Regardless of how any particular version of the College Football Playoff actually turns out, many will always use its results as an argument to argue that other teams would have been better choices. That happened during and after Indiana’s 27-17 first-round loss to Notre Dame on Friday, and things are already going well in the game between SMU and Penn State, with the visiting Mustangs trailing 28-0 at halftime.

Overall, there were media members from many media outlets who felt that SMU and/or Indiana should not have been selected. But some of the criticisms, coming from SEC Network anchors Paul Finebaum and Peter Burns and SECN game analyst Jordan Rodgers, seemed particularly pointed and particularly interesting given their affiliation with the network of a conference that made notable omissions in Alabama (this year (batt against SMU in 2009) includes rankings for last place):

So far, the CFP selection committee has given us some blockbusters. Notre Dame led Indiana 27-3 near the end, and Penn State took a 28-0 halftime lead against the bottom team on the committee. Bow.

— Paul Finebaum (@finebaum) December 21, 2024

So you’re telling me that two teams with a combined record of 0-3 against the top 25 shows us all that they are not playoff caliber…

I’m shocked. Stop looking at the number in the loss column and instead look at WHO they played and WHO they beat!!

The 12 team playoffs are great, we just didn’t make it…

— Jordan Rodgers (@JRodgers11) December 21, 2024

SMU and Indiana earn their way into the playoffs by beating the bottom teams in their respective conferences. pic.twitter.com/rAzRzsXtxs

— Peter Burns (@PeterBurnsESPN) December 21, 2024

For those upset that I pointed out how Indiana and SMU were in the bottom of their conferences to hone a CFB playoff invite and then point out Texas’ schedule…

Keep that energy up when the Longhorns take a walk with Clemson later this afternoon.

— Peter Burns (@PeterBurnsESPN) December 21, 2024

As noted, the SEC Network figures were not the only ones to criticize the CFP decisions. Many of her ESPN colleagues have also expressed criticism of Indiana’s choice over Alabama or even Miami, and even coaches like Ole Miss’ Lane Kiffin have commented on it. And some media representatives from other media outlets have also clearly expressed their criticism of the Mustangs and Hoosiers. And some of them came at the time of selection, not just after the fact.

But even around the Indiana and SMU performances, some non-ESPN media members also took the opposite viewpoint. Many were willing to argue that the complaints miss the point of the CFP committee’s decision, which is based on what the teams have done up to that point, rather than how they would theoretically perform compared to the field:

There are some incredibly disappointing results!@IndianaFootball certainly didn’t do their best@NDFootball was great. However, IU played better than

– @AlabamaFTBL Their doors will be blown down by 6-6 OU
– @OleMissFB This gave Kentucky its only P4 win

– Joel Klatt (@joelklatt) December 21, 2024

I don’t understand the outrage over the CFB playoffs after two games. Like it or not, Indiana and SMU had solid regular seasons with enough wins to make the field. The teams in the bubble had huge losses that kept them out. If they want to be there, they have to win the games…

– Bucky Brooks (@BuckyBrooks) December 21, 2024

I’m officially done with all of your “Indiana/SMU shouldn’t have been there” tweets.

The excluded teams’ resumes haven’t magically improved over the last two weeks.

Just enjoy the games.

— Stewart Mandel (@slmandel) December 21, 2024

I would like to add that this is the team that everyone says “deserves” to be in the playoffs.

A team that went 1-3 in SEC road games this year.

There is no evidence other than “You are Bama!” that Alabama actually did better than Indiana/SMU in both games pic.twitter.com/UYqmBfRP3K

— Aaron Torres (@Aaron_Torres) December 21, 2024

Whether the CFP debate should continue once the Games actually begin is a matter of opinion. Some above think this is pointless, especially in hindsight, but there are also some who believe that teams’ performance in these fixtures matters in player selection. And this has been the case with almost all versions of the CFP (and BCS before that).

But it’s really interesting to see so many particular critics of this selection coming from ESPN. And these particular ones don’t just come from the entire network, which faces constant discussions about “SEC bias” due to its agreement with this conference. They come from the very specific group of people who do a lot of their ESPN work on the SEC Network. And it’s remarkable to see this group spotlight the CFP so heavily after an SEC team made a significant and controversial omission.