The committee is sending a clear message that they don't care about strength of schedule and only care about record and the eye test and blue blood status. According to espn strength of schedule (which I know isn't perfect)
https://www.espn.com/college-football/fpi/_/view/resume
We have the hardest strength of schedule of any 1-loss team. So why schedule a tough OOC game if it can only hurt us. We would be ranked in the exact same spot if we had beaten a cupcake in place of ND and if we had lost to ND we would be next to Vandy - on the outside looking in.
The NCAA has a very clear problem if they disincentivize scheduling good/tough OOC games. Why do they get this so wrong? College basketball seems to get this stuff mostly right. Why not follow their lead where they reward good OOC wins but don't penalize the losses heavily? Why on earth would a team like Ole Miss be ahead of us when they have a far weaker SOS and scheduled 4 cupcakes in their non-conference?
https://www.espn.com/college-football/fpi/_/view/resume
We have the hardest strength of schedule of any 1-loss team. So why schedule a tough OOC game if it can only hurt us. We would be ranked in the exact same spot if we had beaten a cupcake in place of ND and if we had lost to ND we would be next to Vandy - on the outside looking in.
The NCAA has a very clear problem if they disincentivize scheduling good/tough OOC games. Why do they get this so wrong? College basketball seems to get this stuff mostly right. Why not follow their lead where they reward good OOC wins but don't penalize the losses heavily? Why on earth would a team like Ole Miss be ahead of us when they have a far weaker SOS and scheduled 4 cupcakes in their non-conference?
