The verdict is in. All conspiracies are true. Nobody can deny anymore that the College Football Playoff committee doesn’t watch the games, as they are instructed to do, and one comment by CFP Chair Warde Manuel after Tuesday night’s rankings came out proves that.
Manuel, speaking on the Tennessee Vols coming in at No. 11, said the committee was “splitting hairs” when trying to decipher between four two-loss SEC teams: UT, the Georgia Bulldogs, the Alabama Crimson Tide and Ole Miss Rebels. He then went on to say, however, the Vols “have great offense, great defense.”
What?
Who could watch the Vols this year and say they have a great offense? They have been mediocre in SEC play at best and downright awful at worse, and this is a team with a resume that includes three straight games of no first-half points and four straight with no first-quarter points. How could Manuel make that comment?
With that quote, there is not doubt now that the College Football Playoff committee doesn’t watch these games. The argument for the Vols is that they have an elite defense and a solid running game. Lack of offensive consistency is the clear-as-day argument against them if you’re using eye test, which they’re supposed to do.
Look, the committee did have to split hairs. Tennessee beat Bama who beat Georgia who beat the Vols. Ole Miss also beat Georgia. Alabama came in at No. 7 in the College Football Playoff rankings with Ole Miss at No. 9 and Georgia at No. 10. There was no way to make this clean. That’s understandable.
What’s not understandable, though, is making an off-hand comment that the Vols have a great offense. They don’t, and Manuel seems to be operating off the reputation of Josh Heupel more than what he has seen, as nobody who has watched this team play would say this.
When you break it all down, it’s clear the College Football Committee is going by resume, but that resume is about recency, quality wins, conference power and brand names. There is obviously no eye test going into it, and Manuel accidentally exposed that with his comment.
