One reason our best versus deserving debates over the college football playoff field are so spirited is that the selection committee isn’t as committed to either standard as it pretends to be.
Some of that is due to the hand it’s dealt. By that, I mean conference championship games. It’s worth remembering those were created in a time prior to the BCS or the CFP, and weren’t meant to serve the purpose of separating the wheat from the chaff nearly as much as generating additional revenues for the owners of the sport. (A goal which, I should remind you, is the raison d’etre for all sports in this country above the high school level. But I digress.)
Anyway, that’s why we’re left with lamentations like Pete Fiutak’s.
Georgia lost to LSU by 20. Yeah, okay, but that doesn’t mean it’s not one of the four best teams right now.
For all of the rightful gushing and love given to Alabama for beating all 12 teams on the schedule by more than 20, Georgia has beaten everyone but LSU – I know, that’s sort of a “besides that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?” thing – by 14 or more, and it’s tenth in the NCAA strength of schedule rankings.
It’s not fair that Georgia has to play Alabama in the SEC Championship instead of Pitt, or Memphis, or Northwestern, or in the case of Notre Dame, no one at all. It’s not fair that it’s going to be punished by playing the Crimson Tide – but it doesn’t have to be.
It’s the nature of the beast they’ve created. It’s not intellectually consistent because it’s a patchwork job. The underpinning belongs to each individual conference and Notre Dame, at least in years like 2018, while the structure on top tries to lash all that together with a binding material that, again, is driven by financial considerations as much as anything. That’s an especially difficult construction because there are only four playoff spots for five power conferences and Notre Dame.
I’m not making this point because I’m a Georgia fan worried about his team getting screwed by the selection committee if the Dawgs play a credible game against Alabama — something that hasn’t happened yet this season — but come up just short and receive a New Year’s Day bowl game as a consolation prize. Indeed, if you read Fiutak’s piece, he makes the same argument for Ohio State that he does for Georgia.
But here’s the thing about best. Look at this set of stats and assume Georgia plays well enough in the SECCG to leave the status quo in place.
If that’s a decent measure of quality, Georgia should certainly be in the field of the four best teams in the country, regardless of the outcome of the championship game. Should Oklahoma and Ohio State win their respective conferences, though, there’s no way a two-loss conference championship game loser is going to the semi-finals. Does that make either team better than Georgia? Of course not, but that’s not really the issue.
This is why I keep coming back to the feeling that the playoff field is destined to grow and to grow beyond eight, ultimately. Cinderella will be the emotional factor that some will point to as why that’s a good thing, although it has nothing to do with determining the best.
If we’re looking for fictional character metaphors to illustrate the motivation for expansion, however, I’d suggest Frankenstein. In its case, the whole was something less than its parts. As the powers that be try to please all the various parties with skin in the game — the power conferences, the Group of Six, Notre Dame, ESPN, etc. — what seems inevitable to me is watering down the product in an attempt to satisfy the demands of all.
What we’ll wind up with will be neither solely about the deserving nor the best, but as long as the money flow is there, the people running the show will live with it and bullshit the rest of us.
Get The Picture 
People are too wrapped up in national titles now. The problem with a national title in football is that you have 130 teams and only so many games in a season. It is borderline impossible to determine exactly who the best team is most years, and narrowing it down to four is even iffy. Personally, I preferred the days when winning 9 or 10 games (or 10 or 11 by today’s standards) was considered a good year, and winning your conference was the ultimate goal. National titles were a nice thing to add to your trophy case, but people weren’t obsessed with them. But there’s no going back to that. They might as well go ahead and expand it to 16 now and be done with it.
LikeLike
Indeed. There simply is no other championship that is validated by play on the field. In order to win your conference every single player, coach, coordinator, staff member, etc. has to do their job well. These kids truly own that title. The playoff simply gives a team a trophy because people outside the arena think they can have it.
LikeLike
The worst part about this, to me, is that if we beat Alabama there’s a very good chance we’ll have to beat them again to win the title. Beating any good college team twice is a huge challenge (ask Auburn 2017), but this Alabama team, with this coach, it’s a near-impossible feat.
