College Football Playoff: 10 questions ahead of committee's first rankings reveal

The College Football Playoff committee will unveil their first set of rankings on Tuesday night. The first rankings are always very interesting given we get to match up how we feel about teams and how the people who will be setting the bracket feel.

Will there be surprises? Discrepancies? Important talking points? Absolutely.

Here’s a look at 10 pertinent questions heading into the reveal.

1. Will there be a two-loss team — cough, Alabama — in the top 12?

By now, most of us have come around to the new system and rules. But in case you haven’t, the final top 12 the committee releases before the Playoff begins won’t correlate to the seeding. It’s possible to be ranked No. 12 but achieve the No. 4 seed if you’re a conference champion.

But these first set of rankings are going to give us a look into who the committee respects as of right now. Is there a team with two losses that will be ranked ahead of one-loss teams? There is one team that comes to mind.

This may annoy some people, but Alabama is nowhere near out of the Playoff discussion. With a win over Georgia in its pocket, the Crimson Tide are going to be looked at quite favorably by the committee on Tuesday night. Yes, Alabama lost to Vanderbilt and Tennessee. And yes, Alabama hasn’t looked like it used to under Nick Saban. But beating Georgia is the ace-in-the-hole.

Alabama plays LSU on Saturday in what should be an elimination game. But if Alabama beats LSU in Tiger Stadium on Saturday night and runs the table, the Crimson Tide will unquestionably make the playoff, even if they don’t make the SEC title game.

In the committee’s eyes, is Alabama already worthy? There is a high chance Alabama is already ranked ahead of one-loss teams like SMU, Iowa State, Boise State, Washington State and Pittsburgh. — Ari Wasserman

2. Is one of these teams five spots better than the other?

Team A
Record: 8-0
Combined opponent record: 34-38
Sagarin strength of schedule rank: 41
Record vs. Sagarin top 30: 2-0
Combined scoring margin: Plus-124

Team B
Record: 9-0
Combined opponent record: 38-38
Sagarin strength of schedule rank: 54
Record vs. Sagarin top 30: 3-0
Combined scoring margin: Plus-224

Team A is BYU. Team B is Miami. I’m not saying BYU, No. 9 in the AP poll, needs to be ranked ahead of Miami, No. 5 in the AP poll. We’re just curious about the gap between the two. And since we’ve seen the committee veering away from the polls in its first ranking before, I’m wondering if the Hurricanes and Cougars wind up closer together in the committee ranking. — Andy Staples

3. What matters more: Good wins or bad losses?

We may as well call this the Notre Dame Question. The Fighting Irish have a win at Texas A&M (great!) and a loss to Northern Illinois (putrid!). Their Sagarin schedule rank is No. 64, and most of their wins are fairly ho-hum except for a blowout of Navy that looks less impressive after Navy lost to Rice last week. The committee has historically rewarded teams for good wins more than it has punished teams for bad losses. Will that continue? — Staples

4. What does the committee think of Indiana?

One of the most interesting stories of the season has been the Indiana Hoosiers, led by first-year head coach Curt Cignetti. Indiana is off to a 9-0 start following a 47-10 win over Michigan State and it has yet to win a game by less than 14 points. Simply put, the Hoosiers have been awesome. But there are doubters because of the logo on their helmets.

The truth is, Indiana hasn’t played a tough Big Ten schedule. Even this weekend’s game against Michigan — which would have been a prove it game had the Wolverines been any good — has a gambling spread of 14.5 points. But with no true quality wins, how will the committee rank Indiana as opposed to someone like Texas, who has one loss to a very good team but an otherwise forgettable resume. — Wasserman

5. What should be done about SMU?

Can SMU make the Playoff if it doesn’t win the ACC? There seems to be some differing opinions on that.

If SMU wins the rest of its games — including a matchup against Miami (probably) in the ACC title game — the Mustangs are in with an automatic bid. They’d likely be the No. 3 seed in that scenario. So the good news for SMU is it controls its own destiny.

