When it comes to playoff expansion, here’s a nice example of throwing enough shit rationalizing against the wall until something sticks:
The 2017 season provided an interesting case for the College Football Playoff committee. In years past, the committee’s final rankings were mildly controversial but ultimately understandable. That wasn’t so much the case in December, when three squads were shoo-ins and the fourth spot was completely up for grabs. Alabama had a case (a very, very good one, as it turns out), as did Ohio State, as did USC, as did UCF (although it was largely ignored until after the fact).
With the eventual No. 4 seed Crimson Tide winning it all for the second time—and beating the No. 3 seed Georgia, to boot—there’s a case to be made that these rankings set the cut line for college football’s elite tier too early, and that perhaps those teams left hanging deserve a chance to compete with the best for the title. This year’s postseason, in its aftermath, will only add to the argument for the eight-team field, but after just four seasons of a playoff format that was years in the making, change won’t come too swiftly.
In other words, because number four won the whole enchilada, that’s her case for having an eight-team playoff. Jesus, I can’t wait to see the excuses these people come up with for expanding to sixteen.
By the way, all these people advocating for UCF — how many of them would have bet on the Knights had they faced off against Alabama? Yeah, that’s about what I thought.