It really looks like committee is doing all they can to boost other conferences at expense of SEC.

Committee clearly likes B1G this year but as far them them being the next power conference.... I don't know what you mean by that?
Do you mean THE premier conference? As the SEC was for the last 10-15 years?

It's possible but not foregone. It's very top heavy and their "middle" is weak. I also don't see anyone other than Ohio State and Oregon with staying power right now. (I just don't believe IU can do it year in and year out, sorry).
Iowa - lol, Michigan - not without cheating apparently, USC - unlikely with one-sided Riley teams, Penn State - clown show

Also the SEC will likely have 5 teams in the playoff to their 3. And two more (Vandy and Texas) ahead of the next B1G team. SEC just doesn't have a juggernaut right now.

The committee's overwhelming bias is to achieve variety across the country and across conferences. By doing so, college football has expanded. Check out the TV ratings this year compared to last year and the year before. It's working. More people are watching ALL games. Most think the committee is loyal to "brands" but nothing could be further from the truth. You don't achieve this level of ratings growth by favoring 3 or 4 programs. You achieve it by doing exactly what the committee has been doing-variety across the country and across conference.

Mizzou and Tennessee haven't beaten a team with a winning record this year

Better question is why is UH ranked they are beyond awful. Mizzou would steamroll them as would any team in the SEC.

Who cares

All that matters is the top 10.

GCP12 said:

---

Mizzou and Tennessee haven't beaten a team with a winning record this year

---

East Tenn State says hello.

My bad. Meant FBS team with a winning record

Sure seems like the B1G is being propped up tremendously.

Obviously OSU is very good but not sure about the other B1G teams until they play someone out of conf.

LB12Diamond said:

---

Who cares

All that matters is the top 10.

---

not true

phatty26 said:

---

Better question is why is UH ranked they are beyond awful. Mizzou would steamroll them as would any team in the SEC.

---

that's what I'm wondering

why are Arizona and UH ranked ahead of Missouri and Tennessee?

Mississippi State's win over Arizona State (4th place BDF finisher) tells the tale of SEC vs. BDF

W said:

---

phatty26 said:

---

Better question is why is UH ranked they are beyond awful. Mizzou would steamroll them as would any team in the SEC.

---

that's what I'm wondering

why are Arizona and UH ranked ahead of Missouri and Tennessee?

Mississippi State's win over Arizona State (4th place BDF finisher) tells the tale of SEC vs. BDF

---

And didn't ASU have their QB1 playing against Miss St?

I don't think he was playing in their other losses.

We will never get any real explanation or documented reasoning. Then the committee changes.

Something needs to happen to have some reliability. When you constantly change who is making the decisions and what the decisions are based on then you are not just opening the door for corruption but instead are welcoming it in with a mariachi band

They go in alphabetical order.

Let's not forget the chair man got replaced... for being a dishonest dbag

Jimbo4win said:

---

The committee's overwhelming bias is to achieve variety across the country and across conferences. By doing so, college football has expanded. Check out the TV ratings this year compared to last year and the year before. It's working. More people are watching ALL games. Most think the committee is loyal to "brands" but nothing could be further from the truth. You don't achieve this level of ratings growth by favoring 3 or 4 programs. You achieve it by doing exactly what the committee has been doing-variety across the country and across conference.

---

Always has been an East Coast/Northern bias regarding rankings … but portal has more to do with above than committee … SEC being screwed by CFPC and their weekly rationalizations on why B1G on par or better than SEC

if you wanted to engage all 50 states and or all regions of the country to increase viewership of the CFP would you do exactly what they are doing with the rankings? if you have to high a concentration of southern only schools your limiting viewership or i think they believe that.