Brad McPherson / Shutterstock.com
A lot of college football fans were surprised when Alabama wasn’t included in the College Football Playoff bracket. The big question was whether a team with three losses, like Kalen DeBoer’s, would be chosen over SMU, which came second in the ACC.
The decision favored teams that won their conference championships.
Warde Manuel and his team made it clear they valued these championship games, leaving Alabama as a notable exclusion from the 12-team bracket. On ESPN’s broadcast, this decision was a hot topic, especially since former Alabama coach Nick Saban was analyzing the reveal. Unsurprisingly, Saban defended Alabama and hinted that they deserved a spot over SMU, showing his SEC bias. He didn’t really hide it well.
Nick Saban doesn’t hide SEC bias in defense of Alabama after CFP snub.
Saban expressed concern about not valuing strength of schedule enough, suggesting it might discourage tough non-conference games. He mentioned future games against big teams like Notre Dame and Ohio State to emphasize this point: “I think one of the things I’ve mentioned throughout this football season is, if we don’t take strength of schedule into consideration, is there any benefit to scheduling really good teams in the future? Here at Alabama, we’re supposed to play Notre Dame, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Florida State in the future outside the league. Those are great games for fans to see. That’s what I think we should be doing in college football is creating more good inventory for great games that people are interested in. Do you enhance people wanting to do that? What’s the athletic director going to do? He may cancel all those games now knowing that the SEC is tough enough.”
Nick Saban discussed why he thinks strength of schedule should be given more weight in the CFP selection process. pic.twitter.com/9LeHFDrItu
— ESPN (@espn) December 8, 2024
It’s important to value strength of schedule, but using this argument for Alabama seems biased towards the SEC. Their non-conference games weren’t very challenging; they played Mercer and Western Kentucky among others. The strength of their schedule mainly comes from being in the SEC.
This shouldn’t be ignored but remember Alabama lost three times in this supposedly tough conference. Two losses were against teams with just average records like Vanderbilt and Oklahoma. Does playing tough SEC games make those losses any better? Even if SEC is top-notch, that reasoning doesn’t hold up unless you’re already leaning towards SEC favoritism.
SMU getting the nod was fair. The Selection Committee faced a tough choice between valuing SOS or conference wins; choosing conference wins was right. Saban’s bias won’t change that — though it might spark discussions on seeding adjustments for future playoffs.
