Indiana Appears in first CFP Bracket - What did we learn?

ESPN aired the first rankings of the season for the new College Football on Tuesday night in the debut for the 12 team, expanded playoff which will begins this season. After a roaring beginning to the Curt Cignetti era that has seen IU get off to a nearly flawless 6-0 start in conference play and 9-0 start overall, the Hoosiers cracked the top 10 in the first poll and find themselves in prime position to make history this season.

IU begins their quest for a National Championship (yes, this is a real sentence) as the #8 team in the country in the initial rankings, slotted in as the #9 seed due to conference champions getting the first four seeds. If the season ended today, Indiana would play in the first round at Tennessee, who was the #7 team and #8 seed. Get the onside hands team ready.

There’s no doubt that Hoosier fans should feel like they’re in a fever dream right now, as they’ve won every game so far by at least two scores, have trailed for about 10 minutes all season, and have blown the doors off of teams that have given IU teams of old trouble. Reactions were mixed for IU’s initial slotting, but how should IU fans feel overall and what does starting at #8 mean for their hopes to make the playoff? Let’s dive in.

The Hoosiers at #8 come in behind Oregon (1), Ohio State (2) and Penn State (6) in the Big Ten, giving the league four total teams in the initial bracket, joining the SEC with four. If you look at where Miami FL and Penn State landed compared to IU and BYU, there is cause for concern for Indiana - brand bias is real. We’ve seen some national media members start to bang the drum for IU and mention that if you took the logos off of the helmets and ranked teams based on on-field results and their bodies of work, that IU would be in the top five, and it’s hard to disagree. Penn State surely has a bunch of talent and could have easily won their game against Ohio State this past weekend - but they didn’t What Penn State has done however, is win some unimpressive games margin-wise against teams that have turned out to not be as strong as once thought.

Here’s what College Football Playoff Committee Chair (and Michigan AD) Warde Manuel said about IU, which overall painted the picture of the strength of schedule argument but still acknowledged how dominant they have been:

“Q. You mentioned about Indiana on the show, how dominant they've been, winning games by two scores. You could possibly make the case to move them higher, but ESPN also showed that they have the 103rd ranked schedule which some would think would be a reason to drop them lower. How did they end up in the spot that they did?

WARDE MANUEL: Well, you really gave the answer to the deliberation that we had. Their strength of schedule was not very high in comparison to some others, but the way that they have played in those games and the dominance that they have shown in those games, winning by an average of 33 points a game, has been really impressive to the committee. So we couldn't ignore that.

As it related to where they are ranked and how we saw them, even though strength of schedule is important, we also have watched those games. The only game they've been behind was last week against Michigan State by 10, and they came back and I believe went on a 47-point run to win that game.

Very impressive team, well-coached by Curt Cignetti. They are just a formidable opponent. That's what we saw.”

@ West Virginia | 34-12 W

vs. Bowling Green | 34-27 W

vs. Kent State | 56-0 W

vs. Illinois | 21-7 W

vs. UCLA | 27-11 W

@ USC | 33-30 W

@ Wisconsin | 28-13W

vs. Ohio State | 20-13 L

Looking at Penn State’s resume, what’s their best win? Illinois at home maybe? The committee valued their close loss to Ohio State more than they valued an IU team that has a +296 scoring margin during a 9-0 season so far, and valued Penn State’s close loss more than BYU’s resume which includes going 2-0 over teams currently ranked in the Top 25 of the CFP rankings. That’s cause for concern for the IU’s and BYU’s of the world, no question. The strength of schedule argument is already coming to light, both from the ESPN hosts (minus Booger McFarland who called IU the most disrespected team in the country), national media members online, and from the committee itself, and you’d have to figure that the goalposts will continue to move for an IU team that would be likely taking a slot away from an SEC team or other national brand if they get in the field.

Here’s the good news for IU though - they control their own destiny. Regardless of what happens against Ohio State, if you beat Michigan and Purdue at home in games you will be favored in by multiple touchdowns, you’ll be in the playoff. The precedent that leaving an 11-1 Big Ten team out of the playoff would set would be something I’m not sure the committee or ESPN wants to touch in year one of this new playoff, and at that point, an #11WINDIANA team would have more than enough quality on its resume to be deserving of a spot. Besides, losing to Ohio State would likely get IU more credit anyways, right? That’s what they thought about Penn State.

IU ended up right where I thought they would heading into the initial rankings, and we’ll now have the usual media talking heads drumming up the major brands and SEC schools while doing whatever they can to dismiss IU, BYU and Boise as good teams. What did we learn? The brand bias is real and will continue to affect IU and others in the rankings down the stretch. What else did we learn? Win two of three, and none of it matters.

We’ll have much more to come on IU’s College Football Playoff prospects in the coming weeks, and those chances ride on beating a desperate Michigan team at home in Bloomington this Saturday.