LikeLike
The nightmare scenario for the anti-playoff expansion cadre (of which I am one) is UGa winning + Oklahoma avenging its in-season loss in a big way + tOSU winning large. If tOSU is left hanging, The B10 will agitate HARD just as it did for the CFP.
LikeLike
and if you take the team rankings from the FPI on team efficiencies, UGA is number 2….it all is a convoluted mess. Not sure if has improved thru the years or not….if it has, not by much. Still too subjective and controversial. Probably at this point, the teams need to be increased. No need for the conference championships if it is all not treated the same….but that ain’t going away, too much money:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/statistics/teamratings/_/tab/efficiency
LikeLike
Spot on, Senator. Georgia is clearly one of the best 4 in the country, playing at a level on par with Clemson and well above Notre Dame, much less Ohio State and Oklahoma. But the piecemeal approach by the various conferences means the path for Georgia is much steeper than those other two.
Here’s the thing: Even if we did have an 8-team playoff, Georgia could still be looking at having to beat Alabama to get a spot. With a L, they’d be on “the bubble.” Everyone assumes the SEC runner-up would be a shoe-in, but would they? You’d have the 5 conference winners getting their automatics. You’d have your G5 representative in spot #6. Notre Dame would be spot #7. That would leave Georgia hoping one of the other conference games didn’t produce an upset winner (say, Pitt) and sliding the conference favorite (say, Clemson) into that final spot. Or imagine Pitt and Georgia both pulling the upsets and the committee having to decide which of the two best teams in the country over the year, Alabama and Clemson, have to sit out the playoffs.
This is why automatic bids for the conference game winner is sheer insanity. No one’s games it out.
LikeLike
Why does an 8-team playoff have to guarantee conference winners? In your scenario Pitt beats Clemson…Pitt with 5 losses would not be getting in with 5 losses.
LikeLike
Because that’s what the P5 commissioners would want as a condition for expansion.
When in doubt, follow the money.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All emotional, ifs and buts aside..if the best four teams are to be chosen..regardless of conference, reputation, fan base, or being a pet of the media, Georgia should get in.
There is no getting around that Georgia is much, much better than ND, who would not even be in the conversation if they were any other team. They are not even top ten.
It’s sad that nothing can ever be done purely and simply.
Who care who it makes happy and who it pisses off? Or who it pays best?
If it’s supposed to be the best four, it should be THE best four..regional bias’ aside.
And I can right now say this……
One of them would be Bama
One of them would be Georgia
One of them would be Clemson
The fourth one is still up in the air..but the first three are obvious and the facts are indisputable to all but the butt-hurt northerners are jealous of and hate the SEC.
But we know that ND MUST get in. I will hope to see them get the living shit beat out of them to the point of embarrassment.
If ‘Bama, UGA, and Clemson aren’t in, the thing isn’t about the best four teams, it’s about appeasement to northern audiences, and ESPN and the ND dreamers.
LikeLike
I can’t help but think back to ND squeaking past Ball St.(24-16), Vandy(22-17) & Pitt (24-19) and realizing that there’s is a different standard. Pitt lost games by 45 and 31 points this season. Ball St. is 4-8. And Vandy is Vandy.
Clearly, for viewership a Midwestern team has to be included.
LikeLike
No one wants to see UGA in and Ohio St out more than me. And I’m a long time Notre Dame hater, as for most of my life they were right behind Auburn as my most hated team. But 2 points:
1) I don’t know that ND still gets the bias they used to. Maybe they do. However, they did play a fairly legitimate schedule. 5 ACC teams, 1 SEC team, 2 Big Ten teams, 2 Pac-12 teams and 2 other non-FCS teams. Most of those teams ended up with middling or disappointing seasons, it’s still not a bad slate.
2) I get the point about championship games, but let me ask this: do you think UGA gets into the playoff last season without the SECCG? Just so you don’t have to look it up, UGA was #6 before that game in the CFP rankings. Again, my point isn’t to support conference championship games or the CFP rankings as I’m pretty much in agreement with the site host on both topics.
