Former ND, Stanford and Washington head coach reportedly named to playoff committee

Submitted by julesh on

Tyrone Willingham & former USA Today reporter Steve Wieberg on CFB Playoff Committee sources told @ESPN. Willingham 1st ex-coach on it

— Brett McMurphy (@McMurphyESPN) October 5, 2013
Who also played for MSU.

LSAClassOf2000

October 5th, 2013 at 10:44 AM ^

The updated list now looks like this (courtesy of SBNation's tracker):

Arkansas AD Jeff Long.

Former Air Force Academy superintendent Michael Gould.

Former Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese.

Former March Madness chief Tom Jernstedt.

Former Ole Miss quarterback Archie Manning.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Former USA Today reporter Steve Wieberg.

Former Washington coach Ty Willingham.

Clemson AD Dan Radakovich.

USC AD Pat Haden.

West Virginia AD Oliver Luck.

Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez.

UMgradMSUdad

October 5th, 2013 at 10:57 AM ^

The head scratcher for me is Condoleeza Rice.  Does she have any knowledge of or connection to college football?  I know she was provost at Stanford and obviously Secretary of State.  

Bando Calrissian

October 5th, 2013 at 11:10 AM ^

I know she's a huge football fan and all, is knowledgeable enough, and always gets bandied about to be the NFL Commish someday, but... It's a celebrity slot at best.

Really, all this whole thing will do is move the bitching down a couple slots in the final polls, from the 3-4 schools who think they should be in the championship, to the 5-8 schools who think they should be in the playoff. Same controversies for a still-imperfect system. 

Danwillhor

October 5th, 2013 at 11:38 AM ^

I know she is a fan and even has helped Stanford recruit in the way of "oh, look who happens to be here on your visit" but unless she is a crazy cfb fan I'm a bit iffy on that as well. Actually, most of that list is just primed for bias potential that will have fans in an uproar every year that rivals the bcs uproar.

ZoltanSmash

October 5th, 2013 at 11:20 AM ^

I understand people worrying about bias coming in to the selection process. But wasn't that an argument IN FAVOR of the BCS that everybody seems to hate? These computers would use formulas and not have the inherent bias of human voters....sounds good. Then everybody complains that the "human element" is missing.

 

I personally am fine with the list. An AD from a B1G, Pac12, Big12, ACC and SEC program. What does it matter if they are there now or they were there a decade ago? The bias will be there either way, but I think using individuals currently involved makes it slightly more likely that they'll be tuned in to the sport as a whole.

 

Bottom line, I think people are going to be upset either way, but this is a pretty decent list.

Tater

October 5th, 2013 at 11:29 AM ^

This is not a political post.  No matter what side of the fence you're on, Condi is a great "get" for the committee.  I think it's safe to say that no matter how intense it gets on the committee, Condi has been through it all and with a lot more at stake.

goblue20111

October 5th, 2013 at 2:23 PM ^

It's from Dave Chappelle's "Black White Supremacist" skit. Lighten up Francis. I'm actually not opposed to Condi's appointment on this committee as opposed to a bunch of halfwits on a sports blog questioning the credentials of one of the smartest women in the world (not accusing you of doing that just the reactions I've read in general).

gopoohgo

October 5th, 2013 at 12:04 PM ^

as opposed to an AD who was never a coach?

or a former  reporter?

or a former NFL qb with two son's in the NFL who probably just watches Denver, NYG, Saints and Ole Miss games?

May as well add Condi.  Why not?

YoungGeezy

October 5th, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^

No matter what, people are going to be pissed when they feel their team was left out of the playoff. It doesn't really matter who's on this panel.

Also, we really have no idea who's on the NCAA Tournament committee (even if we can find out, we don't really care) and just accept the choices and move on. Don't really see this being any different.

julesh

October 5th, 2013 at 12:26 PM ^

While I agree with you for the most part, there is definitely a difference between the playoff selection and the Tourney selection. If 64+ (is it up to 68 now?) teams were selected for a football playoff, no one would care, either. But with so few teams making it in, everyone is going to care and complain.

AHM16

October 5th, 2013 at 3:30 PM ^

I still don't understand why they don't keep the BCS as a computer system to figure out the top by. Only addition would be factoring in SOS

treetown

October 5th, 2013 at 8:45 PM ^

The NCAA BB selection committee has a long history of having various people who strictly speaking have serious conflict of interest issues - either being former or current conference officials/coaches.

Probably the key presence of these people may be in swaying the choices outside of number 1 and 2. That is why the big conference can usually count on getting their 5 and 6th teams into the NCAA - historically some of the mid major conferences 2nd or 3rd teams might be as good or better.