The CFP's Dilemma: Can a Win Not Be a Win?

The Unlikely Dispute

It's been a wild week in college football, and it all started with a game that shouldn't have mattered much—Michigan's win over Western Michigan. Or so it seemed. The result? A win, yes—but one that the College Football Playoff has decided not to overturn. Why? Because the CFP selection committee doesn't think it should. And that's where things get complicated.

"We can't overturn a game result," said the CFP spokesperson, speaking on behalf of the committee. "But we will take into account what happened in the game when making our selections."

I've been covering college football for over a decade, and I've seen plenty of controversial outcomes—some that have made it to the playoff, others that haven't. But this one is different. It's not just about a single game—it's about how we evaluate performance when the stakes are high.

The Numbers Don't Lie

Let's start with what we know. Michigan's offense was on fire, but it wasn't flawless. Their defense allowed Western Michigan to score 17 points in the first half, something that would've been catastrophic in a higher-stakes game. Still, they won by 23 points, which is more than enough to earn a bid to the playoff. But the CFP's decision speaks volumes about what they're looking for beyond just wins and losses.

Here's the thing: when a team like Michigan loses a close game, it could be seen as a sign of inconsistency. When they lose by 23 points in a blowout, it might signal that their competition isn't up to par. In this case, though, it's the latter that's troubling. And that's what the selection committee is taking into account.

Why This Matters for Selection

There's a reason why the CFP puts so much stock in games like this. It's not about whether a team beat another team—it's about how they did it. In a sport where parity is king, we're always looking for signs of true dominance. When you play an opponent who can't even score in the first half, that says something about your team's overall strength.

The CFP committee doesn't just want to see wins—they want to see them against quality competition. So while Michigan won, their performance might not have impressed the committee enough to warrant a spot in the playoff. That's not to say they're wrong, but it does highlight how nuanced and complex this selection process really is.

What This Means for Teams Like Michigan

For teams like Michigan, who are always at the top of the national rankings, the pressure to perform in every game is intense. They're not just playing for themselves—they're playing for a shot at the playoff. And if they don't play their best, even a win can be viewed as lacking.

What's more, the CFP has made it clear that they'll look at how teams perform in these types of games. So, if you're a program like Michigan and you lose to a team like Western Michigan by 23 points, it raises questions about your overall competitiveness. It's not just about beating someone—it's about doing it with authority.

The Competitive Edge

Let me be clear: I'm not here to criticize Michigan. They're a powerhouse in college football, and they've earned their place at the top of the rankings. But this is exactly why we need more nuance when it comes to how we evaluate these teams.

Take Alabama or Ohio State—two programs that have dominated the CFP for years. Their games are always competitive, regardless of who they're playing against. That's what makes them elite. If you're not getting tested by quality opponents, then how do we know you're truly ready for the playoff stage?

How the Committee Will Adjust

The CFP committee has indicated that they'll consider the outcome of games like Michigan vs. Western Michigan when selecting teams for the playoff. That's not a small thing. It means that even if a team wins, they're not automatically guaranteed a spot.

It also means that programs that are consistently outperforming their competition—like Notre Dame or Clemson—have an edge. Their games show dominance, and that's what the CFP values most. But it's not just about winning—it's about how you win.

The Bigger Picture

At the end of the day, the College Football Playoff is trying to showcase the best teams in college football. That means they're looking for programs that can consistently compete and dominate. It's not enough to just win—you have to dominate.

This is where I think we'll see a shift in how we evaluate teams moving forward. The CFP is signaling that wins matter, but only when they're backed up by performance. A blowout victory may look good on paper, but it doesn't tell the full story of a team's potential.

And that's what makes this decision so interesting. It's not just about one game—it's about the philosophy behind how we select champions in college football.

What's Next?

We're still early in the season, but this is going to be a defining moment for teams like Michigan and their path to the playoff. If they want to make it, they'll have to show that they can handle the pressure of high-stakes games—especially when facing top-tier opponents.

The CFP committee's decision may seem cold, but it's actually a reflection of what they're trying to achieve: putting the best teams in the playoff, regardless of how they got there. And if we want our sport to be taken seriously at the highest level, that's exactly what we need.

• Teams must dominate their opponents
• Wins are important—but performance is everything
• The CFP is moving toward a more nuanced selection process