LikeLike
You’ll have this same problem with 8, 16, 32, or 64. We’re asking the wrong question. It’s not whether “team x deserves to be in because it’s one of the best 4 teams in the country”. It should be “team x should be in there because if it wins out the clear majority of the country would comfortably regard them as the best.” If you think of it that way there’s no need to keep expanding the field. If we had an 8 team playoff this year and a Texas, LSU, or Washington won it all, I would regard them as merely a good team that got hot or lucky at the right time, not as the best team in the country. If Georgia loses by 7 this Saturday but somehow gets in and beats a banged-up Bama with a lucky bounce and questionable officiating, I might regard them as the best, but I’m not so sure Montana would. Keep the field at 4, and let the 4 teams in that still have something to prove. I say that even if it costs UGA a shot this year.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If after Saturday, Alabama and Clemson are undefeated, Notre Dame is undefeated, Oklahoma and Ohio St have 1 loss, then UGA shouldn’t be in the playoffs. Frankly, I don’t care that I think UGA is a better team than Oklahoma and Notre Dame. 2 loss non-conference Champion should not get in over 1 loss major conference champions. It’s just a bad precedent.
Now if Bama loses to UGA, then good luck figuring out the 4 from the 2 undefeated and 4x 1 loss teams
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Frankly, I don’t care that I think UGA is a better team than Oklahoma and Notre Dame. 2 loss non-conference Champion should not get in over a 1 loss major conference champions. It’s just a bad precedent”.
So you’re saying you don’t think the four best teams should get in? If Northwestern beats OSU, they should be in by your reasoning. And “precedent” is a good enough reason to deny justice (which would be purely giving the BEST four teams a slot). And what conference championship did ND ever win? Their schedule is soft and their performance in games has been lackluster and pitiful. They suck and should not be in.
LikeLike
I think the committee has one charge, put the four best teams into the playoffs. They should weigh everything. Thinking a two loss team shouldn’t be in the four over a one loss team is no different than having a two loss team ranked #7 over a one loss team at #8. Obviously the committee would belive that two loss team to be better. Based on the guidelines the committee has used in past years, conference champions are considered and they matter BUT, based on explainations from the committee themselves, it’s used more in a tie breaker situation where both teams are considered to be even. If one team is definitely better than the other, based on the entire body of work, when they’re grouped together, a mere conference title would not be a deciding factor. If that’s the case, I clearly belive if UGA wins, or doesn’t get throttled in the SEC game, they’ll still be a better team than Oklahoma or OSU based on EVERYTHING. In that case politics is the only reason they should be left out. A tip of the hat to previous committees who’ve shown that they wouldn’t be swayed by politics or conference consideration. If they do the same this year, IMO, UGA could clearly get in, even with a loss. Crossing my fingers, regardless of the outcome, that they simply get it right and put the best four teams in the playoffs, that’s their only job.
LikeLike
Good post 1smartdude, but you kind of gave ND a pass. They shouldn’t even be under consideration. They’re slow, soft and inept. The reason I point this out is so many people seem to have just accepted the fact that they get in just because. Let them get their silly asses kicked by UCF in a bowl game somewhere. I don’t give them a pass because they have struggled against a weak schedule and don’t have to play the extra game.
LikeLike
While I understand the purity, and honesty, in everyone rallying around the concept of identifying the “best” (whether it be the “best” as a champion, or the “best” as an invitee to be in the playoff, whatever the size) but it is the inability to accept this as an impossibility that stops us from getting the national championship format right. With 130 teams, 5 power conferences and 6 conferences a step below as conferences, but not necessarily as teams, and then playing just 12 regular season games, there will always, and I mean always, be a case for a different team than the one that emerges as “the best”, or the “best” 2, or 4, or 6, or 8 teams. Get over that and let the arguments go until next season, just fix the playoff. And for those attempting to make this bigger than 8, you are just trying to dirty the water and distract the discussion. Eight is as large as will work without screwing up the season and changing the economics, not to mention making it logistically impossible.
