I saw an AP pollster say if FSU beats Georgia and Texas/Alabama win the Playoff, they will vote FSU to be #1 I get the sentiment and FSU would be the only undefeated P5 team in that scenario, but let's not get carried away.
Well, the AP poll doesn't carry the same kind of weight as it used to be. When it's all said and done, and FSU beats Georgia, if he really thinks they are the best team, he SHOULD vote for them # 1, regardless of who wins the playoff. But if he thinks the playoff winner is the best team, and he still votes for FSU # 1, then he's kind of an asshole.
Okay, but if strength of schedule is so important, why is Michigan ranked number 1?
Because they felt they were clearly the overall best team. To be fair, they beat Ohio State, and also Penn State. But the rest of their schedule was definitely trash. For that reason, I would have had them ranked second or third, and would have ranked Washington # 1.
And the committee was so concerned about FSU without Travis, but they didn't have him for basically the last three games (he got hurt in the 1st quarter of the North Alabama game), and they scored 100 points in those three games.
Michigan scored 87 points in their last three games.
In other words, Michigan's offense is no better than FSU's without Travis AND they have about the same strength of schedule. Where is the consistency?
Obviously, it's all just opinions at the end of the day, but for me the consistency is, again, in the schedule. The level of competition that Michigan faced in its last 3 games was, as far as I can tell, a lot better than what Florida State faced. So just flat numbers-to-numbers doesn't work. *shrugs*
Also, the committee also doesn't have regard for defense obviously. Louisville was averaging over 30 a game, yet FSU held them to 6 points last week. I know ugly defensive games are not considered style points, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense. FSU probably would have gotten more consideration had they beaten Louisville 54-51 than they did for dominating them on defense and winning 16-6.
Maybe, maybe not. What I know for sure is that if they had beaten Louisville 54 - 10, they would have eliminated the criteria that allowed them to take the injury into consideration, because there would have effectively been no dropoff. But that didn't happen.
Edit: not trying to be argumentative, really, I just think all this illustrates the moving goal posts the committee used to come to their decision.
No worries, I love these kinds of discussions. People wouldn't bother if they didn't care.
For me, the only real goalpost that moved this season was the number of "deserving" teams. College football screwed itself when they set up a four team playoff while having five power conferences. They just miraculously avoided the consequences of that ludicrous decision until this season.