FBS Committee Rankings

[mauf]

Here they are. Aggie at #4 is obviously the big surprise.

College Football Playoff Rankings
RK TEAM REC
1 ALA 8-0
2 CLEM 8-0
3 MICH 8-0
4 TA&M 7-1
5 WASH 8-0
6 OSU 7-1
7 LOU 7-1
8 WIS 6-2
9 AUB 6-2
10 NEB 7-1
11 FLA 6-1
12 PSU 6-2
13 LSU 5-2
14 OKLA 6-2
15 COLO 6-2
16 UTAH 7-2
17 BAY 6-1
18 OKST 6-2
19 VT 6-2
20 WVU 6-1
21 UNC 6-2
22 FSU 5-3
23 WMU 8-0
24 BSU 7-1
25 WSU

 

[snowmanny]

I suppose they decided there's no penalty for losing to Alabama. If Alabama loses a game I suspect it would drop A&M as well.

 

[mauf]

Judging by this weekend's lines, the gambling community thinks the Committee is overrating Aggie, Nebraska, Florida, Florida State and Oklahoma State, and is underrating Washington, tOSU and Auburn.

 

[RingoOSU]

I don't understand what OU has done to still be ranked besides lose to Ohio State to up its SOS. They've beaten 0 top 30 teams and lost to Houston. Ok State might be overrated as well but at least they beat a team o overrated at 10.

 

[Ale Xander]

It's pedigree/reputation bs

Rankings don't matter until the last one

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

A&M is done and I'd be fine if that is the end of the shakeup. As a Clemson fan, I'd much rather see Mich or Wash, than OSU or Louisville again.

 

[Infield Infidel]

1 ALABAMA 12-0
2 OHIO STATE 11-1
3 CLEMSON 11-1
4 WASHINGTON 11-1
5 MICHIGAN 10-2
6 WISCONSIN 10-2
7 PENN STATE 10-2
8 COLORADO 10-2
9 OKLAHOMA 9-2
10 OKLAHOMA STATE 9-2
11 USC 9-3
12 FLORIDA STATE 9-3
13 LOUISVILLE 9-3
14 AUBURN 8-4
15 FLORIDA 8-3
16 WEST VIRGINIA 9-2
17 W MICHIGAN 12-0
18 STANFORD 9-3
19 NAVY 9-2
20 UTAH 8-4
21 LSU 7-4
22 TENNESSEE 8-4
23 VIRGINIA TECH 9-3
24 HOUSTON 9-3
25 PITT

Nothing really surprising. WMU in the top 20

 

[Awesome Fossum]

Navy is closing the gap on Western Michigan in the race for the Cotton Bowl. If Navy beats 9-3 Temple and 6-5 Army while WMU beats 8-4 Ohio, it's going to be interesting.

 

[Awesome Fossum]

double post

 

[BigMike]

Navy is closing the gap on Western Michigan in the race for the Cotton Bowl. If Navy beats 9-3 Temple and 6-5 Army while WMU beats 8-4 Ohio, it's going to be interesting.

I just can't imagine the committee letting that happen. Heck Navy might be better, but really since it is all mostly irrelevant after the top 4, they really should have WMU about 5 spots higher, no real reason to put them behind 4 loss Auburn, Louisville, etc.
No WMU wouldn't beat those teams, but they probably wouldn't beat Stanford, LSU, VT either

 

[mauf]

Not much here that we didn't know.

-- Alabama, Clemson and Washington control their own destiny.

-- If Clemson or Washington falls, the B1G gets two teams in, with both tOSU and the B1G champion making it.

-- If Clemson and Washington both lose, the Final Four is Bama, tOSU, the B1G champ and Colorado. Doesn't seem to be a path to the Final Four for OU or OKSt.

-- If Bama/Clemson/Washington all win, the only question is whether the B1G champ leapfrogs tOSU. I can't imagine Wisconsin would; PSU is harder to read because of their H2H win.

