Back in June, ESPN released its initial Football Power Index (FPI) rankings, and it looked like the ACC’s best were getting some real respect. Miami came in at No. 9, Clemson was sitting pretty at No. 11, and both teams had a shot at the College Football Playoff, with Miami’s odds at 46.3% and Clemson’s at 47.3%. Fans felt a sense of optimism, seeing their teams line up right behind the top dogs from the SEC and Big Ten.

But fast forward to today, and ESPN’s updated FPI has thrown everyone for a loop. Miami dropped eight spots to No.17, Clemson fell to No. 16, and their chances to reach the CFP sank by double digits. Miami now sits at a 35.9% chance, Clemson at 38.2%. These numbers just don’t add up, given their unchanged rosters and schedules over the last two months. Meanwhile, SEC and Big Ten teams are surging: Tennessee and Michigan each rose two spots, Ole Miss jumped three, Florida and USC catapulted five places apiece, and LSU hopped up as well. The new rankings clearly favor non-ACC programs by a significant margin.

Rhett Lashlee was quick to call out ESPN on social media, responding bluntly to the controversy, “Because the whole thing is rigged.” His reaction also echoed the frustrations of ACC fans who see the gap growing and the metrics shifting without any real explanation. Looking at the logic prompts, real questions. Miami and Clemson didn’t lose starters or change coaches, yet teams with bigger question marks moved past them overnight. When power index formulas seem to change their tune with no clear reason, concerns about bias and transparency become hard to ignore.

It’s not the first time Lashlee has pushed back against perceived favoritism for the SEC, either. He’s been vocal about labeling it a “top-heavy” conference, noting in interviews that “the same six schools have won that league for the last 60 years,” and that true parity is lacking despite ESPN’s insistence on depth. Lashlee has never been the one to just take disrespect. By pointing to historical facts and the lack of rotation at the top, Rhett Lashlee made a stand for fairer treatment for his own conference.

With rankings like these, it’s no wonder the debate rages on. ESPN’s FPI remains influential, but Lashlee’s sharp critique and the visible discrepancies are shining a light on how the formula just might be favoring tradition and hype over true team strength. As the season kicks off, expect the conversation and the pressure to keep building.

Lashlee and ESPN

Rhett Lashlee’s knack for stirring the pot was on full display at ACC Media Days, too. His comment, “It’s (SEC) top-heavy to me,” was meant to highlight the ACC’s schedule strength and advocate for fairer playoff representation, but it instantly caught fire and drew plenty of passionate responses from around the sport. Paul Finebaum, never one to let a jab slide, was quick to clap back on his own turf. The SEC’s most visible defender called SMU the “worst program” in college football history, doubling down in classic Finebaum fashion. Lashlee, who probably thought he’d made his point and moved on, found himself at the center of a swirling media debate.

Yet, it was ESPN’s Scott Van Pelt who reframed the argument, challenging Lashlee’s SEC critique during a candid chat with Stanford Steve. Van Pelt pushed back, noting, “Like, oh, only six? Come on, Rhett. I like you. Yeah, I like you. What are you talking about?” He made it clear that having six different teams win a national championship over the past 25 years isn’t a weakness but rather a sign of depth and quality that most conferences, including the ACC, can’t claim.

This showdown, along with Rhett Lashlee’s ongoing fight with ESPN, is all the evidence we need to know what Lashlee stands for. Whether he meant to ignite a full-on conference debate or not, his comments ensure the ACC’s perspective stays front and center. With FPI controversy swirling and voices like Finebaum and Van Pelt challenging his logic, Lashlee has become an unfiltered advocate for his conference and for shaking up the status quo in how college football measures greatness.