If Michigan and Notre Dame win out (Clemson,too)then neither a one loss Alabama or a one loss Georgia can’t be ranked ahead of Michigan.
This is the same point I made last week. I don't think I said they "can't be" because I don't have a lot of faith in the committee. If they put in a one loss non conference champ before a one loss power five conference champion (Michigan), I suspect the committee would lose support from at least 3 of the 5 conferences.
I guess they will get crap either way and I'm sure they are praying Alabama does not lose before the title game so they don't have to face that choice.
I suspect this point will come up later, but I think the committee has done as good a job as humanly possible in setting the playoffs each year. Even where I disagree, the Committee has at least been consistent and I have understood its rationale.
The thing is, the Committee is charged with first, determining which team is better based upon their over all resume. Only where two teams are substantially equal in their over all resumes does the committee afford special status to things like head to head or conference championships. That is why two years in a row the Committee has elevated a one loss non-champ over a two loss champ: the resume of a two loss Power 5 team is not equal to that of a one loss Power 5 team in the Committee's eyes. But if, say. Alabama loses in its Conference Championship game, you compare them as a one loss team to, say, Michigan as a one loss team. Since Michigan's Conference Championship does not gain significance unless the Committee determines they are substantially equal, the Committee could look at Alabama's overall resume and decide that they were simply the better team. It is certainly a rational argument, based on how dominant they have been both offensively and defensively, while Michigan has not been as dominant, and only defensively.
But as you say, if the Committee does that I suspect at least the Big 12, the Big 10 and the PAC would start lobbying for alternatives.
Poll
