Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   Nick Saban says that despite claims, UCF really isn't the National Champions in football   ( espn.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Nick Saban, NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship, College Football Playoff, Alabama Crimson Tide football, coach Nick Saban, national championship, national champion claims, undefeated team  
•       •       •

567 clicks; posted to Sports » on 16 May 2018 at 8:35 AM (30 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-05-16 08:32:23 AM  
Maybe so Nick, but college football is structured in such a way that it unjustly benefits schools like Alabama & others in the alleged Power 5. It's one of the major reasons why I really don't watch college football anymore. There's such a chasm between schools that can compete for a national title and those that can't all because of what conference they're in, not because of what they're actually doing.

The fact that UCF, USF, Boise, Houston, etc have virtually no shot at playing for a national title despite a sustained level of excellence is disgraceful. And that benefits Alabama.

Say what you will about college basketball, but at least all conferences are invited. Sometimes it produces results like Butler, Loyola, and sometimes it produces Virginia as well. It might be chaotic, but it's also the most fair.

College football would never invite UCF to a national title contest so it has to take what it can get.
 
2018-05-16 08:43:26 AM  
"And there's probably a significant number of people who don't respect people who make self-proclaimed sort of accolades for themselves."

And I don't respect any process of determining "the best" if it does not allow undefeated teams a chance at the title. I imagine there are a significant number of people like myself as well.

/not a UCF fan
 
2018-05-16 08:45:21 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-05-16 09:07:35 AM  
 
2018-05-16 09:08:35 AM  
Auburn thinks they are.
 
2018-05-16 09:26:49 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: The fact that UCF, USF, Boise, Houston, etc have virtually no shot at playing for a national title despite a sustained level of excellence is disgraceful. And that benefits Alabama.


One of the most particularly ludicrous arguments against paying college athletes is that the current system protects "competitive balance". As if the same elite schools don't already get all the top-level recruits and win the national title year in and year out. Even among the power 5 conferences, the majority of those schools are never ever going to win a title.
 
2018-05-16 09:33:50 AM  
Alabama is an overglorified SEC Champion.  I will recognize UCF, as it is a Floridian school not located in Tallahassee or Miami, and is close enough to Gainesville to count as a middle finger to that extremely crappy school in Athens that fields a football team worse than Cleveland.
 
2018-05-16 09:37:02 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: Maybe so Nick, but college football is structured in such a way that it unjustly benefits schools like Alabama & others in the alleged Power 5.


Hell, even among the "Power 5", it is structured in such a way that unjustly benefits schools in the SEC thanks to their television contract with ESPN (who owns the broadcast rights to the Championship games).
 
2018-05-16 10:03:54 AM  
And Nick Saban isn't really the Roy Moore of sports.
 
2018-05-16 10:20:34 AM  
UCF is the "non-Power Five" national champion (very clearly, actually). Until the Power Five open up their little cabal to the other five 1-A conferences, it is perfectly acceptable to a) have two separate national champions and b) occasionally have a debate about which one is better. Saban needs to shut his hole and get on back to coaching his boring-ass style of college football. It's the only thing he does well.
 
2018-05-16 10:28:54 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: The fact that UCF, USF, Boise, Houston, etc have virtually no shot at playing for a national title despite a sustained level of excellence is disgraceful.


In general, most of these teams perform badly when they get to bowl games and play teams near the top of the "power" conferences.  I say most, because I'm sure some of them have been championship caliber and never get the shot they deserve.  But when their average opponent is the 4-8 East Texas Polytech State, El Paso Annex campus Fighting Stink Bugs, who haven't won a non-conference game in two seasons, they're hard to evaluate on a national stage.

The issue is that 130 schools field FBS football teams, and we have only ~11ish games to evaluate a regular season.  Even with a random opponent assignment across the country, we can't mathematically determine a reasonable, legitimate top group.  Conferences and regional ties adds so much mud and fog to the situation, we can't even come close from a competitive standpoint.  Giving edges to historically strong powers is the filler used by committees and the public to rationalize the choices.

The best course we have right now is an ~8 team playoff with mostly or entirely conference winners.  Even that is highly imperfect, but we're on our way to it.  It won't take long before we're there.  That introduces a new layer of poor determinacy, but it's better than what we have now.
 
