The Rice Owls...a C-USA team...is a six star program.

[XxKrebsxX]

The Rice Owls.

This team has not had a season with more than two losses ever. I'm in the year 2018 mind you.

Right now, they are on an incredible 26 game winning streak and are ranked #8 in week #2 of the season. You could argue that they are in the C-USA and they're a product of a crappy conference.

YOU HAVE NO IDEA.

Last year the defeated Ohio State at the Horseshoe and defeated undefeated big 10 Champ Wisconsin in the Rose bowl. This team hasn't lost to a C-USA team except once. To UCF in a C-USA Champ. game in like 2008. (UCF is a 5 Star Program along with Houston)

I think C-USA should be a BCS conference in my dynasty. It's unreal. That conference is more competitive than the damned Big East which sould be called "WATCH WVU WIN ANOTHER CONFERENCE TITLE"

[Spanky]

One of the problems in past versions of NCAA was that too many crappy Texas schools (UTEP, TCU, SMU, North Texas and Rice) got too good. Must be a product of the recruits in Texas. I had hoped they would have solved this problem.

[clayshime]

I hate when the non-bcs teams turn into powerhouses. I usually just make sure I schedule after an undefeated season or two so that they won't make it to the championship game.

[Village Idiot]

I agree this is totally lame. In fact, it has been a major pet peeve of mine for years and I've written EA several emails about it (apparently they don't agree).

For starters, the problem is with the prestige system as a whole: movement between levels is much too fluid. A six-star program doesn't all of a sudden become a five-star program just because they lose three games, and a five-star program doesn't become a six-star just because they finish the year in the top five.

Particularly speaking of six-star programs, it should be much harder to achieve the feat and much harder to lose once achieved. Take a five-star program like Iowa and a six-star program like Ohio State. In the game, should Iowa win the Big Ten and finish in the top five, they'll jump to six star. If, in the same season, Ohio State happens to lose three or four games, they'll fall to five-star. HUH? So Iowa is now a better program than Ohio State because of this one season? Hardly.

The problem is of course compounded when factoring in all the non-BCS teams. It only takes two or three seasons for any number of three-star programs (basically scrub teams) to emerge as five-star programs. If, during the same span, luck has it that a couple six-star squads have back-to-back poor seasons, all of a sudden you've got a team like Western Michigan with the same prestige as Michigan.

If I were ten or fifteen years into a Dyanasty I might be okay with that. But when you're talking about five and six years in, there's no excuse for Akron being a better program than Ohio State.

There's a simple fix, really: the six-star programs should ALWAYS land a top 20 recruiting class - no exceptions. The five-star programs, in turn, should compose the bulk of classes ranked 15-30. So on and so forth. From there, BCS schools (including the likes of Iowa State, Indiana, Syracuse - no matter their prestige) should fill in classes 30-70. Bottom line: five- and six-star programs should never be landing recruiting classes in the 40's and 50's, and non-BCS teams cracking the top 20 and top 10 is just absurd - a team from the MAC should never be in position to out-recruit a Big Ten school; if they are, they had better be coming off back-to-back undefeated seasons ... even then.

Sure, let the likes of TCU, Fresno State, Utah, etc. do their thing - maybe grab a #15 or something here and there. But for the most part, the power programs need to remain as such. Bluntly speaking, there's nothing quite as lame as having a Dynasty where Central Florida and UAB have replaced FSU and Alabama as national powers.