The Case for Selecting Two Teams From the Same Conference in the College Football Playoff

Back in May, Arkansas Razorback head coach Bret Bielema made the bold prediction that at least two teams from the SEC will make the inaugural College Football Playoff. Of course, the initial reaction is a sour taste in the mouth that can’t be cleansed, but would it really be horrible to have two teams from the SEC, or any conference, battling it out for the national championship?

On Wednesday, during the SEC Media Days, Executive Director of the College Football Playoff, Bill Hancock, gave some hypothetical examples of how we may see rematches within the four teams selected by the 13-member committee. Again, we instantly get a reaction similar to food poisoning. But rather than waste your time with a bunch of hypothetical thoughts, let’s use actual examples.

Obviously we won’t know exactly how teams will be ranked until later this season, but to illustrate a more accurate “hypothetical” we can use some of the BCS formula to try to form an understanding.

Take for instance 2013, Hancock stated Alabama and Auburn would likely have faced off for the second time if the playoff had begun last season. So, go back to the end of week 16. The top four teams were Florida State (13-0), Auburn (12-1), Alabama (12-1) and Michigan State (12-1). Alabama was the only team to not have a conference championship to their resume.

Conference championships don’t need to be the deciding factor in the four team selection, as stated here. What we’re going to look at is the strength of schedules.

What we do know, thanks to MR. Hancock, is the Committee will be focusing on the top 6-8 teams, of their choosing, heading into the final weekend. Using the “old” ranking system, look at strength of schedule from last years’ top eight teams after the final weekend. Based solely on victories over AP ranked teams FSU (undefeated with two wins) and Auburn (three wins) are no brainers. After the top two, it gets a bit trickier.

Bama was ranked #3, and had two wins against ranked opponents, but failed to even make the SEC Championship. Michigan State was #4, had one win against a ranked foe, but did defeat Ohio State for the Big 10 Championship. Put aside the fact the Spartans beat Stanford (11-2) in the Rose Bowl (the Committee wouldn’t have known that without a crystal ball). Stanford had a much greater claim to #4, or even the #2 spot, with six victories over ranked teams.

Jul 14, 2014; Irving, TX, USA; The new college football playoff championship trophy unveiled during a press conference at the college football playoff headquarters. Mandatory Credit: Kevin Jairaj-USA TODAY Sports

Behind the Cardinal at #5 was Baylor (11-1). But in no way should the Bears have been chosen over Alabama. Even with a Big 12 title on the table, the Bears had claim to one victory over a ranked team (Oklahoma). The Crimson Tide didn’t exactly have a tough non-conference schedule, but they can come to the discussion with a victory over Virginia Tech, whereas Baylor had Wofford, Buffalo and La-Monroe.

Does it bother you the Tide would still have a place in the four team playoff? Would you rather have a team that actually played in a conference championship, but lost? I give you Missouri (11-2). The Tigers had two wins against ranked teams and had some decent road wins to their credit (Georgia, Ole Miss and Vandy). Bottom line, the Tigers based just on the fact they had one more win against a ranked opponent should have qualified them over Baylor.

Can you honestly say Alabama or Missouri, both from the SEC, wouldn’t have deserved to be featured in the playoff? Can you truly say it wouldn’t have been great football, and the lone team to rise up out of the final four didn’t deserve to hoist the trophy?

Depending on the seeding we could’ve seen #1 FSU vs. #4 Aubrun / #2 Stanford vs. #3 Alabama/Missouri. We could debate the seeding, but you get the picture.

With two wins, each over ranked opponents, Bama or Mizzou would have had a stronger, and more deserved spot in the final four teams in 2013, than both Baylor and MSU, who each had just one victory over ranked teams. There wouldn’t be a problem with two teams from the same conference being selected by the committee if the teams had a better resume than the other few possible teams.

It’s simple, right?