Despite being on top of the College Football Playoff Rankings last week, the Buckeyes were jumped by LSU and finished the rankings at the No. 2 team and must now play No. 3 Clemson out in the desert at the Fiesta Bowl.
At least there wasn’t a whole lot of drama concerning the Buckeyes getting into the CFP this year, but moving them down after the body of work they have put together was not without controversy. Now, Ohio State must play the game as they say, and beat the best to be the best.
After each set of rankings, the College Football Playoff Committee holds a teleconference with select media members to be as transparent as possible, and to field questions about the ranking process.
We’re a part of those and we’d like to pass on what the Playoff Selection Committee Chair Rob Mullens had to say about Ohio State after the final set of rankings. So, here goes after the last one of 2019 …
Next … General remarks and the Ohio State vs. LSU debate
On the overall comments from the selection committee on the Buckeyes:
Good afternoon. At 10:50 last night,the committee gathered. We met until 1:00 in themmorning, and we met again this morning beginning at 8:00 a.m. Our rankings are complete, and you’ve seen them. The committee ranked LSU No. 1, Ohio StateNo. 2, Clemson No. 3 and Oklahoma No. 4. Here’s why:
The committee holds LSU and Ohio State in the highest regard. We flipped them between 1 and 2 three times this season. That’s what happens when you work off of a clean sheet of paper with two teams that are so closely matched. LSU’s dominating performance against an excellent Georgia team was a final piece of information that influenced the committee’s vote. LSU’s wins were against Georgia, Florida, Auburn and Alabama, ranked 5, 9, 12 and 13.
The committee favorably compared that to Ohio State’s wins against Wisconsin twice, Penn State, Michigan and Cincinnati, ranked 8, 10, 14 and 21.
On determining what team would ultimate get the No. 1 seed:
Question from the media: I think I heard you tell Reese that you assigned
committee members to state a case for each of those undefeated teams at No. 1. Who stated the case for Ohio State and LSU, and what were the cases beyond top-25 wins?
ROB MULLENS: Yeah, I don’t want to disclose who we asked to do that because sometimes they were appointed. But we did want to make sure that somebody presented the resume for each of those. We went through it like we do every week. You’re looking at the full resume, wins against ranked opponents, how they’re performing, and with those, because they are such good teams, we were getting into each phases of the game. The difference in the end was for the 1 and 2, the games against ranked opponents, and not only against the ranked opponents but where they were ranked. LSU’s dominant performance against what was the No. 4 team, ended up being the No. 5 team, and their defense has really improved the last couple of weeks, and obviously the excellent play of Joe Burrow.
On measuring the discussion of the top four and if it was easier this year:
Question from the media: Sort of along those lines, how would you characterize the discussion for the top four? I know obviously 1 and 2 were difficult, but as far as the top four, was it easier this year than it’s been in the years that you’ve been on the committee?
ROB MULLENS: You know, I would never classify it as easier. Last year there were three teams, and we had a long debate with varied resumes for No. 4. We didn’t have that element this year. I think you’ve seen our rankings and heard us discuss throughout the whole process. We’ve got three undefeated conference champions at 1, 2 and 3 who have performed at a consistently high level. So that piece has been there.
So each year is unique, and yes, at the end we didn’t have that intense debate with three teams for one spot.
On the decision to elevate LSU over Ohio State:
Question from the media: I’m not sure how much you were asked already about Ohio State versus LSU, but I guess did something about Ohio State’s resume in your mind change just based on the first half of the Big Ten Championship game, or how much of a factor was that in how things shook out?
ROB MULLENS: Well, we’ve been asked about it a lot. I think these are two teams that have been really close the entire time, and as we’ve explained, every weekend one of them has done something to move above the other. I think last night in watching the championship game, LSU’s performance against a No. 4 ranked Georgia propelled the committee to put them just ahead of Ohio State in 1 versus 2. Did last night’s games play a role? Sure they did. Every game plays a role, and I think it was more about LSU’s strong
dominant performance over a No. 4 ranked team that elevated them to No. 1.
On Wisconsin’s performance against Ohio State:
Question from the media: I think you touched on it a bit already, but in the case of Wisconsin, how much did the committee factor in the way they lost to Ohio State in the Big Ten Championship, the way they kept it close, when you got to the Rose Bowl argument, as opposed to the fact that they had lost three games in total this season?
