Here is why I think a lot of people are overly paranoid about the possibility of Miami leapfrogging ND next week:
1. If the committee really wanted to have Miami leapfrog Notre Dame, they would have done it already. They're not going to suddenly say "Oh wow. Miami beat Notre Dame in week 1? I had no idea. This changes everything!" The committee members have not been sequestered from the ND vs Miami media debate that has been going on for several weeks, and they will look like idiots if they wait until both teams are idle to have Miami pass them. And I don't think they want to look like idiots.
2. If the committee really wanted to have Bama remain ahead of ND after a loss while Miami leapfrogs ND, then they would not have kept BYU in front of Miami. If they wanted to prevent the obvious contradiction of saying "The #9 team won't be punished for losing a CCG to the #3 team, but the #11 team will be punished for losing to the #4 team", then there was a very easy way to avoid that. They could have very easily rewarded Miami for their road win over ranked Pitt and punished BYU for sputtering to a 14-0 deficit in the first half vs UCF. But they didn't do that. Miami is one spot behind BYU, just like they were the week before. They will look like idiots if they punish a BYU loss more heavily than a Bama loss (assuming similar margins of loss), and I don't think they want to look like idiots.
3. If the committee really wanted to avoid the awkwardness of Bama being the last team out two years in a row, then they would do exactly what they've done - build some cushion to allow them to drop 1 spot after a loss but still be in.
4. If the committee really wanted to avoid the awkwardness of having Bama being kicked out FOR losing a CCG the year after they were kicked out BY a team who lost their CCG, then they would do exactly what they've done - build some cushion to allow them to drop 1 spot after a loss but still be in.
5. If the committee really wanted to avoid the awkwardness of Bama being kicked out by a team from the shitty ACC conference two years in a row, then they would do exactly what they've done - build some cushion to allow them to drop 1 spot after a loss but still be in.
6. There is an assumption that the committee wants to avoid rematches in the first round if they can do so gracefully. If they really want to avoid rematches in the first round, why would it rank Oklahoma #8 and Alabama #9? As revressbo explained in the post linked below, they have given themselves the flexibility to make Alabama drop one spot to #10 with a loss and move up to #7 with a win. Assuming a Texas Tech win over BYU, Notre Dame would be the beneficiary and move up to #9 (just as idle Indiana leapfrogged SMU last year). However, if BYU wins and Bama loses, the committee would be forced to choose between Bama and ND. Unless Bama embarrasses itself or their QB gets hurt, I agree with everyone else's presumption that they will remain in front of ND for reasons 3, 4, and 5 above. The point is, the purpose of putting Bama in front of ND is to give themselves flexibility.
7. I didn't watch the show tonight but I heard that the chairman said it's possible for idle teams to switch places, which was the opposite of what the chairman said last year. I believe last year's guy misspoke and never should have said that in the first place. Since they still have a process of re-voting every week, there is always at least a theoretical mechanism for last week's debates to be relitigated this week, for people to change their mind. But that's mostly theoretical, I wouldn't expect it to happen very often and I don't expect it to happen next week with Miami & ND. Again, if they really wanted Miami to be ahead of ND then they would have done it already. I can't overstate that enough.
I believe Occam's Razor is that the committee members (a) think they are smart enough to conspire for desired results and smart enough to avoid foreseeable scenarios that will make them look like idiots; (b) ARE conspiring to get Bama into the tournament over ND in the event that BYU wins; and (c) are NOT conspiring to get Miami in over ND in the event that BYU loses - based on their actions/inactions over the past few weeks there is more evidence that the opposite is true.
I'll sadly eat crow and grab a pitchfork with the rest of you if I'm wrong about this, but I believe Miami is dead and it will be easy for the committee to defend: They lost to two unranked teams, which is something that NONE of the other Top 10 playoff teams have done either this year or last year. And they should say out loud that it's not absurd for other factors to overcome the head to head result because it happened in 1993.
