(08-27-2018 09:58 AM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  I'm OK with this. Since Colley was part of the BCS formula, it makes sense not to list its pick separately when that was used. And when Colley picked Alabama, since they did get a chance to play in the CFP and got knocked out, their claim to a national championship was ceded.

Not according to Colley, they picked Alabama anyway. Which tells us all we need to know about how valid this method is, right?

(08-27-2018 09:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 07:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Lots of schools claim one or more national titles under less than unanimous, and dubious, circumstances, including Alabama more than once, so it's not like this is the first time it ever happened anywhere.

Nobody said it was. I was commenting on the UCF listing in the 2018 NCAA FBS record book and how that deviates from prior year's record books with regard to schools that were named national champ only by Colley-matrix.

And I replied that lots of championships are disputed, or double claimed, and this one is not the exception you seem to want to make it out to be. Otherwise, why mention it?

So I had a valid point, as a response.

(08-27-2018 11:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:19 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 08:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  It's not official, because the NCAA has nothing to do with the determination of the FBS champ. That's the whole basis of FBS, that it rejects NCAA jurisdiction for football.

The CFP is what is official for FBS.

Actually, there is still no official national champion or champion of the FBS. The winner of the CFP is just that - the CFP tournament champion. No more, no less.

And your point is correct. That's the way the FBS schools collectively want it. The ambiguity is good for college football. Controversy sells.

I am curious as to what would count as "official" for you? To me, what makes a competition winner "official" is that it is the competition that is endorsed by the participants themselves as the competition that determines their champion.

E.g., for the NFL, the Super Bowl winner is regarded as the official champion of the NFL, because that is the game that all of the NFL franchises have collectively decided determines the winner of the NFL for that season.

Likewise, the FBS conferences and schools have collectively decided that the CFP is the process that determines the national champion of those FBS schools and conferences for the season. So in what way is the CFP champion any less the official national champ of the FBS conferences/schools than the Super Bowl champion is the official champ of the NFL?

The NFL is one league with two divisions were every team has an equal path to the championship. Therefore there's no outside sources trying to determine anything. If the worst team in the NFL last year went undefeated this year they are the champions period case closed. Any "agreement " that lets outside forces decide things such as college football, will always leave the door open for controversy and yes multiple champions. To compare college football to the NFL is apples to oranges, two completely different operational setups. The most overreaching and constant entity for college football has decided by these predetermined data points that UCF is also a champion

What "outside forces" does the CFP allow to determine anything? That's the way it was in the old days, when the AP and Coaches polls - outside forces - determined the champion. But the CFP is self-contained. It is agreed on by all the member conferences, and the playoff teams are determined by a CFP-created committee. There are no 'outside forces' involved with the CFP.

And what on earth does that bolded phrase mean? :coffee3:

The moment it's not decided purely the field period means you've created an outside force. The NCAA basketball tournament is completely legitimate because literally every team has access to the championship even with a selection committee of you have a great season and win your conference tournament you have the same chance as a Duke or Kansas period. The easy fix would be to eliminate some of these useless bowls and to give every conference champ an auto-bid while keeping the better bowls for the good teams that didn't win their way in as a reward for a good season.

(08-27-2018 11:39 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 07:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Lots of schools claim one or more national titles under less than unanimous, and dubious, circumstances, including Alabama more than once, so it's not like this is the first time it ever happened anywhere.

Nobody said it was. I was commenting on the UCF listing in the 2018 NCAA FBS record book and how that deviates from prior year's record books with regard to schools that were named national champ only by Colley-matrix.

And I replied that lots of championships are disputed, or double claimed, and this one is not the exception you seem to want to make it out to be. Otherwise, why mention it?

So I had a valid point, as a response.

Exactly. I think Quo should call the NCAA and give them a piece of his mind, otherwise why gripe about a group of kids and coaches that did something rare by working hard and accomplishing all of their goals and making their childhood dreams come true. That's why America is great because anything is possible even when the powers that be is doing everything they can to maintain their power. Maybe UCF opened a door for an even greater college football future that in the long run will benefit everyone.

