Skip to content

College Football Playoff reveals full selection committee

College Football Playoff Logo

While the vast majority of the names had already been leaked, the College Football Playoff officially announced the member of the group that will shape the postseason for the foreseeable future.

The 13-member committee, which you can view in its entirety below, will be charged with selecting the four teams that will take part in the College Football Playoff that will begin following the 2014 regular season. Generally speaking, each selection committee member will serve an unpaid, three-year term, although the initial terms could be longer or shorter depending on unknown variables.

While the number is 13 now, that total could go up or down moving into future seasons.

“We wanted people of the highest integrity for this committee, and we got them. Every one of them has vast football knowledge, excellent judgment, dedication and love for this game,” said Bill Hancock, executive director of the College Football Playoff, in a statement. “They will no doubt have one of the hardest jobs in sports. But their skills and wide variety of experiencesfrom coaches and athletes to university leaders and journalistswill ensure that they will be successful. And they are committed to investing the time and effort necessary for this endeavor. We are grateful that they will be serving this terrific game of college football.”

Individuals with experience as a coach, player, administrator and journalist, as well as sitting athletic directors, were considered for the committee. Out of more than a hundred expressing interest at various points, the following baker’s dozen constitutes the initial selection committee:

  • Jeff Long, vice-chancellor and director of athletics, University of Arkansas-Fayetteville, Chair
  • Barry Alvarez, director of athletics, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  • Lieutenant General Mike Gould, former superintendent of the United States Air Force Academy
  • Pat Haden, director of athletics, University of Southern California
  • Tom Jernstedt, former NCAA executive vice president
  • Oliver Luck, director of athletics, West Virginia University
  • Archie Manning, former University of Mississippi quarterback and all-pro NFL quarterback
  • Tom Osborne, former head coach and director of athletics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  • Dan Radakovich, director of athletics, Clemson University
  • Condoleezza Rice, Stanford University professor, former Stanford provost and former United States Secretary of State
  • Mike Tranghese, former commissioner of the Big East Conference
  • Steve Wieberg, former college football reporter, USA Today
  • Tyrone Willingham, former head coach of three FBS institutions

If you were curious as to the accomplishments of the committee as a group, which will be chaired by Long, as a group, the CFP release broke it down for you.

In aggregate, the selection committee members have roughly 230 years of experience in college football. The group includes 10 people who played college football, two former top-level university administrators, five current athletics directors, three members of the College Football Hall of Fame, three former college football head coaches, a former United States Secretary of State, a former member of Congress, and a retired three-star general.

In addition, the group includes a Rhodes Scholar, two Academic All-Americans, three Phi Beta Kappa graduates, and a retired journalist who won numerous awards as a reporter. Collectively the group has 26 degrees of higher learning, including eight master’s degrees, two law degrees, and two doctoral degrees.

While one key component, the committee, was revealed, just how the teams will be selected by the group remains vague and without any type of mandated structure.

A basketball-like RPI was mentioned as a possibility, although at this point in time the members will rely simply on factors such as win-loss record, strength of schedule, head-to-head results and conference championships won. They are, though, not limited solely to only those factors.

“Unlike the BCS, which uses a formula based on a combination of computer rankings and human polls to select teams, selection committee members for the new playoff will have flexibility to examine whatever data they believe is relevant to inform their decisions,” the release stated.

In a press conference currently ongoing, Long mentioned that injuries would be another factor that the committee could take into consideration, saying “it would be unfair if we didn’t take [them] into account.”.

The release further adds that “the selection committee will meet several times in person to evaluate teams and prepare interim rankings during the regular season. It will meet again during selection weekend and will announce the pairings for the playoff.”

Rankings consisting of a Top 25 will likely be released 4-5 times a year, with the first coming around midseason. Unfortunately, individual Top 25s will not be released, which rips to shreds the notion of transparency that most thought there would be and which the sports’ leaders had hinted at repeatedly throughout the run-up to this announcement.

Permalink 30 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Posts
30 Responses to “College Football Playoff reveals full selection committee”
  1. sparty0n says: Oct 16, 2013 2:58 PM

    It’s a long list of very successful people, and Tyrone Willingham.

  2. John Taylor says: Oct 16, 2013 3:00 PM

    ^^^…can’t stop laughing…^^^

  3. imaduffer says: Oct 16, 2013 3:26 PM

    Eight conference champions, no selection committee. See, wasn’t that simple?

  4. sportsdrenched says: Oct 16, 2013 3:43 PM

    “they are committed to investing the time and effort necessary for this endeavor”

    Oh No! You mean, they will have to spend every Saturday watching as much College Football as possible, up to 13 hours most Saturdays, and then spend some time forumalting who they think the best teams in the land are? And not get paid for it?

