Alabama climbed into the College Football Playoff, but not without a bit of controversy.

After knocking off previously top-ranked Georgia in the SEC Championship Game, the Crimson Tide vaulted up four spots to No. 4 in the rankings. That earned Alabama (12-1) the fourth and final playoff spot and a semifinal matchup against No. 1 Michigan (13-0) in the Rose Bowl on Jan. 1. It also saw the Tide leapfrog Florida State (13-0), as the Seminoles missed out on the playoff despite finishing as the undefeated ACC champion.

In a typical year, an undefeated Power Five champion would have the edge against a one-loss conference champion. However, the committee decided to put Alabama in over Florida State due in large part to the Seminoles losing starting quarterback Jordan Travis to a season-ending leg injury last month.

Travis, the leader of Florida State’s offense, was injured during a win over North Alabama on Nov. 18. Since then, the Seminoles' offense struggled, failing to amass 225 total yards in wins at Florida and against Louisville in the ACC Championship Game.

Alabama is 4-1 against top 25 teams, while Florida State is 3-0. The Crimson Tide ranks No. 5 in strength of schedule, while the Seminoles rank No. 55.

Shortly following Sunday’s playoff reveal, CFP chair Boo Corrigan explained the situation to put Alabama in over Florida State, stating “Florida State is a different team than they were through the first 11 weeks.”

During a teleconference later in the day, he went further into the decision, facing several questions from reporters. Here’s a transcript of what Corrigan had to say on the call.

QUESTION: Obviously when the conversation is Florida State versus Alabama, you've got a team that's played multiple top-15 opponents. You mentioned, of course, the injury to Jordan Travis. Did you feel like Florida State was given enough of an opportunity to kind of earn its way back after that injury, or was that something that once that happened and they had sort of a poor offensive performance, it was over?

BOO CORRIGAN: No, not at all. I think what we were looking at, and again, like the previous question, and I don't know if you heard it or not, it doesn't happen just in isolation. It happens, as well, when other teams around them are doing.

But in the eyes of the committee, Florida State is a different team without Jordan Travis. One of the things we do consider is player availability, and our job is to rank the best teams, and in the final decision looking at that, it was Alabama at 4 and Florida State at 5.

Q: Do you worry that by setting a precedent that once a player goes out that you're kind of incentivizing teams to mislead or hide information that might hurt them in the committee's eyes?

BC: That's not a topic that ever came up. So no.

Q: I heard on the ESPN broadcast in Alabama-Florida State today, you mentioned one of the things considered was from a coaching standpoint, who do you want to play, who do you not want to play. I don't believe that the criterion is listed in the rules for selection, so when and why did the committee start to consider that factor?

BC: Well, there's 13 people on the committee, all of whom have unique views. As we go into this, a coach is going to have a different unique view as opposed to an athletic director or a former player or Kelly, all of whom take great pride in what they do. Really more the point of that was to make sure that we're getting every single, hearing every opinion that's in the room to make sure that everyone is able to weigh everything as they look at it and everyone has got their own view finder, if you will, as they watch the games and make sure that we're hearing from everyone in the room.

Q: Boo, Florida State and Alabama had a common opponent in LSU. Florida State won by 21 on a neutral field and Bama won by 14 at home. How much of a discussion point was that in the room?

BC: It was part of the discussion, as everything was, as we looked at the entirety of the season, all 13 weeks, to make sure that there wasn't anything that we didn't talk about is what I would share. We talked about everything that we could – from every person on the committee to making sure that we were weighing everything.

Q: How much of a factor was strength of schedule? It seems like you've talked so far about Bama over Florida State a lot, but how much was strength of schedule an issue?

BC: It's a factor. It's a factor, and it's part of our protocol, as we look at it.

Again, Alabama's strength of schedule was significantly higher than Florida State's, but again, it's two really good teams. You can only play the teams in front of you, et cetera, but at the end of it, just the difference in their offense, and defense is wonderful, the special teams, the job that Coach Norvell has done this year is very admirable, but everyone has got great respect for the job that he's done. But we ended up with Alabama at 4 and Florida State at 5.

Q: Last week or actually less than a week ago, you guys put Florida State in the top 4 while saying their offense was different without Jordan Travis. With a quarterback who you know would be available for the College Football Playoff. What was different in a game that they ultimately beat a top-15 opponent and as you mentioned the defense was dominant? Essentially what changed from Tuesday to Saturday with what was different without Jordan Travis that made you cautious about it?

BC: Well, I mean, there's other teams that played, and Texas playing, Alabama playing, Alabama beating Georgia. Again, it would be great if it was just in isolation as we did this, but it is in combination as we're looking at it.

The fact that Rodemaker was not there, we did have limited access visual on the job that he did, but again, looking at the top four, we had to decide if Florida State was better than Michigan, Washington, Texas or Alabama, and in the eyes of the committee, Florida State was fifth.

Q: What was your response to – there's just a lot of statements made but one from Mike Norvell saying that he wondered why play the games if they win all their games and do everything that they've been asked and are left out. What's your response to that claim?

BC: It's a unique year. To have the conference champions that we had, to have the undefeated teams going into it, eight teams vying for an opportunity to be there, injuries do happen, and regardless of what we do, someone is going to be disappointed in what we do.

But the committee's job and the 13 people in the room is to come up with what they believe are the best four teams.