(07-14-2017 06:10 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-12-2017 11:12 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-12-2017 11:05 AM)vcoog Wrote:  I don't buy the whole premise.. it says UCF and UH 'fumbled the ball' in reguards to national relevancy.. This might be the case if UCF had lost to baylor and UH had lost to FSU, but the fact that both teams won demonstrated that the aac teams deserved their top 15/top 10 rankings that season. And UH's " mediocre 9-4 " season last year included two top 5 wins and at one point a top 5 ranking. You can argue we fumbled down the stretch but you can't argue we didn't demonstrate competing with the p5.. I also wouldn't limit the teams to UH UCF and South Florida. There are a few teams in this league that haven't had a pulse in football, but it's out of the norm, not the other way around. The American has surpassed expectations.

No G5 has ever reached the top 10 in a single CFP ranking. The first CFP ranking waitd weeks before even ranking an undefeated Marshall. In year 3 of the CFP, an undefeated G5 with wins over 2 P5's was not even top 10 worthy per the committee. In fact, the committee saw fit to place an undefeated W Michigan, with 2 P5 wins, behind every single 3 loss P5 (plus WMU was even ranked behind one FOUR-loss P5). Based on that, it would appear almost impossible for a G5 to get into the top 10---much less the top 4.

I dont think the guys on the selection committee even see themselves as unethical. The issue is the guys on the committee are all the same guy, cut from the same cloth, possessing the exact the same point of view. They all are P5 guys who truly believe it really isnt possible for a G5 team to be a legit top 10 team. Until the selection committee is made up of one representative from every FBS conference, the chance of a G5 crashing the playoff party is essentially zero.

I think we're blowing this a little out of proportion. The fact of the matter is that we haven't produced a team good enough to crack the top 4.

WMU didn't play a tough enough schedule, same with Marshall. Houston got up to (was it 7?) before racking up 4 losses. I think they would have spurred some argument had they kept it to 0 losses or 1 (quality) loss. Instead, they lost 4 games to division teams, many of which were unranked with losses to bad P5 teams.

I'm going to wait until we're clearly snubbed before jumping on this train.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe...maybe not. Perhaps not top 4---but I do personally believe we have produced teams at least deserving of top 10 status.