I've been on record for quite some time as saying there are too many FBS teams. There are programs that are basically just a vanity project for the college (at a time when I hear more and more complaints about student debt). Along with losing money, some of these programs meet the minimum NCAA requirements purely through gaming the system or the NCAA simply failing to enforce rules.
They're pretenders, and to emphasize to what extent, I've seen lists showing college win totals showing pre-FBS win totals for Boise State and Appalachian State as though winning a junior college game or something is comparable to winning at the top level. Here's a hint, Boise State has only been playing in the FBS since 1996, they darn sure haven't won 20 games a year.
So, the idea is through smoke and mirrors to confuse us into thinking these nothing programs are something special. Boise State was the queen of this for years, but lately they've been getting tripped up by fairly mundane obstacles. Then there was that time in 2018 when their bowl game got cancelled and no one seemed to notice. However, with much of the Power 5 teams playing conference only schedules, a new opportunity for these wannabes presented itself.
So, we have undefeated Cincinnati, Coastal Carolina, and BYU. First, I'll address Coastal Carolina. They're a joke. They didn't even play anyone last year and they went 5-7. Their schedule consists of the sort of teams Alabama gets made fun of for scheduling as OOC games. They did manage to play one Power 5 program and that is telling in and of itself. One of their closet games of the year came against 0-7 Kansas (I remind people not all Power 5 programs or conferences are equal). This also happened to be Kansas' closest game of the year by the way.
BYU can posture all they want, but they haven't played anyone either. What's their big win? The only ranked team they played was another pretender, 4-1 Boise State. They want us to pay attention to the 0 losses, but who did they beat? What did they accomplish? Then we have Cincinnati, who I'd argue might be getting too much credit. The wreckage of the Big East still gets attention sometime, but at least Cincinnati did play Army out of conference. Think about it though, Cincinnati's big victory is Army?
If we shift over to Sagarin, we have SoS rankings to look at. They are going to be a little weird this year, but for instance Alabama sits at a healthy 24. Cincinnati is at 84, Coastal Carolina is at 107 and BYU is at 108. How many SEC teams would be undefeated with those schedules? I am actually for Alabama playing some of those type of games OOC, but specifically so Alabama can rest the starters.
Generally speaking though, I think the committee did a good job of not awarding participation trophies with their rankings. BYU, Oregon, USC, and Coastal Carolina all fall 15 or lower and deservedly so. They haven't done anything. I think Cincinnati might be too high, but who is supposed to be higher? 5 win Northwestern? 5-2 Georgia? So I understand that rational and take solace in the fact that three 1 loss teams are ranked higher.
This will be interesting to watch play out. But so far I have to agree with the basic position the committee seems to have taken. They're not going to reward a team for accomplishing nothing of merit. That's the way it should be.
They're pretenders, and to emphasize to what extent, I've seen lists showing college win totals showing pre-FBS win totals for Boise State and Appalachian State as though winning a junior college game or something is comparable to winning at the top level. Here's a hint, Boise State has only been playing in the FBS since 1996, they darn sure haven't won 20 games a year.
So, the idea is through smoke and mirrors to confuse us into thinking these nothing programs are something special. Boise State was the queen of this for years, but lately they've been getting tripped up by fairly mundane obstacles. Then there was that time in 2018 when their bowl game got cancelled and no one seemed to notice. However, with much of the Power 5 teams playing conference only schedules, a new opportunity for these wannabes presented itself.
So, we have undefeated Cincinnati, Coastal Carolina, and BYU. First, I'll address Coastal Carolina. They're a joke. They didn't even play anyone last year and they went 5-7. Their schedule consists of the sort of teams Alabama gets made fun of for scheduling as OOC games. They did manage to play one Power 5 program and that is telling in and of itself. One of their closet games of the year came against 0-7 Kansas (I remind people not all Power 5 programs or conferences are equal). This also happened to be Kansas' closest game of the year by the way.
BYU can posture all they want, but they haven't played anyone either. What's their big win? The only ranked team they played was another pretender, 4-1 Boise State. They want us to pay attention to the 0 losses, but who did they beat? What did they accomplish? Then we have Cincinnati, who I'd argue might be getting too much credit. The wreckage of the Big East still gets attention sometime, but at least Cincinnati did play Army out of conference. Think about it though, Cincinnati's big victory is Army?
If we shift over to Sagarin, we have SoS rankings to look at. They are going to be a little weird this year, but for instance Alabama sits at a healthy 24. Cincinnati is at 84, Coastal Carolina is at 107 and BYU is at 108. How many SEC teams would be undefeated with those schedules? I am actually for Alabama playing some of those type of games OOC, but specifically so Alabama can rest the starters.
Generally speaking though, I think the committee did a good job of not awarding participation trophies with their rankings. BYU, Oregon, USC, and Coastal Carolina all fall 15 or lower and deservedly so. They haven't done anything. I think Cincinnati might be too high, but who is supposed to be higher? 5 win Northwestern? 5-2 Georgia? So I understand that rational and take solace in the fact that three 1 loss teams are ranked higher.
This will be interesting to watch play out. But so far I have to agree with the basic position the committee seems to have taken. They're not going to reward a team for accomplishing nothing of merit. That's the way it should be.