2018-05-16 10:35:51 AM  

Khellendros: Straight Outta Wells Branch: The fact that UCF, USF, Boise, Houston, etc have virtually no shot at playing for a national title despite a sustained level of excellence is disgraceful.

In general, most of these teams perform badly when they get to bowl games and play teams near the top of the "power" conferences.  I say most, because I'm sure some of them have been championship caliber and never get the shot they deserve.  But when their average opponent is the 4-8 East Texas Polytech State, El Paso Annex campus Fighting Stink Bugs, who haven't won a non-conference game in two seasons, they're hard to evaluate on a national stage.

The issue is that 130 schools field FBS football teams, and we have only ~11ish games to evaluate a regular season.  Even with a random opponent assignment across the country, we can't mathematically determine a reasonable, legitimate top group.  Conferences and regional ties adds so much mud and fog to the situation, we can't even come close from a competitive standpoint.  Giving edges to historically strong powers is the filler used by committees and the public to rationalize the choices.

The best course we have right now is an ~8 team playoff with mostly or entirely conference winners.  Even that is highly imperfect, but we're on our way to it.  It won't take long before we're there.  That introduces a new layer of poor determinacy, but it's better than what we have now.


UCF just put a bunch of guys drafted. Boise State just had a 1st round LB drafted. It's not like they're playing with scrubs.

I think the most fair proposal I've heard was from Kannel, actually. Have an 8-team playoff. Invite the Power 5 conference winners plus 3 Wild Cards with this caveat. If you go undefeated, you get an automatic invite. That means I need this scenario, UCF gets an automatic bid.

Maybe they get their ass kicked by 40. Or maybe they pull a UMBC. At least we'll get an answer rather than rampant speculation.
 
2018-05-16 10:35:55 AM  

Khellendros: The issue is that 130 schools field FBS football teams, and we have only ~11ish games to evaluate a regular season. Even with a random opponent assignment across the country, we can't mathematically determine a reasonable, legitimate top group. Conferences and regional ties adds so much mud and fog to the situation, we can't even come close from a competitive standpoint. Giving edges to historically strong powers is the filler used by committees and the public to rationalize the choices.


There are 124 teams in 1-AA and they have had a playoff system that allows every single one of them a chance at the title if they keep winning for decades
 
2018-05-16 10:39:24 AM  

Khellendros: In general, most of these teams perform badly when they get to bowl games and play teams near the top of the "power" conferences.


Boise St. is 3-0 in the Fiesta Bowl against teams with records of 11-2, 12-0, and 10-3.

The game against 12-0 TCU was a great way for the Bowl folks to bail out of having to have one of their "power" teams lose again to a "lesser" Boise squad.
 
2018-05-16 10:41:07 AM  

ElwoodCuse: Straight Outta Wells Branch: The fact that UCF, USF, Boise, Houston, etc have virtually no shot at playing for a national title despite a sustained level of excellence is disgraceful. And that benefits Alabama.

One of the most particularly ludicrous arguments against paying college athletes is that the current system protects "competitive balance". As if the same elite schools don't already get all the top-level recruits and win the national title year in and year out. Even among the power 5 conferences, the majority of those schools are never ever going to win a title.


Generally when somebody refers to "maintaining competitive balance" or "protecting the integrity of the game" what they're referring to is "maintaining the status quo" and the status quo is shiatloads of athletic department profits.
 
2018-05-16 10:54:06 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: There's such a chasm between schools that can compete for a national title and those that can't all because of what conference they're in, not because of what they're actually doing.


And this is why I honestly don't understand the point of college football, or at least in crowning a National "Champion".  Why even bother being a fan of some school like Northern Illinois, Akron. or Central Florida if you'll play well year after year but never get a chance to play for the big prize?

You get to go to a meaningless, corporate sponsored exhibition "bowl" game at the end of the year?
Woo-hoo?

Seems like a waste of time to me.
 
2018-05-16 10:57:54 AM  

ElwoodCuse: Straight Outta Wells Branch: The fact that UCF, USF, Boise, Houston, etc have virtually no shot at playing for a national title despite a sustained level of excellence is disgraceful. And that benefits Alabama.

One of the most particularly ludicrous arguments against paying college athletes is that the current system protects "competitive balance". As if the same elite schools don't already get all the top-level recruits and win the national title year in and year out. Even among the power 5 conferences, the majority of those schools are never ever going to win a title.


