translated .. we heard the UNH criticism loud & clear. The notion that bias and influence plays zero role .. I call BS .. partly. I will say it has improved considerably since the 2011 sham which had EKU buying their way into playoffs and CAA getting 5 teams in field of 20 .. while MVFC got just 2 teams despite being the highest rated FCS conference according to Massey Composite of 35 polls.

So it has slowly improved, And I liked the step they took 2 years ago announcing their top 10 leading up to games 9 and 10. I'm not completely sure of their rationale for not doing same leading up to game 11. I see more good than harm (i.e. being held too accountable for their week 11 rankings) announcing their top 10 leading up to the 3 final games. I think the idea of being transparent is great. But what makes it great is that the committee can hear the criticisms and arguments before making their actual selections after game 11.

My additional suggestion is to be more transparent about strength of schedule playing a direct factor into their selections. Very simply .. when you have a 9-2 team that played the 60th ranked SOS being compared to a 7-4 team who played the 6th ranked SOS, combined with quality of wins and losses (appropriate margins against opponents). As for the 7-4 "qualifying" record, while I love the Austin Peay story last year, they had zero quality wins .. yet they were supposedly on the bubble.

We'll see if there is any tangible benefit to this latest announcement .. explanations and open dialogue can only help the impartiality. I appreciate that it has improved considerably since 2011 .. but stil some work to do and the committee should welcome this kind of scrutiny .. it can only help the game.