Decision That The Committee Finally Has To Make

It's a simple question for the committee:

1 Do you put the best 4 teams in?

or

2. Do you put the 4 most deserving teams in?

I honestly believe it should be the 4 most deserving teams. There have been plenty of examples of teams at the end of the year who were playing better than anyone else, but they didn't deserve it.

1993 Notre Dame was probably the best team in the country that year and beat FSU head to head.

2003 USC could (and does, even though to most of us it's a paper title) argue they were better than either LSU or Oklahoma and would've handled either team.

2004 Auburn absolutely had a claim they were the best team in the country and while USC would've beaten them, they could absolutely claim they would've beaten Oklahoma.

2007 Georgia was absolutely playing like the best team in the country at the end of that year. You could make the argument they beat LSU if they played. No one wanted to play them at the end of the year.

2012 a whole host of teams could claim they were better than Notre Dame that year. Heck 2012 Ohio State could claim they were the best team in the country at the end of the year. Texas A&M beat Bama that year and was playing better than Notre Dame at the end of the year.

But at the end of the day none of those teams got a chance. And they shouldn't have gotten a chance because they didn't earn it. They had the opportunities and blew it. Bama always starts the year with the path right in front of them. Go undefeated and there's no debate. The best 4 is always subjective. Bama fans think they are the best. I think if Texas and Bama played again Texas dominates them again. The most deserving 4 is typically a lot clearer and is the better criteria.

Bama and UGA might still be 2 of the best 4 teams, but neither earned the right to be in the CFP. Neither took care of business. The other teams, whether you all like or not, did take care of business. That still means something.