College Football Playoff field set: Florida State’s denial, Alabama's triumph
The decision to choose Alabama over Florida State was exceedingly challenging at the conclusion of a distinctive college football season, but was it the correct decision?
The College Football Playoff is set, with the controversial decision by the selection committee to exclude undefeated ACC champion Florida State in favor of SEC champion Alabama. The top spot belonged to Michigan, with Washington closely trailing at No. 2 and Texas making a significant leap to No. 3.
The CFP committee overlooked FSU, the first undefeated Power 5 conference champion when selecting the teams.
Michigan, with a flawless 13-0 record, secured its place in the Playoff for the third consecutive year by blanking Iowa 26-0 to claim the Big Ten championship.
In a triumphant finale to their perfect regular season, Washington secured their spot by defeating Oregon 34-31 in a nail-biting Pac-12 championship.
Florida State emerged as the winner of the ACC championship with a 16-6 victory over Louisville, but the selection committee weighed the loss of quarterback Jordan Travis to a season-ending leg injury. FSU opted to start freshman Brock Glenn, who was their third-string quarterback, against Louisville.
“Florida State is not the same team that they were for the first 11 weeks of the season,” College Football Playoff chairman Boo Corrigan said.
The defending national champion Georgia will not have the opportunity to achieve a historic three-peat after their defeat to Alabama caused the Bulldogs to drop to No. 6.
The schedule for the semifinals on New Year’s Day:
No. 1 Michigan vs. No. 4 Alabama in the Rose Bowl, 5 p.m. ET
No. 2 Washington vs. No. 3 Texas in the Sugar Bowl, 8:45 p.m. ET
In the closing season of the four-team era — until its expansion to 12 teams in 2024 — the CFP committee was faced with an exceedingly difficult decision, certain to leave a deserving team with a sense of injustice. The committee, for the very first time, found themselves in a situation where they had to make a choice between valuing the teams that have earned their spot or the teams that have something that is more appealing for TV.
Florida State, widely regarded as the most deserving team, became the inaugural unbeaten Power 5 conference champion to be excluded from the field. It was the Seminoles who were left with a sense of being deceived.
And with that one decision, the committee didn’t just choose teams in a given year. It revealed to the world the ugly truth about college football — this sport is a beauty pageant where decisions on which teams can win the national title are sometimes made as much in a snug hotel boardroom in Grapevine, Texas, as they are on the actual field.
Michigan and Washington finished the season without any damage. Texas had a nail-biter of a loss to Oklahoma in their rivalry game, but surprisingly, they were able to defeat Alabama.
If Jordan Travis hadn't broken his leg two weeks ago, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Nevertheless, the Seminoles team that emerged victorious in the ACC Championship Game against Louisville with a score of 16-6 had a third-string quarterback at their helm. The victory was anything but impressive.
The committee, understanding the unfairness, made the difficult choice to break Florida State's heart. The committee members made the judgment on Saturday night in that room that the Seminoles were inadequate for us.
That's not the true essence of sports. As the four-team CFP era concludes this season, fans will see it as a flawed system in need of change, not as the pioneer of modernizing the sport.
The committee's struggle between Alabama and Texas is understandable. Alabama, the one-loss SEC champion, defeated Georgia on Saturday, halting the Bulldogs’ 29-game winning streak. Texas, the Big 12 champion with only one loss, secured a 10-point victory over Alabama in Tuscaloosa in September.
Fans wanted the SEC to be excluded, but the committee couldn't overlook the Crimson Tide's achievements. If Alabama goes, how can the committee justify excluding the team that defeated them? It would be illogical to exclude Texas.
This is probably the easiest path to take. With the exception of Florida State fans, most individuals agree that the addition of high-level teams will enhance the excitement of the Playoff semifinals. The best teams, as they say, rose above the competition.
Choosing the best is problematic because it's purely subjective, leading to potential misguidance. This is particularly evident in a sport where unpredictable results and unforeseen runs are common. Ohio State, in the inaugural season of the four-team College Football Playoff, defied expectations by winning the national title with a third-string quarterback.
The Buckeyes stood out from the Florida State team because Ohio State dominated the Big Ten title game with a resounding 59-0 victory. The game between Florida State and Louisville was a nail-biter, but the absence of explosive offensive plays took away from the excitement for those who enjoy high-scoring matchups. Perception falsely became reality, blurring the lines.
The remarkable success of Florida State was demonstrated by their victory in a Power 5 conference championship game with a true freshman quarterback. In the CFP, Florida State would have been afforded the luxury of having their second-string quarterback, Tate Rodemaker, return to the team, giving them ample time to prepare for a semifinal game.
What occurred to the Seminoles was an egregious injustice and only served to tarnish the reputation of the CFP Committee, if there ever was one, to begin with. Florida State was robbed.
And its head coach didn’t hide his disappointment.
“I am disgusted and infuriated with the committee’s decision today to have what was earned on the field taken away because a small group of people decided they knew better than the results of the games,” Mike Norvell said in a statement. “What is the point of playing games?”
The committee should have made the tough decision to exclude Alabama. Most of us instinctively understand that the Crimson Tide, widely regarded as the most skilled team on paper, is among the top four teams. Alabama is unquestionably prepared to come out on top in every aspect.
However, Alabama - similar to its counterparts Georgia and Ohio State, teams boasting an abundance of untapped potential on their rosters - suffered a defeat at home. In previous instances, more proficient teams were excluded compared to this Alabama team due to the repercussions of their losses.
The defeat of Alabama by Texas had no repercussions because of our infatuation with the SEC and the significance of defeating Georgia. It was inconsequential that Alabama, despite being perceived as a completely different team in September, suffered a loss against the Longhorns. That game had the caliber of a Playoff game in September. It turns out it was an exhibition.
Due to the sanctity of the regular season, there exists a significant number of individuals who oppose the expansion of the field to 12. However, if the outcomes of the regular season games are not going to have any impact on selecting the final four teams, then there would be no negative repercussions for expanding the tournament to include 12 teams.
This is where I start to feel disconnected if we’re playing the “four best in the country” game. If we're basing our judgment solely on visual observations. So, why is Georgia excluded? I can certainly argue that Georgia, as a collective unit, has displayed superior performance compared to Washington on certain occasions throughout this year. Assuming all teams in the country, including Alabama, were given truth serum and asked about their least desired opponent, it is highly probable that Georgia would be the unanimous response. Nevertheless, the Bulldogs' chances have been dashed as a result of their defeat yesterday. This Playoff does not include the four strongest teams.
If we're engaging in the "game of determining who is most deserving," then why is Florida State excluded? A Power 5 conference champion, who remains undefeated and, similar to Alabama, faced a challenging out-of-conference opponent in the early season but, unlike Alabama, emerged victorious, and does not qualify for the Playoff. The Playoff does not include the four most deserving teams.
This is screaming into oblivion. Yet, I adamantly deny the perception that this is an acceptable or simpler alternative for the committee to have opted for. The lack of consistency is because the teams are being evaluated in batches of three rather than directly. The committee fell short in evaluating candidates based on either the "best" or "most deserving" measures.
Thank you for dedicating your time to reading the article, and we hope you will remain engaged for future updates.
By subscribing below, you can ensure that you stay notified with fresh content, especially if you find this article illuminating.
Another great post. Man you're amazing. Do you watch like NFL football or like other sports?
Definitely a great article. Roll Tide.