Alabama Football: Selection Committee sets new standard with Tide ranking

Alabama football was pushed down to No. 13 in the final ranking by the CFB Playoff Committee. The committee explanation set a new standard for ranking teams.

The primary purpose of the CFB Selection Committee is to select the best four teams to play for a national championship. Alabama football fans know this season’s Crimson Tide was not one of the four best.

Credit the current Selection Committee for correctly choosing and seeding the best four teams. Additionally, most fans believe the four-team Playoff has always resulted in the nation’s two best teams competing for the national championship. Over the preceding five years, mistakes have been made inside the four-team selections. Notre Dame, last season is one example of a mistake.

With Alabama football always in the top four, many Tide fans have not quibbled over how the other 21 teams have been ranked. This year is different. A 10-2 Crimson Tide was not worthy of a Playoff slot. It is also not worthy of being ranked No. 13.

The Committee’s main task of picking the four, best teams is best done with some flexibility of standards. The main standards are team records, wins against ranked teams and Conference Championships. When those standards do not separate teams, head-to-head results and ‘football judgment’ have been added to the menu of standards. From outside the committee, there have been assumptions some weight was also given to ‘good losses’ and ‘bad losses.’

The only way the Alabama Crimson Tide can be ranked No. 13 is the Committee puts no value in good losses and does not punish teams for bad losses. Otherwise, Georgia, with two very bad losses could not be ranked at No. 5 – eight spots higher than the Crimson Tide.

In no way am I claiming any anti-Alabama bias in this year’s rankings. I believe the Committee works hard to be, not just fair, but also to do its job well. In the past, the ‘eye-ball’ tests, the Committee now prefers to call ‘football judgment,’ appeared to guard against ranking mistakes. To the extent the Committee’s ‘football judgment’ is still valid, the Tide’s ranking at No. 13 can only be a post-Tua response. Maybe ‘football judgment’ no longer applies when a key player is lost to injury.

Otherwise, Alabama football should not be No. 13. Many Alabama football fans honestly believe the Crimson Tide (without Tua and with a leaky defense) is arguably better than Georgia (No. 5); Oregon (No. 6); Baylor (No. 7); Wisconsin (No. 8, with 3 losses); Florida (No. 9); Penn State (No. 10) and Utah (No. 11). We may believe the Tide is better than Auburn in anything other than a fluke-driven game, but the head-to-head result matters most.

The only conclusions to be drawn are the Crimson Tide was punished for a weak schedule. No wins against ranked teams meant ‘football judgment’ was either not material or it was not used because of Tua’s injury. The Committee gives no value to good losses and has little or no concern about bad losses.

No Playoff accomplishment means the Tide’s final ranking does not much matter. Except, when considering future schedules. Looking at the Alabama football schedule for 2020, there may again be few chances to beat a team, that by season’s end, will be ranked in the Top 15. Hopefully, there will be more than two.

One argument against an expanded Playoff field can be made this season. Using the Crimson Tide as an example, the Committee appears to be flawed when picking teams below No. 4.