-- Not clear how far Bama falls if they lose.

 

[Awesome Fossum]

I just can't imagine the committee letting that happen. Heck Navy might be better, but really since it is all mostly irrelevant after the top 4, they really should have WMU about 5 spots higher, no real reason to put them behind 4 loss Auburn, Louisville, etc.
No WMU wouldn't beat those teams, but they probably wouldn't beat Stanford, LSU, VT either

I suspect you're right. But I would argue that the logic used to rank Louisville and Auburn ahead of WMU today is the same logic that ought to rank a 12-2 Navy ahead of a 14-0 WMU: the better team should be ranked higher.

 

[luckiestman]

Not that it really matters but what is the logic of Louisville lower than the Noles by one spot? They pasted us, it was ugly.

 

[troparra]

-- If Clemson or Washington falls, the B1G gets two teams in, with both tOSU and the B1G champion making it.

Why the B1G champion and not Michigan? The committee seems to be bending over backwards to say there's a very small separation between Washington and Michigan. If Washington loses, it seems Michigan takes their spot.
This would be extremely awkward, though. Essentially you would have the 2nd place and 3rd place teams in the Big Ten East (and 3rd and 4th place teams in the conference as a whole) making the playoffs, while the champ gets left out despite a better record (i.e. 11-2 vs. 10-2). Plus, there's the Big 12 reinstating their championship game next year because of how everybody kept stressing the importance of the mighty championship game. Then less than two weeks after the Big 12 announces their resurrected championship, it's possible that two non-conference champions from the same conference get selected for the playoffs.
College football is screwed up.

 

[mauf]

Not that it really matters but what is the logic of Louisville lower than the Noles by one spot? They pasted us, it was ugly.

Might be an oversight on the Committee's part, but maybe it means H2H records aren't a major factor in their deliberations.

 

[loshjott]

Why even bother ranking beyond say the top 10? Do the bowls outside the semis take any of this into account?

 

[kenneycb]

Why the B1G champion and not Michigan? The committee seems to be bending over backwards to say there's a very small separation between Washington and Michigan. If Washington loses, it seems Michigan takes their spot.
This would be extremely awkward, though. Essentially you would have the 2nd place and 3rd place teams in the Big Ten East (and 3rd and 4th place teams in the conference as a whole) making the playoffs, while the champ gets left out despite a better record (i.e. 11-2 vs. 10-2). Plus, there's the Big 12 reinstating their championship game next year because of how everybody kept stressing the importance of the mighty championship game. Then less than two weeks after the Big 12 announces their resurrected championship, it's possible that two non-conference champions from the same conference get selected for the playoffs.
College football is screwed up.

Well the 6/7 team would have another top 10-15 win plus a conference championship, so presumably that will put them ahead of Michigan.

 

[mauf]

Why the B1G champion and not Michigan?

By its words and its history, the Committee has communicated that conference championships are important. Have to imagine a B1G title will be more than enough to vault Wisconsin, Penn State, or (less clearly) Colorado ahead of a 2-loss Michigan team.

Stated another way, the current rankings don't account for the fact that tOSU and Michigan don't have the opportunity to secure a conference championship, but I think both teams will be leapfrogged next week by teams that do win their conference championships.

 

[Zososoxfan]

From CBS article regarding CFP Chairman Kirby Hocutt's commentary:

But the biggest takeaway Tuesday is how much Hocutt stressed that the gap between Washington and Michigan is "very, very small" and it's the committee's job to pick the four best teams. Hocutt said the committee spent about two hours comparing Washington and Michigan.

"I know there were a number of selection committee members that were really struggling between who was the better team," Hocutt said.

Why does this matter? Because the window seems to be left wide open for Michigan, whose regular season is over, to get into the playoff. Hocutt said the Wolverines played an "impressive" game by losing in double-overtime at Ohio State.

