We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

The debate over Alabama’s inclusion in the College Football Playoff has led to many passionate disputes, including among ESPN personalities.

On Sunday’s College Football Playoff Selection Show, ESPN’s Booger McFarland pointed out that if the 13-member College Football Playoff Selection Committee chose Alabama over SMU as the #12 seed, they would be selecting “brand” over substance.

Alabama ended the season as a three-loss team with two defeats against unranked opponents. SMU had only two defeats, one against a tough BYU squad and another in the ACC Conference Championship game against Clemson.

Ultimately, the committee voted to give the final at-large spot to SMU.

Herbstreit, however, did not appreciate McFarland’s characterization of the committee’s selection process as brand vs. substance.

“Right out of the gate, I don’t understand Booger’s comment about brand over last night, I think that’s low-hanging fruit on the internet or social media,” Herbstreit said. “To me, it’s very, very clear that … this isn’t easy. The committee is going to lose no matter what they do. You look at SMU, they make it to their conference championship game, they lose on a last-second field goal, they don’t have any wins over anybody in the Top 25. Then you have ‘Bama with the strength of schedule, but then they have a very, very disappointing, almost embarrassing loss late in the year when they’re a three-touchdown favorite to Oklahoma.

“So, really, there’s no right answer. Normally, I’d err on the side of what Coach Saban is saying. Alabama has three wins over teams that are currently in the Top 25, usually that should matter. But that loss, for me, I called the game in Norman, it’s not a great Oklahoma team, and Alabama didn’t just lose that game, they got embarrassed. And I’m guessing that could potentially be an anchor for them that could be tough to overcome. I wouldn’t be surprised if the committee honored SMU because of that loss in Norman late in the year.”

McFarland responded by claiming his point was to bring some “levity” to the discussion.

“Yeah, to your point, Kirk, (I’m) just bringing a little levity to the situation. But you’re right. It was maybe a little low-hanging fruit. But at the end of the day, we’re having a little fun up here,” McFarland said. “I differ a little bit with you talking about Alabama’s strength of record. They have three losses, and one of those is by 21 points on the road in Norman. Another is to Vanderbilt. So I hear you and Coach (Saban) talk about who we’ve beat. But at some point, it’s hard for me to dismiss those losses out of my mind.

“I get it; the schedules aren’t balanced, and teams are playing different schedules. But at some point, we have to take a look at who these teams beat based on who’s lined up on their schedule, and that’s why I’m going to lean towards SMU a little bit.”

College Football Playoff Committee Chairman later joined the ESPN broadcast to explain the committee’s decision-making process.

“We looked at the number of wins Alabama had against ranked opponents,” Manuel said. “We looked at SMU’s schedule and they were undefeated in-conference. Their losses were to ranked teams. But we also looked at Alabama’s losses to unranked teams. And it was quite a debate. We value strength of schedule. That’s why Alabama, as a three-loss team, is ranked ahead of other teams that have two losses. It’s something that we talked about quite a bit. But in the balance of it, the way SMU played in that game, losing on a last-second field goal, great win by Clemson, great game. We just felt that in this particular case, SMU still had the nod at 10 above of Alabama. And that’s no disrespect to Alabama’s strength of schedule. It’s merely looking at the entire body of work for both teams.”

The national championship will be played at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta on Jan. 20.