The irony of the situation is that if several teams on the bubble, possessing stronger strength of schedules, hadn’t experienced upsets in the season’s final two weeks, the selection committee might have excluded Indiana from the playoff field. This is because, contrary to the narrative pushed by the SEC, the committee does indeed consider strength of schedule when making its decisions.However, with enough upsets occurring among those bubble teams, the Hoosiers managed to secure a spot. The college football landscape then seemed to accept Indiana’s scheduling approach as a sound strategy, rather than a flawed one, at least until the committee alters its criteria or the strength of the bubble increases in future seasons.
Cignetti‘s remarks at media days,along with his team’s scheduling choices,can be interpreted as a subtle jab at both the SEC and the committee’s decision to include the Hoosiers. He appears to be acting as if he has outsmarted the committee. However, it’s crucial to remember that the committee is a dynamic entity, not bound by past selection methodologies.
The committee has never previously excluded an undefeated Power Four team from the four-team playoff. This precedent was broken when they overlooked the undefeated 13-0 Florida State in favor of the SEC’s one-loss champion. What’s to prevent the committee from rejecting a future 11-1 team that, on Selection Sunday, boasts victories over numerous non-conference opponents with weak football programs and no wins against ranked teams?
There is, actually, nothing preventing them from doing so.The composition of the committee changes. The chairperson rotates. Circumstances evolve. No two seasons unfold identically.
If the committee perceives that Cignetti and others like him are attempting to manipulate the system, they may well adopt a firmer stance against teams that utilize a weak schedule to inflate their record.The continued reluctance to schedule challenging non-conference games remains a notable impediment to college football reaching its full potential. The committee possesses the authority to encourage a shift in this non-conference scheduling strategy. if the committee begins to reject bubble teams that exclusively play weaker opponents in September, it’s likely that we will see a decrease in schedules lacking Power four non-conference opponents.
Until that day arrives, if cignetti expresses concern about a game against Virginia, it suggests he doesn’t truly believe he has assembled one of the nation’s top 12 teams. Perhaps the committee will eventually learn to trust his assessment.
Blake Toppmeyer is the national college football columnist for the USA TODAY Network. he can be reached at BToppmeyer@gannett.com and followed on X @btoppmeyer.