[snip]

But what if Colorado wins? Michigan would have beaten the Pac-12 champ (Colorado) and the Big Ten champ (No. 6 Wisconsin or No. 7 Penn State) [and obviously the runner up]. What if Clemson loses to Virginia Tech? Michigan is still sitting at No. 5 to possibly stay ahead of the Big Ten champion.

The committee doesn't add whatever value it deems appropriate for winning a conference title until it happens so that's an X-factor. Hocutt continued to stress that when there's little to no separation when comparing teams, the committee looks at four metrics: conference champions, strength of schedule, head-to-head matchups and results against common opponents. Each member decides which criteria to emphasize more or less.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/cfp-chairmans-remarks-show-why-michigan-is-still-alive-with-some-help/

The article then goes on to talk about wins vs. top 10, top 25, and SoS. What stands out IMO, is that UM is 3-1 vs. the top 10 compared to Wiscy (0-2) and PSU (1-1) (both records prior to the championship game). So, if Wiscy wins, I think the argument is pretty strongly in UM's favor (within the Big10, I won't get into comparing that to OU). If PSU wins, the CFP committee will just have to take the noble high road and screw them over.

 

[mauf]

It's hard for me to construct a scenario in my head where Michigan finishes higher than #5. They won't finish ahead of tOSU, and I can't imagine the Committee would put them ahead of a B1G champion with the same record, H2H wins notwithstanding. And no matter what the Committee says about picking the best four teams, they won't pick three B1G teams -- in a chaos scenario, they're going to swallow hard and put Colorado ahead of Michigan for that fourth spot, even if they believe in their hearts that UM is the more deserving team (which they arguably would be).

 

[Average Reds]

It's hard for me to construct a scenario in my head where Michigan finishes higher than #5. They won't finish ahead of tOSU, and I can't imagine the Committee would put them ahead of a B1G champion with the same record, H2H wins notwithstanding. And no matter what the Committee says about picking the best four teams, they won't pick three B1G teams -- in a chaos scenario, they're going to swallow hard and put Colorado ahead of Michigan for that fourth spot, even if they believe in their hearts that UM is the more deserving team (which they arguably would be).

Agree with this 100%.

The scenario we have this year was clearly not anticipated, but there is no way they can have two Big 10 teams in the playoffs and neither of them are the conference champ.

I mean, they could, but I'm not buying it.

 

[BigMike]

We can talk about how the early rankings mean nothing, but in the end they are pretty critical. The committee clearly makes it's mind up early and then only tweaks as the weeks move on.

In the 4 weeks between the 2 bowls posted only 5 teams were added to dropped out of the top 25. And USC at #11 from unranked was by far the biggest climber

Nebraska was the big loser dropping from #10 to out of the top 25 based on losing 3 of their last 5 with 2 blowouts along the way

Louisville's last couple of UGLY losses only drops them 6 spots.

 

[troparra]

As for a B1G champion leapfrogging Michigan, it doesn't sound like Penn State will be the one to do that:
http://pennstate.247sports.com/Bolt/Unfortunate-what-the-selection-committee-is-doing-to-Penn-State-49400310

“As I said last week, Penn State remains at the No. 7 spot and Ohio State at the No. 2 spot, nothing’s changed,” College Football Playoff selection committee chairman Kirby Hocutt said during ESPN's Playoff reveal show. “They’re not close in the eyes of the selection committee.”

Rece Davis asked Hocutt if there was any chance Penn State could leap Michigan and get to the No. 4 spot by beating Wisconsin.

Sure didn't sound like it.

"We don’t look ahead, but we’ve seen some crazy things happen in this college football season,” Hocutt said. "We’ve seen a weekend where three of our top four teams got bet. It’s hard to project what can happen. Again, I want to emphasize, our protocol is to select the four very best teams in college football. When the selection committee believes there are comparable teams, when two teams with razor-thin margins between the two are comparable, that’s when we go to the protocol and the metrics being conference championships, strength of schedule, head to head and outcomes against common opponents.

