Its a little comforting to know that committe values the MW conference even with 2 losses over an undefeated Marshall with a weak schedule.
I agree that Mashall should be ranked at this point in the season, but I'm perplexed as to why CSU isn't ranked unless its because of the theory that BSU needs to lose.
EDIT: OK, well actually if the committe is really playing this SOS, then BSU's SOS grants them a 2 loss waiver because Marshall is 100 behind. CSU has a little stronger schedule than Marshall but their 1 loss keeps them out for now. I guess that is the way to see it, since there are a 4 loss team in the top 25.
Utah St will be a tough game....who have thought that USU with their 3rd or 4th string QB would be leading USU so well? It seem they have a bright furture at the QB spot at least and will keep them at the top of the MW for years to come. (if so then BYU will be losing to recruits to both Utah's.)

(11-26-2014 10:51 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:40 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  After seeing Boise play I have to agree with the committee. They are the best mid-major.

Perhaps, to gain access some G5's are going to need to start scheduling other top level G5's I believe.

That could be the answer for the MWC/AAC. NIU in the MAC is trying it.

The SOS issue though might be what finally blows up CUSA. Marshall could go off with Georgia Southern to form a more regional FB oriented league.

(11-26-2014 11:05 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  I agree that Mashall should be ranked at this point in the season, but I'm perplexed as to why CSU isn't ranked unless its because of the theory that BSU needs to lose.

Utah St will be a tough game....who have thought that USU with their 3rd or 4th string QB would be leading USU so well? It seem they have a bright furture at the QB spot at least and will keep them at the top of the MW for years to come. (if so then BYU will be losing to recruits to both Utah's.)

The CFP votes and revotes on schools 6 at a time. Boise ahead of Marshall could have come down to as little as 1 vote by 1 administrator going the other way. What I'm saying is they could easily be flipped next week if Marshall dominates and Boise struggles.

Re: Utah State they seem to be on the rise since Utah earned a spot in the PAC. Utah is signing more PAC level players and the players that would go to Utah in some cases are ending up at Utah State. Utah having 3 quality teams is a "testament" to its rise as a football state.

(11-26-2014 11:05 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Its a little comforting to know that committe values the Boise State brand even with 2 losses over an undefeated Marshall with a weak schedule.
I agree that Mashall should be ranked at this point in the season, but I'm perplexed as to why CSU isn't ranked unless its because of the theory that BSU needs to lose.

Because CSU doesn't have a couple of major bowl skins on the wall and 100-wins-in-10-years and blue turf?

(11-26-2014 11:10 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 10:51 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:40 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  After seeing Boise play I have to agree with the committee. They are the best mid-major.

Perhaps, to gain access some G5's are going to need to start scheduling other top level G5's I believe.

That could be the answer for the MWC/AAC. NIU in the MAC is trying it.

The SOS issue though might be what finally blows up CUSA. Marshall could go off with Georgia Southern to form a more regional FB oriented league.

Sigh. Starting a new conference and going 5 or 6 years without NCAA tournament credits (and an autobid in non-revenue sports--ADs do care about that) is not an option. If Marshall wants to play Georgia Southern and stAte that badly, they can play them OOC.

(11-25-2014 08:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If this committee system lasts 4 years I'll be surprised. They cant win as they are certain to exclude at least one champ from the CFP. If the SEC gets 2 in, then 2 champs are sent to the crap can. I cant imagine that it would take more than 3 to 4 years for the committee system to make enough enemies to be prematurely blown up. When it happens, that's when the 8-team playoff will come to pass. The P5 champs will be AQ and the top G5 will be AQ (that will be the price of returning AQ status to certain leagues). There will be 2 wild cards. If the committee survives---it will simply fill the CFP access bowls, decide the wild cards, and determine the top G5 champ. If it doesn't survive, then something like the old BCS ranking system will return to carry out that same function. The 8 team playoff will probably be the way it is for the rest of most everyone's lifetime. I don't see it getting bigger than that.

Naw it will be like the BCS.....highly criticized, but it will survive for the 12 years of the contract with some probable tweaking. In the end I do not believe they will ever give the G5 an automatic spot in the playoffs. The TV networks and the bowls will not allow it. Take this year as an example.....can you see Marshall in an 8 team playoff.

My fear is that if we have another year like this one, they may take away the automatic Access bowl slot.

Just as long as no AAC team makes the News Year 6 I'll be satisfied.

(11-26-2014 11:30 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Naw it will be like the BCS.....highly criticized, but it will survive for the 12 years of the contract with some probable tweaking. .....

My fear is that if we have another year like this one, they may take away the automatic Access bowl slot.

Your first part answers your second part. The G5 don't have much of a stake in the system, but the Access Bowl is big enough that taking it away is a big enough lawsuit that it's not happening.

The committee itself doesn't have that kind of skin in the game. Could the committee be replaced by a spreadsheet? Sure. Who's gonna sue? Nobody. Rearranging the semifinals/Access Bowl setup? Not gonna happen. Somebody would sue.

