Shutterstock
SMU is having a tough time with the College Football Playoff committee. Even though they’ve been doing really well, the committee doesn’t seem to think they’re good enough to be in the playoffs. This is because the committee seems to like big-name teams more, even if they don’t say it out loud.
The move to the ACC hasn’t helped SMU much this year.
Despite being undefeated in their conference, SMU still finds itself outside the playoff picture. Surprisingly, even Georgia, which has lost twice, ranks higher than them. It seems like the committee just can’t get over their love for SEC teams and might keep SMU down until the championship games.
The College Football Playoff was created to make things fairer than the old BCS system. Instead of clarifying who’s best, it’s added more confusion and debate. One major problem with BCS was that smaller teams didn’t get a fair shot.
With 12 teams now allowed, it should help non-Power 5 schools. But here we are, still arguing about top-tier Power 4 conference teams getting snubbed.
SMU’s ranking at No. 14 is puzzling given their only loss came from an undefeated BYU squad. Miami’s recent loss didn’t impact SMU’s standing either; it feels like favoritism at play. ESPN even hints a three-loss team might sneak into the playoffs! Clearly, brand recognition matters more than performance.
The committee seems enamored with Big Ten and SEC brands, valuing their tough schedules above all else. It’s widened the gap between these conferences and others after realignment.
Georgia’s ranking defies logic after their shaky performances and losses against Texas and Florida; yet they sit above SMU. Make it make sense.
Ultimately, expanding playoffs hasn’t resolved who truly deserves spots—it merely reinforces exclusion of lesser-known teams. The committee shows us that losing gracefully trumps winning outright.
