When Alabama took the field against Oklahoma in Norman, it wasn’t just a College Football Playoff matchup-it was a litmus test. A test of whether the committee’s controversial decision to include the Crimson Tide over a red-hot Notre Dame team was justified. And early on, that test wasn’t going well for Alabama.
Let’s rewind for a moment. After getting blown out by Georgia in the SEC Championship Game, Alabama looked like a long shot to make the final four.
They’d dropped two of their last four games and barely got past an Auburn team that had already fired its head coach. Meanwhile, Notre Dame had rattled off ten straight wins, finishing the season with real momentum.
But when Selection Sunday came around, the committee stunned just about everyone-Alabama was in, and Notre Dame was out. Miami leapfrogged the Irish as well, adding another twist to an already unpredictable playoff picture.
Fast forward to this matchup with Oklahoma, and it didn’t take long for the Tide to find themselves in trouble. Alabama opened the game with a three-and-out, and Oklahoma wasted no time capitalizing.
The Sooners marched down the field and punched in an early touchdown to take a 7-0 lead. Then, after another Alabama offensive stall, a missed tackle on defense helped Oklahoma tack on a field goal, pushing the lead to 10-0 by the end of the first quarter.
The second quarter brought more of the same. Oklahoma offensive coordinator Ben Arbuckle dialed up a beautifully designed play to spring Isaiah Sategna wide open, and quarterback John Mateer delivered a strike to make it 17-0. The Sooners were rolling, and Alabama looked flat-footed.
To their credit, the Crimson Tide finally showed a pulse. Ty Simpson connected with Lotzeir Brooks to get Alabama on the board, and the defense finally forced a stop. A botched punt snap by Oklahoma gave Alabama a short field, and suddenly, there was a flicker of hope.
But here’s the thing: even if Alabama manages to claw back and win this game, the early struggles raise legitimate questions about whether they were the right pick. Oklahoma’s offense, which has been inconsistent all season, was moving the ball with ease. Meanwhile, Alabama looked out of sync and overwhelmed for much of the first half.
That brings us back to Notre Dame. The Irish closed the season looking like a complete football team.
They weren’t just winning-they were dominating, showing the kind of consistency and resilience that playoff teams are built on. Yes, they had two close losses to other playoff contenders, but by December, they were playing at a level that made those early-season stumbles feel like distant memories.
This game in Norman doesn’t just reflect on Alabama or Oklahoma-it reflects on the process. The selection committee made a bold call, and so far, it hasn’t aged well.
Notre Dame may not be on the field, but their absence is being felt. If the goal of the Playoff is to put the four best teams in the country on display, it’s fair to wonder if the committee missed the mark.
Looking ahead, this could be a defining moment for how teams are evaluated in future Playoff selections. With the expanded format coming soon, the margin for error might shrink-but the need for clarity and consistency in the selection process will only grow. For now, the message is clear: Notre Dame made a strong case, and the early returns from Norman suggest they may have been more deserving than we were led to believe.