New College Football Playoff poll proves the selection committee is just making it up as they go
When the first poll from the College Football Playoff committee was released last week, it was immediately greeted with scorn, derision, frustration, and even anger from many fans and analysts who questioned how the rankings were determined.
- The lapses in logic, clear mistakes, and often inexplicable justifications from committee chairman Hunter Yurachek during his post-release interview only served to make the poll appear worse.
- 11 in the CFB Playoff poll, without their best player, Malachi Toney.
- After all, that's the standard that poll voters have set for the SEC; lose a close game on the road to a highly-ranked team and you'll drop one spot.
This week's poll managed to take the clear bias towards one conference and make it even more obvious, while Yurachek's defense of an inexplicable ranking change only served to reaffirm that the committee is just making it all up as they go.
- Or at least, provide some acknowledgment that the committee had overcorrected for "strength of schedule" in favor of one specific conference.
- 1, NOTRE DAME CRACKS TOP 5 AFTER BIG WIN OVER MIAMI Well, hope everyone didn't get their hopes up too high, because week two's release on Tuesday night only served to reaffirm the same concerns and frustrations from week one.
- When SEC teams dominated teams defensively, particularly Nick Saban's Alabama or the early Kirby Smart-era at Georgia, it was a testament to their toughness and quality and "defense wins championships" mindset.
- When the Georgia Bulldogs lost, at home, to a mediocre Auburn Tigers team, AP Poll voters dropped them four spots.
- "The quarterback play in general and the offensive play in general is kind of a discussion point of Indiana...They've won games because of their defense and not their offense." Dear lord.
How this summary was made: extractive summary — built from the sources' own reporting. It is drawn only from the reporting of the sources listed below — read the originals for full detail. How we summarize →