Go Penn State!

[AppStFan1]

Nostradamus I am!

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

The two leagues are comparable and I don't think the talent at the top is far apart, if much at all. I'm pretty sure not only App but Louisiana could have competed with the top 3-4 in the AAC.

After seeing Memphis today I think it would be a good game if we played them. They are very good but I think we have a little more depth, which could be the difference. They deserved what they got but it is a shame that we could not play them just to settle who the top G5 is for sure. I have a feeling the polls will drop them to just 1-2 spots ahead of us but not below and I really am not sure who would win.

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

[AppStFan1]

Penn State by two touchdowns. Remember, the AAC doesn't play defense.

Nostradamus I am!

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

Meant to ask earlier. What was the perception when we flipped a DB commit to you guys? Were fans mad or thought the player was taking a much lesser offer? Were you guys shocked or saw it coming?

The reason I ask about fan perception is that I have talked to several of our players who have had visits to UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Troy, etc and they all said that App State blew the others away. Between our winning, what we have, what we are building, and the atmosphere they all seemed to say the visits are what separated us from everyone else. I would be curious to hear a fan perception of you guys because I was surprised we flipped a UCF guy.

[citroknight]

Penn State by two touchdowns. Remember, the AAC doesn't play defense.

Nostradamus I am!

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

Meant to ask earlier. What was the perception when we flipped a DB commit to you guys? Were fans mad or thought the player was taking a much lesser offer? Were you guys shocked or saw it coming?

The reason I ask about fan perception is that I have talked to several of our players who have had visits to UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Troy, etc and they all said that App State blew the others away. Between our winning, what we have, what we are building, and the atmosphere they all seemed to say the visits are what separated us from everyone else. I would be curious to hear a fan perception of you guys because I was surprised we flipped a UCF guy.

Is it Mike Smith? If so, I'm gonna be honest, that flip didn't register for our fan base. I was trying to remember just off memory but then searched through both our Rivals forum and the Facebook group we have.

Those two represent the different parts of our fan base. The rivals forum is for those more involved in following recruiting and more familiar with college football and rules, etc whereas the Facebook page has a lot more casual fans and just generally supportive alumni but not quite as in the weeds with the sports.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't alarm the Facebook group. Might've just gone under the radar. Because the Facebook group freaks out over kids who couldn't cut the two deep transferring from us. Which is pretty standard for every school that a kid that's been there 2-3 years but can't break through is probably never going to so might as well make the most of your limited eligibility.

I can't speak for all of us, but my general feel is that an App flip isn't really bad. It's a comparable G5 peer and there's always fine details that make sense when you look into it like relationships with coaches as well as the position depth at one school versus another. That's hurt us this year and in the past at QB for instance. We wanted to sign Brock Purdy for the class of 18 but Milton had just finished his junior season, the 2017 magical perfect season, and Purdy wanted to start right away but knew he'd be stuck behind Milton for 2 years. So instead he went to Iowa State and has been great for them. The flips that annoy us and register more are spurning us for a bottom barrel P5. Those hurt because it brings up the reality of how much some of these kids care about the conference brand even if they're part of the conference punching bag and not an actual contender.

I asked our Rivals source for mor information because though I swear I read it, I couldn't find it myself just searching. But on the rivals board we knew Smith wasn't signing with us before signing day. So for us it wasn't surprising. I'm just trying to remember if we had actually dropped him earlier. A lot of that stuff is never shown but it happens. Kids get dropped but schools give them the courtesy of "decommiting" or "flipping" on their own terms publicly as to not embarrass the recruit. And then we've been on the opposite end too where a kid just uses us as a placeholder commitment until he gets that P5 school he was really pushing for and drops us. Or we cut off the effort but in reality it's because the kid moved on from us.

[citroknight]

Just confirmed, he was dropped by UCF. Still waiting to see if I can get more details. But it was likely to make room for someone else at DB.

[citroknight]

Alright, update part 2 lol.

He was cut loose by UCF once it was clear we were going to be able to sign Justin Hodges (he had a top 5 of UCF, Minnesota, Miami, Wazzu, Indiana) and Davonte Brown (top 3 of UCF, Miami, and Pitt). I believe they might have been our most desired DB targets.

*Like I said before though, take the players top 3/5 with a grain of salt. Our fans love to celebrate when a kid picks us over Miami and others but in some cases Miami wasn't pushing as hard because he was DB3/4 for them compared to DB1/2 for us. Or the school already stopped pursuing him and he didn't have a truly commitable offer but they still want the hype on social media as well as going through the pageantry of it all with whittling down a top 10/5/3 and doing the signing day hat display.

[citroknight]

As for the other part of kids being blown away by App versus others, I can believe it. It's really about an individual connection. From my own personal experience applying to college, I had gotten into UCF in December because they do rolling admission. But I had to wait until February to find out about UF because they only have one set date when they give out decisions. UF, being the best public school in Florida, was the best university I got into. But by the time February came around, I had already fallen in love with UCF. The only thing that made me hesitate a little was am I going to turn down the best school I got into? But I did because there was something else I felt with UCF.

I'm sure athletic recruitment is more exciting than the regular college application experience like mine lol but there's similarities. There's objective things we can point to like this school has more students than this one, this one has more money than that one, this one plays more ESPN games, sends more NFL players, etc. But it's an emotional process built on relationships so it can become subjective and so I totally see those kids being blown away by the culture and tradition and facilities at App.

[AppStFan1]

Nostradamus I am!

