Regardless of how any particular version of the College Football Playoff actually plays out, many are always going to use its results to argue that other teams would have been better picks. That happened during and after Indiana’s 27-17 first-round loss to Notre Dame Friday, and it’s already going strong in the SMU-Penn State game, with the visiting Mustangs trailing 28-0 at the half.
Overall, there have been media members from a lot of outlets suggesting SMU and/or Indiana shouldn’t have been selected. But some of the criticisms, from SEC Network hosts Paul Finebaum and Peter Burns and SECN game analyst Jordan Rodgers, felt particularly pointed, and particularly interesting given their affiliation with the network of a conference that includes notable omission Alabama (which was battling SMU in the rankings for the last spot):
So far, the CFP selection committee has given us some blockbusters. Notre Dame led late over Indiana 27-3 and Penn State just went up on the committee’s final team 28-0 at the half. Take a bow.
— Paul Finebaum (@finebaum) December 21, 2024
So you’re telling me two teams with a combined 0-3 record vs Top 25 are showing us all they aren’t playoff caliber…
I’m shocked. Stop looking at the number in the loss column and start looking at WHO they played and WHO they beat!!
12 team playoff is great, we just didn’t get…
— Jordan Rodgers (@JRodgers11) December 21, 2024
SMU & Indiana finessing their way into the playoffs by beating on the bottom dwellers of their respective conferences. pic.twitter.com/rAzRzsXtxs
— Peter Burns (@PeterBurnsESPN) December 21, 2024
For those upset that I pointed out how Indiana & SMU feasted on the bottom part of their conferences to finesse a CFB playoff invite and then point out Texas’ schedule…..
Keep that energy when the Longhorns dogwalk Clemson later this afternoon.
— Peter Burns (@PeterBurnsESPN) December 21, 2024
As noted, the SEC Network figures weren’t the only ones to criticize the CFP selections. Many of their ESPN colleagues have also weighed in to criticize Indiana’s pick over Alabama or even Miami, and even coaches like Ole Miss’ Lane Kiffin have opined on this. And some media members from other outlets have also dropped major criticisms of the Mustangs and Hoosiers. And some of those came at the time of the selections, not just with this extra hindsight.
But even around the performances of Indiana and SMU, some non-ESPN media members also took the opposite tack. There were many willing to argue the complaints are missing the point of the CFP committee making selections based on what teams had done to that point, not how they’d theoretically stack up against the field:
Some incredibly disappointing takes out there!@IndianaFootball certainly didn’t play their best while@NDFootball was terrific However, IU played better than
– @AlabamaFTBL getting their doors blown off by 6-6 OU
– @OleMissFB giving Kentucky their only P4 win— Joel Klatt (@joelklatt) December 21, 2024
I don’t understand the outrage over the CFB Playoff through 2 games. Like it or not, Indiana and SMU had solid regular seasons with enough wins to get into the field. The teams on the bubble had egregious losses that kept them out. If they want in, they need to win the games…
— Bucky Brooks (@BuckyBrooks) December 21, 2024
I’m officially over all your “Indiana/SMU shouldn’t have been in” tweets.
The excluded teams’ resumes didn’t magically get better in the last 2 weeks.
Just enjoy the games.
— Stewart Mandel (@slmandel) December 21, 2024
I’d add – this is the team everyone is arguing “deserved” to be in the playoff.
A team that went 1-3 in SEC road games this year.
There is zero evidence outside of “they’re Bama!” that Alabama would’ve actually performed better than Indiana/SMU in either of these games pic.twitter.com/UYqmBfRP3K
— Aaron Torres (@Aaron_Torres) December 21, 2024
Whether or not the CFP debate should keep going once the games actually start is a matter of opinion. There are some above who find this pointless, especially with the current benefit of hindsight, but there are also some who think teams’ performance in these matchups is relevant to who should have been picked. And that’s been the case for almost all versions of the CFP (and before that, the BCS).
But it is really interesting to see so many particular critics of these selections come from ESPN. And these particular ones come from not just that overall network, which is always facing discussions around “SEC bias” given its deal with that conference. They come from the very specific group of people that do a lot of their ESPN work on SEC Network. And it’s notable to see that group lighting up the CFP so heavily after a significant and controversial omission of a SEC team.
