(11-07-2018 07:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: You need a majority of voters to agree to leave TWO P5 champs out of the playoff so a G5 can get in---and you need to garner that majority in a room made up almost entirely of P5 reps....any reasonable individual knows that is never going to happen---ever.
I agree that the CFP committee is unbalanced in favor of people with P5 backgrounds and it shouldn't be that way. It should be balanced the way the CFP Executive Board is, say with 1 rep from each conference plus an independent.
Nevertheless, it's highly unlikely that this would matter. We see that because no group of "balanced" voters has done anything substantially different from what the CFP does. E.g., the AP and Coaches polls are usually pretty close to the CFP. And no, there's no evidence for one of your pet theories, that the polls 'adjust' to the CFP once it is released. If anything it works the other way, the CFP is influenced more by the AP poll released two days before than the AP poll is by the CFP released five days previous.
Heck, last year, after the bowl games and playoffs, in the coaches poll there were six coaches from the AAC and all of them voted Alabama #1. None of them ranked UCF higher than #5, and this was after UCF beat Auburn.
The reason the CFP doesn't rate a team like UCF higher is because basically nobody does, and that's because the preponderance of evidence says they don't belong in a four-team playoff.
Bottom line is that only a CFP committee that consisted entirely not of G5 reps but of AAC representatives, with Aresco chairing it, would be likely to find room for UCF in a 4-team playoff. A balanced committee wouldn't come close.
You really should stop blocking me from posting on the AAC forum, my kind of common sense is sorely needed there.