. Now, the Crimson Tide has a 5.13% chance, and no, that’s not a typo. (8) Miami_FL never had as good a chance as (4) Alabama blew, but their loss cost them 17% points, which could be more than enough to keep them out of the College Football Playoff. But let’s show some love to the teams that beat the two titans. Well, our love to (77) Pittsburgh will be brief, because they were only playing spoiler to (8) Miami_FL, and boy did they do that! As for (7) Auburn, their win over (4) Alabama in the Iron Bowl is arguably more interesting. A week ago, the Tigers had 0.43% chances of making the College Football Playoff; now, they’ve launched up to 48.58% chances. As you can see, that still leaves them 5th when you rank the teams by their chances, which would give them front row seats to watch as the top-4 teams compete for the National Championship. Still, the general consensus is that a late-season loss is far more detrimental than an early-season loss, so perhaps that same logic could be applied to this late-season upset in favor of (7) Auburn earning a bid for the College Football Playoff. This would also help explain why (4) Alabama is ranked higher than (5) Oklahoma, (7) Auburn, (8) Miami FL_, and (9) Ohio State in the overall Oracle rankings, yet is ranked below all of those teams in the chances to make the CFP.
| Rk | Team | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 1 | Clemson | 57% | 18% | 15% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 2 | Wisconsin | 25% | 27% | 14% | 22% | 11% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 3 | Georgia | 12% | 25% | 12% | 5% | 16% | 19% | 9% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 4 | Alabama | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 13% | 29% | 32% | 18% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 5 | Oklahoma | 3% | 13% | 17% | 13% | 4% | 5% | 14% | 17% | 10% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 6 | Central Florida | 2% | 12% | 23% | 11% | 2% | 5% | 12% | 16% | 12% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 7 | Auburn | 0% | 4% | 16% | 20% | 9% | 1% | 2% | 8% | 16% | 16% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 8 | Miami FL_ | 0% | 0% | 2% | 14% | 24% | 11% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 19% | 19% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 9 | Ohio State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 15% | 19% | 10% | 2% | 0% | 6% | 19% | 19% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 10 | Penn State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 28% | 41% | 22% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 11 | Southern California | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 4% | 10% | 15% | 13% | 6% | 1% | 3% | 15% | 22% | 9% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 12 | Notre Dame | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 10% | 26% | 30% | 21% | 10% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 13 | Washington | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 29% | 38% | 21% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 14 | Texas Christian | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 10% | 16% | 14% | 6% | 1% | 0% | 1% | 7% | 18% | 18% | 6% | 0% | 0% |
| 15 | Memphis | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 4% | 12% | 16% | 12% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 1% | 3% | 14% | 19% | 10% | 3% | 0% |
| 16 | San Diego State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 16% | 60% | 23% | 0% |
| 17 | Stanford | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 12% | 19% | 12% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 13% | 35% | 3% |
| 18 | Washington State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 25% | 61% |
| 19 | Toledo | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 16% | 22% | 9% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 25% |
| 20 | Michigan State | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
This weekend’s games are reserved for Conference Championships, meaning that only 12 of Oracle’s top-20 playing. Those third and fourth positions for the College Football Playoff are still there for the taking, so some of these games could be huge in deciding how things shape up. (1) Clemson is sitting about as comfortable as any team possibly could right now, but that doesn’t mean their game against (8) Miami_FL is inconsequential. As always, depending on how things play out in this game, the Hurricanes might be able to do just enough to salvage their season and force their way into that third or fourth spot. The same can be said for (9) Ohio State when they travel to play (2) Wisconsin, although the Buckeyes have much slimmer odds than the Hurricanes do to steal one of those spots for the College Football Playoff. If we had to pick one that is the largest swing game, it would have to be (3) Georgia against (7) Auburn. As we said previously, (7) Auburn has nearly 49% chances of making the CFP, not quite good enough to get them in. However, (3) Georgia is not doing considerably better, sitting at about 59% chances. This isn’t set in stone by any means, but whoever wins this game could effectively punch their ticket for the third or fourth spot.
Have a great rest of the week and weekend.
Written and published by Tyler Caldwell
>>