The Flaw(s) of the College Football Postseason, including the current College football playoff

If you haven't already, read the introduction first.

When the new college football playoff was first announced, I was overjoyed. Finally the ridiculous, extremely flawed BCS system was dead and more deserving teams were getting a shot at the national championship. I was a bit puzzled at the selection committee(why did it have to exist. What makes it different/better from the media members voting) and the weekly College Football Playing rankings(which are completely unnecessary in my opinion) but even then, I was excited. But my excitement quickly faded as the first season of the college football playoff went by. Week after week, it got more and more clear to me that while there are 4 teams given the shot at the crown instead of 2, not much has really changed.
By the end of the season where the committee released their final rankings, it was clear. There were three teams that were comfortably into the playoff: undefeated defending national champion and winner of 3 consecutive ACC titles Florida State(13-0), SEC champion Alabama(12-1) and PAC-12 champion Oregon(12-1). There was only one truly contested spot remaining. And there were three real contenders for that last spot: Big-12 champion Baylor(11-1), Big-12 "co-champion" TCU(11-1) and Big Ten champion Ohio State(12-1). Most would agree that the Big-12 was a stronger conference(especially the upper half), than the Big Ten(the conference of my Fighting Illini(6-6)). Baylor played the pretty much the same schedule as TCU,though TCU beat a decent Big Ten team(Minnesota(8-4, including a loss to my Illini)). Baylor managed to defeat TCU. And while some try to minimize that game(It was a home game for Baylor, it was only by 3 points, etc.), a win is a win. If the games on the field don't count, then why play them at all? Baylor should go in ahead of TCU. Baylor's only loss was on the road to a fellow B12 foe, West Virginia(7-5). Ohio State was far and away the best team in the lowly Big Ten and dominated the rest of the conference. They did somehow lose a home game against Virginia Tech(6-6) a mediocre team from the worst of the power conferences, the ACC and they lost it by 14 points. This would appear to make it clear the Baylor was to be the 4th team in the playoff.
Unfortunately for Baylor, two things sunk them: (1) The B12 commissioner oddly refusing to name them the sole B12 champion by virtue of their tie-breaking win against TCU. The committee was emphasizing conference champions and a co-champion isn't a champion. The commissioner hurt his own conference by making such a strange decision. The second reason is a bit more political.(2) The team selected instead of Baylor was Ohio State. If you know anything about the history of college football, you'd know that Ohio State is a traditional college football powerhouse. Baylor, on the other hand, has only recently found success. Before that, Baylor was a doormat in the Big 12 and one of the worst programs in the country. Ohio State has a much larger and more influential fan base than Baylor. The media will tend the emphasize Ohio State's successes more than Baylor's successes. Also the backgrounds of committee members suggest that they are far more likely to support Ohio State than Baylor regardless of the facts.
The Ohio State/Baylor situation, the Marshall(12-1) situation(until they lost to Western KY(7-5, including a loss to my Illini)) as well as other situations made me realize some serious flaws with the new college football playoff system.
For one thing, the College Football Playoff Rankings are made by the committee, which can allow them to manipulate the rankings in order to confirm biases. For example, Wisconsin lost their final game 59-0, a top 25 team doesn't lose to anyone 59-0. Yet somehow they're 18. Minnesota is an 8-4 team with no notable wins(perhaps Nebraska) and a loss to Illinois(I love my Illini but no top 25 team would lose to Illinois), yet they are at 25, while a Oklahoma(8-4) team from a better conference is unranked.  Is it a coincidence that that Wisc and Minnesota are teams Ohio State has beaten and Baylor is a team Oklahoma has beaten, giving Ohio State 3 top 25 wins, while Baylor only has 2? Maybe. But the possibility alone is a huge flaw, in my opinion.
But this kind of flaw(the flaw of incompetence or bias) always exists when who gets a shot at the title is determined solely by a group of people as opposed to by the team's results, like it is in the other major sports.

