Originally Posted by
td577
They do it every year. You tell me.
NDSU and USD are in with at least 7 wins each.
I have ISUr winning at least 7 with a win over WIU, for sure.
SDSU plays NDSU, ISUr, and USD. They could easily be stuck at 6 wins. If they don't get to 7, they also don't have any signature wins.
UNI has to beat USD or they can't get better than 6 wins. UNI beat SDSU for their best win.
SIU doesn't look like a team that is going to win out to get to 7. They will probably get to 6. SIU beat ISUr for a good win.
WIU has ISUb. They get to 6. WIU beat a FBS program. They might have the best SRS rating.
YSU might still get to 6 if they win out over ISUb, SU, and MSU. YSU beat SDSU.
All five have some bad losses. Without going through all the suspected math, I am guessing their SRS ratings are probably pretty close. Unless one of them pulls away, there is the potential for 5 teams to still be sitting at 6 wins and you have 5 big fluffy teams looking like maybe having a better shot at 7? Then somewhere between the Southern, CAA, and the Southland, there will be an extra 8 win team than normal that will take a at-large. There is going to be some playoff worthy teams not playing a month from now, as usual, and if there is a logjam in the valley at 6 wins, how does the Valley justify getting their normal allotment of schools in? Now show me where the committee has had a history of being blatantly pro-valley in the past. They have allowed a 6 win valley team in when they have had multiple signature wins and clearly separated from everyone below them in their own conference.
What is logical is SDSU getting another win, having 4 valley schools with 7 or better in the win column, and the committee stopping with 4. Certainly not 8, even if 4 more are at 6 wins. Not even 5 because there will be really nothing differentiating the 4 six win schools from each other.