If, IF the first year of the 12-team playoff gave us our first-ever 3-loss NC, do you think everyone freaks out and tries to change things up?
There are two separate issues here:
- A champion with two or three losses, and
- A really weak NC
A champion with three losses is obviously MUCH more likely because if a team like Georgia, Alabama, or Ohio State loses two or three games they'd still likely finish high enough to get in. Then they'd probably be a road favorite in the first round against a weak league champion and have two more games against relatively equal teams at neutral sites.
The expanded playoff makes a weak NC like BYU in 1984 or a team like TCU last year less likely.
That BYU team beat Michigan in their bowl. Sounds impressive, right? Well based on the program it is, but that particular Michigan team was 6-6. BYU beat them by seven but:
- Iowa blew them out by 26
- Ohio State beat them by 15
- MSU beat them by 12
- Washington beat them by 9
In the BCS era they'd have had to play Oklahoma in the BCSNCG and they'd have been embarrassed.
In the CFP era they'd have had to play #5 Nebraska in the semi-final then the winner of #2 OU or #4 Washington (#3 UF was under suspension) in the CG. Nebraska would have crushed them.
Consider TCU last year but applied to the BCS or pre-BCS era:
In the BCS era they'd have only been two very plausible game changes from an NC:
- If they win the B12CG, and
- UGA loses that close one they had with Mizzou,
In that case the final 1/2 are 13-0 undefeated TCU and M teams and we saw TCU take out M.
In the pre-BCS era it might even be easier. If they win the B12, they go to the Orange Bowl at 13-0. They'd be behind 13-0 Georgia and Michigan teams but Georgia would be in the Sugar Bowl and Michigan would be in the Rose Bowl. They'd just need to beat a weak ACC Champion in the Orange Bowl and have other teams take out UGA and M.