(08-27-2018 11:55 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  The moment it's not decided purely the field period means you've created an outside force. The NCAA basketball tournament is completely legitimate because literally every team has access to the championship even with a selection committee of you have a great season and win your conference tournament you have the same chance as a Duke or Kansas period. The easy fix would be to eliminate some of these useless bowls and to give every conference champ an auto-bid while keeping the better bowls for the good teams that didn't win their way in as a reward for a good season.

People need to stop comparing other sports... yes you probably want an 8 or perhaps 16 team playoff, but there is still a LOT of room for subjectivity and outside forces.

You can't compare a 12 game season in football to 30 plus games in BB, plus conference tourneys. It's just not enough of a sample size.

With 5 or 6 AQ, or even 10 AQ with 16 teams, that only gives you 2-3 or 6 extra slots for at-large bids. There is no way anyone can say definitely what those teams should be in any given year. It's NOT the same thing as an NCAA selection committee.

(08-25-2018 10:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 08:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 06:16 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 05:33 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

The entire concept of FBS is organized around the principle that those schools REJECT the NCAA as the determiner of their national champion. That's what FBS is - the schools that did not want to participate in NCAA sanctioned national championship format but rather use the bowls and polls and other methods to determine their champion. The FBS schools have chosen the BCS and now the CFP to crown their champ.

So saying the NCAA officially recognizes UCF (or anyone else) as a national champ is like, oh, citing the Pope as an authority who determines who the Lutheran Bishop of a city should be, when the whole concept behind the Lutheran church is a rejection of the Pope's authority to decide such things. it's kooky!

Be that as it may, the NCAA 'recognition' is itself clearly the result of UCF pressure. The reason we know this is look at page 115 of the 2017 rule book, the one that has Clemson as the last national champion: That year, 2016, Alabama was chosen #1 by Colley-Matrix, but guess what? Alabama isn't listed as a national champ! Also, in 2012, Notre Dame was #1 in Colley-Matrix, but they aren't listed either. And in 2011, Oklahoma State was #1 in Colley-Matrix, but they aren't listed either. So up until 2017, there was NO history of listing the CM #1 as a separate national champ:

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...17/FBS.pdf

But now all of a sudden the 2018 book comes out and suddenly UCF being #1 in Colley-Matrix warrants them being listed as a national champ? Why? Heck, if you look on page 115 of the 2018 book, they STILL don't list 2016 Alabama or 2012 Notre Dame or 2011 Oklahoma State even though they "won" the same dumb Colley title that UCF did!

That shows that this is nothing but bowing to UCF political pressure. Totally bogus:

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...18/FBS.pdf

Ya know why the pressure worked? POWER BABY POWER!!

Still totally bogus. Totally.

Yeah, but it's official.

It's not official, because the NCAA has nothing to do with the determination of the FBS champ. That's the whole basis of FBS, that it rejects NCAA jurisdiction for football.

The CFP is what is official for FBS.

FBS is under the NCAA umbrella and every FBS stat kept by the NCAA is considered the "official" statistical record book for teams under the NCAA umbrella. By your logic--since the NCAA sponsors no FBS championship--the NCAA cant endorse the CFP winner as the "oficial" champion either. Instead---the NCAA has chosen to recognize the CFP winner----just as they have chosen to recognize the UCF 2017 national championship claim. It is what it is. Cant have it both ways. Either the NCAA can recognize a champion or it cannot. It cant do both.

FBS could avoid controversy and either turn the playoff over to the NCAA or create a playoff system that isnt seen by many as closed to half of football and rigged. The current record book is simply a reflection of the actual facts on the ground. Like I said---it is what it is.

(08-27-2018 12:43 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:55 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  The moment it's not decided purely the field period means you've created an outside force. The NCAA basketball tournament is completely legitimate because literally every team has access to the championship even with a selection committee of you have a great season and win your conference tournament you have the same chance as a Duke or Kansas period. The easy fix would be to eliminate some of these useless bowls and to give every conference champ an auto-bid while keeping the better bowls for the good teams that didn't win their way in as a reward for a good season.

