USA TODAY International Edition
PLAYOFF COMMITTEE FORMS ITS FIRST HUDDLE
Members focus on defining role for 2014 launch
WASHINGTON In its inaugural meeting Monday, the College Football Playoff selection committee did not debate the merits of Baylor vs. Stanford.
“That’s not in the purview of this committee,” said Arkansas athletics director Jeff Long, the committee chairman.
It soon will be, though. Which is why former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she hasn’t necessarily watched more football this season but she has watched “more closely.”
“I think it’s impossible, having been appointed to the committee, not to view football games differently,” Rice said.
Her comments came during a photo opportunity open to reporters during the meeting at the Marriott Wardman Park. Bill Hancock, the executive director of the College Football Playoff, called the committee “a group of all- stars” and said the occasion was “truly a historic day for college football, a signature moment for our game.”
But the committee’s signature won’t come until next season, when it wrestles with issues such as whether one- loss Stanford, which is fourth in the Bowl Championship Series standings, is more deserving of a spot in the four- team playoff than unbeaten Baylor, which is fifth.
Just don’t expect them to broach the issue now. The College Football Playoff’s management committee — the 10 Football Bowl Subdivision- level conference commissioners and Notre Dame athletics director Jack Swarbrick — decided not to have the selection committee do a dry run this season because it didn’t want to damage the legitimacy of the final BCS race. Still, Rice said she is viewing college football through a different prism.
“I try to watch more games — which in my case is almost impossible, since I already watch a lot of football,” said Rice, a former provost and current professor at Stanford who long has had a reputation as a devout football fan. “It’s not so much to say how I would be ranking but, ‘ What ought I to be looking for? What am I really seeing in this game that will help me when we get together for discussion? How am I thinking about what this team is showing on the field and what I see another team show on the field?’
“It’s more like that for me than, ‘ This team I would be thinking of as stronger than that team.’ ”
How committee members will make those assessments remains uncertain. Although they’ll meet several times during the season, issuing four sets of interim rankings before the final decision, committee members won’t be attending games in an official capacity. “We couldn’t decide on which color jacket,” Long said, a joking reference to the colorful blazers worn by bowl representatives. Instead, they’re expected to be provided with condensed versions of game broadcasts.
The committee will be expected to consider factors including conference championships, strength of schedule, head- to- head competition, common opponents and the effects of injuries. Part of the task of the committee, beginning now, is to develop metrics to compare and contrast teams. Also to be determined in the next few months is the committee’s protocol on recusal. Long noted that several members have been associated with more than one school.
Eleven of the committee’s 13 members were present. Archie Manning, the College Football Hall of Fame quarterback and chairman of the board of the National Football Foundation, was unable to attend because of other obligations. Tom Osborne, the former Nebraska coach, athletics director and U. S. congressman, is scheduled to attend today’s meeting.
“We’re excited to begin the process,” Long said. “We know we have more work to do in the first year. … This meeting is really more to get the issues on the table.”
Baylor vs. Stanford wasn’t one of them — not yet. But they know the debate, or one like it, is coming.
“I think there is going to be a lot of times where there is more than one right answer,” said Steve Wieberg, a former college football reporter for USA TODAY Sports, who is on the committee as a former media member. “It will be up to us to come up with the best right answer. And it will be defensible.”