Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Changed it around so you could time warp back a year ago today.  
It's kinda humorous to me to to hear all of this a year later, now that the shoe's on the other foot.  OSU's resume yesterday essentially mirrored Penn State's last year and frankly was weaker in my opinion (at least PSU got whitewashed by by a Top 15 team, not a 5 loss team).  Wasn't much crying/whining for the Nits as I recall.  
Suck it up, this is how it goes.  PSU has been screwed out of 5 MNC's that I can count, and that doesn't include the right to try and play for one last year.  This is CFB, these are the politics.  

Last year PSU against ranked (final CFP) opponents:

• #3 Ohio State:  Won by 3, home
• #6 Michigan:  Lost by 39, road
• #8 Wisconsin:  Won by 7, neutral
• #23 Pitt:  Lost by 3, road

Last year Ohio State:

• #5 Penn State:  Lost by 3, road
• #6 Michigan:  Won in 2OT, home
• #7 Oklahoma:  Won by 21, road
• #8 Wisconsin:  Won in OT, road

Bama this year:

• #7 Auburn:  Lost by 12, road
• #17 LSU:  Won by 14, home.   
• #23 MissSt:  Won by 7, home 

Penn State has a better argument this year than they did last year.  Last year Penn State's best road win was . . . Indiana?  

Ohio State had a ridiculously tough schedule last year that included three road games against top-10 opponents.  

Bama this year doesn't have a signature win to rival either Ohio State or Penn State in either 2016 or 2017.  

Last year PSU against ranked (final CFP) opponents:

• #3 Ohio State:  Won by 3, home
• #6 Michigan:  Lost by 39, road
• #8 Wisconsin:  Won by 7, neutral
• #23 Pitt:  Lost by 3, road

Last year Ohio State:

• #5 Penn State:  Lost by 3, road
• #6 Michigan:  Won in 2OT, home
• #7 Oklahoma:  Won by 21, road
• #8 Wisconsin:  Won in OT, road

Bama this year:

• #7 Auburn:  Lost by 12, road
• #17 LSU:  Won by 14, home.  
• #23 MissSt:  Won by 7, home

Penn State has a better argument this year than they did last year.  Last year Penn State's best road win was . . . Indiana?  

Ohio State had a ridiculously tough schedule last year that included three road games against top-10 opponents.  

Bama this year doesn't have a signature win to rival either Ohio State or Penn State in either 2016 or 2017.  

Add to that, Ohio State last year had a play in game. Number 2 versus# 3, on the last day of the regular season.    They won and went into the final championship weekend ALREADY in the top 4.  Bama got manhandled on their last week end and went into the final weekend OUT of the top 4.  No comparison.
And comparing PSU last year to OSU this year is nothing short of humorous.  People forget, the debate was Penn State or Washington for that 4th spot.  The committee said they didn't even consider it (OSU or PSU)       But the committee didn't want 2 teams from the same conference ( funny- how that changes this year for the conference that only schedules 8 conference games ). 

we're focusing a lot on Ohio State obviously, but lets not forget. if USC plays Akron instead of ND, then USC is in the playoff as well. 

this is what sucks, teams that challenge themselves, with "true" road games, with multiple tough OOC games or play a 9 league schedule will always be at a disadvantage until the committee has the stones to put a 2 loss team (with a good resume like USC or Ohio State this year) over a 1 loss team and cite specifically it's the 8 game conference schedule and lack of OOC opponents. until then, Bama's doing what's right for Bama. I think it sucks, I think it leads to less a less exciting regular season, I don't think it's particularly fair, but it is what it is. so the PAC, BIG, BIG 12 have to decide, do we all go back to 8 games, scheduling FCS etc? I wouldn't blame anyone for doing so, because the committee's stance on scheduling tough for the last 4 years is pretty BS. 

now, if you're not a helmet, if you're northwestern or something, you're probably in a particular bind, because you gotta go 13-0 if you play a weaker schedule. not fair either, but that's what the committee is saying. 

we're focusing a lot on Ohio State obviously, but lets not forget. if USC plays Akron instead of ND, then USC is in the playoff as well. 

This is exactly what is wrong with what the committee did.  Every AD in the nation now knows two things:

• If USC had hosted Akron instead of travelling to Notre Dame, the Trojans would be a 12-1 P5 Champion in the CFP.  
• If Ohio State had hosted Tulsa instead of playing Oklahoma, the Buckeyes would be a 12-1 P5 Champion in the CFP.  

The committee sent a message loud and clear and that message is that SoS is merely a tiebreaker while number of losses is the #1 consideration.  

This is exactly what is wrong with what the committee did.  Every AD in the nation now knows two things:

• If USC had hosted Akron instead of travelling to Notre Dame, the Trojans would be a 12-1 P5 Champion in the CFP.  
• If Ohio State had hosted Tulsa instead of playing Oklahoma, the Buckeyes would be a 12-1 P5 Champion in the CFP.  

The committee sent a message loud and clear and that message is that SoS is merely a tiebreaker while number of losses is the #1 consideration.  

Interesting in this scenerio, the choices would have been
1.  12-1 Clemson (did not play S Car or Auburn)
2.  12-1 Georgia (did not play ND or GT)
3.  12-1 Oklahoma (did not play ohio st)
4.  12-1 USC (did not play ND or Tex)
5.  12-1 Ohio St (did not play Okie)
6.  11-1 Bama (did not play FSU)
Who does the committe pick?  

Changed it around so you could time warp back a year ago today.  
It's kinda humorous to me to to hear all of this a year later, now that the shoe's on the other foot.  OSU's resume yesterday essentially mirrored Penn State's last year and frankly was weaker in my opinion (at least PSU got whitewashed by by a Top 15 team, not a 5 loss team).  Wasn't much crying/whining for the Nits as I recall.  
Suck it up, this is how it goes.  PSU has been screwed out of 5 MNC's that I can count, and that doesn't include the right to try and play for one last year.  This is CFB, these are the politics.  

hmm... I do recall lots of nittany tears last year. I think they were justified. Last year the committee claimed quality wins, better wins vs. same competition, and 1 loss; trumped head to head and conference title.
This year they are claiming weaker schedule, only 1 loss trumps tougher schedule and conference title. 
Both cases PSU last year, and OSU this year they had an embarrassing loss. I think the committee is saying what Saban said, championship caliber teams don't get embarrassed when they stub their toe. 

hmm... I do recall lots of nittany tears last year. I think they were justified. Last year the committee claimed quality wins, better wins vs. same competition, and 1 loss; trumped head to head and conference title.
This year they are claiming weaker schedule, only 1 loss trumps tougher schedule and conference title.
Both cases PSU last year, and OSU this year they had an embarrassing loss. I think the committee is saying what Saban said, championship caliber teams don't get embarrassed when they stub their toe.

I agree.