be much more impressed with wins over a 10-2 UCF and an 11-1 BSU, than a 6-6 USC, and a 6-7 Stanford. Some of these AAC teams are very solid teams, and up and coming, whereas some of the other traditional powers are fading in performance, even if the prestige brings eyeballs to the TV and butts in the seats for regular season games. That will only last so long, and the underdog card can also bring similar viewership results.

For example, the BSU vs Oklahoma miracle with the "hook and ladder" and "statue of liberty" plays was a historic game, with a ton of intrigue. Regular season games vs USC and Michigan certainly attract eyeballs, until a few losses taint the traditional power. But when the year wraps up in November, an undefeated Hawaii or Temple team in a bowl game vs a traditional power is way more interesting to most unaffiliated fans than a meh 6-7 Michigan team.

The year UCF went undefeated, most serious football fans would have been far more intrigued to see what UFC could have done vs Bama, than to see what a mediocre 7-6 USC team could do - likely get blown out. Then again, even if the 7-6 USC team pulled out the win vs Bama, it wouldn't generate a ton of excitement for most. Rather, it would seem like luck, and leave a kind of a bad taste in the mouth of most fans (except the USC fans). However, a UCF win vs Bama - not at all the same! More parity in college football, including underdogs winning vs traditional powers is part of the lifeblood of college football!