Seeding is subjective with the BS committee, and yeah it happens that teams with the best shot of winning don't make the playoffs with a smaller field (see UGA last year although I think Michigan still would've won it all, UGA probably was the toughest opponent they could've faced).
So yes, I would say Texas and especially Ohio State don't deserve to be playoff teams despite having the talent to win it all.
And as an example, Bama probably would have had a better shot than 8 of the teams in the playoffs this year (SMU, AZ St, Clemson, Indiana, etc) but didn't deserve to be in and got left out.
Talent and depth is college football. While there's more parity than before, people are acting like it's NFL level parity where the worst team could possibly beat the best team at any time. It's not close to that, especially in big playoff games where the opponent won't be overlooked.
EDIT: I also mentioned 6-8 seeds would've been fine to expand to, not 12. That was my point not keeping it at 4, which I thought was too small of a window.
So Ohio State would have been in even at 6 teams