People need to stop comparing other sports... yes you probably want an 8 or perhaps 16 team playoff, but there is still a LOT of room for subjectivity and outside forces.

You can't compare a 12 game season in football to 30 plus games in BB, plus conference tourneys. It's just not enough of a sample size.

With 5 or 6 AQ, or even 10 AQ with 16 teams, that only gives you 2-3 or 6 extra slots for at-large bids. There is no way anyone can say definitely what those teams should be in any given year. It's NOT the same thing as an NCAA selection committee.

You just basically agreed with me. You can't compare the NFL to college football because without the ability to settle it on the field subjective outside forces will continue to be used to determine things. This is what leads to end of season controversies which has always been a part of college football history so if the NCAA has decided to recognize UCF as a champion also it's not taking anything from an Alabama no more than it has with any other split championship in the past. Quo has a problem with the NCAA so why pee all on those young men at UCF for earning a bit of legitimacy for a job well done. Whether you agree with the NCAA or not, by the ncaa's determination it's official.

(08-27-2018 12:43 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:55 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  The moment it's not decided purely the field period means you've created an outside force. The NCAA basketball tournament is completely legitimate because literally every team has access to the championship even with a selection committee of you have a great season and win your conference tournament you have the same chance as a Duke or Kansas period. The easy fix would be to eliminate some of these useless bowls and to give every conference champ an auto-bid while keeping the better bowls for the good teams that didn't win their way in as a reward for a good season.

People need to stop comparing other sports... yes you probably want an 8 or perhaps 16 team playoff, but there is still a LOT of room for subjectivity and outside forces.

You can't compare a 12 game season in football to 30 plus games in BB, plus conference tourneys. It's just not enough of a sample size.

With 5 or 6 AQ, or even 10 AQ with 16 teams, that only gives you 2-3 or 6 extra slots for at-large bids. There is no way anyone can say definitely what those teams should be in any given year. It's NOT the same thing as an NCAA selection committee.

FBS Football
Current CFP
4÷129=3.1% Of FBS teams

Hypothetical NCAA football tournament:
16÷129=12.4% Play off spots as percentage of teams
6÷119=5% At large spots as part of percentage


Average number of teams per conference 12.9
13÷129=10% |Possible percentage of available teams
12÷129=9.3% |played in a season for the sport.

Basketball
NCAA Tournament
68÷347=19.5% Tournament bids as percentage of teams
35÷314=11.1%. At large bids as part of percentage


Average number of teams per conference 10.5
24÷347=6.9% |Possible percentage of teams played in a
26÷347=7.5% |season for the sport.

This thread has to have set a record for number of emojis used.

(08-27-2018 03:17 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  This thread has to have set a record for number of emojis used.

(08-27-2018 11:39 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 07:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Lots of schools claim one or more national titles under less than unanimous, and dubious, circumstances, including Alabama more than once, so it's not like this is the first time it ever happened anywhere.

Nobody said it was. I was commenting on the UCF listing in the 2018 NCAA FBS record book and how that deviates from prior year's record books with regard to schools that were named national champ only by Colley-matrix.

And I replied that lots of championships are disputed, or double claimed, and this one is not the exception you seem to want to make it out to be. Otherwise, why mention it?

So I had a valid point, as a response.

Your point was not valid in context, which is that the NCAA had NOT previously listed the "winner" of CM poll as a national champion, and still hasn't, except for UCF. OK State 2011, Notre Dame 2012, and Alabama 2016 all 'won' the same bogus CM that UCF 2017 did, but they were never listed by the NCAA and still aren't listed, while UCF is.

So UCF being listed is absolutely the exception I made it out to be.

(08-27-2018 12:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 08:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 06:16 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Ya know why the pressure worked? POWER BABY POWER!!

Still totally bogus. Totally.

Yeah, but it's official.

It's not official, because the NCAA has nothing to do with the determination of the FBS champ. That's the whole basis of FBS, that it rejects NCAA jurisdiction for football.

The CFP is what is official for FBS.