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

Meant to ask earlier. What was the perception when we flipped a DB commit to you guys? Were fans mad or thought the player was taking a much lesser offer? Were you guys shocked or saw it coming?

The reason I ask about fan perception is that I have talked to several of our players who have had visits to UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Troy, etc and they all said that App State blew the others away. Between our winning, what we have, what we are building, and the atmosphere they all seemed to say the visits are what separated us from everyone else. I would be curious to hear a fan perception of you guys because I was surprised we flipped a UCF guy.

Is it Mike Smith? If so, I'm gonna be honest, that flip didn't register for our fan base. I was trying to remember just off memory but then searched through both our Rivals forum and the Facebook group we have.

Those two represent the different parts of our fan base. The rivals forum is for those more involved in following recruiting and more familiar with college football and rules, etc whereas the Facebook page has a lot more casual fans and just generally supportive alumni but not quite as in the weeds with the sports.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't alarm the Facebook group. Might've just gone under the radar. Because the Facebook group freaks out over kids who couldn't cut the two deep transferring from us. Which is pretty standard for every school that a kid that's been there 2-3 years but can't break through is probably never going to so might as well make the most of your limited eligibility.

I can't speak for all of us, but my general feel is that an App flip isn't really bad. It's a comparable G5 peer and there's always fine details that make sense when you look into it like relationships with coaches as well as the position depth at one school versus another. That's hurt us this year and in the past at QB for instance. We wanted to sign Brock Purdy for the class of 18 but Milton had just finished his junior season, the 2017 magical perfect season, and Purdy wanted to start right away but knew he'd be stuck behind Milton for 2 years. So instead he went to Iowa State and has been great for them. The flips that annoy us and register more are spurning us for a bottom barrel P5. Those hurt because it brings up the reality of how much some of these kids care about the conference brand even if they're part of the conference punching bag and not an actual contender.

I asked our Rivals source for mor information because though I swear I read it, I couldn't find it myself just searching. But on the rivals board we knew Smith wasn't signing with us before signing day. So for us it wasn't surprising. I'm just trying to remember if we had actually dropped him earlier. A lot of that stuff is never shown but it happens. Kids get dropped but schools give them the courtesy of "decommiting" or "flipping" on their own terms publicly as to not embarrass the recruit. And then we've been on the opposite end too where a kid just uses us as a placeholder commitment until he gets that P5 school he was really pushing for and drops us. Or we cut off the effort but in reality it's because the kid moved on from us.

I'm not sure exactly what happened there. I do know we dropped two kids because one showed up for camp and was not nearly as good as Drink thought he would be. I never liked the offer to begin with. When I saw his film he just was not good. The other kid was a grades issue but I don't know if the coaches felt his skills were not as good.

As for Mike Smith, I'm surprised UCF dropped him. I figured that may be it but his film is good. I know it was not grades though because we can't take guys with grade issues.

Get use to the placeholder thing because many kids do that. What is funny is that we beat South Carolina but not one single player on our team had an offer from them and I bet at the time 90% of our kids would have gone there just because it is the SEC.

Many kids do commit to a school because it is the best offer in a conference they want. I would say Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Missouri have benefited more in recruiting just from the conference affiliation alone.

[citroknight]

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

Meant to ask earlier. What was the perception when we flipped a DB commit to you guys? Were fans mad or thought the player was taking a much lesser offer? Were you guys shocked or saw it coming?

The reason I ask about fan perception is that I have talked to several of our players who have had visits to UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Troy, etc and they all said that App State blew the others away. Between our winning, what we have, what we are building, and the atmosphere they all seemed to say the visits are what separated us from everyone else. I would be curious to hear a fan perception of you guys because I was surprised we flipped a UCF guy.

Is it Mike Smith? If so, I'm gonna be honest, that flip didn't register for our fan base. I was trying to remember just off memory but then searched through both our Rivals forum and the Facebook group we have.

Those two represent the different parts of our fan base. The rivals forum is for those more involved in following recruiting and more familiar with college football and rules, etc whereas the Facebook page has a lot more casual fans and just generally supportive alumni but not quite as in the weeds with the sports.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't alarm the Facebook group. Might've just gone under the radar. Because the Facebook group freaks out over kids who couldn't cut the two deep transferring from us. Which is pretty standard for every school that a kid that's been there 2-3 years but can't break through is probably never going to so might as well make the most of your limited eligibility.

I can't speak for all of us, but my general feel is that an App flip isn't really bad. It's a comparable G5 peer and there's always fine details that make sense when you look into it like relationships with coaches as well as the position depth at one school versus another. That's hurt us this year and in the past at QB for instance. We wanted to sign Brock Purdy for the class of 18 but Milton had just finished his junior season, the 2017 magical perfect season, and Purdy wanted to start right away but knew he'd be stuck behind Milton for 2 years. So instead he went to Iowa State and has been great for them. The flips that annoy us and register more are spurning us for a bottom barrel P5. Those hurt because it brings up the reality of how much some of these kids care about the conference brand even if they're part of the conference punching bag and not an actual contender.

I asked our Rivals source for mor information because though I swear I read it, I couldn't find it myself just searching. But on the rivals board we knew Smith wasn't signing with us before signing day. So for us it wasn't surprising. I'm just trying to remember if we had actually dropped him earlier. A lot of that stuff is never shown but it happens. Kids get dropped but schools give them the courtesy of "decommiting" or "flipping" on their own terms publicly as to not embarrass the recruit. And then we've been on the opposite end too where a kid just uses us as a placeholder commitment until he gets that P5 school he was really pushing for and drops us. Or we cut off the effort but in reality it's because the kid moved on from us.

