Back when the College Football Playoff was a nascent entity, I asked a CFP poohbah why the committee persisted in holding weekly reveals of non-binding rankings. Why not spare its members the time and effort of gathering in Dallas six times? Why trot out its chairperson to defend shifts in seeding? Why not wait until December to announce the only ratings that matter and be done with it?
Because, the poohbah said, people watch such reveals. They discuss such reveals. They argue about such reveals, and in the world of entertainment – what is sports if not entertainment? – there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
(What the poohbah didn’t say, but what I figured out for myself: Because ESPN – the “E” originally stood for “Entertainment” – pays big money for the CFP rights, and disagreement drives ratings. And what does TV care about if not ratings?)
Then the poohbah said, knowing my affinity for college hoops: “Your folks on the basketball side might want to do something similar.” (Sure enough, the NCAA selection committee began holding a teaser February reveal.)
All of which is a windy way of saying: I wish I didn’t spend so much time parsing the CFP rankings, but I do. I don’t know why Texas – with no victories over a team in the latest top 25 – is No. 3 and Georgia – three victories over teams, Texas among them, in the top 11 – is No. 10. I’m not sure the committee does, either.
I hate to pick on Warde Manuel, the latest chair charged with defending the indefensible, but his latest take on Texas vis-à-vis Georgia was classic:
“Obviously Georgia has a very good win at Texas, but as the committee analyzed the body of work of Texas versus where Georgia is at the present time with two losses, even to top-25 teams, we came out that Texas was still a very strong team deserving of a 3 seed. They have a top-5 defense. Quinn Ewers is leading one of the top passing offenses in the country.”
Then: “We just looked at them and thought -- and came out, I should say – with them at 3. It’s nothing against Georgia. Georgia is a great team, but they did struggle against Ole Miss at Ole Miss but had a great win this past week against Tennessee. We will continue to monitor both teams and see how it goes in the next few weeks.”
Translation: “We’ve got Texas at No. 3 and Georgia at No. 10 because we felt like it. So ask your next question and I’ll offer up another 136 words while saying nothing, and on we’ll go.”
In its defense, this committee is tasked in a way no previous committee was. It must fill a 12-team bracket, though not necessarily with the top 12 teams. Five conference champs must be accommodated. As it stands, No. 12 Boise State – which leads the non-Power-4 Mountain West – would receive not just a berth but a bye. As it stands, No. 11 Tennessee would be shunted to one of those bowls that good players skip.
Is this fair? Probably not. But the reason the committee exists is because – unlike the NFL, where 32 teams play an NFL schedule – the collegiate postseason will always come down to a vote. Sometimes the voting makes no sense. Ask Florida State. Or ask any SEC team that happens to be staring upward at Texas.
In its first SEC run, the Longhorns were handed the football equivalent of a bunny slope. Their conference victories have come against Mississippi State, Oklahoma, Vanderbilt, Florida and Arkansas. Those five hold an aggregate record of 10-22 in league games. Next up for Texas: Kentucky, which is 1-6.
I’m not sure the Longhorns would beat Alabama, Ole Miss or Tennessee on a neutral field. I’m not sure they’ll beat Texas A&M in Austin. I know for a fact they were overrun by Georgia, though apparently the committee missed that game. (Could have sworn it was televised.)
This is the part of the CFP rankings I hate: No matter how hard I try to stay above the fray, something always pushes a button. Last year, it was the snubbing of Florida State. This time, it’s the embrace of Texas. Which only goes to show that my poohbah pal knew whereof spoke. Even if we hate this CFP stuff, it’s a hate we’ve come to love.
About the Author