The debate is ludicrous because everyone buys into the NCAA's fiction that the cash money universities pay students doesn't count as pay. Since they call the pay given to athletes a "housing and food allotment" and a "cost of attendance grant", they can pay the athletes but don't have to worry about pesky things like payroll taxes, unionization, worker's comp claims, and the like.
 
2018-05-16 11:00:49 AM  

Khellendros: The issue is that 130 schools field FBS football teams, and we have only ~11ish games to evaluate a regular season.  Even with a random opponent assignment across the country, we can't mathematically determine a reasonable, legitimate top group.  Conferences and regional ties adds so much mud and fog to the situation, we can't even come close from a competitive standpoint.  Giving edges to historically strong powers is the filler used by committees and the public to rationalize the choices.


We can easily do it. Each conference has very specific on-the-field rules for how they award conference championships. There's only 10 conferences. You can easily give a couple teams a bye based on objectie criteria like they do in the NFL (their record, record of opponents, etc) and then do a random draw among the teams each round to determine who plays whom. There's no need at all for a poll, human subjectivity, committees, or any of that garbage. It can easily be settled on the field without adding more than 1 potential game.
 
2018-05-16 11:02:33 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: If you go undefeated, you get an automatic invite


Sorry, there are a lot of objectively mediocre teams that went undefeated in the last 20 years.  That's not a good measure of quality with any level of universality.  It helps, sure, but not as a firm line.

ElwoodCuse: There are 124 teams in 1-AA and they have had a playoff system that allows every single one of them a chance at the title if they keep winning for decades


And like most large playoff systems, the best teams rarely make it to the end, and often winners had easy roads to the final.  That's the poor determinacy problem, similar to the NCAA basketball championship.  An 3 round maximum is about the best we can get to without creating that problem on a huge scale, which gives us 8 teams.

Go Fast Turn Left: Boise St. is 3-0 in the Fiesta Bowl against teams with records of 11-2, 12-0, and 10-3.The game against 12-0 TCU was a great way for the Bowl folks to bail out of having to have one of their "power" teams lose again to a "lesser" Boise squad.


Good singular examples, I'm talking about overall.  You're neglecting the masses of examples that get curb-stomped even when they enter bowl games with undefeated or one-loss records.  The history isn't good for mid-level conference 0/1 loss teams going into bowl games against top 3 spots in power conferences.  We tend to forget that these conversations occur every year, and we selectively forget the pile of 30 point losses that the bulk of these teams take.  But people will always remember Boise and UCF, who are good teams that run circles around practice squads all year, and we know in retrospect they should have been higher.
 
2018-05-16 11:07:13 AM  

Khellendros: In general, most of these teams perform badly when they get to bowl games and play teams near the top of the "power" conferences.


I think TCU, Boise State, UCF, and Utah are something like 8-0 when matched against a Power-5 team in a major bowl.
 
2018-05-16 11:09:14 AM  

Khellendros: And like most large playoff systems, the best teams rarely make it to the end


then they aren't the best

The best Patriots team wasn't the 18-1 team
 
2018-05-16 11:32:55 AM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: Maybe so Nick, but college football is structured in such a way that it unjustly benefits schools like Alabama & others in the alleged Power 5.


Schools that dislike it are welcome to do their own thing rather than demanding a piece of the pie that they didn't bake. It sucks for programs such as UCF and I feel for the players who are in a bad position through no fault of their own but it is what it is. UCF has attendance problems in a 45,000 seat stadium and they think they have some right to the money that others make? There were only 106 or so 1-A teams near the start of the millennium and there are 128 of them now, 1-AA exists for a reason.

UNC_Samurai: This is hilarious, considering Alabama will award themselves a championship from 85 years ago the minute anyone with more gravitas than the cashier at Piggly Wiggly makes the claim.


Pretty much what I came in to say as well.
 
2018-05-16 11:38:47 AM  

WoodyHayes: Straight Outta Wells Branch: Maybe so Nick, but college football is structured in such a way that it unjustly benefits schools like Alabama & others in the alleged Power 5.

