1922 AFCA Blue Ribbon Commission Champion

Teams named national champions by NCAA-designated selectors
(Underline: claimed title season; +: co-champion/split selection)

Other possible contenders

	California	Cornell	Iowa	Michigan	Princeton	Vandy	WV
Overall Record	9-0	8-0	7-0	6-0-1	8-0	8-0-1	10-0-1
Opponent Win %	0.587 ^	0.514	0.407	0.482	0.590	0.567	0.552
+.500 Opponents	4	4	1	2	5	5	7
Average PF-PA	44.2-3.8	42.4-3.4	29.7-4.7	26.1-1.9	15.9-4.3	19.7-1.8	24.3-3.1
FBS Record	4-0	4-0	6-0	4-0-1	6-0	6-0-1	6-0-1
FBS Opponent Win %	0.643	0.639	0.444	0.581	0.630	0.654	0.590
Average FBS PF-PA	36.5-1.8	25.5-0	24.5-5.5	14.4-2.6	12.5-3.5	13.9-2.3	18.6-4.4
Conference Record	4-0	Ind	5-0	4-0	Ind	5-0 #	Ind
Non-Home games	3	2	3	3	2	4	4 $
SOS (S-R/BR)	89/75	67/91	30/27	24/12	4/25	17/15	63/49

I had initially planned to include Drake (7-0, MVIAA co-champion) in my analysis, but opted not to after further examining their ratings and schedule. The Bulldogs didn’t average out to being a Top 25-caliber team and played a fairly weak schedule (no Top 25-caliber opponents, only 1 opponent with winning record). Another team I passed on was Army, who did receive a CFBDW selection and went unbeaten. However, they had 2 ties on the year (one of which was to a Yale team that both Iowa and Princeton beat), so I felt they didn’t warrant a closer look.

I’m going to venture the following 2 won’t receive serious consideration from the BRC: Iowa and West Virginia. Iowa, I think, gets way too much credit for beating Top 25-caliber Yale, as they didn’t have much else on the schedule. Illinois, Minnesota, and Ohio State are in the top 50 when you look at power ratings, but all 3 had records .500 or below. The Hawkeyes struggled against 2 of those team and avoided playing either of the other top teams in the Big 10 this season, which hurts their case. Iowa supposedly had a scheduled game with undefeated Drake that was cancelled: that would’ve given a chance to boost the optics of their resume if that were the case. They did play the fewest non-FBS teams and their win over Yale was a favorable comparative result against fellow contender Princeton, which might help their case more than I think. As for West Virginia, the Mountaineers played the most games of any of the contenders and had fairly comparable scoring stats with the majority of contenders as well. While they did tie for playing the most games away from home, they also tied for playing the 2nd-most non-FBS opponents. Their schedule strength also doesn’t help them either: they did have wins over Top 25-caliber Pitt and a top 50 rated Washington & Jefferson, but faced no other foes of that caliber and suffered a tie to a Washington & Lee team that’s dancing on the cutoff of top 50 consideration. While they were selected to play in the only other postseason game outside of the Rose Bowl this year, a win over a poorly rated Gonzaga team doesn’t help their case.

Up next are Big 10 co-champ Michigan and SoCon co-champ Vanderbilt, who gave each other their only blemishes on the year with a scoreless tie in Nashville. Both teams are highly rated, finishing in the Top 10 of the vast majority of ratings people can produce for this season. Michigan, despite having a blemished straight record compared to Iowa, performed better against the Hawkeyes overall against common opponents and their schedule was considered tougher, which is why I’m giving them a leg up here. The Wolverines played a Wisconsin team that was pushing Top 25 consideration in addition to the Vandy contest and performed better on the scoreboard than the Commodores. Vanderbilt counters with 2 games against teams that would’ve been pushing Top 25 consideration as well (Tennessee, Texas) along with 2 other teams that would be top 50 (Georgia, Kentucky) that had better straight records than the Wolverines’ top 50 (Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio State). The Commodores also pitched more shutouts and more victories by 2 or more possessions against a schedule that compares very well to Michigan’s. Because of that scoreless tie in Nashville, I have to treat both as equals for time being.

