t this committee has made conference championships meaningless by putting in 2 non conf champs who didn’t even play for that conference championship already. The CCG should be the first step in qualifying you for the playoffs.
Everyone whined and bitched about the B12 not having one and even said “ Until they play one they shouldn’t get in as the 13th data point is the tie breaker”. My how that view changed by Ohio St and Bama fans a few years later. Did you complain about the B12 early on because if you did that makes you a hypocrite.
Should the best teams get in or should the teams that earned their way by playing and beating quality opponents get in?
The estimation of which are the best teams would best be left to bookies, they are right or they are broke. Any time you think they have the wrong team favorite you can bet your house on it, in the long run you will lose.
IMO it should be the teams that earn in by beating quality opponents.
If LSU had lost to UGA and finished 12-1 and 4-1 vs Top Ten teams, maybe LSU woudda deserved to be in over a Clem ACC Champ that lost to UNC and beat no ranked team. Or maybe an undefeated ACC Champ that beat no ranked team, what have they proved other than they can beat scrubs?
Now this year Clemson may be, IMO, the best team in the nation but they have played no one of consequence to earn anything.
Conference Champs aren't necessarily equal. FIVE of the top 13 teams this year are in the SEC. No other conference comes close. LSU beat the other 4, that is earning it, but had Tua not been injured bama might have beat AU and lost only to LSU. That would've, IMO, made them at least as deserving as Clem who beat no one.
My preference, by far, is objective measures.