FBS is under the NCAA umbrella and every FBS stat kept by the NCAA is considered the "official" statistical record book for teams under the NCAA umbrella. By your logic--since the NCAA sponsors no FBS championship--the NCAA cant endorse the CFP winner as the "oficial" champion either.

That's absolutely correct and I never said otherwise. An NCAA endorsement of the FBS football champion is null and void, including of the CFP winner, because FBS is defined as those schools and conferences that reject NCAA governance of their championship process. Saying an NCAA pronouncement about the FBS champ is 'official' is like the Pope endorsing who the Rabbi of Jerusalem should be, when the Jewish religion rejects the authority of the Pope to decide such things. It's an absurd idea.

The official champion of FBS is the CFP winner, because the CFP is the method agreed on by all the member schools and conferences, just as the Super Bowl is the agreed on championship game of the NFL.

It's really not complicated.

(08-27-2018 11:55 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:19 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 08:06 AM)ken d Wrote:  Actually, there is still no official national champion or champion of the FBS. The winner of the CFP is just that - the CFP tournament champion. No more, no less.

And your point is correct. That's the way the FBS schools collectively want it. The ambiguity is good for college football. Controversy sells.

I am curious as to what would count as "official" for you? To me, what makes a competition winner "official" is that it is the competition that is endorsed by the participants themselves as the competition that determines their champion.

E.g., for the NFL, the Super Bowl winner is regarded as the official champion of the NFL, because that is the game that all of the NFL franchises have collectively decided determines the winner of the NFL for that season.

Likewise, the FBS conferences and schools have collectively decided that the CFP is the process that determines the national champion of those FBS schools and conferences for the season. So in what way is the CFP champion any less the official national champ of the FBS conferences/schools than the Super Bowl champion is the official champ of the NFL?

The NFL is one league with two divisions were every team has an equal path to the championship. Therefore there's no outside sources trying to determine anything. If the worst team in the NFL last year went undefeated this year they are the champions period case closed. Any "agreement " that lets outside forces decide things such as college football, will always leave the door open for controversy and yes multiple champions. To compare college football to the NFL is apples to oranges, two completely different operational setups. The most overreaching and constant entity for college football has decided by these predetermined data points that UCF is also a champion

What "outside forces" does the CFP allow to determine anything? That's the way it was in the old days, when the AP and Coaches polls - outside forces - determined the champion. But the CFP is self-contained. It is agreed on by all the member conferences, and the playoff teams are determined by a CFP-created committee. There are no 'outside forces' involved with the CFP.

And what on earth does that bolded phrase mean?

The moment it's not decided purely the field period means you've created an outside force.

To make any sense at all, "outside force" has to mean "outside of the organization that is running the competition". E.g., if the FBS schools said that the AP poll would determine their national champion, that would be allowing an outside force to influence the result, because the AP is not a part of the FBS schools and conferences.

But every aspect of the CFP is a creation of and under the control of the CFP member conferences, so there is no aspect of the CFP, including the committee, that is an outside force.

(08-27-2018 06:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 12:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 08:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Still totally bogus. Totally.

Yeah, but it's official.

It's not official, because the NCAA has nothing to do with the determination of the FBS champ. That's the whole basis of FBS, that it rejects NCAA jurisdiction for football.

The CFP is what is official for FBS.

FBS is under the NCAA umbrella and every FBS stat kept by the NCAA is considered the "official" statistical record book for teams under the NCAA umbrella. By your logic--since the NCAA sponsors no FBS championship--the NCAA cant endorse the CFP winner as the "oficial" champion either.

That's absolutely correct and I never said otherwise. An NCAA endorsement of the FBS football champion is null and void, including of the CFP winner, because FBS is defined as those schools and conferences that reject NCAA governance of their championship process. Saying an NCAA pronouncement about the FBS champ is 'official' is like the Pope endorsing who the Rabbi of Jerusalem should be, when the Jewish religion rejects the authority of the Pope to decide such things. It's an absurd idea.

The official champion of FBS is the CFP winner, because the CFP is the method agreed on by all the member schools and conferences, just as the Super Bowl is the agreed on championship game of the NFL.

It's really not complicated.

