[Papa John]

I think the recusal grounds are ongoing financial relationships. If people had to be recused from consideration of every school they ever attended or worked at, the room might get pretty empty at times.

Thanks for the clarification, garvin. Although, I could see a scenario where a committee member's emotional loyalties lie with an institution s/he attended, as opposed to the one at which s/he works. For example, off-and-on for the past 26 years I have been employed by the Los Angeles or Santa Barbara campuses of the University of California system. But my loyalties have been, and will always be, with Stanford. On the other hand, I will never be a member of the college football playoff committee.

I wonder if these potential/imagined conflicts of interest will come up once the committee starts its deliberations and rankings. Hey, if it leads to an 8-team playoff that ensures inclusion of the Big 5 conference champions plus 3 at-large teams, then I'm all for it.

[Papa John]

I think the recusal grounds are ongoing financial relationships. If people had to be recused from consideration of every school they ever attended or worked at, the room might get pretty empty at times.

Thanks for the clarification, garvin. Although, I could see a scenario where a committee member's emotional loyalties lie with an institution s/he attended, as opposed to the one at which s/he works. For example, off-and-on for the past 26 years I have been employed by the Los Angeles or Santa Barbara campuses of the University of California system. But my loyalties have been, and will always be, with Stanford. On the other hand, I will never be a member of the college football playoff committee.

I wonder if these potential/imagined conflicts of interest will come up once the committee starts its deliberations and rankings. Hey, if it leads to an 8-team playoff that ensures inclusion of the Big 5 conference champions plus 3 at-large teams, then I'm all for it.