(10-30-2019 04:15 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(10-30-2019 08:35 AM)kevinwmsn Wrote:  CFP is about getting the best teams in the playoff. All conferences and divisions are not equally good. We pretty much know an undefeated P5 conference champion is in, no matter how bad the conference is(ACC). The 2nd best team in a division can be the 2nd best team in the conference(Penn State/Ohio State loser, Alabama/LSU loser). Having to win their division is not a requirement. The SEC Championship is still the premier Conference Championship game with full stands.

This is where I think the CFP makes its mistake. It shouldn't be just about getting the *best* into the playoff, but also getting the *most deserving*. When you focus on the 4 best, you start to see criteria like the 'eye test' and quality losses to determine the field.

Maybe in theory, but ... in the 5 years of CFP, the four playoff teams have been almost identical to the 4 teams the computers would have picked, and absolutely identical to what the AP would have picked.

So who 'deserving' has been left out? Probably the example that would pop up is 2017, when Alabama, who didn't win the SEC, got in over Ohio State, who won the Big 10. But why does winning the Big 10 make Ohio State more deserving than Alabama, who didn't compete in the Big 10? It simply doesn't.

Another time would be 2016, when Ohio State got in over Penn State. That was different, because OSU did compete for the B1G title vs Penn State, and lost out. But, Penn State lost two games, whereas OSU only lost one.

So I'm not sure that the CFP has failed to put the four most deserving teams in.