Jan 8, 2024; Houston, TX, USA; A view of the CFP Trophy before the 2024 College Football Playoff national championship game between the Michigan Wolverines and the Washington Huskies at NRG Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports Credit: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports
By Reice Shipley on

When the College Football Playoff Board of Managers decided to expand the CFP format to 12 teams, some expected that this change may end the debates about who’s in and who’s out. But on Tuesday night, we learned that this couldn’t be further from the truth.

The fifth CFP poll was released on Tuesday, which looms incredibly large considering it is the last poll before the official CFP bracket is announced next week after the conference championship games.

While there will likely be some movement amongst teams based on the results of the conference championship games, this final CFP poll paints a clear picture as to which teams still have a chance at a bid, and which teams are on the outside looking in.

Of the at-large teams who will not have a chance to improve their resume, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Alabama, Indiana, and Tennessee found themselves inside of the 12-team bracket. Meanwhile, Miami, Ole Miss, and South Carolina among others found themselves outside of the current projection.

Jamie Pollard, the athletic director at Iowa State, wasn’t overly pleased with the rankings, detailing in a post on X how he believes the CFP committee didn’t properly factor in the weak strength of schedule from SMU, Indiana, and Boise State.

“Disappointing that strength of schedule clearly does not matter for SMU, Indiana, and Boise State. Message is clear, win as many games as possible regardless of who you play. Time to rethink non-conference scheduling. Very different standards than the basketball committee.” wrote Pollard on X.

Rick Hart, the athletic director at SMU, took notice of Pollard’s post calling out SMU’s strength of schedule, himself responding in a post calling into question Iowa State’s weak non-conference schedule.

“Jamie, respect you but bad take. ISU had No. D, Iowa, Ark. St. non-con. SMU had Nev., HCU, TCU, BYU. (And scrambled due to Vandy dropping us.) SMU 1 of 2 to win all conf. games, 1 of 3 with 9 P4 wins, trailed a TOTAL of 6+ mins. last 9 games. I could go on… Stay off my lawn,” replied Hart.

Pollard saw this response from Hart and challenged SMU to beat Clemson and solidify their CFP spot. Because in his eyes, their resume otherwise is not worthy of a CFP spot.

“Rick, beat Clemson Saturday and I will respect your ranking. Until then you did not play Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech, or Syracuse AND lost to BYU at home. Looks like your lawn may be artificial,” replied Pollard.

As Nick Saban recently said, college football is entirely subjective when it comes to which conference the CFP committee values over another. But it does somewhat seem like the committee is flip-flopping a bit as to what goes into their process for at-large teams in their final rankings.

Having Alabama ranked higher than Miami would suggest that the CFP committee does indeed value strength of schedule over having a better record. However, as Pollard points out, ranking teams like SMU, Indiana, and Boise State as highly as they are sends an entirely different message.

Luckily for both Pollard and Hart, their programs each have a chance to seal their own fate by winning their respective conference championship games.

With a win for Iowa State over Arizona State in the Big 12 Championship, they will receive an automatic bid into the CFP. And the same goes for SMU with a win over Clemson in the ACC Championship.

[Jamie Pollard on X, Rick Hart on X]

About Reice Shipley

Reice Shipley is a staff writer for Comeback Media that graduated from Ithaca College with a degree in Sports Media. He previously worked at Barrett Sports Media and is a fan of all things Syracuse sports.

View all posts by Reice Shipley