It's pretty simple, but I think Bob believes in the bullshit that was sold at the outset.
All of the stuff about championships and the like is horseshit. ESPN paid billions for this thing, and they need Ohio State in there. The only reason Michigan isn't is because there would have been a revolt had three of the five P5 champs been left out.
What you and bowlsby fail to grasp is that in '14, Ohio State, TCU and Baylor all had the same number of losses. That year, the "13th data point" and "conference champion" rationale was used as a tiebreaker of sorts between similarly situated teams (i.e. teams with only one loss). This year is different, as all P5 teams with 1 or fewer losses are in the CFP. It's unnecessary to do any sort of analysis re. conference championships or 13th data points.
This gnashing of teeth about preference for blue blood schools would've made sense tOSU had 2 losses in '14 compared to TCU's and Baylor's 1.
KU only had 1 loss in 2007. Did you feel like they got screwed out of a NCG game berth?
That's a good point, and honestly, I think they had a pretty good argument. On the other hand, I the situation is a little apples and oranges for a couple reasons:
1. 2007 is regarded (by me) as the weirdest year ever during the BCS era.
2.There the BCS's formula (comprised of the hundreds of harris and coaches voters and computer rankings) is the one to blame -- not a group of 12 (?) CFP individuals. Maybe there was some conspiracy among all the coaches and computers to prefer a 2-loss LSU team over 1-loss Kansas for whatever reason, but I think you'd be breaking out tinfoil hats in order to make the argument. In any event, you can't criticize the CFP for being inconsistent when they had nothing to do with the 2007 selection.
3. LSU's and 2007 KU's schedules were much, much different. LSU played 6 ranked opponents during the season, including VT in the OOC. LSU's SOS was number 3. KU played (and lost to) only 1 team that finished in the Dec. 2, 2007 BCS rankings -- Missouri, who, in turn, lost twice to conference champion OU. This is why everyone (coaches and ap...probably computers too, but can't find raw computer rankings) crushed KU after losing to MU. KU finished EIGHTH in the only two polls that mattered (Harris, Coaches). When the disparity between schedules is that wide, I can understand the argument. On the other hand, Ohio State and PSU played essentially the same schedule this year (though Ohio State's was better I imagine) and Ohio State finished with fewer losses.
But you're right, under my personal rule of thumb P5 ranking system which prioritizes 1. number of losses, then 2. SOS, KU would've played for the national title in '07. But given the crazy disparity in SOS, I think an exception to the rule can, and probably should, be made.
