(12-08-2016 02:19 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I think they would have put Clemson in the game. I don't think they would have put a non-conf champ in the top 2.

OSU wouldn't have the extra data point that Clemson had. Plus it's been stated already that they factored in the Harris Poll 1/3, so I don't think the human element would have rewarded one less game played, regardless of the win over OU.

Clearly Clemson would have gotten in having played game #13 and having scheduled Auburn OOC as opposed to Washington's OOC.

Clemson would have had to be considerably ahead in the polls. While yes, some voters would have done so, a lot of voters would have still taken Ohio St.

(12-08-2016 02:19 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I think they would have put Clemson in the game. I don't think they would have put a non-conf champ in the top 2.

OSU wouldn't have the extra data point that Clemson had. Plus it's been stated already that they factored in the Harris Poll 1/3, so I don't think the human element would have rewarded one less game played, regardless of the win over OU.

Clearly Clemson would have gotten in having played game #13 and having scheduled Auburn OOC as opposed to Washington's OOC.

They did it with the LSU-Alabama rematch. So the history shows they didn't care about the title.