Things get tricky if SMU reaches the ACC title game and loses to whoever it’s playing. That would leave SMU with an 11-2 record and wins over Pittsburgh and Louisville. That, in turn, will open debates between the Mustangs and really good teams from the SEC and Big Ten. So if you’re a Mustangs fan, keep rooting for Pitt and Louisville. SMU is going to need resume-boosters.

SMU’s only loss is to BYU. That looked terrible at first, but the Cougars have turned it into an understandable loss given they are one of the few unbeaten teams remaining in the country. We’re going to find out how much the committee respects SMU. — Wasserman

6. What will the committee think of Boise State?

Boise State is a one-loss team with quality wins over Washington State and UNLV. It’s loss was a last-second defeat at Oregon, who is the No. 1 team in the country in most people’s eyes. It also has one of the best players in college football in running back Ashton Jeanty. As of right now, the Broncos are the clear favorite to be the highest-ranked conference champion in the Group of Five.

In most College Football Playoff bracket projections, you’ll find Boise State in as the No. 12 seed. There has been this assumption the Broncos, because they don’t play in a power conference, will be the final team into the field. But there is nothing in the new playoff guidelines stating the highest-ranked G5 Champion will be seeded at the bottom of the bracket.

Are we thinking about this wrong? Could Boise State — not the Big 12 Conference winner — be one of the top four seeds in the bracket?

Boise State won’t have impressive quality wins over big-time opponents. We know the committee covets big wins. But just how much will the committee respect the Broncos, having played Oregon all the way down to the wire in Autzen Stadium? — Wasserman

7. Are they considering potential rematches when ranking teams?

The official answer is going to be no. And I suspect that when we take the committee’s first ranking and slot it into the bracket using the rules set by the commissioners that it will show that the committee didn’t consider matchups at all. There likely will be rematches and conference opponents playing one another in the first round. That’s fine, though. We want the committee to try to rank the teams as honestly as possible without considering other factors. — Staples

8. How does the committee feel about blowouts?

There are teams still in the hunt that have gotten smoked in certain games. While the committee hasn’t punished teams for losing to mediocre or bad teams in close games, we have seen instances where a team was dinged for losing by a lot. The 2017 Ohio State team that won the Big Ten but lost 55-24 at Iowa is the prime example. Eventual national champ Alabama might not have snuck into the field at No. 4 had that game been a one-point loss. (Ohio State also had a loss to Big 12 champ Oklahoma that year.)

This season, there will be more teams on the fringes for the committee to consider, and all those teams will have multiple losses. Some of those losses will be by a lot. Theoretically, Missouri (6-2) and Illinois (6-2) are still in the hunt if they run the table. But Missouri lost to Texas A&M and Alabama by a combined 65 points and Illinois lost 38-9 to Oregon in a game where the Ducks took their webbed feet off the gas. How will the committee compare these teams to others with similar records but no blowout losses? — Staples

9. Are any three-loss teams going to have a chance?

This question is open to current three-loss teams such as Vanderbilt — with a win against Alabama, a one-possession loss to Texas and LSU and Tennessee still on the schedule — and teams with difficult schedules that may take a third loss in the future. (Looking at the LSU-Alabama loser.) Given that there may be some one-loss teams sweating at-large spots, it seems unlikely that a three-loss team will get any consideration. Vanderbilt feels like the canary in the coal mine here. Do the Commodores wind up in the top 25 this week? If they do, think about who they’d have to beat to go. — Staples

10. What does the bottom of the top 25 look like?

Quality wins are going to be the difference this year. Make no mistake about it. That’s going to be it. The most interesting questions with the rankings always are found at the top because that’s where we figure out who has the best chance to get in. But the bottom of this top 25 is going to tell a story of teams that aren’t in the Playoff picture, but have rankings that will alter the resumes of the teams competing for spots. Which teams with three or more losses look the best in the committee’s view? Which teams will have extra quality wins as a result of those lower-tier rankings? — Wasserman