I'm not sure exactly what happened there. I do know we dropped two kids because one showed up for camp and was not nearly as good as Drink thought he would be. I never liked the offer to begin with. When I saw his film he just was not good. The other kid was a grades issue but I don't know if the coaches felt his skills were not as good.

As for Mike Smith, I'm surprised UCF dropped him. I figured that may be it but his film is good. I know it was not grades though because we can't take guys with grade issues.

Get use to the placeholder thing because many kids do that. What is funny is that we beat South Carolina but not one single player on our team had an offer from them and I bet at the time 90% of our kids would have gone there just because it is the SEC.

Many kids do commit to a school because it is the best offer in a conference they want. I would say Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Missouri have benefited more in recruiting just from the conference affiliation alone.

There was one recruiting cycle, can't recall if it was 3 or so years ago, that I swear every other kid we lost to Kentucky. It was infuriating.

[AppStFan1]

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

Meant to ask earlier. What was the perception when we flipped a DB commit to you guys? Were fans mad or thought the player was taking a much lesser offer? Were you guys shocked or saw it coming?

The reason I ask about fan perception is that I have talked to several of our players who have had visits to UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Troy, etc and they all said that App State blew the others away. Between our winning, what we have, what we are building, and the atmosphere they all seemed to say the visits are what separated us from everyone else. I would be curious to hear a fan perception of you guys because I was surprised we flipped a UCF guy.

Is it Mike Smith? If so, I'm gonna be honest, that flip didn't register for our fan base. I was trying to remember just off memory but then searched through both our Rivals forum and the Facebook group we have.

Those two represent the different parts of our fan base. The rivals forum is for those more involved in following recruiting and more familiar with college football and rules, etc whereas the Facebook page has a lot more casual fans and just generally supportive alumni but not quite as in the weeds with the sports.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't alarm the Facebook group. Might've just gone under the radar. Because the Facebook group freaks out over kids who couldn't cut the two deep transferring from us. Which is pretty standard for every school that a kid that's been there 2-3 years but can't break through is probably never going to so might as well make the most of your limited eligibility.

I can't speak for all of us, but my general feel is that an App flip isn't really bad. It's a comparable G5 peer and there's always fine details that make sense when you look into it like relationships with coaches as well as the position depth at one school versus another. That's hurt us this year and in the past at QB for instance. We wanted to sign Brock Purdy for the class of 18 but Milton had just finished his junior season, the 2017 magical perfect season, and Purdy wanted to start right away but knew he'd be stuck behind Milton for 2 years. So instead he went to Iowa State and has been great for them. The flips that annoy us and register more are spurning us for a bottom barrel P5. Those hurt because it brings up the reality of how much some of these kids care about the conference brand even if they're part of the conference punching bag and not an actual contender.

I asked our Rivals source for mor information because though I swear I read it, I couldn't find it myself just searching. But on the rivals board we knew Smith wasn't signing with us before signing day. So for us it wasn't surprising. I'm just trying to remember if we had actually dropped him earlier. A lot of that stuff is never shown but it happens. Kids get dropped but schools give them the courtesy of "decommiting" or "flipping" on their own terms publicly as to not embarrass the recruit. And then we've been on the opposite end too where a kid just uses us as a placeholder commitment until he gets that P5 school he was really pushing for and drops us. Or we cut off the effort but in reality it's because the kid moved on from us.

I'm not sure exactly what happened there. I do know we dropped two kids because one showed up for camp and was not nearly as good as Drink thought he would be. I never liked the offer to begin with. When I saw his film he just was not good. The other kid was a grades issue but I don't know if the coaches felt his skills were not as good.

As for Mike Smith, I'm surprised UCF dropped him. I figured that may be it but his film is good. I know it was not grades though because we can't take guys with grade issues.

Get use to the placeholder thing because many kids do that. What is funny is that we beat South Carolina but not one single player on our team had an offer from them and I bet at the time 90% of our kids would have gone there just because it is the SEC.

Many kids do commit to a school because it is the best offer in a conference they want. I would say Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Missouri have benefited more in recruiting just from the conference affiliation alone.

There was one recruiting cycle, can't recall if it was 3 or so years ago, that I swear every other kid we lost to Kentucky. It was infuriating.

And I can promise you it is 100% because of the conference. Go on campus at App, UCF, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Missouri, etc and the only thing those last 3 schools have better than UCF and App is they are in the SEC and have more money. Their culture, tradition, and all the stuff that truly builds a football program just aren't as good. Give App and UCF the same money and put them in the SEC and both would run circles around those schools mentioned.

[citroknight]

Meant to ask earlier. What was the perception when we flipped a DB commit to you guys? Were fans mad or thought the player was taking a much lesser offer? Were you guys shocked or saw it coming?

The reason I ask about fan perception is that I have talked to several of our players who have had visits to UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Troy, etc and they all said that App State blew the others away. Between our winning, what we have, what we are building, and the atmosphere they all seemed to say the visits are what separated us from everyone else. I would be curious to hear a fan perception of you guys because I was surprised we flipped a UCF guy.

Is it Mike Smith? If so, I'm gonna be honest, that flip didn't register for our fan base. I was trying to remember just off memory but then searched through both our Rivals forum and the Facebook group we have.

