Has there been a season that the best team didn't win?

Sure, there will always be some debate about which team won between the four selected (or the two in the championship game), but I don't remember an outcry over an undeserving champion after the CFP has been played. I feel like it's gotten the champion right every season it's been played - there's been no "yeah, but if so-and-so had gotten in, the results would have been completely different". It feels like these playoff expansion people are just pro-conference folks with a solution to a problem that doesn't actually exist.

I mean, what is expanding to 8 teams supposed to solve besides making more money? Providing more access to major conference members? Conference representatives exercising their influence to drum up a problem that doesn't exist, to further their conference's interests? The "powers that be" see more money to be made, so they need to invent a problem to access it? Is there any doubt that, no matter how many teams the playoff is expanded to, there will always be one or two more teams on the outside looking in, and thus a perpetual expansion conversation?

Personally, I like the playoff at four teams. It makes regular season games more important (just ask tOSU) and doesn't give automatic reward to an undeserving P5 conference champion in a weak season. Most importantly, the four team playoff has given us college football fans a champion who won it on the field, and so far that champion has given us little reason to complain.