College Football Playoff Committee ranked Penn State over SMU and Indiana due its logo

Ask any Indiana or SMU fan currently enjoying the most entertaining football seasons for their teams in maybe ever, what their biggest fear is. What do you think they’d say?

I hope my team isn’t treated unfairly because of the logo on its helmet.

The College Football Playoff Committee has gotten it right through 10 years. They have a difficult job to do and outside of an impossible decision they had to make last year with Florida State, these committees have been reliable. The committee has always made fair, unbiased, and just decisions at the end of the season. You have to trust that will remain true this season.

But on Tuesday night, the CFP Committee released their first official rankings in the inaugural season of the 12-team field. They got it wrong. It doesn’t feel like SMU or Indiana got a fair shake.

Someone, anyone explain how one-loss Penn State, who came in at No. 6, is ranked higher than No. 8 Indiana, who remains undefeated. And for that matter, how are the Nittany Lions ranked seven spots ahead of No. 13 SMU?

Here are the blind resumes of the three teams:

Team A

Record: 7-1
Sagarin strength of schedule: 32
FPI strength of schedule: 28
Record vs. Sagarin top 30: 1-1
Scoring differential: Plus-146

Team B

Record: 8-1
Sagarin strength of schedule: 60
FPI strength of schedule: 71
Record vs. Sagarin top 30: 1-1
Scoring differential: Plus-165

Team C

Record: 9-0
Sagarin strength of schedule: 81
FPI strength of schedule: 103
Record vs. Sagarin top 30: 0-0
Scoring differential: Plus-296

Team A is Penn State. Team B is SMU. Team C is Indiana.

There is no question that Penn State has an advantage in one category. It has a tougher strength of schedule, which we know matters to the committee. Here’s what CFP Committee Chair Warde Manuel said about Indiana and Penn State.

Indiana: “Their strength of schedule was not very high in comparison to others. But the way they have played in those games and the dominance they have show, winning by an average of 33 points per game, has been really impressive to the committee. We couldn’t ignore that as it related to where they were ranked or how we saw them. Even though strength of schedule is important, we have also watched those games. The only game they have been behind was last week to Michigan State by 10, and they came back and went on a 47-point run to win that game. Very impressive team, well-coached by Curt Cignetti. They are a formidable opponent.” 

Penn State: “Penn State lost to the No. 2 Ohio State Buckeyes. It was a game that went back-and-forth and obviously a game that could’ve gone the other way. They have wins over Illinois, Southern Cal in overtime, opening win at West Virginia, which is difficult place to play. We looked at their body of work.” 

There is a lot to unpack there. Let me translate: We don’t know why Penn State is ranked higher than Indiana, so we’re going to throw out the only statistic where the Nittany Lions hold an advantage while ignoring the loss.

You’re saying the strength of schedule is more important than whether a team actually won or lost? You’re saying Penn State’s loss to Ohio State is the most impressive thing on its resume? You’re saying Penn State gets credit for beating West Virginia and USC when both of those teams have been bad?

Yes, Indiana hasn’t played anyone this year. But it also has won every game by 14 points or more this year. The Hoosiers, which the committee has watched, have looked dominant week in and week out.

Penn State has played someone this year. Guess what? The Nittany Lions lost the only time it did and Ohio State makes for a nice little boost to its strength of schedule. There are no quality wins on Penn State’s resume — regardless of nonsense about West Virginia and USC — and strength of schedule shouldn’t weigh more than losing. The best thing on a team’s resume cannot be a loss. It just can’t.

Now to SMU. The Mustangs’ lone loss came to an undefeated BYU team the committee ranked No. 9. SMU also has a win over No. 22 Louisville and is coming off a blowout of No. 18 Pittsburgh on Saturday. SMU, like Penn State, has a quality loss to a team contending for a power conference title. It also has two more quality wins than the Nittany Lions and are ranked seven spots behind and out of the CFP field.

Listen, Indiana gets to play Ohio State in a few weeks. The Hoosiers will get their chance at the Buckeyes and the schedule boost that Penn State is enjoying. If it wins, this isn’t an issue. And if it loses, it isn’t an issue. Things in this sport always come together when we get all of the context.

The thing that’s frustrating, though, is that with the information we have, there is no clear or identifiable reason why we’re propping Penn State up over SMU and Indiana other than its logo.

Are we 100 percent sure that Penn State would beat SMU and Indiana? I’m definitely not. I’m not even sure Penn State would be favored if it played Indiana tomorrow.

You may not think these rankings matter. You may be right when we have all the data points at the end of the season. But both Indiana and SMU could find themselves in head-to-head debates with attractive two-loss teams later in the process, and starting points matter. The committee is telling us what they think of these teams right now. And it seems like they’re thinking about it wrong.

So, for the time being, I’m giving Indiana and SMU their flowers when the committee won’t. They, unlike Penn State, have earned it.