After leading the race for several weeks to host the Mountain West championship game, San Diego State’s football team was unexpectedly edged out when the league’s computer ranking system made its final calculations. Despite a strong finish to the season, the Aztecs fell short in composite metrics that determine the two teams competing for the conference title.
The Mountain West Conference does not rely solely on head-to-head results or win-loss records to determine championship contenders. Instead, it uses a combination of computer rankings from national systems including Anderson & Hester, Colley Matrix, and Wolfe rankings.
When the computers finalized their data, San Diego State ranked just behind rival teams, losing their place in the title matchup. The system’s outcome sparked frustration among fans and even some conference observers, many of whom questioned the transparency and fairness of relying on algorithmic calculations rather than on-field results.
The Mountain West defended its use of the ranking model, explaining that the approach had been publicly established before the season began. Still, San Diego State supporters expressed disappointment, especially given the team’s late-season surge and their belief that the Aztecs had earned the right to compete for the championship based on performance.
Officials declined to release detailed scores from each ranking system, fueling additional speculation about small numerical differences that may have kept San Diego State from advancing.
Despite the setback, San Diego State’s turnaround this season has restored optimism about the program’s trajectory. The coaching staff emphasized using this disappointment as motivation heading into preparations for a potential bowl game and the next season’s campaign.
“We’ve shown a lot of progress this year,” a team source said. “It’s tough to swallow, but the players have every reason to be proud of what they accomplished.”
Author’s Summary: San Diego State narrowly missed the Mountain West title game after computer metrics ranked them just below competitors, sparking debate over fairness and transparency.