NCAAF  > General NCAAF  > NCAA Football Playoff Selection Committeeis announced.
October 14, 2013, 02:49 PM
I Posted this over on T&R but thought it was worth posting here also.

Arkansas athletic director Jeff Long has been named the first chairman of the College Football Playoff selection committee.

Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez

Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Gould, a former Air Force Academy superintendent

USC athletic director Pat Haden

Former NCAA executive vice president Tom Jernstedt

West Virginia athletic director Oliver Luck

Former NFL and Ole Miss quarterback Archie Manning

Former Nebraska coach/athletic director Tom Osborne

Clemson athletic director Dan Radakovich

Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice

Former Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese

Former USA Today reporter Steve Wieberg

Former Stanford/Notre Dame/Washington coach Tyrone Willingham
October 14, 2013  02:53 PM ET

I suspect that a few of the regular posters on the NCAA threads whose opinions I really respect could do just as well of a job as any of these folks will do--and be just as biased!

October 14, 2013  03:00 PM ET

I hope this doesn't turn into Phase II of the current BS!!

October 14, 2013  03:10 PM ET

Perhaps the most interesting selections are that Jeff Long and Barry Alvarez are both appointed. That should make the meetings bit more than a little interesting.

October 14, 2013  03:42 PM ET

Manning's selection card will read 1. SEC team 2. SEC team 3. SEC team 4. SEC team first through fourth alternates SEC teams.

And why is Mike Tranghese on the list? He has never wanted anything to do with changing the bowl line-ups.

October 14, 2013  04:37 PM ET
QUOTE(#4):

Manning's selection card will read 1. SEC team 2. SEC team 3. SEC team 4. SEC team first through fourth alternates SEC teams.And why is Mike Tranghese on the list? He has never wanted anything to do with changing the bowl line-ups.

I do not agree with your sour prediction of Archie Manning's predilections.

I do agree with your questioning of Mike Tranghese's suitability, given his outspoken avocation for the post-season Bowls.

October 14, 2013  05:17 PM ET

My first impression is that the PAC-12 and B1G are well represented, but the ACC and SEC look a little under-represented.

October 14, 2013  05:19 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

I suspect that a few of the regular posters on the NCAA threads whose opinions I really respect could do just as well of a job as any of these folks will do--and be just as biased!

I wouldn't be biased. Unless, of course, always voting against TSUN is considered biased.

October 14, 2013  06:12 PM ET

They put Tom Osborne on the committee so they'd have someone to disagree with everyone and whine in the media when he doesn't get his way. Drama sells.

October 14, 2013  06:16 PM ET

I'm not a fan of sitting ADs being on the selection committee.

October 14, 2013  06:18 PM ET
QUOTE:

...Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice...Former USA Today reporter Steve Wieberg...

Condi's inclusion is still a head-scratcher to me. Not trying to be sexist here, but if the panel must have a politico, at least include someone who played the game. Heath Shuler comes to mind.

Steve Wieberg? Meh. Give me Keith Jackson on the committee, or no media representative at all.

October 14, 2013  06:50 PM ET

What I have to keep reminding myself is that the NCAA didn't make these appointments.

A fairly eclectic group. Sitting AD's from each of the 5 majors plus eight others. Assuming the 5 AD's balance each other out, I'd rather the other 8 be picked more for their objectivity (Jernigan) than for their association with one particular school (Osborne). But who's to say which will be the most biased? The only one that give me any real heartburn is Tranghese. His appointment is like putting Bill Maher on a committee to sort out the next Republican presidential nominee.

Also interesting is the only representative of Notre Dame, past or present, is Ty Willingham. I guess the days of kowtowing to South Bend are over.

Just one question.... How do you get 13 people to agree on anything?

October 14, 2013  06:53 PM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Condi's inclusion is still a head-scratcher to me. Not trying to be sexist here, but if the panel must have a politico, at least include someone who played the game. Heath Shuler comes to mind.

Steve Wieberg? Meh. Give me Keith Jackson on the committee, or no media representative at all.

Read an article recently where Rice is an avid football fan. As Secretary of State, her staff knew to never schedule meetings or events on Sunday afternoons. Mostly NFL, she's also thoroughly enjoying Stanford's run since Harbaugh came in. She supposedly threw her hat in the ring to run the NCAA. My head-scratcher is General Gould. Can't find any bio that mentions his connection to football.

Keith Jackson would be a great inclusion, provided he's still compos mentis.

October 14, 2013  07:43 PM ET
QUOTE(#12):

Keith Jackson would be a great inclusion, provided he's still compos mentis.

Keith Jackson is 84 years old.....sorry, but that's a bit too old for my tastes.
I thought having Dr. Tom at 76 was a bit old.

October 14, 2013  08:47 PM ET

I don't think age or sex or football knowledge is at all needed to determine the most deserving teams. The resumes are more for us than fairness.

October 14, 2013  10:20 PM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Condi's inclusion is still a head-scratcher to me. Not trying to be sexist here, but if the panel must have a politico, at least include someone who played the game. Heath Shuler comes to mind.Steve Wieberg? Meh. Give me Keith Jackson on the committee, or no media representative at all.

I read an article that she was the best choice....looks at the outcomes and results of the games and takes the emotion of "he played in extremely hot/cold/wet/etc weather" out of the equation.

We'll see.

October 14, 2013  10:21 PM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Just one question.... How do you get 13 people to agree on anything?

I think it will be majority rules and not needing to be unanimous?

October 14, 2013  11:50 PM ET

Hopefully this is a stepping stone to a real playoff like what FCS has today: 20 teams (conference champs + 8 at-large), playoffs begin in December, Final Four on New Years Day.

I'm willing to trust Condi & and the ADs to decide seeding and debate the merits of Texas Tech vs. Fresno St. as bubble teams. But (to use last year's example) trying to decide among three 11-1 Oregon/Florida/K-State resumes for the final two invites?

October 14, 2013  11:53 PM ET
QUOTE(#13):

Keith Jackson is 84 years old.....sorry, but that's a bit too old for my tastes.I thought having Dr. Tom at 76 was a bit old.

I'd give just about anything to hear one more "Whoa Nelly" on a Saturday afternoon.

October 14, 2013  11:54 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

I wouldn't be biased. Unless, of course, always voting against TSUN is considered biased.

No, voting against them is considered common sense.

 
October 15, 2013  01:10 AM ET
QUOTE(#14):

I don't think ..... football knowledge is at all needed to determine the most deserving teams.

Pray tell, what qualities would be desirable?

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Irving: Fans don't deserve the Cavs
    Views
    7260
    Comments
    680
  2. 2
    Red Sox dodged two injury scares
    Views
    2928
    Comments
    495
  3. 3
    Trump taking a legit run at the Bills
    Views
    2202
    Comments
    106
  4. 4
    Why the Raiders have lost 111 of 160 games
    Views
    5638
    Comments
    66
  5. 5
    Bruins can't count on shut-down D
    Views
    1493
    Comments
    59

SI.com

SI Photos