Again, my point is to make people think about this favorite player outside of their biased viewpoint. This doesn't mean after a moment of thought their favorite player still doesn't make the list, he still may be very deserving- but maybe the arguments can be better than team winning percentage, or how tough a league is.
I can see your point that good players play on bad teams, HOWEVER, in this situation, the best teams (besides Chapman and ASU) had the majority of the players on the list. It is way too obvious by the picks that there is bias for more established programs and players. If the majority of players did not come from top 10 teams, then the "diamond in the rough" argument could be made, but that is not the case. Better teams do get more picks, because they play better teams, have more visibility, etc. Including playoffs, ASU played 10 top 25 teams, Chapman played 14. The argument that players that we have mentioned did not stand out in those games is very hard to make. I look at the list and I see past AA players that did not have great seasons, but are still on the list. No offense, but if you are Northeastern, and you got crushed against every top 25 team you played, not to mention non-top 25 teams, it is still a hard argument that you have more guys on the list than 2 of the top teams in the country. Since many coaches that vote do not see certain players play, they need to look at stats, honors, and what team and conference someone plays in to help weigh their talent. When a third team player from the LSA, from a team that went 0 and 4 against top 25 teams, makes the list over the players we have mentioned, there is a serious problem with this system.