Why not USC? Beat a good Stanford team twice, conference champ (just like the Buckeyes), got waxed once (just like the Buckeyes) but at least their other loss was a nail biter on the road in torrential rain, unlike OSU getting owned on their home field. For Karma’s sake, the Bucks should get passed over like Penn St. last year. And if Florida St had the year that was expected, Bama would have a signature win and this wouldn’t be an argument. Can wait to see what happens.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
USCs fate was sealed when they were placed 10th in the playoff rankings. No real reason why USC and Ohio State couldn't have been in each other's positions. Alabama was placed where they were with intent and purpose. It keeps them in the picture. Could have easily just put Ohio State above them last week and sent a clear message. But they didn't
What the committee seems to try to do is make Championship weekend the 1/4 final round. Problem is, they have 5 power conferences and only 4 slots. So you have to push one of the conferences out of contention before that. In this case the PAC 12.
This would be cut and dried if Ohio State didn't have such a bad season. That brings into play a team like Alabama. Which really shouldn't happen, but does all the time.
In some sense what you want is for the playoffs to be a battle of the power conferences. Each team gets one representative. That's how this was envisioned I think. And on some level, makes sense. EVEN IF those 4 conference champions aren't the 4 best teams. What needs to go is the ranking system. That should only be applicable to teams that don't make the playoffs (well, I guess you need something to seed the 4 playoff teams). Or just have a straight tie in system. Runners up in the Power 5 (and the champion left out) are tied into the next tier of bowls. After that, nobody cares, so let all other bowls basically invite who they want.
The reason why what I say won't work is because what really drives the process is money. And to some extent that is driven by ratings. That's why last year they had to take OSU over Penn State (Imagine if OSU and Penn State traded resumes last year. OSU still would have gotten in). This year, the decision is different because both OSU and Alabama drive ratings.
OSU is not a good team at all and they will get absolutely waxed by Clemson again. Alabama is at least as good as the other 3. And this is pretty common knowledge I'd say. So in this sense, it will be interesting to see which way the committee goes. I'm thinking Alabama to avoid an embarrassing blow out of OSU two years in a row, when both years OSU was questionable to be in the playoffs at all. Looks bad. But, the Big 10 is still powerful, so it's hard to not let them have a representative. The politics might push in OSU and then they just pray OSU doesn't get blown out.
The mistake would be to believe that what ESPN jabbers about as to why OSU or Alabama get in is the actual story. It's not. That's just how the selection is rationalized to the public. But the selection is made for other "behind closed doors" reasons.