4 loss Auburn is not a top 10 team.
Agreed. Granted according to the committee, 3-loss Auburn was ranked a top-10 team. At the time of determination of the CFP field we can't look ahead to see that Auburn was going to lose to UCF.
Now, was 2-loss Auburn a legitimate #2 according to the CFP committee before the SECCG? That's an interesting debate, but one I don't think it's useful to any of us to get into lol...
bwarb, one nitpick: Bama didn't beat a "terrible 6-6 FSU team" - they beat a full-strength with their QB #3 FSU at the time. Yes, final ranking is more accurate than ranking at the time, but in this case, FSU crumbled bc their backup QB was a 3* true FR.
So yes, Bama scheduled tough OOC as well as OSU did.
If I'm wrong on that one, OK. I don't know how much of FSU's 6-6 finish was due to them not being as good as they were hyped to be vs injury problems. But even with a 2nd string QB taking snaps, there should be enough talent on that team to not finish 6-6. I think they very well might have been highly overrated on opening night.
I was opposed to the expansion of the playoff from two to four teams and I oppose an expansion to six or eight for the same reason: Every expansion of the playoff necessarily dilutes the regular season to at least some extent. The expansion to four made it nearly impossible for a 1-loss team to miss the playoffs. An expansion to eight (with auto-bids for the P5) would make OOC games meaningless and non-divisional games only marginally meaningful.
I believe that the 4-team playoff actually diminishes the value of winning your conference. The committee says it should carry a lot of weight but in both 2016 and 2017 they took non-champs over conference champs. Heck, 2016 Penn State beat eventual CFP participant OSU head to head, but because of a week 2 loss to Pitt ended up not making it into the CFP.
It seems that what matters to the CFP committee is whatever they feel like mattering each year.
An expansion to 8 makes the conference championships meaningful. And if you don't win your conference, I would think OOC games would matter quite a bit to getting your at-large bid.
But no, OSU fans are crying out about fairness this year....with 2 losses.
As the OP, I should point out that I decry the lack of fairness in the system and I am NOT an OSU fan.
I just can't stand the inconsistency in what the CFP committee does, which appears to be whatever the heck they want whenever they want, changing what supposedly carries weight.
To me, it's not national title or bust (which I'll elaborate on later, but don't have time now). I just want meaningful football. A CCG to determine who gets slaughtered by Clemson is still a hell of a lot more relevant than a CCG to determine a conference title, that doesn't really mean anything
Well, the simple fact is that the G5 teams don't really mean anything. They never will. The P5 haven't yet made a move to break off from them, but they certainly make sure that the G5 will never get a seat at the table and do everything they can to keep them out of the power structure.