2 things:
1. I have learned over the years that Xavier has one of the most spiteful, insecure, delusional fan bases in all of college sports. A look at one of their message boards will confirm that, where they spend almost as much time talking about hating other schools and coaches than they do talking about their own team.
They are also convinced that the new Big East is vastly superior to the AAC, despite the fact they are struggling to get 3 bids. I have even heard talk of holding the new Big East in similar regard to the old Big East. The reality is that the Big East is better than the AAC from 6-10. The AAC is better from 1-5. All in all, the leagues are fairly comparable.
2. In order to help our computer rankings year in and year out, we don't need the UCF's and Houston's of the world to become perennial NCAA tournament fixtures. However, we do need them to become top-150 RPI teams on a regular basis. If we have to play 8-10 conference games against sub-150 teams every season, we will have to run the table just to get a 1 seed.
I do think Temple will recover. Fran Dunphy took them to 6 consecutive NCAA tournaments before this season and they have always been a terrific program. Houston still has the history and they have been getting better every year under Dickey. Stan Heath has proven he can take USF to the tournament and recruit talent -- he just needs to find some consistency. UCF hasn't proven anything yet, but they do have the success of the football program to help build their reputation. As for Tulane, Tulsa, and East Carolina... ehhhhhhhhh.
