Gene, if you all get to ask the commissioner questions, I have a couple to ask.
1. Has The ACC verbalized any future concern to "The Godfather 13" aka The Playoff Committee, about the criteria for dropping an undefeated FSU that played no FCS schools, had an out of conference that included Oklahoma State, uf, & Notre Dame dropping below schools from Mississippi (Ol Miss ooc sched. = Boise St-decent, Louisiana, Memphis, & Presbyterian) (Ms St ooc = So Miss, So Ala, UT Martin, UAB 47-34 in a shoot out) who have not won anything significant in the last 1/2 century (take into account take into that Ole Miss losing to a 5 loss LSU, 5 loss Auburn, & a 6 loss Arkansas while Mis St won a shoot out w/ UK, loss to a Ole Miss who had 3 losses at the time), Oregon (had So Dakota & Wyoming ooc, & lost to at home to an Ariz team who had lost to two teams outside of the top 15 by the penultimate committee rankings, TCU (who is all offense and very little defense), and even Alabama? My point is, with an ooc schedule like FSU's in 2014 why schedule like that if the committee can arbitrarily discount it if the opponent is having what is perceived as a subpar year? Why should any school comprise a challenging schedule when it can just be arbitrarily discounted behind closed doors.
2. With the EsecPN network numbers in where are we in the timeline of starting a network, and is starting a network a given (something we can count on happening)? I recently heard an interview (XM 91 I believe) in which Swofford stated that they are still vetting if starting a network can be profitable. If he ponders much longer the divide in benefits from conferences with networks will become an insurmountable abyss.
1. Has The ACC verbalized any future concern to "The Godfather 13" aka The Playoff Committee, about the criteria for dropping an undefeated FSU that played no FCS schools, had an out of conference that included Oklahoma State, uf, & Notre Dame dropping below schools from Mississippi (Ol Miss ooc sched. = Boise St-decent, Louisiana, Memphis, & Presbyterian) (Ms St ooc = So Miss, So Ala, UT Martin, UAB 47-34 in a shoot out) who have not won anything significant in the last 1/2 century (take into account take into that Ole Miss losing to a 5 loss LSU, 5 loss Auburn, & a 6 loss Arkansas while Mis St won a shoot out w/ UK, loss to a Ole Miss who had 3 losses at the time), Oregon (had So Dakota & Wyoming ooc, & lost to at home to an Ariz team who had lost to two teams outside of the top 15 by the penultimate committee rankings, TCU (who is all offense and very little defense), and even Alabama? My point is, with an ooc schedule like FSU's in 2014 why schedule like that if the committee can arbitrarily discount it if the opponent is having what is perceived as a subpar year? Why should any school comprise a challenging schedule when it can just be arbitrarily discounted behind closed doors.
2. With the EsecPN network numbers in where are we in the timeline of starting a network, and is starting a network a given (something we can count on happening)? I recently heard an interview (XM 91 I believe) in which Swofford stated that they are still vetting if starting a network can be profitable. If he ponders much longer the divide in benefits from conferences with networks will become an insurmountable abyss.