I think you should call the NCAA and tell them that, but have your ear plugs to protect your ears from all of the load laughter.

(08-27-2018 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:55 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 11:19 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I am curious as to what would count as "official" for you? To me, what makes a competition winner "official" is that it is the competition that is endorsed by the participants themselves as the competition that determines their champion.

E.g., for the NFL, the Super Bowl winner is regarded as the official champion of the NFL, because that is the game that all of the NFL franchises have collectively decided determines the winner of the NFL for that season.

Likewise, the FBS conferences and schools have collectively decided that the CFP is the process that determines the national champion of those FBS schools and conferences for the season. So in what way is the CFP champion any less the official national champ of the FBS conferences/schools than the Super Bowl champion is the official champ of the NFL?

The NFL is one league with two divisions were every team has an equal path to the championship. Therefore there's no outside sources trying to determine anything. If the worst team in the NFL last year went undefeated this year they are the champions period case closed. Any "agreement " that lets outside forces decide things such as college football, will always leave the door open for controversy and yes multiple champions. To compare college football to the NFL is apples to oranges, two completely different operational setups. The most overreaching and constant entity for college football has decided by these predetermined data points that UCF is also a champion

What "outside forces" does the CFP allow to determine anything? That's the way it was in the old days, when the AP and Coaches polls - outside forces - determined the champion. But the CFP is self-contained. It is agreed on by all the member conferences, and the playoff teams are determined by a CFP-created committee. There are no 'outside forces' involved with the CFP.

And what on earth does that bolded phrase mean?

The moment it's not decided purely the field period means you've created an outside force.

To make any sense at all, "outside force" has to mean "outside of the organization that is running the competition". E.g., if the FBS schools said that the AP poll would determine their national champion, that would be allowing an outside force to influence the result, because the AP is not a part of the FBS schools and conferences.

But every aspect of the CFP is a creation of and under the control of the CFP member conferences, so there is no aspect of the CFP, including the committee, that is an outside force.

The CFP itself is an "outside force". It is a for profit organization. Its not about competition, fairness, or finding the champion. Its about making money. Not to mention half the team that "agreed" to it essentially had no choice.

To me---the CFP is basically the college equivalent of Don King in 1980's boxing. They select the teams they think will generate the biggest audience and most profit---which is why SOS is so heavily weighted (that's code for no G5's) and within the P5 brand is every bit as important as record. The CFP is a joke. Its a high paying invitational championship---but not really THE FBS championship. Given that the lowest ranked team has won it 50% of the time, its entirely possible the best team in FBS in any given year might not even be in the field. They can either fix it---or they can expect to see more split championships in the future. Don King liked it rigged---it gave him lots of power and money. I suspect the CFP feels the same way.

(08-25-2018 10:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:15 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Yeah, but it's official. What's the great quote from the movie training day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove " and 20-30 years from people will look in the history books to see who all have won college football championships and boom there will be the that team from the AAC UCF.

And then they'll wonder why it says "Alabama" right above it....



http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...18/FBS.pdf (p. 115)

... and why DOESN'T it say Alabama 2016, Notre Dame 2012, or Oklahoma State 2011 as national champs even though they won the same bogus Colley-Matrix poll as UCF did.

It's a pure propaganda listing.

Heck Colley was NEVER a major selector on its own, it was only a major selector while part of the BCS formula, a formula that died 6 years ago.

The answer to your question is that the NCAA record book recognizes claimed national championships which are validated by a "major selector"
And if you look on page 115 of the current record book, it does list '16 Bama, '12 ND, and '11 Ok State in the same way it does '17 UCF.
Any one of the three teams you listed could claim it tomorrow, just like '41 Bama does.

(08-27-2018 09:19 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:15 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Yeah, but it's official. What's the great quote from the movie training day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove " and 20-30 years from people will look in the history books to see who all have won college football championships and boom there will be the that team from the AAC UCF.

And then they'll wonder why it says "Alabama" right above it....



http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...18/FBS.pdf (p. 115)

... and why DOESN'T it say Alabama 2016, Notre Dame 2012, or Oklahoma State 2011 as national champs even though they won the same bogus Colley-Matrix poll as UCF did.