(11-26-2014 11:17 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 11:05 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Its a little comforting to know that committe values the Boise State brand even with 2 losses over an undefeated Marshall with a weak schedule.
I agree that Mashall should be ranked at this point in the season, but I'm perplexed as to why CSU isn't ranked unless its because of the theory that BSU needs to lose.

Because CSU doesn't have a couple of major bowl skins on the wall and 100-wins-in-10-years and blue turf?

(11-26-2014 11:10 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 10:51 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:40 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  After seeing Boise play I have to agree with the committee. They are the best mid-major.

Perhaps, to gain access some G5's are going to need to start scheduling other top level G5's I believe.

That could be the answer for the MWC/AAC. NIU in the MAC is trying it.

The SOS issue though might be what finally blows up CUSA. Marshall could go off with Georgia Southern to form a more regional FB oriented league.

Sigh. Starting a new conference and going 5 or 6 years without NCAA tournament credits (and an autobid in non-revenue sports--ADs do care about that) is not an option. If Marshall wants to play Georgia Southern and stAte that badly, they can play them OOC.

They care about it with good reason. It's probably difficult enough to recruit top athletes for "olympic sports" at most G5 schools. Imagine how much more difficult if you have to explain to recruits that their chances of ever playing in an NCAA tournament are almost nil at your school (but not at the other schools recruiting this kid) because your new conference will be without an autobid for the entire time that recruit is in college. You can't even sell hope to those recruits.

(11-26-2014 12:38 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  Wow people are going to cry about how overrated the SEC teams are until come bowl season like every year.

Then it's going to change to "Well, it was pretty much home game". "That was their x best team vs our x best teams". "They matched up favorable with us", "The refs gave them that game!"

What will the excuses be when both SEC teams win and it's a SEC vs SEC national championship.

Send your candy arses to Wisconsin or Minnesota or even to an Oklahoma in November (instead of home FCS) and see how you fare when it is single digit temps and frozen footballs etc...

(11-26-2014 11:17 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 11:10 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 10:51 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:40 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  After seeing Boise play I have to agree with the committee. They are the best mid-major.

Perhaps, to gain access some G5's are going to need to start scheduling other top level G5's I believe.

That could be the answer for the MWC/AAC. NIU in the MAC is trying it.

The SOS issue though might be what finally blows up CUSA. Marshall could go off with Georgia Southern to form a more regional FB oriented league.

Sigh. Starting a new conference and going 5 or 6 years without NCAA tournament credits (and an autobid in non-revenue sports--ADs do care about that) is not an option. If Marshall wants to play Georgia Southern and stAte that badly, they can play them OOC.

Im aware of the autobid rules and have talked about that being an impediment for many years. I didn't say a new league had to form immediately over this issue but it could begin the rumblings, especially if CUSA comes back weak on TV numbers.

The CUSA alignment of today is no longer a power alignment. Its a sponge for programs that couldn't get into a power alignment. It of itself it doesn't do anything for those programs.

This is the realignment board so the solution to a lot of problems is going to start with some realignment.

I have no problem with boise being ranked, I think they deserve it. I do have a problem with a 4 loss Utah being in over CSU. I think the rankings should have been boise marshall csu, so if boise loses then it is easier to justify the flipping of boise and csu, like they did with Alabama and miss state. I still think this week of csu wins and boise loses then csu will just take boise's place, but it will look weird. Even if boise wins , I think CSU deserves a top 25 ranking to finish the season

(11-26-2014 11:36 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Just as long as no AAC team makes the News Year 6 I'll be satisfied.

(11-26-2014 10:53 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 10:34 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I think CSU will be ranked higher if Boise loses. The fact that they don't look like they will win the MWC right now is likely hurting them.

I don't think Boise loses to Utath State at home, however. They are likely in.

Good thing is our Tigers are not far from of the relm of access this year, and that is hard to believe knowing where we were 3 year's ago.

Yeah, that was my point. The committee apparently is treating Boise as the conference champ, so they assume no more losses, as opposed to CSU, who with one loss, would have an argument to be ranked ahead of both Boise and Marshall, but will likely not win the conference.

(11-26-2014 10:53 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Yeah, that was my point. The committee apparently is treating Boise as the conference champ, so they assume no more losses, as opposed to CSU, who with one loss, would have an argument to be ranked ahead of both Boise and Marshall, but will likely not win the conference.

That doesn't matter...if CSU's body of work deserves to be ranked, then they should be. Having them ranked does not impact ANYONE else (or than the 26th team that missed out). It does not impact the top ranked G5 champ and it definitely does not impact the 4 team playoff.

Maybe the committee did throw Boise a bone, with the EXPECTATION that they will be a champ, but that's NOT how they should rank. Just placed the G5 where you think they should be and let the "Highest ranked Champ" rule takes care of itself.

So many people feel for CSU because of 1 loss, but the simple truth (if it holds out) is they didn't do what they needed to do to win the conference title. But maybe they would feel a little better if they were ranked as they should be!

Why can't they rank CSU ahead of Boise even if they aren't eligible for the access bowl ?
They have the better record better win and better loss compared to Air Force. I can see the loss to Mississippi not hurting Boise .

