[CTcard]

Perhaps. But the problem is that even when the PAC-12 scheduled good OOC games, we lost ALL of them.

The problem with interconference won-loss records is that there are so few games that the results are kind of random. 

For example, during the regular season last year the Pac had the best Power 5 interconference record at 6-2 (7-3 if one includes und). 
Then the bowl season happened (which is what everyone remembers) and the Pac ended at 7-9 (8-10 with und), which was fourth among the Power 5 (but just about barely behind the SEC at third). 

So far this season the Pac is 3-4 in inter-Power5-conference games, which places it third. 
(The Pac was 3-6 if one includes und. Others took a hit there as well - ACC 0-5 vs und, Big Ten 0-2, SEC 0-1).

My impression is that the Pac  has a tendency to be relatively even; weaker at the top but stronger at the bottom. That hurts it as far as having teams in the playoff, and it should. There really is not a Pac 12 team among the top 4 this year. However, it doesn't say anything about average strength. 

As to WSU, I'm not sure. 

I'd kind of like to see them in a NY6 bowl - it would help us in a couple of ways. (Money and moving up in the bowl sequence.)
I also understand why they might feel a little put out. The committee has almost always used number of losses as the primary sorter among Power 5 teams. Rarely has a two-loss Power 5 team lost out on a NY6 bowl bid in deference to a three loss team. I think it happened to WVU in 2016. It sort of happened in 2015 but I think only because of conference-bowl contracts rather than CFP rankings (in particular 3-loss Mississippi got into the Sugar Bowl because it is obligated to take the top SEC team available). 

On the other hand, WSU scheduled horrendous teams for their non-conference schedule and lived rather a charmed life this season. I suspect they are not one of the top 12 (or really top 11 Power 5) teams in the country.

[CTcard]

Perhaps. But the problem is that even when the PAC-12 scheduled good OOC games, we lost ALL of them.

The problem with interconference won-loss records is that there are so few games that the results are kind of random. 

For example, during the regular season last year the Pac had the best Power 5 interconference record at 6-2 (7-3 if one includes und). 
Then the bowl season happened (which is what everyone remembers) and the Pac ended at 7-9 (8-10 with und), which was fourth among the Power 5 (but just about barely behind the SEC at third). 

So far this season the Pac is 3-4 in inter-Power5-conference games, which places it third. 
(The Pac was 3-6 if one includes und. Others took a hit there as well - ACC 0-5 vs und, Big Ten 0-2, SEC 0-1).

My impression is that the Pac  has a tendency to be relatively even; weaker at the top but stronger at the bottom. That hurts it as far as having teams in the playoff, and it should. There really is not a Pac 12 team among the top 4 this year. However, it doesn't say anything about average strength. 

As to WSU, I'm not sure. 

I'd kind of like to see them in a NY6 bowl - it would help us in a couple of ways. (Money and moving up in the bowl sequence.)
I also understand why they might feel a little put out. The committee has almost always used number of losses as the primary sorter among Power 5 teams. Rarely has a two-loss Power 5 team lost out on a NY6 bowl bid in deference to a three loss team. I think it happened to WVU in 2016. It sort of happened in 2015 but I think only because of conference-bowl contracts rather than CFP rankings (in particular 3-loss Mississippi got into the Sugar Bowl because it is obligated to take the top SEC team available). 

On the other hand, WSU scheduled horrendous teams for their non-conference schedule and lived rather a charmed life this season. I suspect they are not one of the top 12 (or really top 11 Power 5) teams in the country.