It's a pure propaganda listing.

Heck Colley was NEVER a major selector on its own, it was only a major selector while part of the BCS formula, a formula that died 6 years ago.

The answer to your question is that the NCAA record book recognizes claimed national championships which are validated by a "major selector"
And if you look on page 115 of the current record book, it does list '16 Bama, '12 ND, and '11 Ok State in the same way it does '17 UCF.
Any one of the three teams you listed could claim it tomorrow, just like '41 Bama does.

They added them in retrospectively starting with the 2018 edition. Check out page 115 of the 2017 edition: http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...17/FBS.pdf

(08-27-2018 07:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:15 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Yeah, but it's official. What's the great quote from the movie training day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove " and 20-30 years from people will look in the history books to see who all have won college football championships and boom there will be the that team from the AAC UCF.

And then they'll wonder why it says "Alabama" right above it....



http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...18/FBS.pdf (p. 115)

... and why DOESN'T it say Alabama 2016, Notre Dame 2012, or Oklahoma State 2011 as national champs even though they won the same bogus Colley-Matrix poll as UCF did.

It's a pure propaganda listing.

Heck Colley was NEVER a major selector on its own, it was only a major selector while part of the BCS formula, a formula that died 6 years ago.

Lots of schools claim one or more national titles under less than unanimous, and dubious, circumstances, including Alabama more than once, so it's not like this is the first time it ever happened anywhere.

Yeah, Alabama has NO grounds to complain about bogus titles.

(08-27-2018 09:31 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-27-2018 09:19 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:15 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Yeah, but it's official. What's the great quote from the movie training day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove " and 20-30 years from people will look in the history books to see who all have won college football championships and boom there will be the that team from the AAC UCF.

And then they'll wonder why it says "Alabama" right above it....



http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...18/FBS.pdf (p. 115)

... and why DOESN'T it say Alabama 2016, Notre Dame 2012, or Oklahoma State 2011 as national champs even though they won the same bogus Colley-Matrix poll as UCF did.

It's a pure propaganda listing.

Heck Colley was NEVER a major selector on its own, it was only a major selector while part of the BCS formula, a formula that died 6 years ago.

The answer to your question is that the NCAA record book recognizes claimed national championships which are validated by a "major selector"
And if you look on page 115 of the current record book, it does list '16 Bama, '12 ND, and '11 Ok State in the same way it does '17 UCF.
Any one of the three teams you listed could claim it tomorrow, just like '41 Bama does.

They added them in retrospectively starting with the 2018 edition. Check out page 115 of the 2017 edition: http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...17/FBS.pdf

Okay. Fine.
The point is that the standard has always been claimed championships validated by an NCAA-recognized major selector.
UCF claimed it, NCAA said "yup, they meet our standard" and then they retroactively listed the other three.

The official NCAA record book recognizes UCF's claim by the same standard that they recognize many, many other disputed claims (including several of Bama's and of other schools with more history than UCF).

(08-27-2018 09:19 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 10:15 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 09:18 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  Yeah, but it's official. What's the great quote from the movie training day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove " and 20-30 years from people will look in the history books to see who all have won college football championships and boom there will be the that team from the AAC UCF.

And then they'll wonder why it says "Alabama" right above it....



http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_r...18/FBS.pdf (p. 115)

... and why DOESN'T it say Alabama 2016, Notre Dame 2012, or Oklahoma State 2011 as national champs even though they won the same bogus Colley-Matrix poll as UCF did.

It's a pure propaganda listing.

Heck Colley was NEVER a major selector on its own, it was only a major selector while part of the BCS formula, a formula that died 6 years ago.

The answer to your question is that the NCAA record book recognizes claimed national championships which are validated by a "major selector"
And if you look on page 115 of the current record book, it does list '16 Bama, '12 ND, and '11 Ok State in the same way it does '17 UCF.
Any one of the three teams you listed could claim it tomorrow, just like '41 Bama does.

Its not "claimed" national championships. Texas makes no claims to 1941, 1968 or 1981, but it is listed.