How did they make the argument that Alabama should be in the 2012 NCG when they didn't even make it to their CONFERENCE championship game? People make up all kinds of stuff to justify doing what they want to do.
"Eye test", etc.
"Texas has squeaked by a few unranked teams and their loss is to mid-ranked OU. Georgia's only loss is to the conference champion and juggernaut, Alabama. Georgia is clearly the better team."
The above might be absolutely true (I think UGA is better than Texas, especially with all the injuries), but it shouldn't matter. You should have to win the games and your conference, period.
But "shouldn't matter" doesn't mean it won't matter.
Let's say Oregon beats Washington, Alabama beats Georgia, and we win out.
We beat Alabama, but do you think if Texas and Alabama are both 1-loss conference champs, Alabama would be the one left out because we beat them head-to-head?