This comment about "the four very best teams", to me, strongly suggests Michigan is the one to get in should Washington lose.

 

[tims4wins]

I mean, I don't think Michigan would deserve it either, but they kicked the ever living shit out of Penn State. It was not a contest. Maybe if Wisconsin wins they could pass Michigan since it was only a 7 point game, and it was in Ann Arbor. I'd be ok with that, I think. But Penn State shouldn't jump Michigan, IMO.

 

[Infield Infidel]

Why even bother ranking beyond say the top 10? Do the bowls outside the semis take any of this into account?

There are a couple things to look at outside the top 10. There are 6 NY6 bowls, so 12 bids, so at least two teams outside the top 10 get bids. The highest mid-major goes to an NY6 bowl. Right now that's Western Michigan. If they lose and Navy wins out then Navy likely jumps them.

 

[Zososoxfan]

I mean, I don't think Michigan would deserve it either, but they kicked the ever living shit out of Penn State. It was not a contest. Maybe if Wisconsin wins they could pass Michigan since it was only a 7 point game, and it was in Ann Arbor. I'd be ok with that, I think. But Penn State shouldn't jump Michigan, IMO.

It will feel beyond dirty to root for PSU and I don't know that I can actually bring myself to do it, but I agree with this. Even the Wisco game wasn't as close as the s core indicates with UM's kicker Kenny Allen having the yips and missing 2 (IIRC) short range FGs that day. If the Committee wanted to, they could argue UM > Wiscy regardless because they would be 1-2 vs. the top 10 and common opponents could come into play if they don't destroy PSU.

 

[Infield Infidel]

I mean, I don't think Michigan would deserve it either, but they kicked the ever living shit out of Penn State. It was not a contest. Maybe if Wisconsin wins they could pass Michigan since it was only a 7 point game, and it was in Ann Arbor. I'd be ok with that, I think. But Penn State shouldn't jump Michigan, IMO.

Yeah, I think Wisconsin could jump Michigan, especially if they win in a blowout.

Interestingly, the way division champs are decided is kind of arbitrary. Like, if this was NFL or NBA, Ohio State would have won the division since they had a better overall record. So I get the committee's hesitancy to put division champs ahead of other teams that had better overall record before the conference title game. It would be tough to put two teams over a conference champ, but if they look at SoS, H2H, only Penn State out of the four teams got lost a non-close game.

One thing that makes it tough is that the divisions are too big. I remember back in the 16-team Big East basketball days, the tournament committee would talk about how they had to compare conference schedules because the teams within a conference would play very different conference schedules, playing 3 teams twice and everyone else once. It's getting that way with college football, since the Big 10 teams have very different league schedules. They went part way with deregulation last year to allow leagues with less than 12 teams to have a title game. But ACC wanted to allow leagues to have more than 2 divisions, but it didn't pass. You could see how, if that happened, lets say a league has 16 teams in four four-team divisions. 3 divisional games, and then two games each against the other 3 divisions. Everyone would play each other more often and it'd be a little easier to compare conference schedules.

 

[mauf]

As for a B1G champion leapfrogging Michigan, it doesn't sound like Penn State will be the one to do that:
http://pennstate.247sports.com/Bolt/Unfortunate-what-the-selection-committee-is-doing-to-Penn-State-49400310

This comment about "the four very best teams", to me, strongly suggests Michigan is the one to get in should Washington lose.

I read that statement as saying PSU will be on the outside looking in if the teams ahead of them all win -- the conference championship and H2H win won't vault PSU over tOSU. Which is interesting, as I thought that was the biggest wild card heading into next weekend. I thought Hocutt dodged the question about Michigan; the PSU-fan author of the linked article is just climbing up on his cross preemptively on that one.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I mean, I don't think Michigan would deserve it either, but they kicked the ever living shit out of Penn State. It was not a contest. Maybe if Wisconsin wins they could pass Michigan since it was only a 7 point game, and it was in Ann Arbor. I'd be ok with that, I think. But Penn State shouldn't jump Michigan, IMO.

