Let me explain the bias I'm referring to: The committee -without seeing anything head to head - automatically assumes that the 3rd, 4th, 5th SEC teams are better than the No. 2 ACC team. (This was reflected yet again in these rankings.) Might Kentucky and all these SEC teams be better than Wake? Perhaps. But how would they or anybody know? When you always assume a 2-loss SEC team is better than a 1-loss ACC team without any evidence that would hold up in court, that's bias.
Just letting everyone know:
Duke isn't ranked so Miami doesn't have a chance at a ranked win this weekend.
SMU isn't ranked so Wake Forest doesn't have a chance at a ranked win this weekend.
Biggest disappointment for me? Lack of pass rush. Some pressures, some on blitzes, but no sacks. Blount (53 snaps) & Damon Wilson (29 snaps) didn't have a tackle (per ESPN), let alone a sack. Nobody necessarily expected Bain/Mesidor production, but far more is needed.
🚨BREAKING🚨: Jacksonville (Fla.) 5-Star WR Brysen Wright commits to #Miami over Florida and Texas!
The 6-foot-4, 215-pound receiver becomes the sixth 5-Star prospect to commit to the Hurricanes in the last eight months.
https://t.co/TYT4GwjGtd
NEW: Florida State University leadership is currently meeting over the future of head coach Mike Norvell, @PeteNakos & @Clowfb report.
Intel: https://t.co/ntyO9o207g
He’s right. It dilutes the product.
People will watch the playoffs regardless, but the pressure and significance of certain regular season games will be diminished.
CFB draws people in because of its high stakes, week in and week out.