Schools that dislike it are welcome to do their own thing rather than demanding a piece of the pie that they didn't bake. It sucks for programs such as UCF and I feel for the players who are in a bad position through no fault of their own but it is what it is. UCF has attendance problems in a 45,000 seat stadium and they think they have some right to the money that others make? There were only 106 or so 1-A teams near the start of the millennium and there are 128 of them now, 1-AA exists for a reason.

UNC_Samurai: This is hilarious, considering Alabama will award themselves a championship from 85 years ago the minute anyone with more gravitas than the cashier at Piggly Wiggly makes the claim.

Pretty much what I came in to say as well.


I don't know what Loyola-Chicago's attendance record was for games, but people showing up for their games had no bearing on whether or not they had a right to play for a national title. They belonged.

Same goes for football. If you're a D-I program & you went undefeated, you should be playing for a national title. Otherwise, what's the point of being invited to that particular level?
 
2018-05-16 12:04:56 PM  

WoodyHayes: Straight Outta Wells Branch: Maybe so Nick, but college football is structured in such a way that it unjustly benefits schools like Alabama & others in the alleged Power 5.

Schools that dislike it are welcome to do their own thing rather than demanding a piece of the pie that they didn't bake. It sucks for programs such as UCF and I feel for the players who are in a bad position through no fault of their own but it is what it is. UCF has attendance problems in a 45,000 seat stadium and they think they have some right to the money that others make? There were only 106 or so 1-A teams near the start of the millennium and there are 128 of them now, 1-AA exists for a reason.


This is where I think the solution lies.  There needs to be another level between the "Power-5" and the 1-AA level that includes the Sunbelts, the Conference USA's and the MAAC's of the world.  Let them play for their own National Title.  Those schools would probably benefit in the long run from such a system.

Or, set up a system of relegation/promotion between the leagues.  Each year the top two teams from C-USA get bumped up the the SEC and the bottom two SEC teams are headed down to C-USA for a while.  Obviously, that is not realistic, but it might be fun.
 
2018-05-16 12:06:54 PM  

bluorangefyre: Alabama is an overglorified SEC Champion.  I will recognize UCF, as it is a Floridian school not located in Tallahassee or Miami, and is close enough to Gainesville to count as a middle finger to that extremely crappy school in Athens that fields a football team worse than Cleveland.


Alabama isn't even that.  Auburn beat Alabama in the last regular season game and played UGA in the SEC Championship.  UGA won that game easily.  Alabama didn't even play in the SEC Championship game, much less win it.
 
2018-05-16 12:21:21 PM  

Straight Outta Wells Branch: I don't know what Loyola-Chicago's attendance record was for games, but people showing up for their games had no bearing on whether or not they had a right to play for a national title. They belonged.


College basketball isn't my thing and I don't know enough to make an informed argument.

Same goes for football. If you're a D-I program & you went undefeated, you should be playing for a national title. Otherwise, what's the point of being invited to that particular level?

That is the thing though, schools aren't invited to 1-A. If they meet the three primary requirements they're in and the NCAA doesn't have a real say in it except that there was a realization a few years ago that too many 1-AA programs who can't compete were jumping up for the money so that a moratorium was enacted to prevent it.

There have been a host of programs that haven't even met the requirements to remain a 1-A program and yet none have been kicked out. Only one program (Idaho) has voluntarily gone back down to 1-AA after jumping up in a money grab and acknowledging that they can't compete. Idaho was dropped from the Sun Belt because, as it always does, it comes back to money.

That is the part which attendance plays in things, if you can't get people to go to your games you can't make money and you're not attractive enough for a conference to want you. Schools such as Alabama are under no obligations to fork over money to other programs and conferences, why should they give up part of the pie they've spent so long building to some Johnny-Come-Lately?

Given more than a few twists of fate over more than the last century, UCF would be waving bye-bye to Alabama as the Crimson Tide drop down to 1-AA and I wouldn't be expecting UCF to make apologies for it in that case either. I get the case that UCF has from an emotional standpoint, I really do, but life just isn't fair sometimes.
 
2018-05-16 12:48:37 PM  
The back story: In the mid-1980s during the Ray Perkins era, then-Alabama sports information director Wayne Atcheson added five pre-Bear Bryant national titles to the Crimson Tide's media guide: 1925, 1926, 1930, 1934 and 1941. Alabama's 1982 media guide, the last season for Bryant, listed 1934 as the only pre-Bryant national championship, thanks to a footnote of Alabama's SEC history. In the year-by-year results in the 1982 media guide, only Bryant's six national titles were listed. Once Atcheson made the changes, Alabama claimed 11 national titles.
 
