(09-06-2017 06:00 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 09:40 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 04:20 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:28 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(09-05-2017 02:25 PM)M1T4 Wrote:  You suck at this

Not sure why people are impressed with their outcomes thus far, that's all.
Last season everyone on here hated that WMU was ranked after a certain amount of weeks for their "weak" schedule. Which it was... weak. USF's will be worse.

I picked them to be the Access Bowl rep. I'm looking for more out of them in future weeks.

You're likely incorrect here. WMU's schedule was certainly weak best win was against Northwestern, #44 in final Massey Composite; second Big10 win Illinois was #99; best MAC opponent was Toledo at #48.

The link below details CFP Committee chairman Kirby Hocutt discussing the rankings on the Tuesday between Thanksgiving and conference championship games.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...some-help/
Hocutt talks about the WMU schedule weakness being a concern and details why 9-2 Navy has gotten so close. Two-loss Navy had three quality wins that WMU did not. The quality wins that got the AAC team near the finish line were all AAC wins. Wasn't Notre Dame, 4-8 and below the median line. Navy had wins against Houston, Tulsa, and Memphis all three above Northwestern and Toledo after the games of 26 November 2016.

It's a pretty safe bet that any AAC champ will have AAC wins that look stronger than any of WMU's 2016 wins.

Wrong. Especially when Houston is the sole big win for USF to have, barring a good possible UCF win. Seriously... Temple blew its chance at being a highly regarded win already. WMU's 2016 SOS will beat USF's 2017 SOS. That's been stated since before the season unless a team comes from the depths and really surprises in the AAC. The AAC is a better league, but USF doesn't play those better teams. They just don't.

Houston is currently better than WMU's best '16 win.
You highlighted UCF possibly climbing 15 or so spots to be there also.
Tulsa is on USF's schedule - currently above the midline at #64 and could climb.
CCG matchup could be Memphis/Navy instead of a rematch w Houston or Tulsa. A division champ Memphis/Navy is easily ranked #44 or higher.
Heck, you write off Temple too quickly - only need to climb 25 spots to be a better win than Northwestern was last year (their schedule is weak so they might not be able to).

That's five chances to have wins better than WMU's last year all VERY reasonable. If we were stretching we could talk about longer shots like Cincinnati or Tulane going on a tear. But we don't have to -- AAC schedule will give USF multiple opportunities for quality wins better than anything WMU had ooc last year.

Houston hasn't even played a game this year.

USF Bulls:
327 AP votes in pre season
207 AP heading into week 2

Houston Cougars:
19 AP votes in pre season
14 AP votes into week 2

Tulsa Golden Huricanes:
4 AP votes in pre season
0 votes in week 2

Navy Midshipmen:
0 votes in pre season
1 vote into week 2

There are already threads for AAC vs G4 in the AP and Coaches polls.
Not sure why you'd post this week's poll news here, since "more AAC teams receiving votes" doesn't go with "shoddy"

(09-04-2017 10:14 PM)AusTxPony Wrote:  Did I miss it or was there no mention of SMU and Tulane? ECU and UConn both mentioned. Are they rated above SMU and Tulane? All in all, Fair is the rating I give the AAC in the week 0 and 1. Last year we had Houston's big win in Week 1 to brag about. Tulsa and Temple failed big time, along with USF. SUPPOSED to be three of our better teams. See Western Michigan v. USC. No excuses.

Except for the Offensive Line Tulsa is essentially breaking in a new offensive team. That's right a team! Most of these players have never started. That includes QB's, WR's, and RB's. No excuses? So what! What has SMU done recently.

Toledo fan still talking nonsense?

We get our turn at TCU, we'll see if we can do any better. And if we don't I'll own it.