No, it's not even most of them. Using the college football selection committee wasn't a good example. Out of 13 on the committee only 4 or 5 are true football guys. It's basically the same as the basketball committee. A bunch of old AD's and a couple of appointed "experts" who never had anything to do with the game...
60 teams get it in, hard to make an argument bubble teams.
+1
End of story
Finally a poster with some sense.
I'm sorry, but that's not more and it's not valid. That's 5 out of 13. And there was also a significant shortage of Big 12 backers on the committee. Which kept Baylor and TCU out of the playoff. We had Oliver Luck on one hand. He doesn't know shit, and wasn't really a true Big 12 guy.. Plus football was secondary to him, especially since he was busy looking for another job at the time. And then Archie Manning had to drop out because of illness. So it was really 4 out of 13 football guys. So I don't know why you continue to make this argument. Manning was a good friend of Art Briles, so that was a potential Big 12 vote out of the picture.. OSU definitely got the vote with Barry Alvarez and especially Tom Osborne, whose Nebraska team left the Big 12 on bad terms. So you have the bias everywhere, not just basketball. But it's much worse for football with just 4 teams making the cut.Barry Alvarez
Pat Haden
Archie Manning
Tom Osborne
Tyrone Willingham
I'm sorry, my more is more than valid. There was significant input from football guys, enough to educate the rest
Although they could do better than her, I really don't have as much argument with Rice as I do some of these AD's. She probably don't do anything else but play golf and watch football. But all of these AD's are another story. Especially the working AD's. When do they have time to watch all of these games other than maybe their own conference teams? I can't believe they can devote that much time to college football when they have all of these other duties.Condi Rice is likely the best educated and watches the most football