[CTcard]

Pretty simple.  The Committee is showing itself to be extraordinarily hypocritical.  They talk a lot about how strength of schedule is important, and then rank a whole bunch of undefeated teams who have played nothing but creampuffs at the top.

For the most part, the committee has not talked at all, much less talked a lot about how strength or schedule is important. Mostly, that has been the various talking heads who tend to rattle on about how SOS is important to the committee but then follow that up with various incompatible statements about other things they think are important to the committee.

I suspect that the committee doesn't take these early rankings overly seriously. Not that I know - but clearly they shuffled things around a lot last year, particularly in the final ranking, i.e. the one that counted.

In the end, in the one year of precedent that we have, while they didn't put anyone with more losses in over any one with fewer, they did rank order the one loss teams appropriately w.r.t. strength of schedule. I expect the same. No one loss team gets in over a Power 5 zero loss team, but with a loss the Big 12 teams are doomed (if there are multiple 1 loss champs).

[CTcard]

Pretty simple.  The Committee is showing itself to be extraordinarily hypocritical.  They talk a lot about how strength of schedule is important, and then rank a whole bunch of undefeated teams who have played nothing but creampuffs at the top.

For the most part, the committee has not talked at all, much less talked a lot about how strength or schedule is important. Mostly, that has been the various talking heads who tend to rattle on about how SOS is important to the committee but then follow that up with various incompatible statements about other things they think are important to the committee.

I suspect that the committee doesn't take these early rankings overly seriously. Not that I know - but clearly they shuffled things around a lot last year, particularly in the final ranking, i.e. the one that counted.

In the end, in the one year of precedent that we have, while they didn't put anyone with more losses in over any one with fewer, they did rank order the one loss teams appropriately w.r.t. strength of schedule. I expect the same. No one loss team gets in over a Power 5 zero loss team, but with a loss the Big 12 teams are doomed (if there are multiple 1 loss champs).