its only criteria and there is no CCG, then how would you feel if this scenario happens? Miami and VT both finish 8-1 in the ACC and 11-1 overall. VT beats Miami 48-14 during regular season. VT loses to FSU 35-31 who is ranked at the time the game is played and ranked ahead of VT in the final Poll even though they finish 7-2 in the conference. Miami is awarded the ACC's automatic bid and VT is left out of the CFP because Miami is ranked #7 and VT is ranked #17. The problem I have with using the CFP Poll as it stands now is it is subjective because you have people voting. So it does open the door to the possibility that the blue bloods and other established names could have a clear advantage going into the final poll because ESPN or whatever networks covering the games have business reasons for only wanting those programs to make the field every year. Also, it has the potential to devalue the regular season. Particularly head-to-head results because the Committee voted the team that lost the regular season game ahead of the team that won the regular season game. At some point it may not even matter if the 2 teams have the same conference record or overall record. Miami could be 10-2 (losses to VT and 6-6 UCF) and the Committee could still decide to vote them ahead of VT even though VT won the head-to-head match-up and the schedules are comparable to each other. For the record, I am fine if a conference wants to use a poll in its tiebreaker process. I do think it should be used as a last resort though. If it is going to be the only criteria, then it should be as objective as possible. Say what you want about the BCS formula, at least it was solid in the objective department. People's main objection to the BCS formula was that it "couldn't show its work" which ironically still the case with the current poll system because the voters really can't provide concrete data to justify why they voted for a particular school at a particular ranking. Their voting behavior with Alabama vs. Notre Dame somewhat proves it.