rankings , almost all computerized , also including the AP , Coaches , and CFP , have UH at 21 on average . They have USF at 29 on average . The CFP isn ' t wrong on either team . AAC teams aren ' t being downgraded simply because they ' re in a nonP 5 conference . They ' re being ranked accurately because the AAC isn ' t as good as the P 5 and it affects their SOS . Signature wins don ' t have any special value , nor should they shitting all over the # 5 school doesn ' t mean much when you got shit on just as badly by the # 84 school in the nation . He ' s right that the AAC is in a class of its own , this year . It ' s been much better than the rest of the G 5 , they ' re closer to the Big XII than MWC is to them , but their teams aren ' t being unfairly ranked . Navy is actually being overrated by the CFP . Last year the AAC were in that same tweener spot , but two years ago the AAC were collectively worse than the MWC and CUSA . Three years ago they were the top of the G 5 , barely , and there was a huge gap to the P 5 . They ' re getting better as a conference , but they ' re still not where the Big East was at its height . When the AAC as a conference is beating P 5 conferences and consistently beating the rest of the G 5 by a large margin , then Aresco will have a legitimate argument the AAC is back to the Big East heyday . When 100 computer rankings have AAC teams ranked significantly higher than the 3 human polls , then Aresco will have a legitimate gripe their teams are being underrated because they ' re not an official power conference . Until then , he can talk about signature wins all he wants and none of it matters . I get it ' s his job to stay hype about the AAC , but it doesn ' t help when he ' s objectively wrong .