The College Football Playoff selection committee told everyone what it thinks Tuesday night. At 8-2, Notre Dame sits No. 9, with Alabama at No. 10 and Miami at No. 13 in the latest CFP rankings. On paper, those three teams look comparable. That is exactly where the problem starts.
By its own protocol, the committee is supposed to separate "otherwise comparable teams" using strength of schedule, head-to-head results and performance against ranked opponents. When you run those tests on Alabama and Miami against Notre Dame, the Irish come up short in the very categories the committee says it values most.
Why Alabama should be above Notre Dame
Start with Alabama. The Crimson Tide are 8-2 with losses to Florida State and Oklahoma, but they also own one of the best win collections in the country. Alabama has beaten Georgia, Vanderbilt, Tennessee and Missouri, all of whom appear in this week's CFP Top 25. The Tide have four ranked wins compared with just one for Notre Dame.
Notre Dame's resume is good, but not better. The Irish are also 8-2, with understandable early losses to Texas A&M and at Miami. They have ripped off eight straight wins, including comfortable victories over Purdue, Arkansas, Boise State, NC State and Pitt, plus a rivalry win over USC. The catch: USC is the only current Top 25 opponent Notre Dame has beaten, something that most people have pointed out in the last couple weeks.
If ranked wins and schedule strength are supposed to differentiate teams, Alabama's is clearly stronger than Notre Dame's. The Tide have twice as many games against current CFP-ranked opponents and far more success in those spots, specifically that road win over Georgia that snapped the Bulldogs' long home streak. Yet they sit one spot behind the Irish.
Why Miami should be above Notre Dame
Miami's case is different, but just as glaring. The Hurricanes are 8-2 with a head-to-head win over Notre Dame in the opener. It was a 27-24 victory in which Miami did not turn the ball over and pushed around ND in the trenches. They also have wins over South Florida when they were ranked in the top 20. Obviously Miami has been on the opposite end of some clunkers, but ignoring the head-to-head is a travesty here.
Notre Dame's case to be above Miami and Alabama
The obvious counter is that Alabama and Miami both have what the committee might view as "bad losses." Alabama opened with a double-digit defeat at Florida State and just fell at home to Oklahoma. While Oklahoma isn't a bad loss by any means, the FSU game is still really bad for the Tide. Miami has a home loss to Louisville and an overtime road loss at SMU. Both were close, but they each feature a poor QB performance and Miami didn't look anywhere like a championship contender in those games. Notre Dame's losses, by contrast, are by a combined four points to top-three Texas A&M and Miami.
But still, even when giving the argument that ND has good losses, it feels ironic to mention when it's supposed to put down Miami. On one hand, the argument props up Miami as a "good loss" for the Irish. On the other, it is used to say ND should be ranked ahead of the Canes, thus moving Miami down. It's just not logical.
Why this is bad for college football
The updated CFP metrics are supposed to reward wins against strong opponents more than they punish losses to them, and penalize teams more harshly for beating up on weak schedules. When the committee leans on "bad loss" math to keep Alabama and Miami behind Notre Dame, it is effectively downplaying both the Tide's collection of ranked wins and Miami's head-to-head victory.
All three teams are good enough to play their way into the 12-team bracket. But if the mandate is to rank the teams in the proper order, Alabama and Miami have a legitimate gripe.