Another flaw is that the current system(as well as the past system) punishes positive parity in a conference. Positive parity(in the way I'm using it) is having a lot of great/elite teams in a conference but none that are dominant over the other. I realized this when observing the the SEC. I tend to root against SEC teams because ESPN's (and other major media outlets) apparent bias which favors teams from that conference. Preseason rankings(which are overvalued in college sports) are filled which SEC teams(even some who had bad seasons the year or lost a lot of key players.). So in my disdain of the SEC, I was imagining scenarios in which the SEC misses out on the (2014-15) playoff. If Missouri(who lost to Indiana LOL) beat Alabama in the conference championship game, then the SEC would likely miss out on the playoff.  Miss St had already loss 2 games and Mississippi lost 3. Sure that would be fun, but would it be the right thing for a conference to be punished for having a lot of strong teams(which lowers those teams records)? Let me try to explain.
Consider this (fictional) scenario:
At the end of one particular year, the selection commitee has determined the playoff. The Four Teams are the only 3 1-loss teams in the country and an unbeaten midmajor which played a strong nonconference schedule: 1.Illinois(I wish), 2.LSU,  3.Stanford and 4.East Carolina. But the thing I want you to focus on is the Big-12 conference. The top four teams in this conference are: Kansas State(10-2,6-2 in conference), Oklahoma(10-2,6-2 in conference), Texas(9-3,5-3 in conference) and TCU(9-3,5-3 in conference). Kansas State(who beat Oklahoma convincingly on the road) wasn't seriously considered as a 4 team playoff candidate because of they're two losses.
Now consider this scenario in addition to the previous one: ( if this ever gets any kind of a following/popularity, please don't go crazy, atheists; it's ok if others have different beliefs than you). Up in heaven there are all kinds of angels and God trusts them allows them to whatever they please. But there's one particular angel who's very relevant. It's the angel who is a huge fan of 21st century American College Football. This angel has the ability to tell who is going to win a game even before it happens(for example, the angel knew that Appalachian State was going to beat Michigan and exactly how it would go down) and can even determine the outcomes of games that would never or could never happen(like a 2011-12 LSU-Oklahoma State title game) and is completely infallible. This angel comes down from heaven and informs you that he has run 100% accurate simulations of every team in the FBS for this particular season in games against all of the other teams in the FBS and has recorded the win-loss record of all these games(of course most of these which would not happen). Based on this, the angel reveals that the top five teams are: Kansas State(126-2), Oklahoma(126-2), Texas(125-3), TCU(125-3) and Illinois(120-8). Also in these rankings it shows that 8 of the 10 B12 teams were in the top 15. So it appears that none of the best teams in the country were even given a chance at the national championship. This appears to reveal a huge flaw in the current college football playoff. Of course, TCU and Texas probably can be dismissed because they finished 3rd and 4th in their conference but the fact that the top 2 teams didn't even get a shot in this scenario shows a real flaw in the system. Now it's a weaker flaw as it can be said that it's not necessarily the best team that should win it all but the best team with the best record but that's more a pro argument(because pro teams play more games and get to play more of the teams). Regardless, it exposes a fairly significant flaw that my playoff proposal doesn't have.

But the main flaw of this current postseason system, as well as the old systems is this: there's a possibility that the best team in the country with a perfect record could not be even given a chance to win the national championship.
In the BCS era this flaw was really obvious. In 2004, USC beat Oklahoma in the title game and was considered the national champion. But both Auburn and Utah were unbeaten to finish the season(and won their bowl games) and were never given a chance at the national championship. Either Auburn and Utah could have been the best team in the country and did not lose any games but weren't even given a shot at winning it all. The same could be said about 2006 Boise State, 2008 Utah, 2009 Boise State and 2010 TCU. Undefeated postseason eligible conference champions would not be given a chance at the national title.
Of course, when the new playoff was unveiled. It was supposed to have solved this problem. For example, the playoff in 2004 would have included USC, Oklahoma, Auburn and Utah. In some years Utah, TCU or Boise would have been given their fair shot in the top 4 bracket. But it doesn't really solve the problem. I realized this while observing Marshall before their loss to WKU. Marshall's AD screwed up. They stopped playing the West Va "rivalry" game and didn't schedule any other games with power five conferences. The result was a soft schedule; a week non conference along with the soft C-USA. As Marshall piled up wins, the selection committee refused to even consider them and understandably so; that's a horribly weak schedule. But while I understood that, I thought of something(Remember this was before their loss): what if Marshall was the best team in the country and was just a victim of bad scheduling that was out of the players' control? What if they went unbeaten and were the country's best team but still was not even given the chance to win it all?
Consider this (fictional) scenario:
At the end of the regular season and conference championship games, there are 6 undefeated teams. All six are from different conferences(of course). One from each of the Power 5(let's say LSU, Kansas State, USC, Ohio State and Miami) and one from the AAC(Houston). All six played similar non conference schedules(a good P5 team, a mediocre P5 team/a good mid major, a bad mid major, and an FCS opponent). None of the teams share a common opponent and all of the games won by these unbeatens were by at least 3 touchdowns. It's clear who is the top 6 for this particular season. So who gets into the 4 team playoff? Of course(by general college football logic used by media analysts and college football elites) the mid-major team(Houston) is out and same with the non traditional powerhouse(Kansas State). So it's an easy choice right?
But  in addition also consider the  scenario of the college football fan who is an angel once again:  Now imagine if this angel comes down from heaven to earth to tell you that Houston is the best team in the country in this season; in an elimination game setting (like a national championship game) on a neutral field no team in the entire FBS could even come close to beating Houston, not even the unbeaten Power 5 teams. So in this scenario, not only do two unbeaten postseason eligible teams that could possibly be the best team in the country not get a chance at winning it all, but the unbeaten postseason eligible team that is the best team in the country also was not even given the chance to win the championship. There's no other postseason system in major sports that allows for this possibility. Not in college basketball, not in the NBA or the NFL(though one can argue that the divisions system in the NFL could exclude a possible Super Bowl champion).
This could even apply to the 2014 season, Baylor and TCU both only had 1 loss, same as the teams that made it in(All those near losses for FSU has to count as 1 loss, right? Just Kidding) Who's to say that TCU or Baylor isn't the best team? There's no conclusive evidence showing otherwise. You never really know until teams play each other. The college football playoff has really solved nothing. Like I said before, it's a step in the right direction but still shares similar flaws to the BCS.
That is why I will present a fairly simple college football tournament proposal that will solve these problems in the next post.