[CTcard]

Not sure just what the committee is thinking because they don't say a whole lot and what they do doesn't address the lower seeded teams. But, more generally there is a lot of discussion out there complaining that Team X only beat 1/2/3 teams with winning records (or something like that). But that is meaningless without comparison. Further, given the top 6/bottom 6 split in the Pac 12 it's basically a result built into the schedule.

Number of wins over teams with winning records:
UW - 2*     
Colo - 2*   
U$C - 2
WSU - 1*
Stanford - 2
Utah - 2

I doubt much of the top 25 would look much better.
So, let's ignore anyone who takes the record of one team and says something like "X is not really very good, they only have 2 wins versus teams with winning records".


* Okay, I cheated a little bit. WSU and UW both have wins over 6-4 Idaho. Colorado has a win over 6-5, but probably soon to be 6-6, CSU. I don't think either of those count.

[CTcard]

Not sure just what the committee is thinking because they don't say a whole lot and what they do doesn't address the lower seeded teams. But, more generally there is a lot of discussion out there complaining that Team X only beat 1/2/3 teams with winning records (or something like that). But that is meaningless without comparison. Further, given the top 6/bottom 6 split in the Pac 12 it's basically a result built into the schedule.

Number of wins over teams with winning records:
UW - 2*     
Colo - 2*   
U$C - 2
WSU - 1*
Stanford - 2
Utah - 2

I doubt much of the top 25 would look much better.
So, let's ignore anyone who takes the record of one team and says something like "X is not really very good, they only have 2 wins versus teams with winning records".


* Okay, I cheated a little bit. WSU and UW both have wins over 6-4 Idaho. Colorado has a win over 6-5, but probably soon to be 6-6, CSU. I don't think either of those count.