Kirk Herbstreit, Booger McFarland get into pointed exchange in Alabama, SMU College Football Playoff debate

It’s not often that ESPN personalities get into a heated back-and-forth live on air, but given the elevated emotions at stake ahead of another controversial College Football Playoff bracket reveal, it happened Sunday afternoon.

ESPN analyst Booger McFarland opened Sunday’s College Football Playoff Selection Show by echoing a prevailing sentiment that was spreading on social media. McFarland suggested the 13-member CFP selection committee was weighing Alabama‘s “brand” over the substance of SMU‘s 11-2 record for the final at-large bid following the Mustangs’ ACC Championship loss to Clemson on Saturday night.

Ultimately, the Playoff committee only dropped SMU two spots to No. 10 and keeping the Crimson Tide at No. 11, leaving Alabama out of the 12-team field by virtue of Big 12 champion Arizona State and No. 16 Clemson claiming bids as conference championship game winners Saturday.

Not that College GameDay analyst Kirk Herbstreit was going to let McFarland’s apparent dig go without rebuke.

“Right out of the gate, I don’t understand Booger’s comment about brand over last night, I think that’s low-hanging fruit on the internet or social media,” Herbstreit said prior to the actual bracket reveal on Sunday’s show. “To me, it’s very, very clear that … this isn’t easy. The committee is going to lose no matter what they do. You look at SMU, they make it to their conference championship game, they lose on a last-second field goal, they don’t have any wins over anybody in the Top 25. Then you have ‘Bama with the strength of schedule, but then they have a very, very disappointing, almost embarrassing loss late in the year when they’re a three-touchdown favorite to Oklahoma.

“So really there’s no right answer. Normally I’d err on the side of what Coach Saban is saying. Alabama has three wins over teams that are currently in the Top 25, usually that should matter. But that loss, for me, I called the game in Norman, it’s not a great Oklahoma team, and Alabama didn’t just lose that game, they got embarrassed. And I’m guessing that could potentially be an anchor for them that could be tough to overcome. I wouldn’t be surprised if the committee honored SMU because of that loss in Norman late in the year.”

McFarland responded and clarified his earlier point was an attempt at “levity.”

“Yeah, to your point, Kirk, (I’m) just bringing a little levity to the situation. But you’re right, it was maybe a little low-hanging fruit. But at the end of the day we’re having a little fun up here,” McFarland said. “I differ a little bit with you talking about Alabama’s strength of record. They have three losses, and one of those is by 21 points on the road in Norman. Another is to Vanderbilt. So I hear you and Coach (Saban) talk about who we’ve beat. But at some point, it’s hard for me to dismiss those losses out of my mind.

“I get it, the schedules aren’t balanced, teams are playing different schedules. But at some point we have to take a look at who these teams beat based on who’s lined up on their schedule, and that’s why I’m going to lean towards SMU a little bit.”

At that point, both Joey Galloway and Herbstreit jumped in to point out all three were effectively arguing the same point: the games matter.

“I said the same thing,” Herbstreit interjected.

“We’re saying the same thing though,” Galloway said. “We’re looking at who they played. … You guys keep saying (SMU) will get penalized for playing. No, they’re penalized for losing.”

Warde Manuel defends SMU as final seed over Alabama

During a Sunday afternoon appearance on ESPN’s College Football Playoff Selection Show, CFP committee chairman Warde Manuel explained the controversial decision.

“We looked at the number of wins Alabama had against ranked opponents. We looked at SMU’s schedule and they were undefeated in-conference. Their losses were to ranked teams. But we also looked at Alabama’s losses to unranked teams. And it was quite a debate,” Manuel said. “We value strength of schedule. That’s why Alabama as a three-loss team is ranked ahead of other teams that have two losses. It’s something that we talked about quite a bit. But in the balance of it, the way SMU played in that game, losing on a last-second field goal, great win by Clemson, great game. We just felt that in this particular case, SMU still had the nod at 10 above of Alabama. And that’s no disrespect to Alabama’s strength of schedule. It’s merely looking at the entire body of work for both teams.”

Ultimately, the committee valued the Mustangs’ overall “body of work” with 11 wins and an undefeated conference run through its first season in the ACC over a Crimson Tide team that lost on the road to unranked Vanderbilt and Oklahoma, the latter of which was a troubling 21-point loss in a game where Alabama came in as a three-touchdown favorite.