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

but, had A&M lost to ND, A&M would still be in the playoff at 10-2

If Texas isn't beating Top 12ish SEC teams, then they're not beating the Ohio States of the world either, so in that case it'd be even better for Texas not to schedule a guaranteed OOC loss.

I think his hypothetical wasn't a Texas team that lost to top-12ish teams it was a Texas team that got an easy SEC draw (al la Ole Miss) and simply didn't get many opportunities against top-12ish teams.  

I do think that is a possibility.  Lets say Texas has something like Ole Miss' schedule:  They win one quality SEC game (say Oklahoma) and lose another (aTm) and don't play ANY other SEC teams with winning records and then they slip up and get upset by a losing SEC team (like UF this year).  Now what?  You have a 10-2 team with one good win (OU) one "quality" loss (aTm), one bad loss (UF) and nine wins over mediocre to bad teams.  That Texas team *MIGHT* get left out but if that Texas team also beat Ohio State (or some other highly ranked OOC opponent) they are almost certainly in.  

It seems like the committee has more-or-less made SoS a tiebreaker among teams with the same record.  So beating a team like Ohio State would help Texas in that it likely makes them the highest ranked _ loss team.  Even losing to Ohio State accomplishes that.  Right now in the AP, Texas is #14 which makes them the highest ranked 3-loss team.  But I already know your answer will be something to the effect that "Yeah, that and $5 will get you a cup of coffee." and that is a legitimate point.  
 
I think with all of this discussion I can conclude that:

• There are potential situations where playing (and winning) a high-end OOC game could help you (ie, OU this year because without that win over Michigan they'd be a LOT more likely to be ranked behind ND, Bama, and even Texas).  
• There are potential situations where playing (and winning) a high-end OOC game really doesn't help (ie, tOSU this year).  
• There are potential situations where playing (and losing) a high-end OOC game really doesn't hurt you (ie, tOSU if they had lost this year).  
• There are potential situations where playing (and losing) a high end OOC game can hurt you (ie, Texas this year because at 10-2 with a home win over GaSo instead of a loss at tOSU they are probably the highest ranked 2-loss team, right ahead of the Sooners whom they beat H2H).  

It seems to me that at this point #1 is less likely than #4 and substantially less likely than the cumulative chances of #2, #3, and #4 which makes it basically a losing proposition.  

I think his hypothetical wasn't a Texas team that lost to top-12ish teams it was a Texas team that got an easy SEC draw (al la Ole Miss) and simply didn't get many opportunities against top-12ish teams. 

I do think that is a possibility.  Lets say Texas has something like Ole Miss' schedule:  They win one quality SEC game (say Oklahoma) and lose another (aTm) and don't play ANY other SEC teams with winning records and then they slip up and get upset by a losing SEC team (like UF this year).  Now what?  You have a 10-2 team with one good win (OU) one "quality" loss (aTm), one bad loss (UF) and nine wins over mediocre to bad teams.  That Texas team *MIGHT* get left out but if that Texas team also beat Ohio State (or some other highly ranked OOC opponent) they are almost certainly in. 

It seems like the committee has more-or-less made SoS a tiebreaker among teams with the same record.  So beating a team like Ohio State would help Texas in that it likely makes them the highest ranked _ loss team.  Even losing to Ohio State accomplishes that.  Right now in the AP, Texas is #14 which makes them the highest ranked 3-loss team.  But I already know your answer will be something to the effect that "Yeah, that and $5 will get you a cup of coffee." and that is a legitimate point. 
 
I think with all of this discussion I can conclude that:

• There are potential situations where playing (and winning) a high-end OOC game could help you (ie, OU this year because without that win over Michigan they'd be a LOT more likely to be ranked behind ND, Bama, and even Texas). 
• There are potential situations where playing (and winning) a high-end OOC game really doesn't help (ie, tOSU this year). 
• There are potential situations where playing (and losing) a high-end OOC game really doesn't hurt you (ie, tOSU if they had lost this year). 
• There are potential situations where playing (and losing) a high end OOC game can hurt you (ie, Texas this year because at 10-2 with a home win over GaSo instead of a loss at tOSU they are probably the highest ranked 2-loss team, right ahead of the Sooners whom they beat H2H). 

It seems to me that at this point #1 is less likely than #4 and substantially less likely than the cumulative chances of #2, #3, and #4 which makes it basically a losing proposition. 

Yeah, absolutely.  It's all just a case of risk analysis.  Where do the risks outweigh the benefits?

but, had A&M lost to ND, A&M would still be in the playoff at 10-2

Would we really?  I can easily see a case where we're not invited, just because our schedule was so weak (says others).  Maybe not in this particular year, but it could happen.  

It's not easy to understand when you're a helmet team.  Non-helmet teams will always be asked to do more.  Look at ND.  They're 10-2, lost both meaningful games, and they're in.  They no more deserve to be in than UT.  

It's very simple. 

• We throw out all except the top 32 teams, and make a league out of them. 
• Separate them into two conferences, with four divisions each. 
• The only play each other; not any of the discarded teams.
• 17 game schedule.
• Play your division mates twice each season, and a collection of other teams once--schedule chosen by the league not the ADs--the rest of the season. 
• Every division leader makes the playoffs. 
• To ensure worthy teams aren't excluded, we'll have 3 additional teams from each conference make the playoffs. I don't like the term "at large", so let's pick something more fun... How about "wild card"?
• The top team in each conference gets a bye. The rest of the playoff games are giving home field advantage to the team with the best record. 
• When we get things down to the end, we'll have the two top teams from each conference play for the College Football National Championship. Wait... That name is WAY too long. But you know, college football used to be all about the bowls. So maybe we'll name a bowl after it. But what term is superlative enough to explain how big of a bowl game this is? Hmmm... Let's go with "Super Bowl".

See! I've just fixed college football. 

gonna need 64 teams

Nah. Anyone below the top 32 CFB programs are basically irrelevant. And why dilute the product more than you need to? 

Anyway, I think we have a new question-- what does the committee do with Ole Miss?

Three seasons ago they ejected Florida State when their QB1 went down.  Would they apply similar logic to a coachless team?

I'm guessing not, but is it possible?

I'm going to join you in guessing not specifically because I think they'll use this the same way they use SoS, as a tiebreaker among teams with the same record.  Thus, I absolutely think that if Ole Miss was 10-2 they would get dropped because there are enough 10-2 teams to fill all the slots without them but luckily for Ole Miss they aren't 10-2, they are 11-1 and there are plenty of slots for all of the 1-loss teams so the loss of their coach may ding their seeding but I do not think it will result in their exclusion.