1) generate hype - the committee knows they have time and this will be sorted out. Putting Alabama at 4 over other undefeateds not only creates controversy, and the nation eats up an "sec bias" controversy, but it builds up the game this weekend between LSU and Bama. Bama loss and they drop out of the top 4 and Bama win and it validates their top 4 status. Committee can't lose, and the ratings will be bigger now and social media is abuzz with CFB rankings.

2) on field results really just don't matter. I'm perfectly content with using eye test to determine the top teams. But when you only take 4 teams from a pool of 60ish (just counting power 5), then on field results simply have to matter more IMO. I think Alabama is one of the best 4 teams, but how can you say they deserve a spot over MSU or Florida, without saying "you just think Bama is better" and ignore resume. Bama has a fluky loss at home to #19, Michigan State has a fluky win on the road against #17 and is undefeated. It's tough to compare across conferences but even look at Florida. Both have one loss. Florida's was on the road to the better team. Florida also has the better win (and it was a 30 point one over the team Bama lost to).

And it's not just Bama, using them as the example. ND is criminally high too. If everyone was undefeated, then I'm all for slightly ignoring resume and basing it off who you feel is best, because all you can do is win the games in front of you. But when you only take 4, and teams clearly have weaknesses (losses) then you have to look more at resumes than what the committee appears to be IMO.

Hopefully it is all just for hype though. Not even sour grapes as I know that the winner this weekend will be top 4 and deservedly so, but just general observation on the rankings to this point and what they represent and mean.