    Man, the sacrifice these people are making. They should be applauded for their selflessness and sacrifice at the alter of College Football. Where would this sport be without people like this?

  5. 8to80texansblog says: Oct 16, 2013 3:44 PM

    I still don’t agree with having non football people on this committee. And Condaleeza Rice is not a football person. She may be a fan with deep roots but she is not currently, nor has she ever been in the profession of football in any capacity.

  6. palmbeachbuckeye says: Oct 16, 2013 4:17 PM

    This is nice mix of people and interests. As far as Condi Rice goes, she was the Provost of Stanford, Secretary of State of the United States, and a very intelligent person. She knows how to get things done, and work together. She will be a fantastic addition to this group.

  7. ajarkoski says: Oct 16, 2013 4:20 PM

    There is a need for a non-bias woman’s perspective and Condaleeza is a good choice, although the formation of her first name which most likely wasn’t her birth name makes me wonder.

  8. 8to80texansblog says: Oct 16, 2013 4:30 PM

    I have nothing against a woman being on the panel. In fact I think it’s a great idea, but there are female journalists that live and breathe football on a daily basis. I agree that Condi Rice is very smart and successful, but again there are plenty of smart and successful people that aren’t right for this committee.

    If they want this committee to be taken seriously, they need panel members with impeccable credentials, and her “football credentials” are suspect at best.

    I feel like I’m digging myself a hole to be later tossed in as a sexist, but that’s really not the issue here at all. I wouldn’t want Joe Biden or John Kerry on that panel either.

  9. ratsfoiledagain says: Oct 16, 2013 4:31 PM

    8to80texansblog says: Oct 16, 2013 3:44 PM

    I still don’t agree with having non football people on this committee. And Condaleeza Rice is not a football person. She may be a fan with deep roots but she is not currently, nor has she ever been in the profession of football in any capacity.
    *************************
    Ty Willingham is on the list. They had to balance his lack of leadership/ineptness with someone else who has much better leadership qualities/experience.

  10. ratsfoiledagain says: Oct 16, 2013 4:32 PM

    imaduffer says: Oct 16, 2013 3:26 PM

    Eight conference champions, no selection committee. See, wasn’t that simple?
    *****************
    This is the best idea. If you can’t win your conference you shouldn’t get in. That’s why it’s called an upset, Cinderella story, etc.

  11. sportsdrenched says: Oct 16, 2013 5:25 PM

    If you have a problem with Condi Rice on this committee, you should have a problem with General Gould being on the committee. His only football credential is a Grad Assistant for the Falcons…in 1976. Other than that, he’s been flyin’ and administratin’ for his entire career.

    If they’re smart enough, and trusted enough to make National Security Decisions…they can decide who the best 4 college football teams are in the country. It’s OK. I’ll trust their judgement.

  12. sportsdrenched says: Oct 16, 2013 5:32 PM

    Ok, I guess Gen Gould was the HC at Air Force Prep (think community college level) for four years while he was a flight instructor at the AFA. But still stand by my original premise. National Security, tougher to judge than College Football.

  13. ljstud1o says: Oct 16, 2013 7:18 PM

    When I think football, I think Condoleezza…

  14. skwackquackwoof says: Oct 16, 2013 7:43 PM

    Reading a teleprompter is not living and breathing football. Football put food on Condi’s table growing up, she paid attention, learned how to evaluate an opponent with film sessions, felt the pressure of big games, etc. I would rather have her than Erin Andrews or Pam Oliver, and I have worked as a Democratic political operative in the past. Football has politics in it’s own sense, but when it comes to left wing/right wing there’s only room for that in the playbook. L-O-V-E-D the 1st post by the way.

  15. goodknave says: Oct 16, 2013 7:51 PM

    “We wanted people of the highest integrity…”

    So, let’s bring in a pathological, lying war criminal in the pitifully underqualified Condoleeza Rice.

    She should be in jail. What a joke.

  16. longtallsam says: Oct 16, 2013 8:27 PM

    8to80texansblog says:
    I wouldn’t want Joe Biden or John Kerry on that panel either.

    I wouldn’t want Joe Biden or John Kerry walking my dog!

  17. longtallsam says: Oct 16, 2013 8:39 PM

    Long mentioned that injuries would be another factor that the committee could take into consideration, saying “it would be unfair if we didn’t take [them] into account.”.

    Why should injuries, per se, be taken into account. If they happen before the last couple of games, the performance of the team will reflect the effect to the injury. If an injury occurs in the last game of the season, we won’t know how the team is affected. But if the committee says injuries will be considered, that would just encourage coaching staffs to cover them up.

    Just weigh the entire season, with probably more weight on performance toward the end of the season.

  18. longtallsam says: Oct 16, 2013 8:46 PM

    goodknave says:
    So, let’s bring in a pathological, lying war criminal in the pitifully underqualified Condoleeza Rice.

