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

I agree with the sentiment, but FSU was an independent, while UCF and Boise State both have conference schedules to worry about.  Even without the conference schedule constraint, I also wonder if either one could find 5 major programs to schedule them in each season?  Things are very different now, compared to 4 decades ago.

I voted yes, unless you're one of the top tear helmet schools you have little or no chance of getting to play in the NC with a two or four team playoff.  You can't convince me that the committee is making an unbiased decision of pick between two teams with the same record and comparable wins for the season.  They will always take Alabama or another SEC team over a Wisconsin, Washington or Oklahoma St. because of their past winning history.  I remember when Wisconsin went to the Rose Bowl in 1994.  I think they were tied with Ohio St but since they hadn't been their since 1963 they got to go to the Rose Bowl and play UCLA who just got knocked out of consideration for the NC with a last game lost.  The Media was all over this saying that Wisconsin had no chance in hell beating the almighty UCLA.  UCLA should be in the playoffs or matched with Ohio St. ( Badgers won 21 - 16 )  Now did Wisconsin have the better team in 1994?  Probably not, but that day they did and I think they could have given Nebraska a competitive NC game.  

I think one of the things that bothers us is that the goal posts move from year to year.  Compare Ohio State this year to Michigan State in 2015 for a great example:
In 2015 MSU looked shaky in a number of wins (by 3 over 9-4 Oregon, by 3 over 2-10 Purdue, by 7 over 4-8 RU) and they had a REALLY bad loss (to a sub .500 Nebraska team).  OTOH, they had a win over Ohio State and they were B1G Champions and they get into the CFP with almost no debate.  

It is pretty hard to make a case that 2018 Ohio State was substantially worse than 2015 Michigan State.  Ohio State's loss was worse but their signature win was better (MSU's win over tOSU in 2015 was by a FG at the buzzer, tOSU's win over M was much bigger).  Both were B1G Champions with a group of alarming close-calls against mediocre and bad teams.  

Some people, I think, are troubled that two very similar teams (2015 MSU and 2018 tOSU) get very different results.  2015 MSU got the #3 seed and there was almost no argument to leave them out in favor of any of the top teams left out:

• #5 Iowa was not a Champion and lost H2H to MSU
• #6 Stanford had two losses
• #7 Ohio State was not a Champion and lost H2H to MSU

2018 Ohio State was a very similar team but they finished ranked three spots lower at #6.  

That bothers some people but frankly I think it is what makes the sport exciting.  This year was unusual with three major undefeated teams.  Since the advent of the BCS in 1998 that has only happened twice in 21 years.  

Consider Ohio State's 2018 season over the five years of the CFP so far:

• In 2018 it wasn't enough, obviously.  
• In 2017 it probably would have been enough.  The 4th spot would have been between 11-1 non-Champion Bama and 12-1 B1G Champion Ohio State.  
• In 2016 it clearly would have been enough
• In 2015 it clearly would have been enough
• In 2014 I'm not sure.  The fourth spot would have been between tOSU, Baylor, and TCU just as it was and Ohio State's 2018 record might not have been enough.  

So over the five years Ohio State's 2018 record would have:

• Gotten the Buckeyes in easily twice (2015, 2016)
• Probably gotten the Buckeyes in once (2017)
• Left the Buckeyes just outside twice (2014, 2018)

Yeah, I said all along, even leading into the OSU-UM game that 2015 MSU is who OSU most reminded me of.  They were winning ugly, had one bad road loss (MSU's was a close loss to a bad team, OSU's was a blowout loss to a mediocre team), and ultimately wound up beating the team that probably was the best, and went on to win the conference title.
There were two differences though.  #1, as you pointed out, there was no realistic alternative to MSU.  But #2, is the MSU beat an undefeated #4 Iowa in the Big Ten Championship Game, while OSU beat a 4 loss Northwestern team.  If OSU had played a better CCG opponent, there's a chance they could have leaped Oklahoma.
The other thing is that while MSU was #3, I think that was contrived to get an actual 1-4, 2-3 matchup.  I think everyone thought Alabama was easily the best team, but Clemson was undefeated and Alabama had a loss.  So it was tougher to justify putting Alabama #1 than putting MSU #3.  So they moved MSU past Oklahoma to get what they felt were true 1-4 and 2-3 matchups, although the actual seedings were flipped.

I voted yes, unless you're one of the top tear helmet schools you have little or no chance of getting to play in the NC with a two or four team playoff.  You can't convince me that the committee is making an unbiased decision of pick between two teams with the same record and comparable wins for the season.  They will always take Alabama or another SEC team over a Wisconsin, Washington or Oklahoma St. because of their past winning history.