re: Did College Football Playoff Committee mess up?

quote:

---

I want to see how the committee will explain having Ohio State in the playoffs, but the Big 10 champion (either Wisconsin or Penn State) not in the playoffs. 

If the above occurs, does a deliver the message that conferences are no longer needed and CFP should be from a group of about 40-45 teams?

---

Let's assume OSU beats Michigan and Wisconsin beats Penn State in B1G CG. Ohio State will have 1-loss and wins over Mich (who beat Penn St bigly) and Wisc. Wisc will have 2 losses to Mich and Ohio St and 1 win over Penn St. Ohio St will also have a win over Oklahoma and Wisc will have a win over LSU.

In that scenario, the commitee may feel like Ohio St has a little bit better resume than Wisc along with a head-to-head win over Wisc. In that scenario, the committe may decide that OSU should be ranked in front of Wisc. If the commitee does that, then they have to decide whether or not Wisc should also get in to the top four. That decision should depend on how the resumes of other contenders (Louisville, Washington, etc.) compare to Wisc's resume.

It seems like a lot of people believe that winning a conference championship is a huge criteria to get in, but it's not. It's one of the tie-breakers used by the committee if two teams' resumes are pretty equal. It's quite possible you could have a future situation where two teams in the same conference division have the two best resumes after the CG games are played. Should one of them get left out just because they didn't win a division or conference championship?