    She should be in jail. What a joke.

    You, goodknave, are the joke! A good thing she is a public figure, or she would have grounds for a lawsuit against your uninformed ass!

  19. goodknave says: Oct 16, 2013 9:09 PM

    I wonder how many deaths of relatives of people on this board that she caused by blatantly lying to the United Nations.

    She and her criminal cronies will soon burn in Hell.

  20. longtallsam says: Oct 16, 2013 9:58 PM

    I am sure you feel the same way about Obama too, since he wants to attack Syria.

  21. goodknave says: Oct 16, 2013 10:03 PM

    Sam, it must be torturous to try to defend the indefensible.

    Common sense is obviously not one of your strengths.

  22. longtallsam says: Oct 16, 2013 10:22 PM

    The same argument can be made against you and your cronies. You are the one making all the unsubstantiated claims. There isn’t anything much more annoying than a dumb-ass trying to be a smart-ass. And you probably think John Kerry is a great secretary of state! :)

  23. goodknave says: Oct 16, 2013 10:39 PM

    I’m not qualified to say whether Kerry is a good S. of S. It’s too early to tell, anyway.

    But I do know that a recent Secretary lied to the rest of the world and contributed to our needlessly attacking another country. This resulted in mass-murder and thousands of U.S. casualties.

    So, yeah….it makes sense to give her another undeserved appointment. She’s like Lane Kiffin, aside from the war crimes part.

  24. longtallsam says: Oct 16, 2013 10:46 PM

    Sure…you know that! You know so much, you should run for public office!

  25. justanobserver says: Oct 16, 2013 11:12 PM

    Why the need for so many members and so much weighing of “this ‘n that” just to come up with the four best teams to be included in a college football playoff. Good God, folks, this isn’t life and death!

    Frankly, I can’t envision many seasons in which the “final four” will not be — or should not be — self-evident, and I sure as heck won’t need a blue-ribbon panel of college football “experts” meeting hither and yon (or more appropriately – yawn) to tell me and the world which four teams should be included.

  26. justanobserver says: Oct 16, 2013 11:26 PM

    By the way. Was there a press release issued prior to this announcement announcing the members of the blue-ribbon committee selected to choose this playoff committee?

    Gee — is it just me or am I beginning to write or sound like an NCAA official.

  27. coneheadthebarchairian says: Oct 16, 2013 11:53 PM

    I hate to interrupt the Condi Rice “discussion”, but first a word from our original topic.

    @imaduffer: Conference champions are determined by their own criteria – namely, by how well they did against other teams in the conference, not how well they stack up against the division as a whole.

    Just because something is simple doesn’t mean it is actually meaningful. If you want a tournament with only the CCs, call it the “Tournament of Conference Champions”.

    As Far as actual playing experience goes, you probably would be a much better game official if you actually played the game. Knowing when someone’s holding or not, or when is something is pass interference or not, and what to look for, sure. Needing this experience to rationally rank teams, not so much. Think forests and trees.

    This “injuries being a factor” business is distraction that, IMO, is best avoided. Your record is your record. Relying on a single player for success says to me that a team lacks depth – hardly the character of a champion – so if is out for a game and you lose because of it, that says something. It also means diving into speculation – “if they had for this game, they would have won.” We can only know what actually happened; there is no way to know what might have been. Period. This is best avoided.

    My $0.02. Don’t spend it all in the same place.

  28. coneheadthebarchairian says: Oct 16, 2013 11:59 PM

    In my post above, some references to (angle bracket) star player (angle bracket) in the “injuries” paragraph were swallowed, making it even less coherent than it actually was intended to be.

  29. longtallsam says: Oct 17, 2013 1:31 AM

    Just as there was often controversy as to which two teams should be in the BCS championship game, it will be the same over which four teams should be selected. The first two, or even three, may be obvious, but you can bet there will often be controversy over who the forth team should be.

    For example, if the season ended right now, Bama and Oregon may seem obvious, but wouldn’t there be a lot of disagreement over who three and four would be out of FSU, Clemson & Ohio State? Some folks would probably think LSU or even Louisville should be in the discussion.
    This will always be a problem, regardless of how many are selected for the tournament.Look at basketball…we argue over who the 68th team should be!
    Admittedly, the more teams in the field, the less likely someone with a legitimate shot of winning it all, is left out. That’s why I think an eight team field would work well. If you aren’t in the top eight, you probably don’t have a legitimate chance, or you have at least lost a game you shouldn’t have lost.

  30. mydoghasfleez says: Oct 17, 2013 12:49 PM

    Might as well put Dick, Rummy, Wolfie, Scooter, Gonzales, Ashcroft on the committee and then invade the SEC, PAC-12, Big-12 and blow them all to hell & just declare Notre Dame the champion every year.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!