[CTcard]

What chafes me is that a Wisconsin or Penn State winner being left out will be talked about as outrageous, but it will pale in comparison to how outrageous it was to keep Stanford out of the playoff in 2015.

I guess that depends upon what you consider outrageous.

The final cfp rankings last year were:
1. Clemson 13-0
2. Alabama 12-1
3. Michigan State 12-1
4. Oklahoma 12-1
6. Stanford 11-2

Some of us have argued that Stanford wasn't a real sixth, that if say Oklahoma were simply out of the equation that there was a high likliehood that the committee would have reordered conference champ Stanford versus runner up Iowa - but of course nobody can actually know.

If you think the exclusion of Stanford was outrageous, then you are arguing on things like strength of schedule and margin of victory. That might lead you to drop Michigan State though it is not entirely clear.

On the other hand, the more traditional mode of thinking would be if you win more and lose less, you should be rated higher. Stanford clearly was going to lose out on that score.

While I personally believed in the former, it tends to be my way of thinking and it was my team that was going to benefit, I wouldn't quite call following the traditional view of things outrageous.

[CTcard]

What chafes me is that a Wisconsin or Penn State winner being left out will be talked about as outrageous, but it will pale in comparison to how outrageous it was to keep Stanford out of the playoff in 2015.

I guess that depends upon what you consider outrageous.

The final cfp rankings last year were:
1. Clemson 13-0
2. Alabama 12-1
3. Michigan State 12-1
4. Oklahoma 12-1
6. Stanford 11-2

Some of us have argued that Stanford wasn't a real sixth, that if say Oklahoma were simply out of the equation that there was a high likliehood that the committee would have reordered conference champ Stanford versus runner up Iowa - but of course nobody can actually know.

If you think the exclusion of Stanford was outrageous, then you are arguing on things like strength of schedule and margin of victory. That might lead you to drop Michigan State though it is not entirely clear.

On the other hand, the more traditional mode of thinking would be if you win more and lose less, you should be rated higher. Stanford clearly was going to lose out on that score.

While I personally believed in the former, it tends to be my way of thinking and it was my team that was going to benefit, I wouldn't quite call following the traditional view of things outrageous.