Re: Do You Feel the Selection Committee Will "Get it Right" or do you have concerns?
It all depends on what is meant by "get it right."
If you mean "put the team we all think is probably the best" in the playoff, I think that will happen every single year. We can generally tell who the "four best" are a whole lot easier than the "two best" because we at least have a margin for error.
If you mean "put in the top four every year," well this better happen more often than not. The polls are not so out of touch with reality that anyone seriously thinks number 19 should be ranked number three.
The catch is going to come during a situation like 2011. This may be the ultimate irony since 2011 is what caused this whole thing. Here's the final regular season standings:
1) LSU
2) Alabama
3) OK State
4) Stanford
5) Oregon
6) Arkansas
7) Boise State
8) Kansas State
9) South Carolina
10) Wisconsin
Now remember - they all told us "we have no problem with Alabama in a four-team playoff." But if that were really true there would be no need for a selection committee. Simply keep the BCS and take the top four. Let's use elimination logic of each team
Oregon is out because they lost twice (LSU, USC) and didn't win the Pac 12.
Arkansas is out because the lost to the top two teams by 24 points each time. But should they really be eliminated? Could we not argue Arky was the third-best team in the country? I think we sure could.
South Carolina is out because they lost twice and one of those was a 16-point loss to Arkansas - plus they didn't even win the Eastern division.
Kansas State is out because they didn't win their conference and lost twice.
Okay, we can safely eliminate those three. And nobody disputes LSU belongs, so we've got to figure out who among the remaining five teams gets three spots.
Alabama - one overtime loss to LSU but didn't even win their division
Okie State - one overtime loss to Iowa St but did win their conference
Stanford - one blowout loss to Oregon but won their conference
Boise State - one close loss at home but didn't win their conference
Wisconsin - lost consecutive games by a total of ten points, one on a Hail Mary that they gained revenge for by beating Michigan State in the B1G title game.
We can immediately fill two slots here with one loss teams: Okie St and Stanford easily get the nod. So we now have to pick ONE team out of three: Alabama, Boise State or Wisconsin.
At this point one has to decide whether TWO losses are somehow mitigated by winning the conference. We can pretty much eliminate Boise with these other two teams in competition - but if we do so via the "didn't win the conference" route, how in the world can we seriously take Alabama over Wisconsin? On the other hand, you can't say "well Wisconsin only lost on the last play" without admitting the same for Alabama against LSU.
But the truth is you don't even need a committee for this. In this particular case, the consensus across vote and computer is that not only is Alabama the better choice, they are EIGHT SPOTS HIGHER in the polls. Keep in mind that had there not been the "only two can go" rule in 2011, it is highly doubtful that Okie State's number three ranking would have been as close to the Tide's two as it was.
You wind up with the same four teams as the BCS had - and yet you somehow need a group t make an end run. Make no mistake, this is why the B1G only signed on with the committee - Delaney would have had a field day in the media with this trying to argue that: a) the second win erases the first loss to Michigan State for the Badgers; b) the loss to Ohio St didn't "really count" because the Buckeyes were off the week before while Wisconsin was slugging it out with Mich St (any of you who think I'm exaggerating need only watch that clown for five minutes).
On the whole they will probably do a decent job. Just note that when Verne and Gary come on and say "it's number one Alabama," that the numbers are even more mythical than they've ever been - Loch Ness Monster type myth.
