Here’s the part I don’t get. Going into Saturday FSU was ranked 4th, ahead of Texas after FSU beat Florida. Friday Texas beat a mediocre Okla St., ranked 22nd. Saturday FSU beat Louisville ranked 16th. So which team beat the best opponent? If the committees ranking was correct going into that weekend, how much did strength of schedule change? Why wasn’t it a criteria previously? The injury consideration is weird. It never previously impacted ranking throughout the year. Why wasn’t Texas disqualified from the playoffs for barely (3pts) beating TCU, who only won 5 games? How about them only beating Houston (7pts), a 4 game winner? Oh, that’s right; Texas had their starting QB out. The QB playing for FSU in the playoffs would surely be the one who beat Florida. Finally how about giving FSU credit for devising a game plan that beat a ranked opponent with a restricted QB. By restricted I mean they didn’t let the QB run because there literally was no QB backup. BTW the kid was a great runner in high school. It’s fairly easy to defend a one dimensional offense. FSU won by 10!
As to FSU playing lousy against a medium opponent, how about the game AL played against unranked Auburn. If not for a questionable coaching decision, AL loses to a vastly inferior team.
To me this says the Committee gave Saban the good old boy treatment. Once they picked him they had to put in Texas who beat AL. They used an excuse which had never been a ranking criteria. They literally changed the rules to get the people they wanted in. FSU beat every team they played. They even won with no backup QB. They won by more than Texas did when Texas was playing their second string QB (with a backup) against 2 unranked opponents. The Committee looked only at the last weekend and only at the SEC and soon-to-be SEC teams. The fix was in.