"S-Curve" logic when ranking college basketball teams. Teams should ultimately be rewarded for what they did THIS year. The problem with college football rankings is that it starts off heavily leaning on prior years/returning experience and I'm not sure it is ever overcome like it is in college basketball.

Take Cincinnati as a great example. Both BYU and Cincinnati had great years last year. Cincinnati ended ranked #8, BYU ended ranked #11. But because Cincinnati returned a lot of experience they started ranked #8 and BYU started unranked. Now that we're a month into the season BYU has beaten two ranked teams and is ranked #13, and Cincinnati's literal only team of consequence they have beaten is Indiana and they are ranked #7. There are plenty other examples.

I would much rather college football rankings come purely from "resume" (which can also include HOW teams win - convincing/squeaking by) instead of some cumulative program strength criteria that is often used by the "haves" to keep down the "have nots."

Give me meritocracy any day.