What Did We Learn About the College Football Playoff This Year?

In a year in which Oklahoma State was a legitimate candidate for the College Football Playoff, it came up well short of the final four. Mike Gundy said on Sunday that does mean the season was a disappointment.

“I don’t see our season as a disappointment,” said Gundy. “I know we all want to make the final four. Winning nine games is difficult. I think the people will be excited about being there (at the Camping World Bowl). I think they’ll be excited about a location where there’s a lot to do. I would be surprised if we didn’t have as much of a fan following as we did a few years ago in Phoenix.”

Two things here. 1. Winning nine games is difficult and 2. Maybe don’t say that less than a week after pitting Tennessee orange against Oklahoma State orange to the tune of $5 million a year following a season in which you were favored in all your games but lost three of them at home.

OK.

Let’s move beyond Oklahoma State and look at the CFP as a whole. Gundy has long said it will eventually move to eight teams, and it will. I don’t know what will push it there. But what we’re doing now is ludicrous, as we all saw on Saturday and Sunday.

Jesse Palmer just said "wins and losses matter more than resume" in case you're wondering if we've reached peak CFP insanity.

— Pistols Firing (@pistolsguys) December 3, 2017

The point is not that Ohio State should have been in the playoff over Alabama. I don’t care about that. You can make a valid argument for either team. The point is that it is complete insanity that we’re allowing a committee of adults to determine which teams get to play for a title.

And this year crystallized something that had been percolating for the last three: There are no set criteria for the playoff, and the CFP Committee will rationalize away any decision they make using any rationale they want. Does it make for great bloggin’ and keep Jesse Palmer’s suits sharp? Sure it does. But is it the best way to determine a champ? Hell no.

Here is CFP Chair Kirby Hocutt on Tuesday, November 28 and Sunday, December 3 explaining the committee’s decision to rank the teams the way they did.

November 28: “Reflecting on the discussions over the last two days, obviously there’s three spots that separate them right there, but it’s close separation from team No. 5, Alabama; 6, Georgia; 7, Miami; 8, Ohio State. Those teams are close. Very little separation in the committee’s eyes between teams 5 through 8.”

Ohio State beats 13-0 Wisconsin in a conference championship game, and this is what Hocutt says on Sunday.

December 3: “We are also instructed that we have the, and I quote again, ‘flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.’ The Committee views Alabama as a non-champion that is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country, and that’s why they are in. The Committee’s conclusion that Alabama is the fourth best team in the nation was widespread and strong. It was unequivocal.”

“Unequivocal,” six days after “very little separation.” One game was played between those two statements … and again, it was an Ohio State win against a 13-0 team!

So what changed? Nothing, only the justification Hocutt needed for Alabama to be No. 4. I don’t blame Hocutt, though. We have charged this committee with selecting the four best teams. I’m not totally sure why we don’t just use a composite of the recruiting rankings and select them in September other than the fact that there is a lot of advertising money at stake for a season that may or may not mean anything.

"I just think Alabama is better."

Why even play the games? Resume > Roster. They didn't beat anyone and didn't win their division.

— Carson Cunningham (@KOCOCarson) December 3, 2017

Why didn’t the committee just select Florida State? We’ve established a precedent that they grade you on a curve when your QB is injured, and FSU has great recruiting classes. Throw them in as well.

The entire exercise is silliness, as Joel Klatt has been pointing out for years.

"Let's just play, turn the scoreboards off, & send the film in to be evaluated. Because that's what happened with this [CFB] committee." — @joelklatt pic.twitter.com/giTj7gcD88

— First Things First (@FTFonFS1) December 4, 2017

the @CFBPlayoff committee has told us
Yr 1 – Championships and 13 data point (sorry Baylor and TCU)
Yr 2 – Head 2 Head and Championship (sorry Ohio State)
Yr 3 – Resume and Good wins (sorry Penn State)
Yr 4 – Just because (sorry Ohio State and USC)

— Joel Klatt (@joelklatt) December 3, 2017

So eventually this entire thing will get bumped to six or eight teams or one of the conferences will be eliminated, and there will be an egalitarian path to the postseason. Eventually. I’m not sure when. It might not be as fun to debate, but it will at least be reasonable and fair. Even if it takes six years to get there.