One of the most influential business books of all time is Stephen Covey's The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. One of the habits Covey highlights for people who ultimately succeed in their goals is they "begin with the end in mind."
That appears to be what the College Football Playoff selection committee is doing with their first batch of absurd rankings: Beginning with the end in mind.
Unfortunately for non-SEC fans, the likely end goal of this biased, compromised committee is to pack as many big-name, big-brand, mostly SEC teams into the playoffs when the teams selected to participate are announced in early December.
The CFP selection committee didn't appear to rank teams based on where things actually stand today.
They seem to be ranking teams based on how they want the final rankings to look in December.
The CFP selection committee is apparently building a future narrative rather than accurately ranking teams in the present
If you think the CFP selection committee tried to honestly rank the Top 25 teams in their initial rankings and you now find yourself either baffled or upset, allow me to straighten you out. The sad reality is you're probably naive. You may have too much faith in humanity, or at least in the CFP.
Before proceeding, the CFP selection committee consists of 13 people. Four of them -- Hunter Yurachek (chair), Gus Malzahn, Wesley Walls, and Mike Riley -- either have, or had, direct ties with the SEC. The Big 12 and ACC combined have four voices in the room. The committee is skewed heavily toward the SEC, including the committee's chair.
The big secret is that the CFP committee isn't necessarily ranking teams based purely on today's merit. Rather, they appear to be ranking teams today to build narratives that will ultimately allow them to cherry-pick the teams they -- and ESPN -- want in the playoffs.
The CFP selection committee is beginning with the end in mind.
At the heart of the conflict of the CFP selection committee is the relationship between ESPN, the SEC, and the CFP. ESPN pays the organization that runs the College Football Playoffs $1.3 billion per year, and ESPN's main desire is for the highest ratings possible when the games air. ESPN also pays $300 million per year to be the exclusive network for SEC football, and therefore wants high viewership for SEC games.
If the CFP selection committee's main goal is to keep ESPN happy, they would: 1) Keep as many SEC teams as possible in the CFP hunt to drive ratings through the end of the year, and 2) Get as many SEC teams into the playoffs as possible.
If the CFP is "beginning with that end in mind", then mission accomplished.
How the CFP selection committee appears to have used their initial rankings to benefit the SEC (and ESPN) come December
Based on objective data, reasonable people can argue that the CFP selection committee's initial November 3rd rankings weren't about November 3rd. They were about December 5th, the date the committee will announce the 12 teams they mostly hand-select to appear in the playoffs.
ESPN's own Bill Connelly noted, "The CFP committee is FAR more skewed toward the SEC than the computers. 2.6 spots per team."
The Athletic's Stewart Mandel compared the CFP rankings to the AP Poll and noted that of the 10 SEC teams in the CFP's initial Top 25 rankings, Alabama is +4, Texas and Tennessee are +3, three other teams are +2, two are +1, and two have the same CFP and AP Poll ranking.
Not a single one of the SEC's 10 teams in the CFP's initial Top 25 were ranked lower than they are in the AP Poll.
When the cameras roll on December 5th to reveal the 12 teams in the playoffs, it's in ESPN's best interests to have big brands that bring big eyeballs like Alabama, Texas, and Tennessee in the field.
A cynic could argue the committee's pro-SEC rankings have little to do with November 3rd and everything to do with December 5th, and it would be a hard accusation to refute.
The apparent negative bias shown against non-SEC teams with December in mind
If the CFP is trying to do ESPN some favors for the billions it has invested in the playoffs and in the SEC, that favoritism will need to come at the expense of non-SEC teams.
And the CFP committee will need to somehow try to justify those decisions on December 5th.
The committee's initial November 3rd rankings could provide shrewd cover.
If the selection committee is trying to keep the ACC a one-bid league in order to maximize spots for SEC teams, they were smart to rank 8-0 UCLA at No. 8. The Bruins are ranked No. 5 in the AP Poll, so they slid three spots. Should UCLA lose any games from here as the No. 8 team (vs. No. 5), it gives the committee perfect cover to move them to No. 11 or lower, meaning they just miss the playoffs at 11-1.
If the selection committee is trying to keep the Big 12 a one-bid league, they were cunning to rank 7-1 BYU at No. 9. BYU is ranked No. 7 in the AP Poll with Top 25 wins over Notre Dame and Arizona, and yet they fell two spots in the CFP's rankings. The committee knows the Cougars face No. 3 Utah this Saturday. Should the Cougars lose to the Utes, they can justifiably fall from No. 7 to No. 11 or worse, just missing the cut -- again -- for a spot in the playoffs.
Now let's talk about Notre Dame. While the AP Poll has the Irish ranked No. 4, the CFP ranked the Irish at No. 11. Notre Dame has a clause with the CFP that if the Irish are ranked in the Top 12 at the end of the season, they make the playoffs. By dropping Notre Dame to No. 11, and knowing they play No. 1 Miami this weekend, the selection committee can drop them out of the Top 12 with a loss.
Here's another shrewd step the CFP committee took with both Notre Dame and BYU.
Kalani Sitake's BYU Cougars are 7-1 with their signature victory against Notre Dame.
According to today's current AP Poll, No. 7 BYU beat No. 4 Notre Dame.
But in the alternate reality the CFP selection committee just fabricated, No. 7 BYU beat No. 11 Notre Dame. Should BYU lose to No. 3 Utah and No. 11 Notre Dame lose to No. 1 Miami on Saturday, both of their resumes look far, far worse. BYU's signature win against Notre Dame is severely diminished, while, at the same time, Notre Dame's loss to BYU looks that much worse.
Do you see how this works?
If you're trying to make sense of the CFP selection committee's current ranking, just save yourself the anger and the headache. Don't try to apply objective logic. Apply business logic.
Don't think about November 3rd's baffling CFP rankings and look forward.
Instead, think about what a pro-SEC/ESPN/CFP future looks like on December 5th and work backward.
As you begin with the end in mind, the CFP rankings make far more sense.
Add us as a preferred source on Google