considering how SMU showed I don't. Any of Colorado, BYU, and Alabama would have been better options.
I don't think Colorado, BYU or Alabama would have faired much better against OSU or PSU or even Notre Dame, especially on the road. It's easy to say in hindsight, but those teams were very flawed as well.
Colorado didn't beat a top 25 team and lost to Nebraska, Kansas State and Kansas.
BYU also didn't be anyone that was a top 25 team in the final poll and lost to Kansas and ASU.
Bama probably is the strongest team of those 3, but they lost to Vanderbilt, Tennessee and Oklahoma. They barely beat South Carolina, who is ranked in the top 25. That and a white washing of Missouri are their signature wins.
Lol, the game that was supposed to be close is turning into a blowout and Buckeye fans are mocking Tennessee with the SEC chants. Fair to say that year 1 of the expanded playoff is off to a bad start and I fully expect Boise State and Arizona State to get their asses kicked next.
I really don't think it's off to a bad start. Everyone knows that there aren't 12 teams that will compete for a national championship. Part of sports is having people talk about the sport after the game, whether it be a close game, controversy, or something like this.
College football is and will forever be a rich vs poor and there's very few rich. There should be no more expanding of these playoffs. 12 is way too much. Hell even 4 some years was too much.
12 is probably too many, but at least you can pretty much be guaranteed that a team that is good enough to win the National Title at least gets a chance to do so. And you eliminate the argument of a team from a lesser conference not getting a shot when they did what they needed to do.
With only 4 teams, there's a very good chance that a team good enough to win the whole thing was left out. Maybe 8 is the right number?
12 brings in more money which I'm sure was the driver.