Auburn is Bowling in Nashville; Did the Playoff Committee Get it Right?

WARNING: I AM AN AUBURN FAN THAT WILL BE DIRECTLY CRITICIZING THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION TO PUT ALABAMA IN THE PLAYOFF. IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR "UNBIASED" CONTENT, PLEASE DO NOT PROCEED.

The conference championships have been completed, and it is now time for bowl season. Auburn will be taking on Maryland in the Music City Bowl in Nashville, TN. I like this draw for us, as it will likely be somewhat of a home game for the Auburn Tigers. I hope that Freeze is able to get some younger guys reps and experiment a little with those that will potentially be contributing pieces for next year's team. I would like to win, of course, but I am more interested in the development and future of this program. I'm happy to see Auburn bowling again.

Now, let's discuss the "elephant" in the room. (see what I did there)

The playoff committee met and made their final decision for who will compete in the College Football Playoff this year. It will be #1 Michigan vs #4 Alabama, and #2 Washington vs #3 Texas in the semifinal round. Undefeated Florida State was dropped to #5 after winning the ACC championship. I will go ahead and tell you, I think the committee made the wrong decision, and I will explain why momentarily. I think that Florida State should have gotten the #3 spot, with Texas at the #4 spot. Obviously, this will just seem like I am lobbying for any reason to keep Bama, Auburn's biggest rival, out. However, I think my reasoning behind WHY Florida State and Texas belong makes plenty of sense. It isn't just a matter of "I don't like Alabama."

Here is why (in my own humble opinion) the order should have been #1 Michigan, #2 Washington, #3 Florida State, and #4 Texas.

#1 and #2 are pretty self-explanatory. After that, it gets tricky. It becomes a matter of what you value at that point. The committee made it clear this weekend that they value the current state of a team rather than their record. Here is why that is flawed. At the point where you decide you "think" that Alabama is better than Florida State, you are injecting your persoanal opinion into the argument. When it becomes about opinions over facts and concrete evidence, that allows room for variance in your decision. Variance allows for mistakes. The reality is, nobody knows whether Alabama is better than Florida State or not. Maybe it's that Florida State's defense is too much for Bama to handle. After all, they were able to slow down LSU's offense in the season opener, which would eventually turn out to be the most powerful offense in college football. Maybe it's that with a month of practice and preparation under his belt, FSU's backup quarterback is able to get comfortable in the system and with his receivers. After all, if you are going to argue that Alabama quarterback Jalen Milroe has progressed so much this season, you have to also believe that FSU's quarterback can progress with this month of preparation, right? Nobody can say with 100% confidence that Alabama is better than Florida State at this point in time. If you think that they are, that is your opinion. What is NOT an opinion is that FSU is an undefeated, power-five conference champion. The committe would not have had to run mental laps trying to justify the decision to put FSU in. All they would have to say is, "they are undefeated conference champions." I do not want to hear about how weak the ACC is either, as FSU finished 2-0 against SEC teams, and the ACC as a whole finished 6-4 against SEC teams. You can say that the ACC beat up on the weaker SEC teams, but at that point, aren't you challenging the integrity of the SEC as a whole? Doesn't that make being an "SEC Champion" less impressive?

I've seen many people arguing that nobody is saying that Texas, who is also a one-loss team, should not be in over FSU, which is showing that people just don't want Bama in. Let me tell you why that logic is flawed. There are three undefeated power-five conference champions. Michigan, Washington, and FSU. That leaves one spot for a one-loss team of your choice. There happens to be two one-loss, power-five conference champs -- Texas and Alabama. These two teams also happened to have played head-to-head earlier in the season. Texas won. Both have impressive resumes, both are power-five conference champs, but Texas won the head-to-head AT Alabama by double digits. Therefore, they get the nod for the fourth spot. Pretty simple logic there. That is why nobody is arguing about Texas over Florida State.

I have also seen people arguing that if undefeated teams deserve a chance to compete for a championship, why did Liberty not receive consideration? Let me tell you why that logic is flawed. The simple answer is, while they are in fact conference champions, they are not power-five conference champions. I'll go a little more in depth, and even offer a comparison. Liberty's strength of schedule was ranked 132nd out of... 133 FBS teams. They did not play a single power-five opponent. They have not proved that they can compete with the best of the best. They will get the opportunity to prove they can compete with the best of the best against Oregon in the Fiesta Bowl, and if they win that one, we will have another 2017 UCF situation on our hands. Florida State has proven that they can compete with the best of the best, beating two current top-25 teams convincingly, including LSU by 21 points. They also ran the table in the ACC, who finished what against the all-powerful SEC? 6-4. Here is my comparison for Liberty. Why is Bill Russell not considered the GOAT of basketball? He has the rings, right? The big argument for Michael Jordan is that he has more rings than Lebron, so why is Bill Russell not the GOAT since he has more rings than both? It is because his resume as a player is not comparable to the other two. He is a winner, but his statisics and talent are not equivalent to the real GOATs like Jordan and Lebron. Liberty is in the same boat. They won all their games, but their metrics and talent-level just don't compare to the big dogs.

The main argument for leaving Florida State out is that their star player, quarterback Jordan Travis, is out with an injury. Let me tell you why this should not have led to the demise of FSU's title chances. My first argument is that FSU is 2-0 with their backup quarterback. Their first win came against Florida in The Swamp. "But Will, Florida finished 5-7, that isn't an impressive win." I don't think I need to remind anyone what it took for Alabama, who is now in the playoff, to beat a 6-win Auburn team in Jordan Hare. Rivalry games on the road are not easy, no matter your opponent's record. FSU gutted out a 9-point win on the road agianst Florida with their backup QB. That would have been a solid win even with Jordan Travis. FSU then went on to beat Lousville in the ACC Championship by 10 points with their THIRD-STRING QB. "But Will, their offense looked terrible, nobody wants to see that product in the playoff." If anyone actually bothered to pay attention, you would notice that FSU's second-string qb, Tate Rodemaker, was sidelined for the Louisville game due to concussion symptoms following the Florida game. Rodemaker looked significantly more comfortable in his game action than third-string QB, Brock Glenn. Rodemaker would obviously be healthy for the playoff games. Therefore, the lack of offense in the Louisville game seems like somewhat of an irrelevant issue to point out in my opinion.

Many people say that the playoff should include the four "best teams" rather than the four "most-deserving teams." Let me tell you why the playoff committee has debunked that theory. If it were truly meant for the best four teams to be in the playoff, then Georgia would have been included. "But Will, they didn't even win their conference championship." If you're gonna argue that, then you're arguing that winning a conference championship makes you...deserving of a playoff spot. Now we've come full circle, back to most deserving. Tell me right now, who would be favored in a matchup of Georgia vs. Washington? It would be Georgia, probably by double digits, end of story. So, if your argument is that the "best" four teams belong in the college football playoff, Georgia has to be included. Clearly, they are not, so the committee has not followed this policy.

I have laid out for you every reason why I believe FSU belongs in the playoff. If this had been an objective process, FSU would be in, end of story. However, the committee has inserted their subjective opinion into the mix, and have now laid the blueprint for getting into the playoff if you are a fringe team. Just pay off some team to purposely injure a playoff contender's star player, ending his season and apparently the team's playoff hopes. Jordan Travis competed agianst a lower-level team on senior day because he loves Florida State, and this decision ultimately cost his team a chance to compete for a championship.

In my opinion, the playoff committee made a mistake.