2018-05-16 01:01:29 PM  

helper_monkey: This is where I think the solution lies.  There needs to be another level between the "Power-5" and the 1-AA level that includes the Sunbelts, the Conference USA's and the MAAC's of the world.  Let them play for their own National Title.


Not to imitate the drum circle crowd I so despise but yeah, "the system, man," is the problem. People are attempting to apply their thoughts formed from watching every other sport (including 1-AA) and match them up with a system which is wholly incompatible with those other sports due to over a century of how 1-A has operated.

Those schools would probably benefit in the long run from such a system.

In terms of stability the non-Power Five schools would benefit from it but that isn't what they're after, at least not a fair bit of them. The conundrum for programs like UCF is that they're capable of having good teams, even good programs, for a number of years, but that good teams do not equal long term achievement. Once good teams are had, coaches and athletic directors are poached by those who successfully underwent the transformation decades ago that UCF is now attempting to make.

UCF can't monetarily match what Nebraska can, nor can UCF say they're Scott Frost's home, therefore they lose. It takes a lot of luck over a long amount of time and it isn't fair to UCF that Frost returned to Nebraska largely because Bob Devaney coached there over half of a century ago but again, it is what it is. In fifty years, perhaps UCF will poach a coach that played at UCF and just went 13-0 at (insert smaller program here that can't afford to keep him).

College football isn't about the teams, it is about the program. A program is not something which can be built overnight. Even if a program has the right people running it, it takes a shiatload of luck before a program can get off the ground and even more luck before it can feed itself.

Aww hell, I did have a point where that was going but I forget it. Oh well.

Or, set up a system of relegation/promotion between the leagues.  Each year the top two teams from C-USA get bumped up the the SEC and the bottom two SEC teams are headed down to C-USA for a while.  Obviously, that is not realistic, but it might be fun.

A system of promotion and relegation would be a blast. As you said it obviously isn't realistic, college football most of all out of any sport I can possibly think of, but it sure would be fun.

Or, perhaps, the Big Ten could just plain boot the only program in the conference that lost a bowl game last year.
 
2018-05-16 01:11:55 PM  

Khellendros:  But when their average opponent is the 4-8 East Texas Polytech State, El Paso Annex campus Fighting Stink Bugs, who haven't won a non-conference game in two seasons, they're hard to evaluate on a national stage.


Or,  the bottom of the SEC, or a powerhouse like Mercer...

Boise State kills in bowl games.  3-0 in the Fiesta Bowl.    UCF beat a ranked Memphis team, a ranked South Florida team, and then took down a top 10 Auburn team in the Peach Bowl.

The best course we have right now is an ~8 team playoff with mostly or entirely conference winners.  Even that is highly imperfect, but we're on our way to it.  It won't take long before we're there.  That introduces a new layer of poor determinacy, but it's better than what we have now.

This is correct.
 
2018-05-16 01:23:26 PM  

Tad_Waxpole: Straight Outta Wells Branch: There's such a chasm between schools that can compete for a national title and those that can't all because of what conference they're in, not because of what they're actually doing.

And this is why I honestly don't understand the point of college football, or at least in crowning a National "Champion".  Why even bother being a fan of some school like Northern Illinois, Akron. or Central Florida if you'll play well year after year but never get a chance to play for the big prize?

You get to go to a meaningless, corporate sponsored exhibition "bowl" game at the end of the year?
Woo-hoo?

Seems like a waste of time to me.


There used to be a point before the playoff.  Teams from No Illinois could still have a great season by going on to winning their bowl game.  Now bowl games, other than playoff bowl games, are meaningless.
 
2018-05-16 01:26:49 PM  

Khellendros: Straight Outta Wells Branch: If you go undefeated, you get an automatic invite

Sorry, there are a lot of objectively mediocre teams that went undefeated in the last 20 years.  That's not a good measure of quality with any level of universality.  It helps, sure, but not as a firm line.


