Bama goes fourth with weak résumé
LET’S be clear: There was no easy answer that would’ve made everyone happy. No obvious choice for the fourth and final spot in the College Football Playoff.
The selection committee was put in a no-win situation, picking among undeserving teams with uneven qualifications for the final spot in the fourteam playoff. They went with one-loss Alabama, despite the Crimson Tide’s paper-thin résumé, despite Nick Saban’s traditional powerhouse lacking one signature victory, and failing to reach its conference championship game.
Criticism followed, because of course it did, and it should. The same would’ve happened if two-loss Ohio State was picked despite Urban Meyer’s team owning top-10 wins over Penn State and Wisconsin. Or USC, which lacked those big wins and had two losses, was chosen. Or anyone else, for that matter.
But fourth-seeded Alabama, which will meet No. 1 Clemson in the semifinals on New Years Day in the Sugar Bowl while No. 2 Oklahoma takes on No. 3 Georgia in Los Angeles, was not the right choice of the underwhelming options presented to the committee. The Crimson Tide’s best victory was over No. 17 LSU, a three-loss team. They didn’t pass the eye test either, certainly not over the last month at least.
College Football Playoff committee chairman Kirby Hocutt said the 13-person panel believed Alabama was better than Ohio State, but that was based on what, exactly? Certainly not performance over the last month, and the résumé definitely wasn’t better. Clearly, the Alabama brand won out, with all those big early-season blowouts against weak teams that made everyone believe in the Crimson Tide’s dominance but didn’t last once the schedule got tougher.
I would’ ve gone with Ohio State for the simple fact the committee has talked up significant wins since the start of the playoff four years ago, because the Buckeyes challenged themselves in the non-conference by scheduling Oklahoma, and won their conference title game, edging previously Wisconsin on Saturday night. Through the committee’s made-for-television rankings, teams with fewer losses weren’t rewarded over others with more impressive wins. It was why Wisconsin and Miami were behind one-loss teams all year, bringing into question why that suddenly changed on Sunday. How does Alabama, ranked fifth on Tuesday, move up without playing a game?
The message sent is poor. After punishing programs for weak non-conference schedules in previous years — hello Penn State a year ago — the committee rewarded Alabama. Basically, it moved the goal posts for Alabama. Yes, Saban did schedule Florida State, a playoff contender before the games began, but the Seminoles flopped after a seasonending injury to Deondre Francois. The Crimson Tide also played Mercer and Colorado State. How can you turn around next year, and punish a team for doing the same?
Look, the Buckeyes clearly had major issues, with two losses in which they were severely outplayed. The point, however, remains: Why play the conference championship games if teams can reach the playoff without qualifying for them? I’ve been a proponent of expanding the playoff to eight teams, and this season is a perfect example for doing so.
If the Football Championship Subdivision can have a 24-team playoff, why can’t the sport’s premier division do a third of that?
Central Florida went undefeated, and has no chance to play for a national title. USC won its last five games, won the Pac-12 crown, and will have to settle for the Cotton Bowl. Was the SEC really that much better than the Pac-12 and Big Ten to where it should have two teams in the playoff, and those conferences be left out completely?
If you expand to eight teams, the five power-conference champions get automatic bids. It leaves two spots for at-large berths, and the best of the smaller conferences gets an automatic invite. It gives the sport a potential true Cinderella story, much like college basketball has every March.
Most of all it avoids a repeat of Sunday, when an undeserving team was selected. It’s time to expand the playoff. Erase the problems that can be easily avoided.