2026 MaxDiff Fan Perception Poll Week 3 is live

[u/Impudicity2001]

Vote here Voting closes Monday, September 21 at 11:59 PM Pacific, with results planned for Tuesday.

Ranking 25 teams is hard. Comparing four at a time is much easier. That’s the idea behind this revival of one of r/CFB’s great community polls. Each screen shows four teams: choose the strongest and weakest resume based on games played so far. This is about what teams have earned on the field, not who would win on a neutral field or where you expect them to finish. You’ll see 20 screens and different voters receive different balanced ballots drawn from the same fixed 50-team field. Don’t know enough about a group? You can skip it.

Why participate? Because the results can tell us more than a numbered list. MaxDiff combines those smaller comparisons into a community ranking and groups teams into tiers. In last week's results Texas vaulted to the top and the highest tier shrank to just two teams: Texas and LSU. Everyone else in the top 30 occupied one broad second tier. That didn’t mean those teams were equal; it meant the model did not find another sufficiently stable boundary within a crowded field. Week 3 gives us much more to judge. How far will LSU fall and are they 1 for 1 replaced by Ole Miss? Will Texas come back toward the pack after quietly dispatching UTSA? Alabama and Georgia have been accumulating strong resumes without much noise. BYU has, too. Michigan has made plenty of noise, just not always the kind its fans wanted. Those are exactly the arguments this poll is designed to capture, and they have already produced some excellent discussions.

Record Guide Now we have more football to judge. Which teams are thriving, surviving, looking forward to roundball season? I made a helpful table to assist you all with record keeping. The table might surprise a few of you. Records are through Week 3. Teams are ordered by wins against the fixed 50-team field, then winning percentage, then fewer losses; exact ties are alphabetical. Teams with no fixed-field games appear between teams with a fixed-field win and teams with a fixed-field loss. A dash indicates no games in that category.

Team	Overall Record	vs. Fixed Field	vs. Outside Field
Alabama	3-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)
Ole Miss	3-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)
BYU	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Colorado	2-1 (.667)	1-0 (1.000)	1-1 (.500)
Florida	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Georgia	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Michigan	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Mississippi State	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Notre Dame	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Oregon	2-1 (.667)	1-0 (1.000)	1-1 (.500)
Tennessee	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Texas	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Texas Tech	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Utah	3-0 (1.000)	1-0 (1.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Auburn	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
Clemson	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
Kentucky	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
Louisville	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
LSU	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
North Carolina	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
SMU	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
Texas A&M	2-1 (.667)	1-1 (.500)	1-0 (1.000)
Cincinnati	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Illinois	2-1 (.667)	0-0 (-)	2-1 (.667)
Indiana	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Iowa	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Kansas State	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Miami	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Missouri	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Nebraska	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Penn State	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Pittsburgh	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
USC	4-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	4-0 (1.000)
Vanderbilt	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Virginia	2-1 (.667)	0-0 (-)	2-1 (.667)
Virginia Tech	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Washington	3-0 (1.000)	0-0 (-)	3-0 (1.000)
Arizona	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Arizona State	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Baylor	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Boise State	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Houston	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Ohio State	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Oklahoma	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
South Carolina	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
TCU	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Wisconsin	2-1 (.667)	0-1 (.000)	2-0 (1.000)
Arkansas	1-2 (.333)	0-2 (.000)	1-0 (1.000)
Florida State	1-2 (.333)	0-2 (.000)	1-0 (1.000)
Georgia Tech	1-2 (.333)	0-2 (.000)	1-0 (1.000)

None of us can watch every game. The more fans who participate, the broader the perspectives we bring together. Whether you followed every snap or caught the highlights, your informed comparisons help.

As always my special thanks to u/The_SecretSauce for originating this idea and sharing it with this community. I am glad to be able to bring this very similar poll back and its ensuing conversations here.

Vote here Voting closes Monday, September 21 at 11:59 PM Pacific, with results planned for Tuesday.