Really?  Can you list them?  I'd be very, very interested in this list of lots of "objectively mediocre" Div 1 football programs that went undefeated, especially considering there are only 13 teams that have done it in the last 20 years and 11 of them played in the national title game.

Can you pick out the objectively mediocre programs here?

Florida State
Marshall
Oklahoma
Miami
Ohio State
USC
Auburn
Utah
Texas
Boise State
Alabama
TCU
UCF
 
2018-05-16 01:35:12 PM  
Now bowl games, other than playoff bowl games, are meaningless.

"now" lol
 
2018-05-16 01:35:58 PM  

Rent Party: Khellendros: Straight Outta Wells Branch: If you go undefeated, you get an automatic invite

Sorry, there are a lot of objectively mediocre teams that went undefeated in the last 20 years.  That's not a good measure of quality with any level of universality.  It helps, sure, but not as a firm line.

Really?  Can you list them?  I'd be very, very interested in this list of lots of "objectively mediocre" Div 1 football programs that went undefeated, especially considering there are only 13 teams that have done it in the last 20 years and 11 of them played in the national title game.

Can you pick out the objectively mediocre programs here?

Florida State
Marshall
Oklahoma
Miami
Ohio State
USC
Auburn
Utah
Texas
Boise State
Alabama
TCU
UCF

 
2018-05-16 01:38:09 PM  

ElwoodCuse: Now bowl games, other than playoff bowl games, are meaningless.

"now" lol


They're still exactly what they've always been - extra cash for the university, a vacation and a small token payout to the athletes (usually in the form of a gift card, electronics, and a ring), and some extra practice time for the team.
 
2018-05-16 01:39:05 PM  

meanmutton: Rent Party: Khellendros: Straight Outta Wells Branch: If you go undefeated, you get an automatic invite

Sorry, there are a lot of objectively mediocre teams that went undefeated in the last 20 years.  That's not a good measure of quality with any level of universality.  It helps, sure, but not as a firm line.

Really?  Can you list them?  I'd be very, very interested in this list of lots of "objectively mediocre" Div 1 football programs that went undefeated, especially considering there are only 13 teams that have done it in the last 20 years and 11 of them played in the national title game.

Can you pick out the objectively mediocre programs here?

Ohio State


I knew you were from Michigan before I even checked.  :D
 
2018-05-16 02:19:26 PM  
extra cash except for when schools lose money on them because they sell a tiny fraction of their ticket allotment because no one wants to travel to watch two 5-loss teams play a football game on a weekday afternoon in December
 
2018-05-16 02:26:14 PM  
Wow. The game was months ago. Saban sounds pretty insecure about the legitimacy of his title. Because he knows who really deserves it, and is pissed there will forever be an asterisk attached to it.

Well done, Knights.
 
2018-05-16 02:28:53 PM  

meanmutton: Ohio State


Oh, hey there! Would you like to check what happened in that year's version of Michigan's annual loss to their betters? We'll check in with one second remaining in the game, perhaps if you watch it again, John Navarre won't get picked trying to throw into the end zone?

2002 #9 Michigan vs. #2 Ohio State (HD)
Youtube K1I1FoiHh7c


Alright, it might be a foreign concept to college football these days but how about you and me have what is known as a "huddle?" I just watched it again and Navarre still pulled a Navarre, with the end results for that game being just like the others in this millennium from 2001, 2002 (duh!), 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. When you watched it, what happened?

The level of disrespect on display when your kind speaks to or of one of their betters is completely out of line. I truly get no pleasure reminding you of Michigan's place in life but I do what must be done because the rules must be followed, there are standard of conduct which will be adhered to and a Michigan fan speaking when not spoken to just can't be permitted if society is to function in a proper manner. I didn't even do a "Hello, my name is..." post after this year's version of Michigan's annual loss to their betters and the thanks I get is unacceptable things such as the above? Not cool on your part, not cool at all.

/2,363
//31-20
///1948
 
2018-05-16 03:11:55 PM  

Khellendros: The best course we have right now is an ~8 team playoff with mostly or entirely conference winners. Even that is highly imperfect, but we're on our way to it. It won't take long before we're there. That introduces a new layer of poor determinacy, but it's better than what we have now.


That makes way too much sense for SEC donors and ESPN the powers that be to ever put into effect.
 
