The final College Football Playoff rankings are out, and according to almost everyone in the media and beyond, there was an absence of controversy this year. Notre Dame tapped out last week and all the conference championship games went to form, leaving a somewhat drama-free, status quo four-team selection with Clemson, Alabama, Michigan State and Oklahoma.
What a difference a year makes.
Okay yeah, this year sorta worked in 2015, but is it going to play out nice and neat going forward? What happened to the outcry of last year? The whole argument that things seem to work themselves out with a four-team playoff doesn’t cut it because it didn’t work itself out last year, and it more than likely won’t work itself out going forward. Three very deserving teams were playing musical chairs for the last spot in 2014, and it was more improbable that we didn’t have something similar this year than what the committee lucked into, with all the results going the way of a smoothly paved roadway.
In reality, we were just one Notre Dame win, or a North Carolina upset of Clemson, away from this whole thing going sideways and people complaining about who got snubbed. Again, I hear you that it didn’t happen, but it easily could have.
Despite the narratives this year, there are still some things to be concerned about, hidden in the weeds of what everyone’s talking about this year.
For starters, the SEC continues to get a perception boost despite being beaten as the No. 1 seed in 2014’s semifinals. This year, Alabama lost to a 9-3 Ole Miss team at home, yet got elevated over unbeaten teams, and teams that have better losses all throughout the season. Why? It’s hard to argue that the Tide shouldn’t be in this year, but what if the scenario played out where Nick Saban’s team was vying for that last spot? Would there really be a fair debate? It’s doubtful.
Then there’s the whole conference championship thing. I have been a big proponent over the years of putting a lot of weight towards being a league champion, but you have to leave some wiggle room. Let’s take Ohio State for example this year.
Somehow lost in all the analysis of the pairings is that Urban Meyer’s team still tied for an East division championship with Michigan State. It couldn’t play for a conference title because of the tiebreaker of losing head-to-head, yet it only lost to the No. 3 CFP team — Michigan State — by three points in a monsoon and wind tunnel.
The Buckeyes have nobody to blame but themselves for losing that night, but Alabama lost a game and still got to play in a conference title game because the league wasn’t good enough to force a tiebreak situation. Had Ole Miss finished the deal in the SEC West, do you really believe the Tide would have been left out because it didn’t win the SEC? Heck to the no. The CFP Selection Committee already laid down the gauntlet by ranking Alabama No. 2 when Ole Miss was leading the SEC West.
Then of course, there’s the issue with only four spots for five power conference leagues to start with. In a world where there aren’t enough head-to-head matchups, it’s almost impossible to determine who’s really the better team, and all you have to do is look at last year when the No. 4 seed won it all. There simply aren’t any apples to apples comparisons, and it’s all guesswork despite what anyone says.
So, why not take some of the hunches and gut feelings out of this thing?
I say let’s go to eight teams.
With eight teams, you can put that big hammer emphasis on winning a conference championship by giving the Power 5 champions the automatic berths into the CFP. That leaves three more spots for wild cards. If a Group of Five team is deserving, so be it. If it’s three others with Notre Dame in the mix, okay.
With eight teams you are more than likely going to include all the teams with one loss as well, so it’ll result in less controversy. Yeah, there’s always going to be the griping and hand-wringing over team nine or ten being excluded, but at that point, if you have a two or three losses, the argument begins to be a little watered down.
The shell is already there. The current bowl structure could still be utilized, and there are plenty of ways to play the first round either on the campuses of the higher seeds, or within the footprint of the bowls themselves.
Oh, and don’t give me the argument of playing more games being logistically daunting or impossible. We’re really only talking about one more game for some very select teams, and you could even pack a bye in the schedule for some of the higher seeds if that’s a huge concern.
I know this is a pie in the sky argument right now. The current contract runs another 11 years, and it’s unlikely any changes are made prior to that. However, we can lay the foundation right now. Remember all the complaining from the purists with a four-team playoff? That seems silly now with the home run we’ve seen, as shown in the television rankings and bales of cash falling out of the sky. The bowls are still intact, and people are traveling and selling out the games.
Still, it can be better.
Go to eight, and you’ll have more games, more intersectional matchups and more storylines. Most of all, though, you’ll have an on-field demonstration of the most deserving teams, not a representation of what we think are the most deserving teams.
*
Phil Harrison is a contributor to The Student Section. He is also the founder of Big10news.com and featured contributor to collegefootballews.com, talking10.com, and occasionally campusinsiders.com. You can follow him on twitter @PhilHarrisonCFB or email him at pharrison28@gmail.com. If that doesn’t work, you can find him in the doghouse at home.