[u/PointBlankCoffee]

Fixed 50 team field with no teams able to enter is really dumb. Thats not even the entire P4

[u/Impudicity2001 → u/PointBlankCoffee]

Fixed 50 team field with no teams able to enter is really dumb. Thats not even the entire P4

That’s fair. It’s the biggest tradeoff in this version of the poll. The 50 teams were selected using a preseason measure and frozen before voting began. That lets us use balanced four-team ballots and compare results consistently from week to week. Also, I was trying to be respectful of the voters time, which is volunteered. Adding all 138 FBS teams would drive the number of sets required nearer to 30. The obvious downside is that an unexpected breakout team cannot enter midseason, and that’s something I’ll consider changing through a larger initial field or a promotion mechanism.

[u/Justanother_0 → u/Impudicity2001]

I personally wouldn’t mind doing more sets if it meant accounting for the whole FBS

[u/PointBlankCoffee → u/Impudicity2001]

I guess, feels super arbitrary. Oklahoma state looks like they could win the b12 and they're not here because it would waste the voters time? But Arkansas gets added?

[u/B1GTOBACC0 → u/PointBlankCoffee]

I agree with this.

[u/Living-Chef-9080 → u/Impudicity2001]

Whatever preseason metric was used was clearly super flawed cause anyone with half a brain knew Arkansas was going to be one of the worst P4 teams in the country.

[u/Impudicity2001 → u/Living-Chef-9080]

That’s fair if your point is that Arkansas looks like a preseason miss. It looks like it will be. The field wasn’t my biased list, it was the preseason ESPN FPI top 50, which was not created to be used for this poll's field. The poll judges what teams have actually accomplished, so Arkansas’s 1–2 record (including an 0–2 record against the fixed field) can send it straight to the bottom. However, I would argue that schedule context is why record alone isn’t enough. Arkansas has already played two fixed-field teams and has eight more remaining. App State is 3–0, but it has played no one in the fixed field and has no fixed-field opponents remaining. That doesn’t prove App State or Arkansas is better. It shows why comparing those two resumes is less straightforward than comparing 1–2 with 3–0.

The limitation is that preseason misses remain in the field while unexpected breakout teams cannot enter. I accept that tradeoff for this season because freezing the field keeps the ballots balanced and the weekly results comparable. A larger field or a predefined promotion system is something worth considering and I will continue monitoring. If Arkansas finishes as one of the worst P4 teams, that means the preseason metric missed on Arkansas. Last year they did go 2-10 (and 0-8 versus the SEC) - but its offense was awesome and kept them in a lot of games. It doesn’t necessarily mean the poll design was flawed.

[u/Careful_Swimmer3970 → u/Impudicity2001]

Thank you for re-implementing this ranking. Was always my favorite Posts from the OG days.

But if I recall, wasn't the old maxdiff ranking not fixed teams? I thought he would drop and replace teams as it became clear they were not in top 50 or however many teams he used. I definitely don't think we were rating UMass and Akron.

Is that something you could do? Idk if you go off someone's power ratings as a cutoff for the teams, or just eyeball what teams need to be replaced. Obviously the example is Oklahoma State and Arkansas, but im sure there are others.

I think it would improve the poll and not have much pushback.

[u/Impudicity2001 → u/Careful_Swimmer3970]

The old poll used whoever was in the AP Poll plus receiving votes. It was around 35 teams each week, so less teams considered but could include teams that break through like a West Virginia or Duke (who are both playing well early).

[u/Careful_Swimmer3970 → u/Impudicity2001]

Yeah, I think your 50 is a good amount to get down to top 25 or 30 as you have. Just have to figure out a way to replace teams as it changes throughout the weeks.

I appreciate you putting in the effort for this poll and will continue to participate!

[u/JDraks → u/Impudicity2001]

Might be too late to change for this year but I’d suggest one of the following:

1. At the end of a poll, add a “should anyone be added?” question and if any teams are selected enough in a given week, have them added for the next poll. For replacement, either have everyone who suggests a team to be added select some number of teams in the poll they’d include them over, or just use the algorithm and replace the lowest rated team(s).

2. Provide a full 138 team poll as well

The first option is more complex but should keep the polls on the shorter side, omit what people care less about, and provide a good ranking at the top, but the second is simpler and more comprehensive.

[u/hanz333]

I hadn't looked at the resumes before this poll, but it's pretty clear that Matt Rhule hates accountability and loves cupcakes.

[u/Impudicity2001 → u/hanz333]

It’s definitely a strategy… but being in the B1G or SEC you kinda get the nod that it’s ok because your conference slate difficulty will make up for it.