2018-05-16 04:05:21 PM  

WoodyHayes: meanmutton: Ohio State

Oh, hey there! Would you like to check what happened in that year's version of Michigan's annual loss to their betters? We'll check in with one second remaining in the game, perhaps if you watch it again, John Navarre won't get picked trying to throw into the end zone?

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/K1I1FoiH​h7c?start=5404]

Alright, it might be a foreign concept to college football these days but how about you and me have what is known as a "huddle?" I just watched it again and Navarre still pulled a Navarre, with the end results for that game being just like the others in this millennium from 2001, 2002 (duh!), 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. When you watched it, what happened?

The level of disrespect on display when your kind speaks to or of one of their betters is completely out of line. I truly get no pleasure reminding you of Michigan's place in life but I do what must be done because the rules must be followed, there are standard of conduct which will be adhered to and a Michigan fan speaking when not spoken to just can't be permitted if society is to function in a proper manner. I didn't even do a "Hello, my name is..." post after this year's version of Michigan's annual loss to their betters and the thanks I get is unacceptable things such as the above? Not cool on your part, not cool at all.

/2,363
//31-20
///1948


I have four college football games on my bucket list.   Iron Bowl, Army-Navy, Anything at Nebraska, and Michigan Ohio State.

This is exactly why.  As an impartial observer of sports hate, it has to be a winner.
 
2018-05-16 04:26:46 PM  
In other news, Alabama has scheduled the likes of Buckwheat State, Cornpone State, and the University of Farkall next year in football.
 
2018-05-16 05:19:20 PM  
UCF won the championship.  Deal with it.
 
2018-05-16 07:30:31 PM  

WoodyHayes: A system of promotion and relegation would be a blast. As you said it obviously isn't realistic, college football most of all out of any sport I can possibly think of, but it sure would be fun.


Are you kidding? College football would be the easiest sport in the world to do this with, outside of, y'know, soccer. 

We keep 120 teams in Division 1/ FBS. We break them up into 10 conferences of 12 teams. For this to work, we've got to invent two brand new conferences- we shall call them the Southwest Conference, and the Big East. Or something. Names aren't important. Anyway, to form them initially, you take the top 2 schools from each of the current Power 5 conferences, and divide them up. Evenly, but arbitrarily. Big East gets B1G 1, SEC 2. Southwest gets SEC 1, B1G 2. That gives each conference 5 initial members. You also promote the two championship game participants/ Top 2 from the remaining FBS conferences. Yes, each of the top 2 in the MAC will go to one of the Big 2. Finally, to get the top 2 to 12 members, you promote 4, by a completely arbitrary measure. The service academies and Notre Dame? Fine, that works. 

The championship game is the two conference champions. Bottom two in each conference get relegated. 

You then rank all the remaining FBS conferences. There are going to be some hurt feelings, but whatever. Let's say the B1G promotes into the Big East, SEC promotes into the Southwest. Then, you just keep going down the list. Let's say on one side, it goes Sun Belt -> C-USA -> Pac-12 -> SEC -> Southwest. The other is MAC -> American -> ACC -> B1G -> Big East. We now have 10 conferences in FBS. Yes, I got rid of the Mountain West and Big XII. Last in, first out. 

Each conference has a simple schedule- you play the other 11 schools in your conference. To get to 12 regular season games, each school has a designated rival of its own choosing. If your designated rival is in your conference, you play the closest ranked school from a comparable conference. If, say, Ohio State and Michigan were designated rivals, for example, and both were in the Big East, they'd play against, say, Alabama and Auburn, respectively. 

Bottom two in each conference get relegated. Criteria is W/L record, then points against, then points for, then yards against, then yards for. You can't gain an advantage by running up the score, but you can by running down the score. 

Bottom two teams in the bottom two conferences go to 1-AA, semifinalists from 1-AA playoffs move up. Oh, and if you're relegated, you go into the pool on the other side. ACC promotes into B1G, B1G relegates into the Pac-12. That way, you're not seeing the same teams every year. 

It would take about 5 years to fully shake out, but you're telling me that wouldn't be fun? And you can still have bowls if you want, they'll be just as meaningful as they are now.
 
2018-05-16 07:37:21 PM  

Tad_Waxpole: Straight Outta Wells Branch: There's such a chasm between schools that can compete for a national title and those that can't all because of what conference they're in, not because of what they're actually doing.

