[BostonCard]

Likewise, thanks for your corrections...

As I wrote to farm, I don't think the rankings outside of the top 4 are very informative, and while I agree that the committee values (lack of) losses more highly than conference championships, I would be very surprised if the committee ever picked a non-conference champion with more losses above a conference champion with fewer losses, and moderately surprised if the committee picked a non-conference champion over a conference champion with the same number of losses, though I am sure some day an exception will pop up.  But based on the evidence so far, I think the general order of operations is:

1 Member of a P5 conference
2 Fewest losses
3 Conference championship
4 Strength of schedule
5 Conference reputation (though this is tough to separate from #4, aside from non-conference games)

BC

[BostonCard]

Likewise, thanks for your corrections...

As I wrote to farm, I don't think the rankings outside of the top 4 are very informative, and while I agree that the committee values (lack of) losses more highly than conference championships, I would be very surprised if the committee ever picked a non-conference champion with more losses above a conference champion with fewer losses, and moderately surprised if the committee picked a non-conference champion over a conference champion with the same number of losses, though I am sure some day an exception will pop up.  But based on the evidence so far, I think the general order of operations is:

1 Member of a P5 conference
2 Fewest losses
3 Conference championship
4 Strength of schedule
5 Conference reputation (though this is tough to separate from #4, aside from non-conference games)

BC