The Arizona State Sun Devils delivered a resounding victory over Iowa State in the Big 12 Championship game, igniting a debate regarding their College Football Playoff (CFP) worthiness. Entering the weekend ranked fifth, behind Boise State, the Sun Devils’ dominant championship performance thrust them into the national spotlight, challenging the selection committee to assess the weight of their late-season surge and conference title against Boise State’s overall record. The crux of the argument hinges on the new 12-team playoff structure, which grants the top four seeds to conference champions. Should Boise State maintain a higher ranking despite not winning its conference championship, a scenario arises where ASU’s conference title might be superseded by the Broncos’ perceived strength of schedule and prior ranking. This potential outcome generates significant discussion regarding the prioritization of conference championships versus overall rankings in the selection process.
ASU head coach Kenny Dillingham immediately championed his team’s 11-2 record, emphasizing the importance of considering their performance with their starting quarterback, Sam Leavitt, for the majority of the season. Drawing a parallel to the previous year’s Florida State team, which was controversially left out of the top four despite an undefeated regular season and conference championship due to quarterback Jordan Travis’s injury, Dillingham argued that ASU’s 11-1 record with Leavitt should hold significant weight. He contended that the Sun Devils, as Big 12 champions, deserve recognition for their accomplishments and should not be penalized for a single loss without their starting quarterback. This argument underscores the ongoing debate surrounding the evaluation of teams with injured key players and the potential for such injuries to unfairly impact playoff seeding.
The selection committee faces the complex task of reconciling various factors, including overall record, strength of schedule, conference championships, and the impact of key player injuries, in determining the final playoff rankings. The case of Arizona State highlights the intricacies of this process and the potential for controversy when seemingly deserving teams are left on the sidelines. The committee must weigh the merits of a dominant conference champion against the overall performance of a highly-ranked team that faltered in its conference championship game.
The situation also brings into focus the potential implications of the new 12-team playoff format. While designed to expand opportunities for deserving teams, the current structure, which prioritizes the top four spots for conference champions, can create dilemmas when highly-ranked teams stumble in their respective conference championships. This scenario can lead to debates regarding the fairness and efficacy of the selection process and the potential for deserving conference champions to be unjustly overlooked. The ASU and Boise State case serves as a prime example of the complexities that can arise under the new format.
Adding another layer to the discussion is the precedent set by the previous year’s Florida State team. The Seminoles’ omission from the playoffs despite an undefeated regular season and conference championship raised concerns about the subjectivity of the selection process and the potential for external factors, such as player injuries, to unduly influence decisions. Dillingham’s invocation of the Florida State case underscores the ongoing debate about the appropriate weight assigned to such factors and the need for greater transparency and consistency in the committee’s decision-making. The ASU situation presents an opportunity for the committee to either reaffirm or refine its approach to evaluating teams with similar profiles.
The ultimate decision regarding ASU’s playoff fate rests with the selection committee, which will release its final rankings on Sunday night. Their decision will undoubtedly generate significant discussion and analysis, with implications for both the current playoff landscape and the future of the expanded 12-team format. The outcome will serve as a crucial test case for the committee’s evaluation criteria and its commitment to recognizing conference championships while considering other relevant factors. The ASU and Boise State scenario underscores the ongoing evolution of the college football playoff system and the challenges inherent in selecting the most deserving teams for a national championship opportunity.
