The way I see it, we have one of two ways to go. We either admit the regular season doesn't mean jack and put a team like Penn State into the playoff just because they won their conference, or we say the regular season does matter and put a team like Ohio State into the playoffs over the conference champ. If we're going to say the regular season doesn't matter, then USC probably should have been in the playoff as they were probably the hottest team at the end of the season
I think there's a lot of room between those two views which is where the argument comes from. As I keep saying, it depends on what you want to put more or less weight on. I don't really argue that Ohio State had a better resume than Penn State overall. But Penn State won the conference and beat them head-to-head. Those have traditionally been the two biggest benchmarks but they both got thrown out last year. So it obvious that the things that held more weight have shifted.
And I think you're creating a false narrative with the part quoted about. Putting Penn State in the playoff wouldn't mean that the regular season doesn't mean jack. They won their division, got to go to the CCG and won that. That's a pretty significant portion of the regular season it takes to accomplish that. What actually happened is there was a lot of focus placed on one particular game for each team. Ohio State beat Oklahoma while Penn State lost to Pitt in the non-conference. The results of those two games basically out-weighed the rest of the regular season.