.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
College Football Playoff committee got it right, based on the 2016 season. And that’s exactly why the tournament needs expansion to eight teams
December 2, 2016; Santa Clara, CA, USA; Washington Huskies head coach Chris Petersen hoists the championship trophy after the Pac-12 championship against the Colorado Buffaloes at Levi
The College Football Playoff committee had a tough task this season to be sure. Aside from runaway favorite Alabama as the number one seed, one could literally argue a half dozen programs deserved one of the remaining three slots. No easy task.
In the end, the committee got it right. And that alone proves the need to expand the tournament to six or even eight teams.
The top-rated Crimson Tide will take on the four seed, and one of two hotly debated teams in the tourney, Washington, in the Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl. The No. 2 Clemson Tigers will face off against No. 3 Ohio State in the PlayStation Fiesta Bowl. The winners will meet in Tampa for the national title game on Jan. 9.
The field includes three conference champions-Bama, Washington and Clemson-as well as one team that didn’t even win its division, let alone the conference-Ohio State. Meanwhile, two conference champions, Penn State and Oklahoma, were left out of the show. Penn State finished fifth in the final poll, while Oklahoma, despite winning Bedlam versus Oklahoma State, never garnered serious consideration and finished seventh. And then there’s No. 6 Michigan, losers of two of their last three games, all in epic fashion, yet owners of some truly impressive numbers against top teams, including wins over Penn State and Wisconsin, who squared off in the Big 10 title game, and Colorado, who lost to Washington in the Pac 12 Championship.
Penn State, Michigan and Oklahoma each finished with two losses on the season. And each team can make a compelling argument as to why it deserves in the playoff.
Penn State dropped two of their first four, losing to Pitt, who finished 23rd in the final poll, and Michigan, who clobbered a banged up Nittany Lion team 49-10. Since then, Penn State rattled off 10 consecutive victories, including Ohio State by a field goal and Wisconsin, a thrilling comeback win in the Big 10 title game.
Michigan started the year 9-0 with convincing wins over Colorado and Penn State, as well as a slugfest win over Wisconsin, 14-7. A poor performance led to a shocking upset loss at Iowa on a field goal, before a controversial spot and call led to a double-overtime loss in The Game versus hated Ohio State.
Similar to Penn State, Oklahoma got off to a rough start, dropping the opener to a Houston team that certainly had its moments in 2016 – remember how it hammered Louisville? Two weeks later Ohio State came to Norman and won convincingly, 45-24, effectively ending the Sooners’ playoff chances in week three. But Oklahoma rallied to win nine straight, including wins over ranked opponents in West Virginia and Oklahoma State, putting the Sooners back into the playoff conversation by year’s end.
There is no doubt that Penn State, Michigan and Oklahoma have some impressive points to their resumes. But its equally clear that the playoff committee got it right in awarding Bama, Ohio State, Clemson and Washington the four playoff spots. They each did as much, or more, than the three teams left out.
More from Wildcat Blue Nation
But can you imagine if the Big 12 Champion had been Texas? What would the ire of eyes of the Texas bring upon the playoff committee? Or what any team from the SEC had gone to Atlanta and won the SEC Championship only to not get the bid? Imagine, in another year, a two-loss Florida team with an early season loss to top 25 teams such as Virginia Tech and Florida State?
Keep this in mind – the College Football Playoff exists as a contract between the so-called Power 5 conferences. Lose them, and what do you have? Every year a conference champion gets left out only further jeopardizes the relationship of that agreement.
The committee did its job, it gave us four solid choices. But like the BCS before it, the system comes up short again. It’s time for every conference champion to get an automatic bid. Then, depending on whether its expanded to six or eight, a number of at-large bids be available as well. I prefer eight, guaranteeing one slot for the highest ranking non-Power 5 school, teams like Western Michigan this year or Boise State in previous seasons.
So this season, that would mean Alabama, Clemson, Penn State, Washington and Oklahoma all receive automatic bids. Western Michigan would get the non-Power 5 automatic, then the two highest ranked teams remaining, Ohio State and Michigan, claim the final two slots.
Eight seed Western Michigan would draw No. 1 Alabama (would that be any less a slaughter than what Washington faces?). Washington, instead, would draw Penn State in the first round, in a 4-5 matchup, settling once and for all who belongs. In the 3-6 matchup, Clemson would take on Michigan, giving us Dabo vs. Harbaugh. The final matchup, 2-7, would feature Ohio State and Oklahoma, a first-round battle between college football blue bloods.
If chalk prevailed, the second round would feature Alabama versus Washington, while Clemson would advance to take on Ohio State. Of course, those potential matchup give credence to any defender of the current system.
But chalk doesn’t always prevail. If it did, Michigan would have beaten Iowa, and Ohio State tops Penn State, and Oklahoma beats Houston, and Washington handles USC, and Clemson survives against Pitt. And this entire mess would be an entirely different kind of mess altogether.
Unless of course you look at Alabama, who has won 25 in a row as the favorite. And they’re about to win two more, arguably making any bracket of four or six or eight all but irrelevant.
Nevertheless, give us more, Expand the tournament. Put all the conference winners in. And let’s just see what madness ensues.
It worked pretty nicely for basketball, after all.
This article originally appeared on 