LikeLike
If there were 8 teams this year I’m sure the committee would find a reason to leave us out even if we lost in 4 OTs to Bama Saturday. Every year that we have had an excellent team since the inception of the BCS we can’t catch a break or get screwed over in some way. Maybe “old Lady Luck” will smile on us this year. No way Notre Dame deserves to get in, especially after Meeeechigan crapped themselves.
LikeLike
dawgfan…that’s damned straight, right there.
ND does NOT deserve to get in.
Screw that “they are entitled” mindset.
Had Georgia or Auburn or any other southern team played that schedule and looked that lackadaisical, they wouldn’t be in.
LikeLike
The best statement I ever heard about making peace with the FBS post-season was actually during the two team BCS era: “Win all your games, or you’re at the mercy of the system.”
That held true for every year of the 2 team system EXCEPT Auburn in 2004 (I believe). It’s an even better philosophy to embrace now, because the odds are much longer that 5 teams go undefeated as opposed to 3 teams.
When you have a loss on the resume, you have only yourself to blame for squandering the only objective measure in determining the best (an unbeaten team). Until I see a Power 5 undefeated team left out, I believe the system works just fine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think you are spot on. And when you look at it that way, 4 is perfect. I’m thrilled with the fact that, even with a loss on our resume, we win and we’re in. If we can’t beat Bama, we’re out. That was almost never the case in the BCS format. It’s as if all the media and fans of teams with 1 loss forgot that none of them would be in the conversation if we were still in a 2 team format.
The BCS yielded very legitimate complaints. 4 fits nicely and doesn’t water down the regular season.
LikeLike
Yep, in the old format Clemson or ND (whoever is 3rd) are praying we knock off Alabama and we basically only play the role of spoiler.
4 is great because, more often than not, the really good teams are going to have their chance at 1 (and only 1) mulligan. Which is better than ZERO room for error and, it’s flip side, over-inclusivity. If you think Bama is in regardless of saturday (probably true), add at least 1 week back and probably 5x the number of games that would be rendered meaningless if you expand to 8. Also, consider those games are the in-state rivalry games. So you either kill those or move them from Thanksgiving week. Talk about killing the golden goose.
LikeLike
How can you look at ND sliding in, almost under the radar since everyone talks about who’s out but they’re never considered “out”, even though they have not played well and are a one loss team that doesn’t play a con-champ game..and say you “believe the system works just fine”?
This is an “entitlement” factor that only ND has. It’s gone on in many different forms for so long (ratings, TV exposure, hype and privileged) that people don’t even see it anymore. Good grief..there are a lot better teams than ND for them to just be handed a slot because they didn’t lose the very close game to Vandy, several other ho-hum programs and did lose to Michigan? The system is OK, but the entitled BS for some schools, primarily ND, needs to go away.
LikeLike
Last time I checked ND was undefeated. They have played a lot of close games against a soft schedule though and the computers generally have them behind UGA.
LikeLike
yeah they beat Michigan… and are undefeated. But your point stands—although i think a hypothetical 1 loss Notre Dame suffers more than another 1 loss team by not having an extra game once “at the mercy of the system.” The real travesty is that it’s not ND vs Ohio State for the B1G title.
LikeLike
If we eliminated the conference championship games and started and 8-team playoff this weekend, what about the excitement for these games: Washington at Alabama
UCF at Clemson
Ohio State at Notre Dame
Oklahoma at Georgia
the winners would advance into the current bowl system. Instead we get to watch Pitt and Northwestern play along with ND getting to sit at home.
LikeLike
Cinderella is NOT a good thing for CFB. The “playoff” was designed to make sure the top 2 teams were represented. Having 4 usually ensures that. This preserves importance of the tegular season and why I love CFB. Screw a 9-7 NY Giants team winning a Super Bowl. Does not = greatness. I hope the playoffnever expands beyond 6…
LikeLike