(03-03-2018 04:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 01:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 08:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2018 07:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2018 06:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  They have no more right to claim a title than does Arkansas State or USF or Penn State. UCF agreed to the CFP system, and they didn't win the CFP playoff. Ohio State didn't either.

And unbeaten means zero, because of SOS, and because schools can actually pick several teams to be on their schedule, which isn't true in pro leagues.

It's really bizarro that anyone thinks that because they felt they should have been in the playoff but was excluded, that this means they can act as if they did beat two playoff teams to win the playoffs. Amazing, really.

Think about it: What if the 49ers would have made the playoffs if they won their last game, but they missed out because they lost their last game. But, they lost because the NFL agrees that a bad call was made and they should have won.

Does that mean that because the 49ers were screwed out of making the playoffs that they can claim they are champions, as if they actually won two playoff games and the Super Bowl even though they didn't actually do so?

Beyond dumb, eh?

That may very well be the most asinine argument you've ever made. UCF didnt LOSE thier last game. UCF didnt lose ANY games. Becasue the NFL utilizes actual on the field results (as opposed to ice skating judges), no team that finishes the season undefeated will ever be anything other than the champion of the NFL for that year. THe NFL is a terrible analogy. Try ice skating---its closer to what the CFP really is.

My argument isn't 'asinine', it's spot-on. What's asinine is this harping about UCF being undefeated. Undefeated in the regular season isn't a requirement to make the playoffs in ANY sport. So the fact that in my scenario, the 49ers weren't undefeated is meaningless. What is meaningful is that they would have made the playoffs had they won their last game, and should have won it, but were screwed by a bad call.

Just as some UCF fans think UCF was screwed out of the playoffs by a 'bad call', in this case the CFP committee's decision to not give them a playoff spot.

See the analogy? In both cases, a team that should have made the playoffs was left out because of a bad decision someone else made.

But again, even if you SHOULD have been in the playoffs but were 'screwed' out of it by a bad decision, system, whatever you want to call it, is "asinine" to then claim you are the champion AS IF you actually won the playoffs.

Even if you are totally correct that you should have been in the playoffs, that doesn't give you any right to claim the status of whoever did win them, because then you are acting as if you not only made the playoffs, but won them, which you did not do.

Being undefeated in not a requirement for making the playoff in any sport. However, being undefeated UNIVERSALLY gets you into the playoff in most any sport (certainly the NFL). So yes, your NFL analogy is the very definition of assinine.

Amazingly lame thinking. My NFL example above assumed that yes, in fact, UCF was absolutely screwed out of a playoff spot. Get it? So let's assume that you are correct that because most every other sport ensures that an undefeated team makes the playoffs, that by being undefeated and not making the playoffs, UCF was therefore screwed out of being in the playoffs. Got it?

Then, as i said above, it does not follow at all that UCF has the right to claim the status of whoever did win the playoffs (and thus the title), because then you are acting as if you not only *made* the playoffs (which you have the right to gripe about because you should have), but *won* them as well.

But since making the playoffs and winning them are not the same thing, you have no right to claim what comes with *winning* the playoffs, because you didn't win them, and merely making them doesn't mean you win them.

That said, you're wrong about the basis for your claim anyway: Yes, the NFL does ensure that every undefeated team makes the playoffs, and it should. So do MLB, the NBA, etc.

But, conceptually, that is only a rational imperative in situations where the league controls the scheduling of games. If a team gets to schedule any of its own games, then it is no kind of imperative at all, because then a team can craft a schedule to its own liking. In the NFL, NBA, etc., the teams have zero control over scheduling, their entire schedules are determined by an impartial league-office process no team has control over. But in college football, teams get to pick all their OOC games, which amounts to about 1/3 of their schedule.

So there is absolutely no rational imperative at all that any undefeated team makes a college playoff.

At best, you can claim that it is rational that conference champions make the playoffs, because no team controls its conference schedule. But even then, UCF has no claim to the title for the same reason given above, plus the fact that there were six other conference champs who didn't make the playoffs either and thus have the same gripe UCF does.

But they aren't griping.

Sounds like argument for required access by the G5 (as the reality is they dont even "control" thier OOC schedule since another party must say "yes" to their offer to play). Basically, what your saying is the schedules are so different they cant really be properly compared. The real issue is going undefeated against weak schedule doesnt mean you can beat every P5 school---it also is not evidence that you can't.

The answer is placing the best G5 champ in the playoff. Otherwise, the CFP Committee is simply "guessing" that an undefeated G5 is not the best team in FBS. Frankly, that guess is no more supported than the UCF National Championship claim. I may be wrong, but I really do think they will get this right when the time to jump to an 8-team playoff rolls around.