HOW TO SELECT THE FOUR BEST TEAMS TO COMPETE FOR THE COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYOFF NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP
(Adopted unanimously by the BCS Group June 20, 2012)
Ranking football teams is an art, not a science. Football is popular in some measure because the outcome of a game between reasonably matched teams is so often decided by emotional commitment, momentum, injuries and the “unexpected bounce of the ball.” In any ranking system, perfection or consensus is not possible and the physical impact of the game on student athletes prevents elaborate playoff systems of multiple games. For purposes of any four-team playoff, the process will inevitably need to select the four best teams from among several with legitimate claims to participate.
Proposed Selection Process:
Establish a selection committee that will be instructed to place an emphasis on winning conference championships, strength of schedule and head‐to‐head competition when comparing teams with similar records and pedigree (treat final determination like a tie‐breaker; apply specific guidelines).
The criteria to be provided to the selection committee must be aligned with the ideals of the commissioners, presidents, athletic directors and coaches to honor regular season success while at the same time providing enough flexibility and discretion to select a non‐champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non‐champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.
When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:
- Championships won
- Strength of schedule
- Head‐to‐head competition (if it occurred)
- Comparative outcomes of common opponents (without incenting margin of victory)
We believe that a selection committee of experts properly instructed (based on beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved; and that championships won on the field and strength of schedule are important values that must be incorporated into the selection process) has very strong support throughout the college football community.
Under the current construct, polls (although well‐intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head‐to‐head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non‐champions and teams that have lost in head‐to‐head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected.
As we expand from two teams to four teams, we want to establish a human selection committee that: (1) will be provided a clear set of guidelines; (2) will be expected to take the facts of each case and specifically apply the guidelines; and (3) will be led by a chair who will be expected to explain publicly the selection committee’s decisions.
Some of the guidelines and protocols expected to be established to guide the selection committee would include, but not be limited to, the following:
- While it is understood that selection committee members will take into consideration all kinds of data including polls, selection committee members will be required to discredit polls wherein initial rankings are established before competition has occurred;
- Any polls that are taken into consideration by the selection committee must be completely open and transparent to the public;
- Strength of schedule, head‐to‐head competition and championships won must be specifically applied as tie‐breakers between teams that look similar;
- Selection committee members associated with any team under consideration during the selection process will be required to recuse themselves from any deliberations associated with that team;
We would expect this same set of principles to be applied, particularly at the margins (teams 10‐11‐12).
NOTE: When creating the College Football Playoff in June of 2012, the 11 university presidents, 10 conference commissioners and Notre Dame’s athletics director unanimously adopted the preceding document which established the guiding principles and the basis for selecting and ranking teams. When the selection committee later added more details and specific operating procedures, those resulted in this full “College Football Playoff Selection Committee Protocol.”
The selection committee has assigned two members to be the “point persons” to gather material about the teams in each conference and the independent teams. The process will assure that the committee fully reviews each team and that no information is overlooked.
The point persons will ensure that (1) the selection committee has complete, detailed information about each team, and (2) the conferences and independent institutions have an effective and efficient channel for providing facts to the committee.
The selection committee wishes to be clear about the role of the point persons. They are not and will not be advocates for teams in any conference or for any independent institution. They will not speak on behalf of any conference or institution during the committee’s deliberations or represent any conference’s or independent institution’s interests during those deliberations. Their function is to gather information and ensure that it is available to the committee. Their role as a liaison to a particular conference or independent institution is purely for the purpose of objective fact‐gathering.
The point persons will communicate with conference staff members on three information‐gathering teleconferences during the regular season: one before the first ranking, one before the fourth ranking and one the week before Selection Day. Outside of these teleconferences, there will be no contact between the point persons and any conference staff member, or vice‐versa, but the conference may relay information to the committee through the CFP staff.
Following are the point persons for the 2023 season:
American: Jim Grobe, Warde Manuel
Atlantic Coast: Warde Manuel, Kelly Whiteside
Big 12: Mitch Barnhart, Jim Grobe
Big Ten: Gene Taylor, Chris Ault
Conference USA: Joe Taylor, Mitch Barnhart
Mid-American: Mark Harlan, Gene Taylor
Mountain West: Chet Gladchuk, Will Shields
Pac-12: Rod West, Chet Gladchuk
Southeastern: Will Shields, Mark Harlan
Sun Belt: David Sayler, Chris Ault
Independents: Kelly Whiteside, David Sayler
- All displaced conference champions and the highest‐ranked champion from a non‐contract conference, as ranked by the committee, will participate in selected other bowl games and will be assigned to those games by the selection committee. If berths in the selected other bowl games remain available after those teams have been identified, the highest‐ranked other teams, as ranked by the committee, will fill those berths in rank order.
(Note: A “displaced conference champion” is a champion of a contract conference that does not qualify for the playoff in a year when its contract bowl hosts a semifinal game.)
- The selection committee shall create the best matchups in these bowl games in light of the following considerations. None of these considerations shall affect the ranking of teams. Also, none of these considerations will be controlling in determining the assignment of teams to available bowl games.
- The selection committee will use geography as a consideration in the pairing of teams and assigning them to available bowl games.
- The selection committee will attempt to avoid regular‐season rematches when assigning teams to bowls.
- To benefit fans and student‐athletes, the selection committee will attempt to avoid assigning a team, or conference, or the highest‐ranked champion of a non‐contract conference, to the same bowl game repeatedly.
- The selection committee will consider regular‐season head‐to‐head results when assigning teams to bowls.
- The selection committee will consider conference championships when assigning teams to bowls.
- When not hosting semifinals, the Orange, Rose and Sugar bowls (the “contract bowls”) will make their own pairings outside the CFP arrangement. Generally, they will take the champion of their contracted conference; if that champion qualifies for the playoff, the bowl will then choose a replacement from that conference.
Orange Bowl: ACC vs. SEC or Big Ten*
Rose Bowl: Big Ten vs. Pac‐12
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. Big 12
- In non‐semifinal years, the following will inform the Orange Bowl’s selection of the opponent for the ACC Champion or next highest ranked ACC team not in the playoff:
- After the Sugar and Rose bowls have chosen, the highest ranked available non‐playoff, non‐champion of the SEC or Big Ten.
- Over the eight years, a minimum of three SEC and three Big Ten appearances must occur, and a maximum of two Notre Dame appearances can occur.