Those two represent the different parts of our fan base. The rivals forum is for those more involved in following recruiting and more familiar with college football and rules, etc whereas the Facebook page has a lot more casual fans and just generally supportive alumni but not quite as in the weeds with the sports.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't alarm the Facebook group. Might've just gone under the radar. Because the Facebook group freaks out over kids who couldn't cut the two deep transferring from us. Which is pretty standard for every school that a kid that's been there 2-3 years but can't break through is probably never going to so might as well make the most of your limited eligibility.

I can't speak for all of us, but my general feel is that an App flip isn't really bad. It's a comparable G5 peer and there's always fine details that make sense when you look into it like relationships with coaches as well as the position depth at one school versus another. That's hurt us this year and in the past at QB for instance. We wanted to sign Brock Purdy for the class of 18 but Milton had just finished his junior season, the 2017 magical perfect season, and Purdy wanted to start right away but knew he'd be stuck behind Milton for 2 years. So instead he went to Iowa State and has been great for them. The flips that annoy us and register more are spurning us for a bottom barrel P5. Those hurt because it brings up the reality of how much some of these kids care about the conference brand even if they're part of the conference punching bag and not an actual contender.

I asked our Rivals source for mor information because though I swear I read it, I couldn't find it myself just searching. But on the rivals board we knew Smith wasn't signing with us before signing day. So for us it wasn't surprising. I'm just trying to remember if we had actually dropped him earlier. A lot of that stuff is never shown but it happens. Kids get dropped but schools give them the courtesy of "decommiting" or "flipping" on their own terms publicly as to not embarrass the recruit. And then we've been on the opposite end too where a kid just uses us as a placeholder commitment until he gets that P5 school he was really pushing for and drops us. Or we cut off the effort but in reality it's because the kid moved on from us.

I'm not sure exactly what happened there. I do know we dropped two kids because one showed up for camp and was not nearly as good as Drink thought he would be. I never liked the offer to begin with. When I saw his film he just was not good. The other kid was a grades issue but I don't know if the coaches felt his skills were not as good.

As for Mike Smith, I'm surprised UCF dropped him. I figured that may be it but his film is good. I know it was not grades though because we can't take guys with grade issues.

Get use to the placeholder thing because many kids do that. What is funny is that we beat South Carolina but not one single player on our team had an offer from them and I bet at the time 90% of our kids would have gone there just because it is the SEC.

Many kids do commit to a school because it is the best offer in a conference they want. I would say Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Missouri have benefited more in recruiting just from the conference affiliation alone.

There was one recruiting cycle, can't recall if it was 3 or so years ago, that I swear every other kid we lost to Kentucky. It was infuriating.

And I can promise you it is 100% because of the conference. Go on campus at App, UCF, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Missouri, etc and the only thing those last 3 schools have better than UCF and App is they are in the SEC and have more money. Their culture, tradition, and all the stuff that truly builds a football program just aren't as good. Give App and UCF the same money and put them in the SEC and both would run circles around those schools mentioned.

Bingo! The true bluebloods are one thing. But the others are just old enough and associated with the right bluebloods at the right time back when these conferences were just academic and regional affiliations and the age of multi-million dollar TV contracts was faaaar away.

[AppStFan1]

Is it Mike Smith? If so, I'm gonna be honest, that flip didn't register for our fan base. I was trying to remember just off memory but then searched through both our Rivals forum and the Facebook group we have.

Those two represent the different parts of our fan base. The rivals forum is for those more involved in following recruiting and more familiar with college football and rules, etc whereas the Facebook page has a lot more casual fans and just generally supportive alumni but not quite as in the weeds with the sports.

I'm honestly surprised it didn't alarm the Facebook group. Might've just gone under the radar. Because the Facebook group freaks out over kids who couldn't cut the two deep transferring from us. Which is pretty standard for every school that a kid that's been there 2-3 years but can't break through is probably never going to so might as well make the most of your limited eligibility.

I can't speak for all of us, but my general feel is that an App flip isn't really bad. It's a comparable G5 peer and there's always fine details that make sense when you look into it like relationships with coaches as well as the position depth at one school versus another. That's hurt us this year and in the past at QB for instance. We wanted to sign Brock Purdy for the class of 18 but Milton had just finished his junior season, the 2017 magical perfect season, and Purdy wanted to start right away but knew he'd be stuck behind Milton for 2 years. So instead he went to Iowa State and has been great for them. The flips that annoy us and register more are spurning us for a bottom barrel P5. Those hurt because it brings up the reality of how much some of these kids care about the conference brand even if they're part of the conference punching bag and not an actual contender.

I asked our Rivals source for mor information because though I swear I read it, I couldn't find it myself just searching. But on the rivals board we knew Smith wasn't signing with us before signing day. So for us it wasn't surprising. I'm just trying to remember if we had actually dropped him earlier. A lot of that stuff is never shown but it happens. Kids get dropped but schools give them the courtesy of "decommiting" or "flipping" on their own terms publicly as to not embarrass the recruit. And then we've been on the opposite end too where a kid just uses us as a placeholder commitment until he gets that P5 school he was really pushing for and drops us. Or we cut off the effort but in reality it's because the kid moved on from us.

I'm not sure exactly what happened there. I do know we dropped two kids because one showed up for camp and was not nearly as good as Drink thought he would be. I never liked the offer to begin with. When I saw his film he just was not good. The other kid was a grades issue but I don't know if the coaches felt his skills were not as good.

As for Mike Smith, I'm surprised UCF dropped him. I figured that may be it but his film is good. I know it was not grades though because we can't take guys with grade issues.

