When considering rankings, do you consider the team that is on the field this year or the team that was on the field last year? Because that is the logic in putting the *Pats, who have two losses, as a higher ranked team than the Bills this season. I understand historical significance when considering the records of two head coaches against each other, but look at the games that each team has played this year and diagnose the product on the field. I understand, and miserably relate to, BBFS but that cannot be a factor in real rankings. You could more readily state that the team with 2 wins and 2 losses this season needs to prove themselves against the team with 4 wins and one loss, especially considering that they each have an extremely comparable strength of schedule.
This was the final straw.