I know he has a tough job to do, but he sounds clueless. He has no clue how to cultivate his image nor any clue that his image reflects on the conference. After the 3rd year, he's still asking what the criteria are, as if the selection process is a flow chart that 12 people are forced into. He's asking for an algorithm that doesn't exist. If it existed we wouldn't need a committee.
He wasted a lot of time and money commissioning studies to calculate something that doesn't exist and now he sounds like he's complaining that the committee didn't follow the process his consultants reverse engineered for a high fee.
Any rational person knows you can't predict what the committee is going to do year-to-year. The committee has gone from 13 to 12 and only 7 of the original 13 are still on it. 3 more are rolling off next year. The committee are going to watch the games and pick the 4 teams they are the best. They will then trot out an AD that is not a publicist to say whatever they can to defend their rankings. I don't mean that in a conspiracy way. It's just human nature. With the constantly rolling committee, of course the criteria is going to change year-to-year.
He's asking what the committee is going to do in the future because it appears the criteria has changed since 2014. Even if he gets an answer, it won't matter going forward because next year there will only be 4 of the 13 committee members left from 2014. It's like he's trying to drop a card 3 feet off the ground over a target, seeing it landed 12 inches to the left so he moved his arm 12 inches right, then complained to the air "why didn't that one hit dead on?"
The other moving target as well is the constantly changing records and who's who of college football at the end of the season. Some years might have 5 undefeated teams, some years might have none, and there will be a whole slew of 1 loss teams in between, and there might even be a day where a 2 loss teams gets in is there are not a lot of 1 loss teams.
The situation from the big 10 that happened this year is not that unlikely and the Big 12 adding a CCG will probably hurt the conference as many times as it will help. There will be a time when an undefeated team enters the CCG and loses to a 2-loss 2nd place team and the Big 12 might be left out for it, or even more likely a 11-1 teams loses to a 10-2 team. There will also be a time where the Big 12 finished with two or 3 11-1 teams and the CCG will give 1 of those teams a most certain and necessary boost to get into the playoff.
Bowlsby though, like so many other dunderheaded decisions and moves made by this conference in it's history, let alone this year (Adding CCG, Bowen's dumbass shooting off about expansion, going through the interview process of expansion, and then not doing expansion, and now this) only shows that the Big 12 suffers from the paralysis of analysis, and it's inability to make a strong decision or even ability to even follow through on any decision shows how disadvantaged and rudderless this conference is. While I still think there is a future for the Big 12, I totally get why certain schools left in the first place, and why others are chaffing under the system.
Bowlsby needs to learn when and how to STFU.