Get use to the placeholder thing because many kids do that. What is funny is that we beat South Carolina but not one single player on our team had an offer from them and I bet at the time 90% of our kids would have gone there just because it is the SEC.

Many kids do commit to a school because it is the best offer in a conference they want. I would say Vanderbilt, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Missouri have benefited more in recruiting just from the conference affiliation alone.

There was one recruiting cycle, can't recall if it was 3 or so years ago, that I swear every other kid we lost to Kentucky. It was infuriating.

And I can promise you it is 100% because of the conference. Go on campus at App, UCF, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Missouri, etc and the only thing those last 3 schools have better than UCF and App is they are in the SEC and have more money. Their culture, tradition, and all the stuff that truly builds a football program just aren't as good. Give App and UCF the same money and put them in the SEC and both would run circles around those schools mentioned.

Bingo! The true bluebloods are one thing. But the others are just old enough and associated with the right bluebloods at the right time back when these conferences were just academic and regional affiliations and the age of multi-million dollar TV contracts was faaaar away.

What is funny is South Carolina went to what is now the SEC at the time because they could not compete. Now they still can't. Missouri got in late but they wanted to expand into the Missouri and Texas market so they picked up A&M and Missouri. A&M brought a ton of money and between the two they have been a little better. Missouri is just lucky they are not in the west because I am pretty sure A&M would win 9-10 every year in the east while Missouri would be a 3-5 win team.

[Mjohn1988]

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

"Its because the AAC plays awesome offense! Defenses can't keep up!"

LOL. Well Memphis did put 39 on Penn State who gave up just 16ppg in the Big Ten. I would say Memphis has a very good offense. I do feel safe in saying the Memphis defense is nowhere near as good as ours.

Crazy, just think, here we are at the end of the 2019 season talking about how good our defense was.

Our defense was suppose to be good just like the standard should be high next year with all the speed we have returning. I know from a leadership standpoint and with new faces there might be an early adjustment period but by game 4-5 I expect to see a top tier G5 defense. We got a lot of speed.

I agree, I expected our D to be very good this year. I think we have good athletes to plug in for the losses at the backer and safety position but we will need some leaders to emerge. I’m not sure about the D line. Crazy to say we can replace the backers we’re losing but the guys coming off the bench looked really good this year.

[ericsaid]

I noticed the same thing about the defense. Go look at all of their scores. I mean didn't ECU put like 43 on Cincy?

Look at the scoring defense. Only 3 teams give up less than 25 per game and 5 teams give up more than 30.

SCORING DEFENSE G TD FG XPT 2XP DXP Saf Points Avg/G
1. Cincinnati 13 33 18 28 1 0 0 282 21.7
2. Navy 12 34 12 33 0 0 0 273 22.8
3. UCF 13 36 16 31 2 0 0 299 23.0
4. Temple 13 43 10 41 0 1 3 337 25.9
5. Memphis 14 45 18 38 4 0 0 370 26.4
6. Tulane 12 41 16 35 0 0 0 329 27.4
7. USF 12 45 11 42 1 0 0 347 28.9
8. Tulsa 12 48 14 44 0 0 1 376 31.3
9. SMU 13 53 20 50 2 0 1 434 33.4
10. ECU 12 53 10 50 2 0 1 404 33.7
11. Houston 12 54 10 52 0 0 1 408 34.0
12. UConn 12 67 6 66 0 0 0 486 40.5

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

The two leagues are comparable and I don't think the talent at the top is far apart, if much at all. I'm pretty sure not only App but Louisiana could have competed with the top 3-4 in the AAC.

After seeing Memphis today I think it would be a good game if we played them. They are very good but I think we have a little more depth, which could be the difference. They deserved what they got but it is a shame that we could not play them just to settle who the top G5 is for sure. I have a feeling the polls will drop them to just 1-2 spots ahead of us but not below and I really am not sure who would win.

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

[AppStFan1]

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

The two leagues are comparable and I don't think the talent at the top is far apart, if much at all. I'm pretty sure not only App but Louisiana could have competed with the top 3-4 in the AAC.

After seeing Memphis today I think it would be a good game if we played them. They are very good but I think we have a little more depth, which could be the difference. They deserved what they got but it is a shame that we could not play them just to settle who the top G5 is for sure. I have a feeling the polls will drop them to just 1-2 spots ahead of us but not below and I really am not sure who would win.

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

At the time we won over UNC nobody thought that would turn out to be a good win. They were still a 6-6 P5 team who had to win their last game to get eligible and won a bowl over the 5th best AAC team basically. Our SC win was basically the same as their Ole Miss win. I would love to see us play Memphis on a neutral site. I think we could win but we will never know.

[citroknight]

For comparison, only 2 SunBelt teams give you less than 25 and 7 give up more than 30.

The two leagues are comparable and I don't think the talent at the top is far apart, if much at all. I'm pretty sure not only App but Louisiana could have competed with the top 3-4 in the AAC.

After seeing Memphis today I think it would be a good game if we played them. They are very good but I think we have a little more depth, which could be the difference. They deserved what they got but it is a shame that we could not play them just to settle who the top G5 is for sure. I have a feeling the polls will drop them to just 1-2 spots ahead of us but not below and I really am not sure who would win.

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

There's definitely some weird circular logic used to determine who is good based on teams that play each other, but the same can be said for out of conference teams.

Who did UNC and SC beat to make them worthy wins? Now that Miami lost it's bowl game, the only team with a winning record that UNC beat was Temple. That's it.

SC had the impressive upset over Georgia and it shows what they can do, but they also only had 3 other wins total. Over Charleston Southern, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.