California was by far and away the best team of the West not only this season, but in the early half of the 1920s. The Golden Bears’ 9-0 season was part of a 5-year stretch where they didn’t lose a game. After back-to-back Rose Bowl trips, Cal elected not to play in the game this season, with the bid falling to Southern Cal. However, as dominating as Cal’s season was, the Bears played only 4 FBS-level teams on the year and 4 overall with winning records, making their schedule one of the worst among the contenders. However, the schedule wasn’t completely devoid of substance, as Rose Bowl champ USC was a Top 25-caliber team and 1-loss Washington was also pushing Top 25 consideration: Cal handed both of those teams (along with non-FBS Olympic Club) their only losses of the year by comfortable margins. California probably would’ve benefitted from playing in the Rose Bowl, if for nothing else to have a game against a team outside the western footprint. However, the potential opponent Penn State, who hadn’t lost since 1919 and started the year 5-0, immediately unraveled after the Rose Bowl committee prematurely awarded them a bid.

Cornell was another team that performed consistently great against their schedule on the year, winning every game by double digits up until their season finale against Penn (that wasn’t as close as the 9-0 score indicated). However, the Big Red’s schedule was in contention with Cal’s for being pretty bad as they faced 4 non-FBS teams, only 1 of which had a record above .500. Working in Cornell’s favor is that all of their FBS foes had winning records: Penn was a Top 25-caliber team, and 2 others (Colgate, Dartmouth) were pushing Top 25 consideration as well across varying rating systems. Add in that 2 of those games were away from home, that helps take away some sting from the non-FBS slate. Cornell was another team on a hot streak, as they were in the middle of a 3-year undefeated run. Had the Rose Bowl reconsidered the bid to Penn State, the Big Red would’ve benefited with a trip out west and a potential win over USC to help boost their SOS (as well as provide a common opponent to compare against with Cal).

However, Cornell wasn’t the only team in the East having a great season. Princeton, after a down season the prior year, rebounded with a perfect season of their own against one of the tougher schedules in the country. 3 of Princeton’s games were against Top 25-caliber competition (Chicago, Harvard, Yale), 1 team pushing for consideration (Colgate), and only 2 non-FBS opponents. While their schedule was home-heavy, 2 of their toughest games were on the road and they also played a more nationally impactful schedule. Working against Princeton is that they weren’t as dominant on the scoreboard as the other teams, which works against them when looking at comparative results. All 3 of the Top 25-caliber games, along with a top 50 rated Virginia, were within 1 possession in the final outcomes. In addition, they beat Colgate by a slightly smaller margin than Cornell did, and only won by 8 against non-FBS (and sub-.500) Swarthmore in a game where none of the Tigers’ starters played. They probably would’ve benefitted from a trip to Pasadena to put them over the top, but Princeton was a team that just wouldn’t be denied on the field this year. In addition, the Tigers captured the CFB Belt (college football’s ‘lineal championship’) during the season and successfully held on to it through season’s end.

The choice for the Blue Ribbon Commission would be what to value more: Princeton’s perfect run over a stronger schedule, or California and Cornell’s consistent dominance against a weaker schedule? The Golden Bears and Big Red had better results against comparative opponents, which would definitely work into their favor with the commission. However, because of their SOS due to facing more Top 25-caliber foes, the Tigers have a narrow edge in NCAA-designated selectors. Among the selectors that were the closest to contemporary (Boand, Houlgate, and Parke Davis), the edge was that narrow as well: 1 outright and 1 shared for Princeton, 1 outright for Cal, 1 shared for Cornell. Princeton was rated higher on average across the various rating systems I did come across. With those things in mind, I give the Tigers the slightest edge as Tier 1 for the best case for a retroactive Coaches Trophy. With having such dominant performances and some comparative edges, the Golden Bears and Big Red are solid Tier 2 teams for co-champion consideration, which I could see the Blue Ribbon Commission opting to do for this year. All three need to make their case because 1) we know Princeton specifically likes to claim everything, and 2) while all 3 do appear a couple more times in the BRC window, they’re going to have some tougher competition in those seasons. Michigan and Vanderbilt were both solid teams and had one of them managed a victory in Nashville, that winner would easily be in the fray. However, the tie between the two knocks both teams down to Tier 3.

Tier 1 (Best Case to be awarded AFCA Trophy): Princeton
Tier 2 (Legitimate case for champion/co-champion): California, Cornell
Tier 3 (Minor Contender, could make a case): Michigan, Vanderbilt
Tier 4 (Not Serious Contenders): Iowa, West Virginia

[1] – The Southern Conference didn’t officially recognize conference champions for the 1922-1932 seasons, as there were as many as 23 teams in the league during a given season. Any team claiming an outright or shared SoCon title during that stretch is doing so by virtue of an unbeaten SoCon record that year.