College Football Rankings: Why the Committee Makes No Sense

So let's go into the college football rankings. I want you to do me a favor. I want you to tell me what metric they're using because I'm confused. Every time I watch them go out and try to put these 12 teams together, I'm lost in what the metric is. Is it strength of schedule? Is it who you've won and who you've even lost to? What's the metric you think they're using? I think they're using a combination of, they use strength of schedule, they use strength of game control, they use head-to-head when they want to use head-to-head, they use head-to-head when they don't want to use head-to-head, and what it was explaining to me, at least what I got from the committee, is head-to-head. Only comes into play if the teams they're comparing are in the same pod. That's the excuse they used for Miami Notre Dame last year when Notre Dame was ahead of Miami, and then Miami Notre Dame when Miami got within the same pod as Notre Dame if the teams are close enough. Now, what's the definition of the pod? Nobody knows. That's the beauty of the committee. Nobody actually knows what they're actually using. So when you're comparing Tennessee and Alabama, and I know that's been the uproar all week is Tennessee blew out Alabama. How do you have them so far apart? Per the committee, they're not worthy of being in the same conversation. So that's basically what they're saying. When they use the term pod, they're saying Alabama and Tennessee are not worthy of the same conversation, but when they are, we'll jump Tennessee. That's what Notre Dame and Miami was all of last year, is they're not worthy of the same conversation, but when they are, Miami's going to jump Notre Dame. At the end of the day, Dan, it makes no sense. I've been against the idea of a committee since the day there was an idea of the committee. Everyone ripped the computers, everyone ripped the polls. That was better than this. There were other issues involved, like when margin of victory used and when Miami lost out to Florida State after they beat them head to head. There are other issues with the BCS. But at the end of the day, you had six really good computer polls, and you had two writers and or SID polls of people who watched football and people who knew the sport and the combination of the AP writers and the coaches poll and the six computers. Can you imagine, Dan, nowadays what computers can do with AI and all of that? This was 1996 through 2010, leaving it up to 12. People in a room to declare what they want to use and not use and it's not transparent is ridiculous to me because you can see it changes every week. What is the purpose, Dan, of having rankings last week and you decide that Indiana is worthy of being the number four team in the country? They didn't play last week. Sure, their resume got nicked a little bit by Ohio State losing and you drop them five spots. What you're telling me is, oops, we made a mistake. We saw you ranting on social media. We'll drop Indiana. Miami, number one in the country. Undefeated. UCLA, undefeated, number eight. Neither one played anybody. One week later, they drop Miami seven spots. They move UCLA up four spots. What are we doing? All they're doing is admitting that the process is flawed week to week.