If Auburn wins out they should definitely be in the playoff (although losing by two scores, irregardlessly of who it was against is never a good look).
If they drop another game, then sorry but they're out (assuming there are 4 one loss/undefeated P5 teams).
this is such dumb logic if we are seeking out the 4 best teams for the playoff.
if ohio state or michigan state wins out and auburn goes 4-1 down the stretch, what would either of those big 10 teams done to make anyone think they are a better team than auburn?
look at michigan state... we are through week 9 and they have 1 win over a top 70 team.
ohio state has no wins over the top 30 but have lost at home to a team outside of the top 50.
OK, so aside from total losses, what arbitrary metric should determine the rankings? Total number of wins against Massey top 70 teams? Total wins against top 20 teams? If the latter, then Alabama (who has zero) should be ranked somewhere around "receiving votes."
My point is, I agree that Auburn's schedule is far harder than Michigan State's, and harder than tOSU's to an even higher degree, but number of losses do and should matter.
of course number of losses matter, but i'd try and think what would their records be if their schedules were flipped. i'm pretty sure auburn would be undefeated with ohio state's schedule... after all, the best team they have faced so far is probably maryland... and i can safely say kansas state, mississippi state, and lsu are all tougher than that... and could make a pretty good case for south carolina and arkansas also being tougher than maryland.
ohio state on the other hand? what have they done to make me think they could beat any good team on auburn's schedule?
when your average conference opponent is ranked about 70th and auburn's average conference opponent is ranked inside around 20.
it's not like auburn's schedule is a little tougher than a big 10 schedule. they are miles apart. ohio state's schedule is honestly a lot closer to that of a nonAQ team than it is to Auburn's... and that's something really just based in dogma that the big 10 must be tougher than X, Y, or Z when the reality is the numbers don't bear it out. for instance, virtually every computer ranking shows louisiana tech being a better team than the majority of the big 10. people might poo poo that win, and i'm not saying it is impressive... but the fact remains that when fed the set of data we have so far on this season, they are better than michigan, illinois, purdue, northwestern, indiana...