The fact that no Big 10 teams got in the playoff last year doesn't mean there was a scheduling problem. The Big 10 had some very good teams but none of them were good enough to deserve to be in the playoffs.
It may or may not have been scheduling because Wisconsin might have gotten in with a tougher schedule.
Not sure I agree completely with the last sentence...
"Deserve" is an opinion though.
Hindsight is 20/20 and maybe Clemson should not have been in the playoffs last year, although they were a lock after winning their conference and having only one loss, which was to a bad/mediocre team in Syracuse.
They pulled an Ohio State and looked like they didn't deserve to be in the playoffs once they got in.
Alabama didn't win their division, much less their conference.
Wisconsin, OSU, and Penn St all had very good teams that, depending on whose opinion, might have deserved to get into the playoffs. If winning your conference meant you deserved it, which it doesn't, then OSU would have deserved to get in.
If OSU lost to Iowa in a close game, they might have deserved to get in.
Wisconsin lost the CCG by a TD while Bama lost by 12 points and never played in their CCG. Why did Bama "deserve" to be in vs Wisconsin? They had a crap schedule.
Bama's schedule included the 2 worst teams in the SEC least, non-impressive wins vs LSU(9-4), MSU(9-4), and TA&M(7-6) from their division, a loss to the only other good team in their division in Auburn, a crappy FSU team that couldn't beat anyone with a backup qb, and Fresno St, Colorado St, and Mercer of the FCS.
Wisconsin had a weak schedule but deserved to be in since they at least won their division...
Like I said, deserve is an opinion. I could make a good argument for Bama against the B1G too, especially in hindsight, given their championship and all...
In a way, scheduling kept UCF out of the playoffs.