The Critique of the College Football Playoff Committee
FOX Sports’ Colin Cowherd has a bone to pick with the College Football Playoff (CFP) committee and its latest rankings. Known for his fiery takes and no-nonsense commentary, Cowherd is nearly apoplectic about the committee’s decision-making process. “I love college football, but it is absolutely ridiculous,” he exclaimed. His frustration stems from the lack of year-to-year consistency in the committee’s rankings, which he believes creates an opaque and unpredictable system. The committee’s criteria often seem arbitrary, leaving fans and analysts alike scratching their heads.
The Case of Miami and Notre Dame
One of Cowherd’s primary grievances is the inconsistency in how teams are ranked. For instance, both Miami (10-2) and Notre Dame (10-2) have identical records, yet the Hurricanes are ranked two spots behind the Irish. What makes this even more perplexing is that Miami defeated Notre Dame 27-24 in Week 1. Despite this early win, Miami’s chances of improving their standing are slim. The ACC’s tiebreakers favor Duke (7-5), who will face Virginia (11-1) in the conference title game, further muddying the waters. This scenario highlights the committee’s seemingly capricious nature, where a clear win over a ranked opponent doesn’t translate into a better ranking.
The Texas Dilemma
Cowherd also brings up the case of Texas, which faced a similar fate. The Longhorns opted to play No. 1 Ohio State (then-ranked No. 3) in their season opener. Despite winning five of their last six games, including victories over three ranked opponents, and losing to No. 3 Georgia and Florida during SEC play, Texas will likely be left out of the CFP. The decision to schedule a tough road game early in the season, which resulted in a third loss, seems to have worked against them. “I thought scheduling big, tough road games mattered,” Cowherd said, emphasizing the committee’s inconsistent application of its own criteria.
The Lingering Aftermath of Last Season
Adding to the confusion, Cowherd points out an anomaly from last season. Notre Dame, which reached the CFP finals, lost to Northern Illinois, a shocking defeat that ultimately had no bearing on their playoff run. This inconsistency further fuels Cowherd’s frustration. “I thought bad losses punished you,” he remarked, highlighting the lack of a clear and consistent approach to evaluating team performance. The committee’s decisions often seem to contradict each other, leaving fans and analysts with more questions than answers.
The Broader Context: High-Level Tournaments and Clarity
Most high-level tournaments, such as those in the NFL, have a clear and transparent process for determining their playoff fields. However, the CFP often lacks this clarity. Cowherd draws a parallel between the CFP and the NFL playoffs, suggesting that the former is more opaque and harder to understand. “Have you ever watched the NFL playoffs and said ‘I like it, but I can’t quite figure it out?’” he asks rhetorically. The answer, he implies, is always no. The NFL, despite its complexities, provides a clear path to the playoffs, something the CFP often fails to do. This inconsistency and lack of transparency make it difficult for fans to understand what it takes for their team to compete for a championship.
The Fan Experience and the Future of College Football
At the end of every college football season, fans are left questioning the committee’s decisions and what it takes to secure a spot in the CFP. This uncertainty can be frustrating and diminishes the excitement and satisfaction of the season for many. Cowherd’s critique is not just about the rankings; it’s about the broader fan experience. The CFP committee needs to be more transparent and consistent in its criteria to ensure that the sport remains fair and enjoyable for everyone. As the debate over the CFP continues, one thing is clear: fans and analysts alike are looking for a more transparent and consistent system that honors the hard-fought efforts of all teams.
