(03-03-2018 08:29 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  [quote='quo vadis' pid='15126306' dateline='1520111911']
[quote='Huskies12' pid='15125172' dateline='1520085536']
[quote='quo vadis' pid='15125092' dateline='1520082462']
[quote='Huskies12' pid='15124707' dateline='1520042575']
[quote='quo vadis' pid='15124244' dateline='1520033827']

To my knowledge, nobody in the SEC or any place else has claimed a national title based on anything but the BCS/CFP, or AP or coaches poll the past 45 years. All those cases where SEC and others make bizarro claims are from before 1975, when the polls voted before the bowls, and when other institutions were recognized as also being title designaters.

May be old, but they still hang the banners. They still claim the National Championships based on eleventy-seven different NCAA recognized national championship selectors. [/quote]

Yes, but before the mid-70s, the standards were in fact much murkier. E.g., a claim that team X makes as to having a share of the 1944 title because something called the Nessy Report voted them #1 seems absurd from our POV in 2018, but in 1944 the Nessy Report might have been widely viewed as a credible selector. But once the two polls moved their polls to after the bowls, the poll standard was settled on. That's obvious, because we don't see those same kinds of claims since then.

Quote:But UCF claims based on Colley-Matrix computer?

It doesn't matter if the Colley-MAtrix computer formula turns out to be monkeys throwing darts at a wall. It's on the NCAA's list.

Look up the NCAA book: In the list of champions by year, CM is only listed when it was part of the BCS, since the BCS went away, no more CM champ being listed. CM was only valid while it was part of the BCS. That's why you don't see Notre Dame 2012 or Alabama 2016 listed.

Quote:3) Actually, 126 other teams didn't get a chance to "prove it on the field" either, because only 4 teams made the playoffs. Undefeated means nothing, as no other sports league requires that you be undefeated to make the playoffs.

That's not true. In college football, as well as in boxing, "undefeated" has a mystique to it. Right or wrong, that's how it is in college football.

If it has such a mystique, how come there are so many unbeaten teams that didn't win a national title? There have been many over the years. Pollsters have had zero problem denying unbeaten teams a share of a title. They had no qualms this year either, UCF didn't make the final top 5 in either poll.

So much for the mystique.

Quote:[quote]4) Even if we agree that UCF should have been in the playoffs and was screwed out of being in them, it is still absurd for them to claim the title, because it assumes they would have won something they didn't win, the playoffs. It's like me thinking "you know, my Redskins should have made the playoffs but the NFL screwed us, therefore since we didn't get to PLAY in them but should have, we can act like we not only played in them but WON them, and declare ourselves champs over the Super Bowl winner!" That's just absurd, acting like you won something you didn't.

Those are the things you should have learned from my post.

The relevant comparison for the NFL wouldn't be a team getting screwed out of a playoff spot on a bad call in the last game. It would be something like the NFL declaring that the Cowboys were playoff ineligible because Jerry Jones something something. And the Cowboys go 16-0, but don't go to the playoff.

UCF didn't make the playoffs because the committee didn't think they were one of the best four teams. That might have been a mistake, but it's close to a mistake a ref makes that costs them a game. I don't even know how to judge your Jerry Jones gobblydy, because you didn't spell it out.

Even worse is the Cowboys going 16-0. If they went 16-0, every "poll" and media outlet in the country and every power ranking computer would say they were the #1 team, and with good reason: Unlike UCF, they would have played a schedule that was essentially equal to that of all other NFL teams. Because no teams choose their schedules, the range between the best and worst NFL schedule is very tight, whereas in college sports it can be vast, as it was this year with UCF and their #72 schedule.

In contrast, nobody - not the pollsters, the committee, or the computers - ever had UCF in the top 5.

Because their undefeated record didn't mean much.

Quote:Did you really just mention UCF going undefeated yet again? As I've explained, that's completely irrelevant,

In the opinion of the college football world, undefeated is important, not irrelevant.

The best indicator of that are the coaches and AP voters. They both had UCF far and away from #1. Heck, UCF wouldn't have made a 4-team playoff that was held *after* they beat Auburn.

So much for being important, at least in the sense of picking a champ.

Quote:It is ridiculous for any team to be able to schedule 1/3 of their games, and then shout "We went unbeaten! Therefore we belong in the playoffs!"

College teams make their schedules. Live with it, Quo.

We all live with it, but it's one reason that "undefeated" doesn't mean nearly as much in terms of being chosen for playoffs as it does in the NFL or any other league. If a team can make its schedule, going unbeaten has considerably less credibility than if their schedule was generated by an impartial third party. It's just the way it is.

(03-03-2018 04:37 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  [quote='Attackcoog' pid='15125770' dateline='1520102743']
[quote='quo vadis' pid='15125139' dateline='1520084469']
[quote='Attackcoog' pid='15124327' dateline='1520035813']
[quote='quo vadis' pid='15124281' dateline='1520034613']

And unbeaten means zero,

Bzzzt. Wrong. Look up the polls, year after year, and spot the team that keeps eking out wins in overtime and by field goals and on hail mary passes, and then the point where their luck runs out--and they drop like a rock in the polls.

In college football, undefeated matters. Deal with it, Quo.


Look at the polls? I did, and they show UCF finishing at #6 and #7, far away from #1.

Heck, there were 6 coaches from the AAC in the coach's poll. They all voted Alabama #1 ahead of UCF.

I guess all of these writers and coaches must have just missed the memo about the important mystique of being unbeaten?