I generally agree but.....and I can't believe I am saying this....both of UM's losses this season were very, very close, whereas UW got pounded by USC. Clemson's loss to Pitt wasn't pretty, but it was a one point game. There are style points in college football and while I think UW deserves to be in the playoff, UM jumping them should they lose another game wouldn't be the biggest travesty.

 

[tims4wins]

I generally agree but.....and I can't believe I am saying this....both of UM's losses this season were very, very close, whereas UW got pounded by USC. Clemson's loss to Pitt wasn't pretty, but it was a one point game. There are style points in college football and while I think UW deserves to be in the playoff, UM jumping them should they lose another game wouldn't be the biggest travesty.

Right. I wonder what Michigan would be ranked had they beaten Iowa but still lost to OSU. 3? Losing to OSU was better than Clemson losing to Pitt since A) road and B) OSU >>> Pitt

 

[Infield Infidel]

Right. I wonder what Michigan would be ranked had they beaten Iowa but still lost to OSU. 3? Losing to OSU was better than Clemson losing to Pitt since A) road and B) OSU >>> Pitt

I think Michigan would be 3, but would they have won the division in a three-way tie? If so they'd have another game to play against Wisconsin. A win and they'd play Ohio State again (they would be 2 and 3 in whichever order). A loss and, would they be out? Interesting to think about.

edit- looked it up, Ohio State would have won the division tie-breaker. Penn State would be eliminated on 5th three-way tie-breaker (best overall win%) and Ohio State wins 1st tiebreaker H2H with Michigan.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Right. I wonder what Michigan would be ranked had they beaten Iowa but still lost to OSU. 3? Losing to OSU was better than Clemson losing to Pitt since A) road and B) OSU >>> Pitt

Agreed, although you also have that "late in the season loss" factor. They could be 4 with Clemson at 3......either way, absent the Iowa loss I think UM is in the playoffs, pushing out UW.

 

[tims4wins]

Agreed, although you also have that "late in the season loss" factor. They could be 4 with Clemson at 3......either way, absent the Iowa loss I think UM is in the playoffs, pushing out UW.

Agreed, and I think the committee would put them at 4 specifically to avoid a re-match in the semis

 

[snowmanny]

Boy, I figured that Michigan was going to get jumped by the eventual Big 10 champion because once that game is over Penn State/Wisconsin would gain lots of committee points by virtue of winning a conference. I'm surprised that may not be the case. Does that mean three Big10 teams could make it if Clemson and Washington lose? If that happens can I watch a live feed of Paul Finebaum's bulbous bald head exploding?

 

[mauf]

I generally agree but.....and I can't believe I am saying this....both of UM's losses this season were very, very close, whereas UW got pounded by USC. Clemson's loss to Pitt wasn't pretty, but it was a one point game. There are style points in college football and while I think UW deserves to be in the playoff, UM jumping them should they lose another game wouldn't be the biggest travesty.

Oh heavens, Washington will definitely fall behind Michigan if they lose to Colorado. The only question is whether Colorado and the B1G champion leapfrog UM in that case.

 

[Infield Infidel]

I generally agree but.....and I can't believe I am saying this....both of UM's losses this season were very, very close, whereas UW got pounded by USC. Clemson's loss to Pitt wasn't pretty, but it was a one point game. There are style points in college football and while I think UW deserves to be in the playoff, UM jumping them should they lose another game wouldn't be the biggest travesty.

While USC's 26-13 win over Washington was decisive, I wouldn't say it was a blowout. It was 17-13 after three quarters, anybody's game, then USC got a TD and a safety. It's more like Colorado's 45-28 loss to Michigan, a game Colorado was in until the third, as opposed to Penn State's 49-10 loss to Michigan.