As for Boise, they beat a mediocre FSU out of conference, beat Marshall 14-7 even though both Cincinnati and UCF would go on to destroy Marshall, beat an FCS team, and lost to a BYU team that was beat by USF and Toledo. Doesn't seem anymore impressive than what App or any of the AAC teams did.

[ericsaid]

The two leagues are comparable and I don't think the talent at the top is far apart, if much at all. I'm pretty sure not only App but Louisiana could have competed with the top 3-4 in the AAC.

After seeing Memphis today I think it would be a good game if we played them. They are very good but I think we have a little more depth, which could be the difference. They deserved what they got but it is a shame that we could not play them just to settle who the top G5 is for sure. I have a feeling the polls will drop them to just 1-2 spots ahead of us but not below and I really am not sure who would win.

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

There's definitely some weird circular logic used to determine who is good based on teams that play each other, but the same can be said for out of conference teams.

Who did UNC and SC beat to make them worthy wins? Now that Miami lost it's bowl game, the only team with a winning record that UNC beat was Temple. That's it.

SC had the impressive upset over Georgia and it shows what they can do, but they also only had 3 other wins total. Over Charleston Southern, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.

As for Boise, they beat a mediocre FSU out of conference, beat Marshall 14-7 even though both Cincinnati and UCF would go on to destroy Marshall, beat an FCS team, and lost to a BYU team that was beat by USF and Toledo. Doesn't seem anymore impressive than what App or any of the AAC teams did.

I stated this on the AAC board multiple times - much to the chagrin of Cincinnati and Memphis fair weathers - that UCF was still the class of the American despite losing three games. I watched the Pittsburgh game and while I was surprised at the result, I saw an incredibly simplified version of the existing UCF offense due to starting a freshman. It was effective against teams that didn't have the horses to play single high safety and man up on the outside to match go routes but Pittsburgh had a solid defense this year and their line play was well above average in the ACC. I didn't watch the other two losses but I know that they were very close and that, again, with a more seasoned quarterback you would likely have won those games.

As for UNC, every loss of theirs was by one score. They lost two games in OT and they lost to Clemson on a failed two-point conversion. If those games go the other way, UNC is sitting at 9-3 and would've been in the ACC Championship Game. Of course those are moral victories but UNC wasn't a pushover that they were made out to be by solely considering their W/L record. The number of close games played generally is reserved for the NFL where margins are more slim but to lose 6 games by an average of 4.6 points with a range of 7 (greatest being 8 and lowest being 1) paints their season in a different light.

USC struggled with injuries down the stretch and I really think that they fell apart after the Florida game. They were robbed on a few penalties called in the 4th quarter of that game which ultimately led to Florida having the ability to put the game out of reach. It's obviously up to the team to adjust regardless of situation. I can't tell you the number of times I've watched a penalty extend a drive (3rd down stop negated by penalty) that has resulted in a score for the "better" team. When margins are lower, you can't afford to have those self-inflicted wounds; but the penalties called on USC to extend the UF drives were marginal at best and likely to not be called in most situations.

Boise State was ranked higher than App based on name alone. The NY6 bowls and the CFP overall are also a money grab. Boise State brings intrigue and notoriety that will draw eyes to the TV. Part of my chagrin with Athletic Directors being on this committee is that they purport to have no bias and have a method of dealing with potential bias by excusing themselves when their programs are discussed. Only issue is that each AD in that room has a vested interest by the disbursement of cash following bowl season. It doesn't make sense to have App State in the NY6 because you don't really know what kind of cash flow they will bring in. You could assume it would be less than a Boise State or Memphis. The city which hosts the game may also be concerned by the the economic impact. There is quite a bit to sort out as to where potential bias could be found within this committee as it is currently set-up.

[AppStFan1]

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

There's definitely some weird circular logic used to determine who is good based on teams that play each other, but the same can be said for out of conference teams.

Who did UNC and SC beat to make them worthy wins? Now that Miami lost it's bowl game, the only team with a winning record that UNC beat was Temple. That's it.

SC had the impressive upset over Georgia and it shows what they can do, but they also only had 3 other wins total. Over Charleston Southern, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.

As for Boise, they beat a mediocre FSU out of conference, beat Marshall 14-7 even though both Cincinnati and UCF would go on to destroy Marshall, beat an FCS team, and lost to a BYU team that was beat by USF and Toledo. Doesn't seem anymore impressive than what App or any of the AAC teams did.

I stated this on the AAC board multiple times - much to the chagrin of Cincinnati and Memphis fair weathers - that UCF was still the class of the American despite losing three games. I watched the Pittsburgh game and while I was surprised at the result, I saw an incredibly simplified version of the existing UCF offense due to starting a freshman. It was effective against teams that didn't have the horses to play single high safety and man up on the outside to match go routes but Pittsburgh had a solid defense this year and their line play was well above average in the ACC. I didn't watch the other two losses but I know that they were very close and that, again, with a more seasoned quarterback you would likely have won those games.

As for UNC, every loss of theirs was by one score. They lost two games in OT and they lost to Clemson on a failed two-point conversion. If those games go the other way, UNC is sitting at 9-3 and would've been in the ACC Championship Game. Of course those are moral victories but UNC wasn't a pushover that they were made out to be by solely considering their W/L record. The number of close games played generally is reserved for the NFL where margins are more slim but to lose 6 games by an average of 4.6 points with a range of 7 (greatest being 8 and lowest being 1) paints their season in a different light.

