Chuck Todd: College Football Playoff selection committee dodges controversy by correctly leaving Alabama out
Thanks to a 56-yard game-winning field goal as time expired in the ACC title game, the College Football Playoff dodged controversy.
Thanks to a 56-yard game-winning field goal as time expired in the ACC championship game, the College Football Playoff selection committee dodged controversy and produced a bracket that is as fair as any of us could have expected.
Do I have nits to pick? Of course I do. But thankfully the committee awarded SMU for making it to its conference championship game rather than punish it for losing. As I wrote late last week, the prospect of the committee rewarding a team that lost three games without making it to its conference championship game over another so-called Power 4 team with 10 wins seemed like a bad precedent to set. Clemson’s clutch kick made the debate moot.
Still, we are left wondering: Would the committee have been so generous to SMU had it not come back from a 17-point deficit to tie the game? The fact that the committee chair admitted the committee debated SMU’s losses to ranked teams vs. Alabama’s losses to unranked teams makes me wonder. So, too, does almost putting a nine-win SEC team in over an 11-win ACC team. It’s a bit distressing to fans of football programs not in the two largest conferences.
Had it picked Alabama over SMU, the unintended consequence would have simply been to end the conference championship games altogether. Why play in them if the risk isn’t worth the reward? Fortunately we avoided that scenario.
The question I have is whether the CFP is simply designed to reward the rich and powerful in the sport. I don’t ask it to troll. Every other league or entity that has expanded its playoff has done so to gain interest in the game beyond its usual dominant markets. Look at how the wild card expansion by MLB has improved local TV ratings for more baseball teams with chances to make the playoffs.
Rating: 5