I think it breaks down like this for each team to get to top 4

Bama: in win or lose
Ohio State: in
Clemson: in with a win, out with a loss
Washington: in with a win, out with a loss
Michigan: in if Clemson or Washington lose and Wisconsin doesn't blowout Penn St; or if Clemson and Washington both lose
Wisconsin: in if they blowout Penn State, and Clemson or Washington lose; or with a win and both Clemson and Washington lose.
Penn St: In with convincing win over Wisconsin, and Clemson and Washington lose
Colorado: In if they beat Washington, and Clemson loses, and the Big 10 title game is a close Penn St win.
Oklahoma/Okla St: only chance is if they get a blowout win, Clemson loses, the Pac12 title game is a close Colorado win, and Big10 title game is a close Penn St win. Even then probably not.

I think Penn St and Colorado have a ceiling of #4 because Michigan would be #3 by virtue of H2H wins by 3+ scores. Only team that I think could jump Michigan is Wisconsin

 

[Was (Not Wasdin)]

Hard to believe that exactly a month ago TAMU was sitting at #4, with the obligatory loss to 'Bama out of the way, and likely in control of their own destiny. Man, did they choke down the stretch.

 

[mauf]

Hard to believe that exactly a month ago TAMU was sitting at #4, with the obligatory loss to 'Bama out of the way, and likely in control of their own destiny. Man, did they choke down the stretch.

I'm not sure if they choked, or if they simply weren't very good. UCLA, Auburn and Tennessee looked like quality wins at the time, but only the Auburn win looks remotely impressive now.

Edit: I say that as someone who totally drank the Kool-Aid and thought Aggie was a top-10 team.

 

[Was (Not Wasdin)]

I'm not sure if they choked, or if they simply weren't very good. UCLA, Auburn and Tennessee looked like quality wins at the time, but only the Auburn win looks remotely impressive now.

Edit: I say that as someone who totally drank the Kool-Aid and thought Aggie was a top-10 team.

Fair point, I probably shouldn't have used choked, I'm in the "they are not that good" camp. But they were set up really nicely, with 3 straight home games to end the year after Miss. State, and really were in a good position to land in the playoffs.

 

[Was (Not Wasdin)]

Double Post

 

[Infield Infidel]

Not that it really matters but what is the logic of Louisville lower than the Noles by one spot? They pasted us, it was ugly.

Oh man I just realized this means FSU will get the Orange Bowl bid over Louisville unless Virginia Tech gets the bid by winning the ACC title game.

 

[luckiestman]

Oh man I just realized this means FSU will get the Orange Bowl bid over Louisville unless Virginia Tech gets the bid by winning the ACC title game.

Thats seems a little corrupt as FSU fans should travel better to the Orange Bowl than Louisville

 

[Ale Xander]

Oh man I just realized this means FSU will get the Orange Bowl bid over Louisville unless Virginia Tech gets the bid by winning the ACC title game.

Yeah in a weird twist, Fsu and cards rooting for Clemson so they go to a much better bowl than otherwise

 

[mauf]

Thats seems a little corrupt as FSU fans should travel better to the Orange Bowl than Louisville

You're selling your team short. Louisville's only decent non-conference opponent was Houston, which beat them like a drum. FSU beat Florida, and also played UNC and Miami, which Louisville didn't. SOS >> H2H, it seems.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Boy, I figured that Michigan was going to get jumped by the eventual Big 10 champion because once that game is over Penn State/Wisconsin would gain lots of committee points by virtue of winning a conference. I'm surprised that may not be the case. Does that mean three Big10 teams could make it if Clemson and Washington lose? If that happens can I watch a live feed of Paul Finebaum's bulbous bald head exploding?

It's possible but unlikely, and no.....come on.........you would need to know exactly when it was going to happen. Who has time for that???