And this is why I honestly don't understand the point of college football, or at least in crowning a National "Champion".  Why even bother being a fan of some school like Northern Illinois, Akron. or Central Florida if you'll play well year after year but never get a chance to play for the big prize?

You get to go to a meaningless, corporate sponsored exhibition "bowl" game at the end of the year?
Woo-hoo?

Seems like a waste of time to me.


Well, I went to school there. That's why I'm a fan. And it is UCF, not Central Florida!
 
2018-05-16 07:49:16 PM  

Rent Party: I have four college football games on my bucket list.   Iron Bowl, Army-Navy, Anything at Nebraska, and Michigan Ohio State.

This is exactly why.  As an impartial observer of sports hate, it has to be a winner.


I've got some excellent news for you then. I keep hearing from Michigan fans about some fabled "return to glory" that J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh will usher in. I mean, I've yet to see it but I'm sure it'll happen because it is seemingly all I've heard for a good while now. Simple math suggests that Michigan can't lose to their betters for eternity and it might even happen within our lifetimes (or this year as some random cockface named Charles Woodson has promised).

If this is considered hate, imagine the rage of second graders in Columbus having no choice but to come to terms with facing an entire year of dealing with the first loss to Michigan in their entire lives. This isn't hate, what you see are remnants leftover from a bitter childhood that have turned to almost boredom. So yeah, come to Columbus the first game there if they ever beat us again, you'll see hate that'd make Fred Phelps take a step back.

chuggernaught: UCF won the championship.  Deal with it.


I fully get why a Nebraska fan would say that. Advocate for "X" and protest against "Y" all you want and you'll get an ear or two, just don't be silly when doing so. Come on.
 
2018-05-16 07:53:59 PM  

Gonz: Are you kidding? College football would be the easiest sport in the world to do this with, outside of, y'know, soccer.


I think we've had a misinterpretation here. What you described would be great, when I was talking about it not being realistic I was speaking more about the political practicalities that'd make a system of relegation and promotion an impossibility.
 
2018-05-16 10:49:06 PM  

WoodyHayes: I've got some excellent news for you then. I keep hearing from Michigan fans about some fabled "return to glory" that J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh will usher in. I mean, I've yet to see it but I'm sure it'll happen because it is seemingly all I've heard for a good while now. Simple math suggests that Michigan can't lose to their betters for eternity and it might even happen within our lifetimes (or this year as some random cockface named Charles Woodson has promised).

If this is considered hate, imagine the rage of second graders in Columbus having no choice but to come to terms with facing an entire year of dealing with the first loss to Michigan in their entire lives. This isn't hate, what you see are remnants leftover from a bitter childhood that have turned to almost boredom. So yeah, come to Columbus the first game there if they ever beat us again, you'll see hate that'd make Fred Phelps take a step back.


cdn.techinasia.comView Full Size
 
2018-05-17 03:50:16 PM  

Rent Party: Khellendros:  But when their average opponent is the 4-8 East Texas Polytech State, El Paso Annex campus Fighting Stink Bugs, who haven't won a non-conference game in two seasons, they're hard to evaluate on a national stage.

Or,  the bottom of the SEC, or a powerhouse like Mercer...

Boise State kills in bowl games.  3-0 in the Fiesta Bowl.    UCF beat a ranked Memphis team, a ranked South Florida team, and then took down a top 10 Auburn team in the Peach Bowl.

The best course we have right now is an ~8 team playoff with mostly or entirely conference winners.  Even that is highly imperfect, but we're on our way to it.  It won't take long before we're there.  That introduces a new layer of poor determinacy, but it's better than what we have now.

This is correct.


Seriously, you think that Auburn win was a big deal huh? I'm willing to bet most of that Auburn team checked out for the season after they lost the SEC title game. Not to mention their running back that shredded UGA in the regular season was hurt. It wasn't a playoff game, they phoned it in. Sorry, that doesn't make UCF a champion. USF and Memphis aren't that good either. Sorry, I hate Bama as much as I hate the Yankees or Patriots, but they are more legit champs than UCF.

Now if you want to talk about how the 3rd best team in the SEC got into the playoffs, that's a good topic to debate from last year but they did somehow get in and then won their games at least.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report