Now that the information is out there, it’s easy to second guess when you don’t get the desired result.
No. 3 Ohio State was the first team without a conference championship to make the College Football Playoff, and quickly became the first team without a conference championship to exit the College Football Playoff. No. 2 Clemson routed the Buckeyes 31-0 in the Fiesta Bowl on Saturday, and you know what comes next.
MORE: What we learned from Clemson's win over Ohio State
The sentiment No. 5 Penn State — which won the Big Ten championship — should have been in the playoff and would’ve given Clemson a better game is out there in full force. It’s OK if the Nittany Lions lose the Rose Bowl Game on Jan. 2. We’ll just switch "that team" to No. 9 USC. Three-loss USC, of course, the same team that lost to Alabama 52-6.
Those should-have and would-have conversations won’t do any good this year, but it will have an impact next time. That’s going to be the byproduct of this blowout. Next time, the committee might play it safe with the conference champion over the one-loss team that should make it. Ohio State essentially used its playoff mulligan — maybe the playoff mulligan for non-conference champions in general — and they might be treated differently next time (emphasis on might).
Why? Even in the four-team playoff age, college football remains a game defined by perception. Ohio State had a better body of work than Penn State, and the perception was the Buckeyes were the next-best bet to Alabama. They were a better playoff choice than the Nittany Lions, Trojans or the rest of the top 10. The Buckeyes beat No. 6 Michigan, No. 7 Oklahoma and No. 8 Wisconsin. That’s why they made it. They didn’t need a conference championship for validation then, so why would they need it now?
MORE: CFP format: The cases for four, six, eight or more
The general consensus was the Buckeyes — who were No. 2 in the next-to last College Football Playoff rankings and No. 3 in the last batch — were a playoff-worthy team. The game was considered a toss-up, and even fewer people predicted a 31-0 blowout. Penn State was the only team that had a legitimate gripe, and a win against USC might validate that claim. How much good will that do?
#USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC #USC
— James Franklin (@coachjfranklin) January 1, 2017
Control the controllables!
Not much. We did the second-guessing thing the last two years, and Ohio State is always involved. The Buckeyes slipped into the playoff in 2014 after beating Wisconsin 59-0. TCU dropped from No. 3 to No. 6 in the final CFP rankings in 2014, and the Horned Frogs drilled Ole Miss 42-3 in the Peach Bowl. Ohio State, however, proved the committee right by winning it all.
In 2015, Ohio State was the one-loss team that looked a lot like Penn State now. Despite one loss and no Big Ten championship, the Buckeyes ripped Notre Dame 44-28 in the Fiesta Bowl and looked like a team that could challenge Alabama. The same could be said for Stanford, a Pac-12 champion which destroyed Iowa in the Rose Bowl. Perhaps some of that thinking seeped into this year.
MORE: Is second time vs. 'Bama the charm for Clemson?
Only the Buckeyes proved the committee wrong — and Clemson’s one-sided domination changed that perception. It’s going to look much worse if the Nittany Lions drill the Trojans, but those are two different games. Clemson looked like a team that would beat all three of those teams — the right team to challenge Alabama. The Tigers did that last year, too, by the way. It’s also not like No. 4 Washington — which didn’t play awful against the Crimson Tide, but still lost 24-7 — is considered any better or worse than Ohio State or Penn State. Remember the Huskies’ nonconference schedule?
In the end, we got the playoff team we wanted. Most people outside of Happy Valley weren’t arguing against the Buckeyes, so the "I told you so" part of this discussion is overblown. We’re just not getting the desired results.
College Football Playoff semifinal average margin of victory:
— Bill Bender (@BillBender92) January 1, 2017
2014-15: 23 ppg.
2015-16: 29 ppg.
2016-17: 24 ppg.
It’s easy to second-guess everything after watching five blowouts in six semifinals, but how does calling for a six- or eight-team playoff make that better? As long as you get the two best teams in the championship, which happened this year, then the process worked.
MORE: Clemson-Alabama date, time, odds
Will Ohio State’s loss change the process next year? Probably not. They’ve been labeled the team that slipped in, the team that should have been in and the team that should have been out in three years. The committee was willing to take a chance on them, and it didn’t work. Would it be different if Clemson won, say, 28-14? That goes back to perception.
The perception on the Buckeyes changes now. They will probably have to win the Big Ten to get in the playoff next year. That won’t make Penn State fans happy either, but maybe it leads to a better result with less second-guessing.
Is that how it will go down in 2017?
