Alabama will play one of these 5 teams in the Playoff. Who’d have the best shot?

Is it possible for an Alabama team to be underrated? Have we just gotten bored with talking about Nick Saban's Tide?

Most of the talk regarding college football's Championship Saturday centered around the fun matchups in Penn State-Wisconsin, whether Virginia Tech had a shot at an upset, or what the Playoff committee might do about Michigan.

But we haven't had much to say about Bama, defending national champion and winner of four of the last seven titles. The Crimson Tide were heavy favorites to roll against Florida to their third consecutive conference title, and they did. And they would be significant favorites against whoever they might play in the semifinals of the CFP.

What else is there to say? Bama has recruited and developed players better than any team in the sport, and the Tide are on a magnificent run because of it.

But that doesn't go far enough.

This isn't just a good Bama team. This might be the best Bama team. This might be the best team, period, since World War II.

Earlier this year, I wrote about the best teams since World War II according to an estimated version of my S&P+ ratings. Alabama’s current S&P+ percentile rating is 99.8 percent. Here’s where the Tide fell on the Best list, entering the SEC Championship:

1. 1945 Army (99.95 percentile)
2. 2016 Alabama (99.75)
3. 1959 Ole Miss (99.71)
4. 2008 Oklahoma (99.69)
5. 1971 Nebraska (99.69)

It’s not just lofty company by S&P+ standards; FiveThirtyEight’s Elo ratings say the Tide are close to topping 1995 Nebraska as the best team of AP poll era (i.e., since the 1930s).

1. 1995 Nebraska (peak Elo: +33.9)
2. 2016 Alabama (+33.8)
3. 2015 Alabama (+32.8)
4. 1974 Oklahoma (+32.3)
5. 1988 Miami (+32.2)

The Tide have easily one of the two best defenses in the country (only Michigan’s is close), and the offense, led by true freshman quarterback Jalen Hurts, is the best since coordinator Lane Kiffin took over. Bama has fewer weaknesses than anybody else and is a significant favorite to win a fifth national title in eight years.

But here’s college football’s dirty little secret: almost everybody loses.

Look at those two top-five lists again. 1959 Ole Miss lost to an awesome LSU via punt return. 2008 Oklahoma lost to similarly elite Florida and Texas teams. 2015 Alabama lost to Ole Miss. 1988 Miami lost to Notre Dame. Five of the S&P+ top 10 and six of the Elo top 10 lost at least once.

So if you’re not interested in ceding control of the world to Saban just yet, you can still hold onto hope.

We know Alabama is spectacular. We don’t know who the Tide might play in the first round. Depending on the final rankings, we could see Saban’s squad against Ohio State, Clemson, Washington, Michigan, or Penn State. And if the Tide win in the semis, they would play another team from this group in the title game.

Of these teams, who might actually stand the best chance of beating Bama? Who matches up the best?

---

Michigan

Greg Bartram-USA TODAY Sports

S&P+ ranking (based on last week’s ratings; S&P+ will be updated later Sunday morning): 2

CFP ranking: 5

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 43%

Michigan’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Run stuffs (No. 3 defense vs. No. 88 offense)
• Standard-downs sack rate (No. 1 defense vs. N. 77 offense)
• Short-yardage rushing (No. 43 offense vs. No. 93 defense)
• Adj. Sack Rate (No. 1 defense vs. No. 44 offense)
• Passing explosiveness (No. 1 defense vs. No. 33 offense)

Michigan proved its bona fides by going to Columbus and basically fighting Ohio State to a draw. Unfortunately for the Wolverines, there are no draws — they fell in double overtime. They maintained their No. 2 S&P+ rating with the strong showing, but losses matter, and Michigan has two. The Wolverines’ CFP hopes are shaky at best. They have to hope for losses by No. 3 Clemson or No. 4 Washington just to have a chance.

If Jim Harbaugh’s team does reach the CFP, the Wolverines could do some Bama damage. Michigan is positioned to take full advantage of some of Alabama’s biggest weaknesses; the Tide suffer negative plays on offense, and while they’re good enough to recover, the stout Michigan defense might not let them. They could harass not only Hurts, but also Alabama’s corps of young running backs.

Of course, they would still have to score. That might be an issue. But we’re talking about who has the best odds of beating Bama, not who would definitely do it.

---

Ohio State

Jeff Hanisch-USA TODAY Sports

S&P+ ranking: 3

CFP ranking: 2

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 30%

Ohio State’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Short-yardage rushing (No. 1 offense vs. No. 93 defense)
• Run stuffs (No. 1 defense vs. No. 88 offense)
• Field position (No. 10 defense vs. No. 42 offense)
• Short-yardage rushing (No. 1 defense vs. No. 29 offense)
• Passing explosiveness (No. 6 defense vs. No. 33 offense)

Ohio State is No. 2 in the rankings and isn’t playing in a conference title game. The Buckeyes might not even fall three spots in the rankings, even if/as other teams get conference title bumps from the committee. Their odds of reaching the CFP have to be considered excellent.

While this is a less experienced, less consistent squad, Urban Meyer’s team is still excellent. They probably wouldn’t score 42 points on the Tide, but they would have a chance to frustrate Hurts with negative plays, control field position, and convert enough short-yardage opportunities to put a few points on the board.

