not have helped the B12. Second, the bias would continue no matter the outcome.

I agree with the second. Which is why I disagree with the first.

The B1G argued it should get a 5th team in over SMU and the SEC argued it should get a 4th team in over SMU. Media bias agreed.

But the committee ignored that and selected SMU.

It seems irrefutable that had both Clemson and SMU won the committee's decision would have been vindicated and next year the ACC would be in a stronger position to argue for 2 or more again when the bias is heard.

But both lost. I cannot see how it can be disputed that that hurt them for next year.

And ASU losing certainly makes it harder to argue a B12 runner-up should have gotten in.