Thats seems a little corrupt as FSU fans should travel better to the Orange Bowl than Louisville

This does raise an interesting point though. In coin flip situations, does it really trouble anyone if the team who travels better gets the nod by the selectors? For whatever reason I have never had an issue with this (although I root for a team that travels incredibly well). I remember having this conversation with a TCU alum when tOSU got in ahead of them.....the two teams may have been roughly the same in terms of talent (this was when Cardale Jones was viewed as a risk as oppose to a guy who would become Joe Montana for a month), but a TCU playoff game risked an 80 percent full stadium for the first playoff series.

To me, I have never gotten my nose bent out of shape when Notre Dame gets put into better bowls than it should be in, nor would I mind college X getting into the playoffs against very similarly performing college Y. The contributions of the fans earn them a little nudge here or there. Louisville fans, you want to be big time contenders? Buy some tickets.

 

[Rook05]

I'm not sure if this is the best place for it, but....

LET'S GO, BUFFALOES!!!!!!11!1!11

 

[mauf]

This does raise an interesting point though. In coin flip situations, does it really trouble anyone if the team who travels better gets the nod by the selectors?

I think it bothers people a lot, and rightly so. As I said above, however, I think the Committee is right in this case to put FSU ahead of Louisville.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I think it bothers people a lot, and rightly so. As I said above, however, I think the Committee is right in this case to put FSU ahead of Louisville.

But why rightly so? I'm not talking about situations where one team is clearly better than the other, but rather the occasions where there is a coin flip (and that happens somewhat frequently. In the hypothetical where UM and UW had both lost one game and the three others were undefeated - very hypothetical - who would you pick?), I see no problem whatsoever in giving the nod to a team who has a deeper track record and whose fans travel better. In the end the TCU-tOSU issue was played out on the field as the right decision (more from TCU getting shellacked in their bowl than tOSU's championship), but even at the time I felt it was justified and would have had it not been the team I root for.

 

[mauf]

But why rightly so? I'm not talking about situations where one team is clearly better than the other, but rather the occasions where there is a coin flip (and that happens somewhat frequently. In the hypothetical where UM and UW had both lost one game and the three others were undefeated - very hypothetical - who would you pick?), I see no problem whatsoever in giving the nod to a team who has a deeper track record and whose fans travel better. In the end the TCU-tOSU issue was played out on the field as the right decision (more from TCU getting shellacked in their bowl than tOSU's championship), but even at the time I felt it was justified and would have had it not been the team I root for.

If anything, the "established" teams already get a nod -- they are in more powerful conference, it's easier to schedule marquee games, etc. And in off years, those teams are going to get the tiebreak in lesser bowls: if you're faced with the practical challenge of keeping the Car Wash Bowl solvent, of course you're going to pick 6-6 tOSU or Bama over, say, the runner-up in the MAC. But going beyond that and giving them the further advantage of getting championship berths they arguably don't deserve would be unconscionable -- if anything, ties should be broken in the opposite direction (and yes, that would hurt my team as much as yours) -- the stadium will be full for the national semifinals (or even the other NY6 bowls) no matter who is playing.

 

[wonderland]

But why rightly so? I'm not talking about situations where one team is clearly better than the other, but rather the occasions where there is a coin flip (and that happens somewhat frequently. In the hypothetical where UM and UW had both lost one game and the three others were undefeated - very hypothetical - who would you pick?), I see no problem whatsoever in giving the nod to a team who has a deeper track record and whose fans travel better. In the end the TCU-tOSU issue was played out on the field as the right decision (more from TCU getting shellacked in their bowl than tOSU's championship), but even at the time I felt it was justified and would have had it not been the team I root for.

You are mixing up your TCU years.

The year they were snubbed, TCU won the peach bowl against Mississippi 42-3.

So the decision wasn't totally played out on the field like you suggest. Of course Baylor was in the mix too.