"It makes no sense. ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS!" - Florida Senator Rick Scott left furious as CFP committee responds to complaint
Recently, the exclusion of undefeated Florida State University from the college football playoffs led to a fiery response from FSU Senator Rick Scott.
In a letter addressed to committee chairman Boo Corrigan, Senator Scott sought transparency. He demanded an answer to the question of why a perfect 13-0 record and an ACC Championship weren't enough for FSU to secure a coveted playoff spot.
The CFP executive director, Bill Hancock, responded to the Senator's demands for transparency, shedding light on the committee's decision-making process. However, Scott, along with other FSU politicians, remains dissatisfied with the explanation provided.
In response to the committee's letter, Senator Scott expressed dissatisfaction on social media, using the platform to share his discontent:
"FSU Football was #4 before beating #14 Louisville without Jordan Travis… but then after that win, the CFP thinks #FSU is a weaker team? It makes no sense. ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS!"
The call for transparency had not been entirely met. Scott's initial request for detailed information, including committee member votes and communication records, was not fulfilled by the CFP executive director.
The frustration extends beyond Scott, with other Florida representatives and Attorney General Ashley Moody expressing concerns. In the latter's case, she has even announced an investigation into the committee's decision-making process.
The committee's response to Florida State's exclusion
In a written response from CFP executive director Bill Hancock, the committee attempted to shed light on the factors that led to Florida State's exclusion.
The letter cited two primary reasons: the protocol's requirement to consider player injuries and the perceived weakness of FSU's strength of schedule.
The pivotal blow came with the announcement that quarterback Jordan Travis's season-ending injury influenced the committee's decision.
While injuries are an unfortunate reality in sports, the justification seems contentious, leaving room for skepticism. The decision to prioritize the perceived impact of a single player's absence over an undefeated record raises eyebrows and prompts further questioning.
The strength of the schedule conundrum
Another point of contention arises from Hancock's use of the term "so-called P5 conference," referencing the ACC as part of the Power 5 conferences. This term sparked consternation among Florida State officials and fans, who interpreted it as downplaying the ACC's status.
Hancock later clarified that the CFP uses the term "Autonomy 5" instead of "Power 5," emphasizing that the choice of words in the letter did not reflect the official language of the committee.
The strength of the schedule argument is a perennial debate in college football. FSU's exclusion based on schedule strength raises questions about the criteria's consistent application, especially when considering past playoff selections.
As the college football community grapples with the aftermath of this decision, it becomes evident that the quest for transparency is far from over. The committee's response, while offering some insights, has not quelled the skepticism surrounding the exclusion of Florida State.