EXACTLY. You can't hypothetically project how a game would go with X player. And, as Klatt points out, injuries happen everywhere to everyone. ISU's potentially on their third quarterback. OU has had a number of injuries. Do only QB injuries matter? What about opponents injuries? Stupid.There argument is not that a loss to Iowa State is worse than Syracuse. They factor in that Clemson's QB was injured during the game despite the fact they were losing when he went down.
I've always hated how they factor in injuries. It's a part of the game.
As soon as they came out with a committee the playoff lost its integrity. The people were the problem with the BCS, and everyone who critically looked at the BCS knew that, but as soon as ESPN inked the deal to make this committee happen, they were trumpeting the computers as the problem.
And since ESPN paid a LOT more for the playoff while still getting the same ratings, there's huge financial pressure to pick the best brands. Regarding the Big 12, there's also the problem that most of the committee has real incentive to leave it out. If they continually leave out the Big 12, it collapses, which leaves more of the CFB pie for them. Not to mention it makes their own leagues look better by comparison.
If ESPN was as objective as they claim to be, 1. the playoff would have never had a committee, and 2. they would be burning this ***** down instead of pumping it up.
Financial conflicts of interest between the biggest brand in sports and the sport itself have defined college football since the 90's. You can't be the news if you own the story.
Last edited: