ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith, known for his fiery opinions on sports, has consistently criticized the College Football Playoff (CFP) system, calling it flawed and unfair. His latest commentary, however, has drawn attention for targeting Ohio State as the scapegoat for the system’s shortcomings.
Smith, who hosts First Take on ESPN, is no stranger to controversy. His outspokenness has made him both a fan favorite and a polarizing figure. Recently, Smith used Ohio State’s exclusion from the CFP in favor of the University of Alabama as a focal point of his criticism. The Buckeyes, with a 12-1 record, had a strong case for inclusion in the playoff, but ultimately, Alabama, despite losing to a lower-ranked team, secured the fourth spot.
In his segment, Smith argued that the current playoff system, which invites only four teams, is inherently biased and lacks a true measure of a team’s overall quality. He believes that the selection committee’s inconsistency, particularly with how they weigh conference championships, schedule strength, and losses, has created an environment where deserving teams are left out. His frustration was especially evident when discussing how Ohio State, despite winning their conference championship and having fewer losses, was excluded in favor of Alabama.
Smith’s view of the CFP system is one of discontent. He believes it places too much emphasis on high-profile programs like Alabama, often sidelining other teams that may have had a stronger overall performance but lack the same national recognition. His criticism highlights how a playoff that excludes teams like Ohio State leads to a distorted representation of the best teams in college football.
Yet, Smith’s scapegoating of Ohio State adds an extra layer to his argument. He framed the exclusion as not just a failure of the system but as a direct example of how flawed the playoff structure is in its current form. By singling out Ohio State’s exclusion, Smith’s commentary reinforces his broader argument that the CFP should expand to give more teams an opportunity to compete for the championship, thus eliminating the biases he perceives in the current four-team setup.
While Smith’s criticism is passionate, it also reflects the larger debate within college football. Fans and analysts alike have questioned whether the CFP committee’s subjective decisions are the best way to crown a national champion. As discussions about a possible expansion of the playoff continue to heat up, Smith’s views are likely to fuel the call for change, especially if teams like Ohio State continue to be left out in favor of programs with more national recognition but similar records.
In conclusion, Stephen A. Smith’s unwavering criticism of the College Football Playoff system and his use of Ohio State as a scapegoat underscores his call for a more inclusive and transparent approach to selecting the top teams in college football. His bold commentary reflects a larger, ongoing debate about the fairness and effectiveness of the current playoff format.