---

Clemson

Tommy Gilligan-USA TODAY Sports

S&P+ ranking: 4

CFP ranking: 3

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 30%

Clemson’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Standard downs sack rate (No. 20 defense vs. No. 77 offense)
• Run stuffs (No. 40 defense vs. No. 88 offense)
• Adj. Sack Rate (No. 4 defense vs. No. 44 offense)
• Passing explosiveness (No. 4 defense vs. No. 33 offense)
• Passing S&P+ (No. 4 defense vs. No. 30 offense)

Clemson’s Nov. 12 loss to Pitt was apparently what the Tigers needed. Dabo Swinney’s team lost its margin for error when Chris Blewitt’s field goal split the uprights, but the Tigers responded with two of their best performances. They put Wake Forest away early in Winston-Salem, and they crushed South Carolina to finish the regular season 11-1.

Alabama and Clemson played a classic in last year’s final, a 45-40 Tide victory; a 2016 rematch probably wouldn’t be as prolific. Clemson doesn’t possess nearly the same offensive advantages, but like Michigan and Ohio State, the Tigers should be able to take advantage of Alabama’s propensity for moving backward. They could theoretically stuff the run, force Hurts to pass, then break up the passes.

Do that, and Deshaun Watson wouldn’t need to replicate last year’s absurd title-game performance — 405 passing yards, 73 rushing yards — to put the Tigers in position.

---

Washington

Jennifer Buchanan-USA TODAY Sports

S&P+ ranking: 6

CFP ranking: 4

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 24%

Washington’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Standard-downs sack rate (No. 22 defense vs. No. 77 offense)
• Adj. Sack Rate (No. 5 defense vs. No. 44 offense)
• Passing-downs sack rate (No. 5 defense vs. No. 27 offense)
• Passing explosiveness (No. 12 defense vs. No. 33 offense)
• Standard-downs explosiveness (No. 7 defense vs. No. 28 offense)

Washington leaped Michigan into the No. 4 spot in Tuesday’s CFP rankings, and it’s hard to imagine the Huskies falling out of the top four with a 31-point win over a top-10 Colorado. This feels like a win-and-you’re-in situation, and S&P+ says UW has a 65 percent chance of beating the Buffaloes.

As with Clemson, all of Washington’s biggest advantages come on defense. The Huskies’ pass defense combines a fierce pass rush with big-play prevention, and if Alabama couldn’t run consistently, the Tide might hit some trouble. (Washington’s defense also ranks sixth in Rushing S&P+.)

The UW advantages against Bama’s defense are minimal, but that goes for just about every team.

---

Wisconsin

S&P+ ranking: 10

CFP ranking: 6

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 19%

Wisconsin’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Short-yardage rushing (No. 31 offense vs. No. 93 defense)
• Run stuffs (No. 34 defense vs. No. 88 offense)
• Passing explosiveness (No. 8 defense vs. No. 33 offense)
• Standard-downs explosiveness (No. 4 defense vs. No. 28 offense)
• Passing S&P+ (No. 9 defense vs. No. 30 offense)

The winner of the Big Ten title game probably still needs a break to reach the Playoff. If Virginia Tech upsets Clemson, that would open a spot for either the Badgers/Nittany Lions or Michigan, and if Colorado knocks off Washington, the Buffaloes would have an interesting case.

One thing is certain: if Wisconsin reaches the CFP, the Badgers won’t be intimidated. Their top-10 defense stood up to LSU in the season opener, and they have lost only to Michigan by seven points and to Ohio State in overtime.

Justin Wilcox’s defense would have a chance to slow Bama down. The Badgers stuff the run and prevent big plays, and if they are able to move the chains, they could tilt the field in their favor.

---

Penn State

Matthew O'Haren-USA TODAY Sports

S&P+ ranking: 11

CFP ranking: 7

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 19%

Penn State’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Run stuffs (No. 20 defense vs. No. 88 offense)
• Standard-downs sack rate (No. 43 defense vs. No. 77 offense)
• Field position (No. 6 offense vs. No. 31 defense)
• First Down S&P+ (No. 6 defense vs. No. 27 offense)
• Adj. Sack Rate (No. 29 defense vs. No. 44 offense)

James Franklin’s Nittany Lions are smoking hot; they are built like Wisconsin, only with a slightly lesser defense and far more big-play potential (and less efficiency) on offense.

Defensive efficiency and special teams proficiency make them a good field position team, and Penn State’s big-play ability could come in handy. Nobody is efficient against Alabama, and a couple of 40-yard gains would make a huge difference.

---

Colorado

S&P+ ranking: 15

CFP ranking: 8

S&P+ win probability vs. Bama (neutral field): 14%

Colorado’s biggest matchup advantages (per S&P+):

• Short-yardage rushing (No. 35 offense vs. No. 93 defense)
• Standard-downs sack rate (No. 43 defense vs. No. 77 offense)
• Passing S&P+ (No. 10 defense vs. No. 30 offense)
• Passing explosiveness (No. 14 defense vs. No. 33 offense)
• Passing efficiency (success rate) (No. 9 defense vs. No. 28 offense)

This year’s Dream Season Team needs a lot of help to reach the Playoff. Not only do the Buffaloes need to beat Washington (and probably by a significant margin), the Buffaloes would probably also need Virginia Tech to beat Clemson. Even that might not be enough.

Regardless, if the Buffs were to squeeze into No. 4, they would find the same potential advantages as the other teams. Their pass defense is top-notch, and they could follow the “tilt the field and hope for breaks” recipe. It probably wouldn’t work, but there’s a one-in-seven chance it might.

So who might do it?

If you combine teams’ likelihood of making the Playoff with S&P+ win probabilities, you find that the most likely teams to beat the Tide are probably Ohio State and Clemson, a.k.a., the team that beat them in the CFP two years ago and the team that nearly did the same last year.

This sport is simultaneously unpredictable (see: Colorado) and very, very predictable.