Maybe I’m not explaining it right.
From a perception level, it definitely matters. NET and the team sheets matter, but human beings are on the selection committee. And if the perception is “ACC is bad,” then that has an effect. To this point, the teams that are supposed to be good actually being good, the teams that are supposed to be bad not being as bad as people thought, and teams that people thought would be mediocre actually being solid all matter. If Duke, and UNC, and Virginia, and Miami, and even to an extent Syracuse, NC State, Florida State and Pitt being good all matters on a human level.
From a NET perspective, you can’t have situations where a Florida State team that actually has some talent ends up getting their NET torpedoed by losing OOC games to Stetson. As we learned last year, that was a team that wasn’t dreadful - but the NET reflected the OOC results. You’ve gotta avoid that as a league. That’s where I’m a little concerned about Notre Dame - they don’t have a ton of talent and they’re going to lose OOC games, but Shrewsberry can scheme up a game plan that can win some ACC games, and those will be huge NET traps. You need the talented teams to win their games, because then their NET will be reflective of their talent level.
By way of example, Duke’s going to be more talented than Pitt this year whether they finish 27-4 or whether they finish 18-13. But if they’re 18-13, then we’re going to go into our home game with Duke where they’re a Q2 win at best, and a loss that won’t look great on the team sheet if we lose, even if they’re a better team. You need the good teams to win, so that their NET is reflective of that. And you need the bad teams to win, too, honestly.