(11-27-2014 09:18 AM)MJG Wrote:  Why can't they rank CSU ahead of Boise even if they aren't eligible for the access bowl ?
They have the better record better win and better loss compared to Air Force. I can see the loss to Mississippi not hurting Boise .

They could. I think that some combination of Boise's brand name and general inattention to lower-FBS. Summarized as "oh crud we have to have someone for the Access Bowl and Marshall is a total fraud--quick check the standings--Boise is 9-2, done."

(11-26-2014 02:53 PM)Bearband36 Wrote:  I have no problem with boise being ranked, I think they deserve it. I do have a problem with a 4 loss Utah being in over CSU. I think the rankings should have been boise marshall csu, so if boise loses then it is easier to justify the flipping of boise and csu, like they did with Alabama and miss state. I still think this week of csu wins and boise loses then csu will just take boise's place, but it will look weird. Even if boise wins , I think CSU deserves a top 25 ranking to finish the season

Well, first of all win vs loss is a subjective statistic because not everyone plays the same type of schedule.

CSU has a few decent wins but they have not beaten a single team that is top 25 level. Nor have they even played one aside from Boise and they lost that game.

If you gave CSU Utah's schedule who has played a few top 25 level teams like USC, Oregon, UCLA, Arizona State, Arizona, CSU could easily be a 4-5 loss team right now.

So why should Utah be penalized because they play stronger teams and beat or played most of them very toughly?

(11-27-2014 09:18 AM)MJG Wrote:  Why can't they rank CSU ahead of Boise even if they aren't eligible for the access bowl ?
They have the better record better win and better loss compared to Air Force. I can see the loss to Mississippi not hurting Boise .

I'd have ranked CSU instead of Marshall.

We have the head-to-head win and the tougher schedule. Keep in mind that CSU actually plays Air Force this week - AFA could very well beat them too. When they're good (which they usually are), Air Force is always a tough team to play. Triple option + cut-blocking = trap game material.

(11-27-2014 10:00 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 02:53 PM)Bearband36 Wrote:  I have no problem with boise being ranked, I think they deserve it. I do have a problem with a 4 loss Utah being in over CSU. I think the rankings should have been boise marshall csu, so if boise loses then it is easier to justify the flipping of boise and csu, like they did with Alabama and miss state. I still think this week of csu wins and boise loses then csu will just take boise's place, but it will look weird. Even if boise wins , I think CSU deserves a top 25 ranking to finish the season

Well, first of all win vs loss is a subjective statistic because not everyone plays the same type of schedule.

CSU has a few decent wins but they have not beaten a single team that is top 25 level. Nor have they even played one aside from Boise and they lost that game.

If you gave CSU Utah's schedule who has played a few top 25 level teams like USC, Oregon, UCLA, Arizona State, Arizona, CSU could easily be a 4-5 loss team right now.

So why should Utah be penalized because they play stronger teams and beat or played most of them very toughly?

I find it unfair to exlcude a team from the club and then punish them for not being in it. You can schedule up in non conference, but if those teams later tank, you are SOL. We can't truely know how CSU would do with a PAC 12 schedule, but we played our conference to the best of our ability and so did Utah. They have 4 losses, and in my opinion teams with 3 or more losses shouldn't be ranked unless there is no one else.

(11-27-2014 12:26 PM)Bearband36 Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 10:00 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 02:53 PM)Bearband36 Wrote:  I have no problem with boise being ranked, I think they deserve it. I do have a problem with a 4 loss Utah being in over CSU. I think the rankings should have been boise marshall csu, so if boise loses then it is easier to justify the flipping of boise and csu, like they did with Alabama and miss state. I still think this week of csu wins and boise loses then csu will just take boise's place, but it will look weird. Even if boise wins , I think CSU deserves a top 25 ranking to finish the season

Well, first of all win vs loss is a subjective statistic because not everyone plays the same type of schedule.

CSU has a few decent wins but they have not beaten a single team that is top 25 level. Nor have they even played one aside from Boise and they lost that game.

If you gave CSU Utah's schedule who has played a few top 25 level teams like USC, Oregon, UCLA, Arizona State, Arizona, CSU could easily be a 4-5 loss team right now.

So why should Utah be penalized because they play stronger teams and beat or played most of them very toughly?

I find it unfair to exlcude a team from the club and then punish them for not being in it. You can schedule up in non conference, but if those teams later tank, you are SOL. We can't truely know how CSU would do with a PAC 12 schedule, but we played our conference to the best of our ability and so did Utah. They have 4 losses, and in my opinion teams with 3 or more losses shouldn't be ranked unless there is no one else.

Okay, well next time Georgia State does well in the terrible Sun Belt basketball conference I want them to be ranked higher than any team from the MVC if they have more wins regardless of who they are.

If Georgia State were 16-0 wins over low SOS teams and Missouri State was 14-2 with wins over teams like Gonzaga, Uconn, UNC, would you not find that unfair if Georgia State was ranked higher?

So again, why penalize Utah? Their ability to schedule certain teams is irrelevant.