USC struggled with injuries down the stretch and I really think that they fell apart after the Florida game. They were robbed on a few penalties called in the 4th quarter of that game which ultimately led to Florida having the ability to put the game out of reach. It's obviously up to the team to adjust regardless of situation. I can't tell you the number of times I've watched a penalty extend a drive (3rd down stop negated by penalty) that has resulted in a score for the "better" team. When margins are lower, you can't afford to have those self-inflicted wounds; but the penalties called on USC to extend the UF drives were marginal at best and likely to not be called in most situations.

Boise State was ranked higher than App based on name alone. The NY6 bowls and the CFP overall are also a money grab. Boise State brings intrigue and notoriety that will draw eyes to the TV. Part of my chagrin with Athletic Directors being on this committee is that they purport to have no bias and have a method of dealing with potential bias by excusing themselves when their programs are discussed. Only issue is that each AD in that room has a vested interest by the disbursement of cash following bowl season. It doesn't make sense to have App State in the NY6 because you don't really know what kind of cash flow they will bring in. You could assume it would be less than a Boise State or Memphis. The city which hosts the game may also be concerned by the the economic impact. There is quite a bit to sort out as to where potential bias could be found within this committee as it is currently set-up.

Those are all good points. Boise State definitely got in on name alone. We will never know who was truly better between Memphis and App State but announcers at games seem to think we could be better. It would have been a fun game to see.

As for UNC they played hard and were better coached. Once they improve their talent some more those close losses should become wins. I do think UNC was better than any team that Memphis or Boise State beat this year.

[AppInDC]

They lost to Temple who couldn't compete with a lowly 6-6 ACC team *sarcasm*.

Memphis and Boise State both won the perception game in 2019 and thats is why they are ranked above App. Each teams most impressive wins came in conference and neither conference had a win against a ranked P5 out of conference. Yet, some how, each conference managed to get multiple teams ranked throughout the season based on playing and beating each other? Its circular logic and it only makes sense to me when you're looking to believe that the committee is positioning Boise or the AAC for NY6.

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

There's definitely some weird circular logic used to determine who is good based on teams that play each other, but the same can be said for out of conference teams.

Who did UNC and SC beat to make them worthy wins? Now that Miami lost it's bowl game, the only team with a winning record that UNC beat was Temple. That's it.

SC had the impressive upset over Georgia and it shows what they can do, but they also only had 3 other wins total. Over Charleston Southern, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.

As for Boise, they beat a mediocre FSU out of conference, beat Marshall 14-7 even though both Cincinnati and UCF would go on to destroy Marshall, beat an FCS team, and lost to a BYU team that was beat by USF and Toledo. Doesn't seem anymore impressive than what App or any of the AAC teams did.

I stated this on the AAC board multiple times - much to the chagrin of Cincinnati and Memphis fair weathers - that UCF was still the class of the American despite losing three games. I watched the Pittsburgh game and while I was surprised at the result, I saw an incredibly simplified version of the existing UCF offense due to starting a freshman. It was effective against teams that didn't have the horses to play single high safety and man up on the outside to match go routes but Pittsburgh had a solid defense this year and their line play was well above average in the ACC. I didn't watch the other two losses but I know that they were very close and that, again, with a more seasoned quarterback you would likely have won those games.

As for UNC, every loss of theirs was by one score. They lost two games in OT and they lost to Clemson on a failed two-point conversion. If those games go the other way, UNC is sitting at 9-3 and would've been in the ACC Championship Game. Of course those are moral victories but UNC wasn't a pushover that they were made out to be by solely considering their W/L record. The number of close games played generally is reserved for the NFL where margins are more slim but to lose 6 games by an average of 4.6 points with a range of 7 (greatest being 8 and lowest being 1) paints their season in a different light.

USC struggled with injuries down the stretch and I really think that they fell apart after the Florida game. They were robbed on a few penalties called in the 4th quarter of that game which ultimately led to Florida having the ability to put the game out of reach. It's obviously up to the team to adjust regardless of situation. I can't tell you the number of times I've watched a penalty extend a drive (3rd down stop negated by penalty) that has resulted in a score for the "better" team. When margins are lower, you can't afford to have those self-inflicted wounds; but the penalties called on USC to extend the UF drives were marginal at best and likely to not be called in most situations.

Boise State was ranked higher than App based on name alone. The NY6 bowls and the CFP overall are also a money grab. Boise State brings intrigue and notoriety that will draw eyes to the TV. Part of my chagrin with Athletic Directors being on this committee is that they purport to have no bias and have a method of dealing with potential bias by excusing themselves when their programs are discussed. Only issue is that each AD in that room has a vested interest by the disbursement of cash following bowl season. It doesn't make sense to have App State in the NY6 because you don't really know what kind of cash flow they will bring in. You could assume it would be less than a Boise State or Memphis. The city which hosts the game may also be concerned by the the economic impact. There is quite a bit to sort out as to where potential bias could be found within this committee as it is currently set-up.

I agree with you that UCF is still better than most think even if they didn't go unbeaten through the regular season this year. Scoring margin is a pretty good indicator of a team's actual strength. The only teams that had a better scoring margin than the Golden Knights this year were the three unbeaten teams that made the playoff, Alabama, and Utah. You obviously need to adjust for schedule strength but I think this is a pretty clear indicator that UCF was still possibly the best team in the American and in the G5. Just came down on the wrong side of too many close games.

