Although the committee is charged with selecting the "four best teams", and I honestly think UGA probably falls within that criteria (backed by Vegas) I'm (mostly) glad they opted not to go with the rematch. Part of what makes the college game so compelling is that, even with the four team playoff, there is still a high degree of "subjectivity" that elicits debate and discussion. A bit of controversy is good for the game. UGA (or perhaps better attributed to LSU) made it easy for them with the loss to the Tigers. Imagine the debate had UGA and Bama both been undefeated going into the CCG, whether they ultimately opted for UGA or OU!
I also (mostly) like the fact that each conference handles their CCG differently. I like the original "One True Champion" concept, but it (having a CCG) cost the BigXII (and TCU/Baylor) in 2012, which ultimately caused them to incorporate the CCG and somewhat of a hybrid "OTC." OU ultimately needed the 13th data point this year to get in, but it could also have cost the conference a spot (had tu won). Of course, the same could happen in a two-division scenario (ie if Pitt had beaten Clemson in the ACC CCG).
An expanded playoff format devalues regular season games.
I also (mostly) like the fact that each conference handles their CCG differently. I like the original "One True Champion" concept, but it (having a CCG) cost the BigXII (and TCU/Baylor) in 2012, which ultimately caused them to incorporate the CCG and somewhat of a hybrid "OTC." OU ultimately needed the 13th data point this year to get in, but it could also have cost the conference a spot (had tu won). Of course, the same could happen in a two-division scenario (ie if Pitt had beaten Clemson in the ACC CCG).
An expanded playoff format devalues regular season games.
Comment