Can we wait until a G5 deserving of a top 4 ranking doesn’t get invited before treating people that believe it’s possible like gullible dupes though? All signs pointed to UH being on the way to a top 4 ranking but choked the week before the CFP ranking came out.
As far as evidence of any chance of G5 teams having any chance of making an 8 team playoff. I’ve made it abundantly clear, that part of doing an 8 team playoff is going back to a rating system like the BCS or even tweaked to have less “polls” in the rating system. Don’t forget, even the BCS added a special stipulation that a non-AQ champ could be ranked as low as 15th if it was still higher than an AQ champ. If the powers that be were willing to agree to that, it’s not a reach to say they would approve a system that includes such rules as:
5 automatic bids for top 5 rated champs
3 at large bids going to best of the rest non-champs/independents
*1 at large bid going to a 6th conference champ if ranked in the top 12
Those rules, combined with going back to computer ratings/BCS ratings and you don’t have to be optimist to know G5 teams will occasionally get in.
Jimmy, I don’t want to be right. I hate to be right. It pisses me off to be right. I want to believe like you do but the F@#!ing reality is that it is not happening. There is not even a smoke signal, a sign from the cfp despots that it will happen and surely not from the media. Like you, like all of us I can’t stand it. That is why our Teams, fans have to make a statement every single week.
If we go undefeated with solid wins over Arizona and Tech, and they go on to have impressive seasons, along with UCF, Memphis and USF (making our conf stronger), I don’t see why we wouldn’t be in the conversation at least. Oh, that’s also assuming there are a few 1 or 2 loss P5 conf champs. That’s a lot of “what if’s” but still possible.
I think Zona has a shot at contending for the PAC title this year. So if they’re 12-1 (loss to UH) and top ten and we can beat a ranked Memphis, USF, and maybe Navy, I think we should be top 10. Margin of victory will be a big factor in any ranking.
The easy answer is probably not, but the rational answer is, it depends. There are so many variables. What if UH smacks Zona by 3 TDs and runs fairly easily through the AAC on the way to 12-0, beating at least 2 ranked teams (Memphis and UCF) along the way? What if 1-loss Zona wins the Pac-12, but barely scraped by some unranked Pac-12 teams in the process? My major issue with the CFP is that I don’t think many, if any, of the voting members actually watch any AAC games. They have no idea of the talent level until we get to a NY6 game and smack down a P5 opponent. Occasionally there will be a regular season game, but it’s rarely against a legit P5 contender because those guys won’t schedule us. So it becomes ultra-important for the voters to actually watch AAC games and take note of how games are actually won. But they won’t do it.
One would hope that it would be about the game but it is truly about ESPN protecting it’s investment in the P5s. Allowing an undefeated G5 in the playoffs over a 1 loss P5 champion would endanger the premise that the P5’s are inherently superior to the G5’s
What does a top 25 ranking mean if the system is rigged that is applying said ranking? At least an algorithm is consistent… 13 millionaires in a room means they are going to make the decision that makes them the most money.
I think the “inherently superior” argument was not only endangered, but destroyed by the 2015 and 2017 Peach Bowls. Everyone knows it and has recognized it except ESPN and the P5 commissioners.
Don’t kid yourself, ESPN is still pushing that belief because that is where their money is. Just because I state the ESPN point of view does not mean that I agree. UH’s #1 can compete on the field with anyone, it is the #2s and #3 that we would struggle. Academically UH ranks behind UT, Kansa, and Iowa St in the B12.
Yeah, I didn’t mean to imply you agree. Just that it’s silly of ESPN to keep pushing a premise that has been proven false repeatedly. I mean, the 2016 UH team that lost to 3 different AAC teams beat two Top 5 teams fairly comfortably. The “inherently superior” premise is demonstrably false and ESPN is starting to look idiotic for continuing to push it. Let’s face it…the casual fan loves to see a good David v. Goliath matchup. ESPN would do well to recognize that most folks are tired of seeing Alabama v Clemson every year, but they won’t because they seem really out of touch with the casual fan.
But those conferences will still say it was fluke and that we are still inferior. The rational will always be pushed that getting through these conferences is always harder no matter if it is down year or not. When ESPN made the label P5 and BCS conference we were doomed until we become one of them.
FYI – Based on the 2017 Opening Rosters, the P5 schools made up about 2/3’s of the rosters. AAC, MWC and CUSA added another 14%. The first G5 school was Boise State (around 35th highest) and the first AAC school was…drum roll…Cincinnati (around 45th).
100% agree. The problem with ESPN’s line of thinking is that the more times a G5 team beats a legit P5 team, either regular season or bowl game, the more it dilutes the argument and the more obvious it becomes when teams like Alabama only schedule Midwest Southern Alabama State of the Gulf Coast to their OOC slate. Once the masses (not just G5 fans, but the casual fan) wakes up to this, ESPN is in trouble. UCF opened a ton of eyes last year. I would prefer it be us, but if any AAC team can keep this streak going, more and more eyes will be opened. At least that’s my hope.