ROB MULLENS: Well, I think what really carried the day is they’ve got three wins against top-25 teams. The No. 14 Michigan, No. 16 Iowa, and No. 18 Minnesota. You know, and then there’s lots of common opponents because in the same league. I think that’s where it really carried today. Obviously the way they played last night, particularly in the first half, was something that was noticed by the committee. But in the end, their three wins against CFP top-25 wins really impressed the committee.
Next … More discussions on Ohio State and LSU
On playing top teams multiple weeks in a row and how that impacts the rankings:
Question from the media: At the end of the year you guys have all the
resumes in totality and you can stack them up against each other one by one, X many wins against top-25 opponents and all that stuff. But I was wondering when you look at a schedule and how it lays out, do you guys weigh in in any way if a team has to play top-15 opponents in consecutive weeks or three weeks in a row, and how does that factor into a resume? Is it just here’s how many wins they have against top-25 opponents or does the fact that a team wins those games consecutively and they’re probably pretty
tough circumstances, like that impacts the way you view them?
ROB MULLENS: Again, when we put those resumes on the board, we see the games in sequential order. And we see what the rankings are. So we recognize that, and that’s a piece of it. But so is the entire resume.
Follow up on playing tough teams for weeks in a row:
Question from the media: Is there a distinction between a team beats the 14th, 12th, 16th teams on their resume, and if they beat them all in a row, does it carry more weight? Do you see what I’m saying? Or is it just what it is
at the end?
ROB MULLENS: Well, it probably depends. When you’re comparing them against a team that beat No. 5, No. 9, No. 12 and No. 13, that’s all part of the
conversation. Sure, the sequence is discussed and who they beat is discussed, but so is another team’s resume who’s beaten highly ranked teams, as well.
On what the Committee was thinking during the first half of the Big Ten Championship Game:
Question from the media: Without violating the sanctity of the discussions, can you talk about, I guess paint the picture of watching the Big Ten Championship game together, the value in being with the other committee members, and what can you say about what you guys were talking about last night when Ohio State was down 21-7 in the first half? Is there any sort of reaction you can share from within the room as the game unfolded and how the discussions contributed to the decisions?
ROB MULLENS: Sure, we don’t really have the deliberations while the game is going on, but we’re watching it just like you would watch it. We’re oohing and aahing at big plays, we’re talking about the strategy that’s being employed and about certain players and how they’re playing. But we save the debate until the results because things change and adjustments are made at halftime, and our job is to look at results. But we’ll watch it just like you would watch it, oohing and aahing at big plays and seeing how it unfolds.
More on the biggest rationale for putting LSU ahead of Ohio state:
Question from the media: Apologies there were technical issues earlier. I
think we missed 10 minutes maybe of this. If you could just speak to what was the most compelling argument for moving LSU ahead of Ohio State?
ROB MULLENS: I think the most compelling argument — these are two very close teams, as you’ve seen. I think in our six rankings, one has been No. 1 three times and the other has been No. 1 three times. As I mentioned earlier in the call, it’s just a matter of one does something to move slightly ahead of the other, and this weekend LSU beat a highly-ranked, at the time, No. 4 Georgia team in an impressive fashion in the SEC Championship. That ended up being their fourth win against teams that are ranked 13 or higher in the final CFP poll. Their defense has improved and shown a lot over the last two weeks as they’ve gotten healthy, and once again, their outstanding quarterback play was on display last night.
On what time the Committee members went to bed, and what it meant to come back in at 8:00 in the morning:
Question from the media: I know you guys get to bed really late. I was wondering what time you actually went to bed, and you guys think a lot about coming back to this. What lingering questions did you have heading into this morning that you knew you guys would have to get back into today?
ROB MULLENS: What time did I go to bed personally? Well, I went back, and again, looked at the sheet, looked at the results, thought in my mind, as the chair, what are the things that we need to make sure that we put on the table to make sure that we’ve been thorough. And we do this every week, and make sure that we engage every member to make sure everybody that went back that night and reviewed it had an opportunity to put anything on the table to discuss, 1 through 25, and when we came back, everybody agreed that we should spend considerable time on 1 through 3 again, and then we wanted to visit the Group of Five again because of what that meant. Even though the rankings have been consistent, we wanted to do it one last time to make sure we were confident and 100 percent certain we got it right because of what was on the line. That was consistent with what I felt we needed to make sure we did.
What time did I go to sleep? I don’t even know. I kind of drifted out with the papers in my hand.