[ericsaid]

I don't disagree at all. I mean I did not expect Temple to get blown out like they did. In defense of Memphis though they got screwed by a bad call and should have won the game. They can also point to App and say we lost to Georgia Southern who got beat by a bad Liberty team. Our GSU loss is worse than a loss to Temple and the committee thinks the AAC is way better.

In our defense of the GSU loss it was a close game that we probably win had we started feeding Sutton much earlier.

I'm with you that I think we can beat Memphis but I don't see how anyone from App or Memphis can say it is clear cut who would win if both teams played. Do I think we would win? Yes. Is it a slam dunk to say they are morons or we are morons for expecting a win? No. Memphis is fast enough that I could see it go either way.

As for your point on Boise State and the AAC it is really more about the leagues. The MWC and AAC have built up capital with the committee over the years with how Boise State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Air Force, UCF, Memphis, Cincy, Houston, etc. have all done in the past. We are new to the scene and will have to earn our stripes.

I think finishing in the top 20 this year after knocking on the rankings last year, beating 2 P5s, and our bowl record now give us the name that if we go 13-0 next year we could get the nod. We had to show we could not only sneak in the rankings but sustain and move up, which we did. And until another team in the league knocks off a P5 and their only loss is to us or we see more success from our league in OOC play we can't lose a SBC game. Right now the league is looking good in bowls and we really need Georgia State and Louisiana to win. I would love to see Louisiana win by 20 and Georgia State handle Wyoming convincingly as well.

I didn't say anything about playing Memphis. I only stated that based on results of common opponents - including South Alabama and ULM - I thought App had a better resume than Memphis.

My irritation about Memphis and the AAC at large (not so much Boise) is that they didn't beat anyone out of conference. They want to point to their record in out of conference play against G5 schools but their best win was arguably Arkansas State. Then they point to their P5 record and their best win was 4-8 Ole Miss (as a conference). Then as the season progresses they get 7 teams ranked at any point in time because of their games against each other. In other words, there is no way to know how good they are because the teams that they should lose to they lose to. The games they should win they win. There are no "upsets" to speak of.

As an aside, I'd like to see Memphis play in weather like App played in on Halloween night.

There's definitely some weird circular logic used to determine who is good based on teams that play each other, but the same can be said for out of conference teams.

Who did UNC and SC beat to make them worthy wins? Now that Miami lost it's bowl game, the only team with a winning record that UNC beat was Temple. That's it.

SC had the impressive upset over Georgia and it shows what they can do, but they also only had 3 other wins total. Over Charleston Southern, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.

As for Boise, they beat a mediocre FSU out of conference, beat Marshall 14-7 even though both Cincinnati and UCF would go on to destroy Marshall, beat an FCS team, and lost to a BYU team that was beat by USF and Toledo. Doesn't seem anymore impressive than what App or any of the AAC teams did.

I stated this on the AAC board multiple times - much to the chagrin of Cincinnati and Memphis fair weathers - that UCF was still the class of the American despite losing three games. I watched the Pittsburgh game and while I was surprised at the result, I saw an incredibly simplified version of the existing UCF offense due to starting a freshman. It was effective against teams that didn't have the horses to play single high safety and man up on the outside to match go routes but Pittsburgh had a solid defense this year and their line play was well above average in the ACC. I didn't watch the other two losses but I know that they were very close and that, again, with a more seasoned quarterback you would likely have won those games.

As for UNC, every loss of theirs was by one score. They lost two games in OT and they lost to Clemson on a failed two-point conversion. If those games go the other way, UNC is sitting at 9-3 and would've been in the ACC Championship Game. Of course those are moral victories but UNC wasn't a pushover that they were made out to be by solely considering their W/L record. The number of close games played generally is reserved for the NFL where margins are more slim but to lose 6 games by an average of 4.6 points with a range of 7 (greatest being 8 and lowest being 1) paints their season in a different light.

USC struggled with injuries down the stretch and I really think that they fell apart after the Florida game. They were robbed on a few penalties called in the 4th quarter of that game which ultimately led to Florida having the ability to put the game out of reach. It's obviously up to the team to adjust regardless of situation. I can't tell you the number of times I've watched a penalty extend a drive (3rd down stop negated by penalty) that has resulted in a score for the "better" team. When margins are lower, you can't afford to have those self-inflicted wounds; but the penalties called on USC to extend the UF drives were marginal at best and likely to not be called in most situations.

Boise State was ranked higher than App based on name alone. The NY6 bowls and the CFP overall are also a money grab. Boise State brings intrigue and notoriety that will draw eyes to the TV. Part of my chagrin with Athletic Directors being on this committee is that they purport to have no bias and have a method of dealing with potential bias by excusing themselves when their programs are discussed. Only issue is that each AD in that room has a vested interest by the disbursement of cash following bowl season. It doesn't make sense to have App State in the NY6 because you don't really know what kind of cash flow they will bring in. You could assume it would be less than a Boise State or Memphis. The city which hosts the game may also be concerned by the the economic impact. There is quite a bit to sort out as to where potential bias could be found within this committee as it is currently set-up.

I agree with you that UCF is still better than most think even if they didn't go unbeaten through the regular season this year. Scoring margin is a pretty good indicator of a team's actual strength. The only teams that had a better scoring margin than the Golden Knights this year were the three unbeaten teams that made the playoff, Alabama, and Utah. You obviously need to adjust for schedule strength but I think this is a pretty clear indicator that UCF was still possibly the best team in the American and in the G5. Just came down on the wrong side of too many close games.

Which is what starting a young QB will do. UNC fell victim to the same thing (not a UNC fan or apologist).