http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/21951014/ucf-knights-rai...
More fuel for not only expanding the playoff, but the NCAA actually sanctioning the playoff so there can no longer be disputes on who the I-A champion is?
UCF also isn't the first school to dispute the national championship. Alabama, for instance, recognizes 1973 as a championship year. The coaches' poll did name the Crimson Tide No. 1 that year, but voting took place before they lost to Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl. The Associated Press voted the Fighting Irish No. 1 and Alabama fourth after the season.
"There should be change," White said. "It's not an equitable system. It's not equitable in terms of how we do the rankings. The BCS era was much more accurate for how teams were ranked, more objective, and I don't think the playoff is adequate to determine a true national champion. You can't subjectively pick only four teams. I think you need to come up with some more objective rankings, which we already had in place with the BCS that allowed computers to have a voice, that allowed the media to have a voice, and the coaches' poll to have a voice so it was a combination of objectivity and subjectivity.
"That model, going back and looking at it, seems to be much more equitable, but then I think you need to have at least eight teams in a playoff if you're really going to call it a true national champion. Absent of that, we're claiming a national championship for the 2017 season."
Comments
Good luck with that...
this makes me cringe in soooo many ways.. sadly it's getting a ton of press and the locals seem super pumped about this. I'm over here like
PS... They're having a Parade this weekend..
I support this. Anything to get the playoffs expanded to 8 teams and eliminate one cheesecake game off the schedule.
You'll never get the I-AA games off of the schedule. Those schools rely too heavily on the money they get for playing that game to run the rest of their athletic department for the year.
And it's not like schools haven't claimed titles for whatever reason. Per Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football_national_championships_in...
Edit: Last part isn't directed at you, so much as just adding on to this post in reply to other posts >.>
Actually you can, just look at the BIG 10. Its called the North Dakota State rule...The BIG 10 passed a rule a couple of years ago that the 2017 football season would be the last year BIG 10 teams would have a 1 AA/FCS team (Richmond, JMU, NDSU) on their schedule. no more "little sisters of the poor". Sports Nation put out an article last year, ohh yeah NDSU beat Iowa again this year.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/8/30/6086977/north-dakota-state-fcs-fbs-STOP-PLAYING-THEM
Hold on...is somebody trying to disparage cheesecake?
I guess it's time to hang that 1918 National Championship banner.
Damn straight!
I think we found a new name for UNCheat (North Carolina Club).
Bud is only the second best D-Coordinator in the illustrious history of VT football.
Whoever ran the D in 1918 only gave up 13 points for the season. That is the GOAT.
/s
Another reason to give him a pass.
I like that we didn't allow a point to a team from a Div 1 school
Five shutouts in seven games.
Camp Humphreys really hurt our SOS that year though.
That W over Belmont Athletic Club made up for it.
I am seriously going to use this the next time I speak to some douchebag from UVA who asks how many national titles VT has.
I am looking forward to the 100-year anniversary commemorative media blitz.
Lol guess that gives Marshall a co-national championship from 1999
Think that was Tulane.
They were '98. Marshall was the following year. Both are applicable o this statement however
I always wanted Marshall to step in for us when we left the Big East. I liked them (especially since they're a thorn in WVU's side).
Yeaaaaaa. Was totally behind UCF being pissed about the playoffs snub until this. Argue that you deserved it more than Bama.... argue for an expanded playoff that would have included you.... but you can't just assume that had you been included you would have won it all. With that line of thinking, every team that was ranked 3-5 after the regular season of the BCS era should go ahead and hang a banner.
In other words any team can claim a national title in football (D-1A) and it's basically valid.
I understand that they CAN claim a title. As wikipedia says, no one's going to walk in and tear the thing down (on second thought, alabama fans would/will definitely do that). I personally think it's pretty dumb to hang the banner anyways just because you're (maybe rightfully) upset you got left out of the widely accepted method of determining the champion.
I disagree that it's the best system though. Playoffs don't determine the best team that often in any sport. That's what makes the NCAA Tournament so much fun. The best team is usually determined in the regular season, the playoffs are just more fun.
You won't get an argument on that from me. I never said I believe it's the best system, only that it's the widely accepted system.
To your point almost anyone would say Super Bowl 42 was not won by the "best" team, but it's not like anyone disputes who has a 'claim' to the championship.
As a fan of Washington Nats and Caps, I accept your definition of best team.
Except every team that was ranked 3-5 was NOT undefeated. I think that is their rationale more than beating Auburn who beat both UGA and Bama.
FIFY
Bama has done this in the past, so why not? They "claim" titles in years they lost their bowl game. Good for UCF
Put UCF down for another 0-12 season next season...it obviously won't happen but it would be pretty funny
I'm going to enjoy the irony when bammer fans are in an uproar 2 weeks from now because someone is claiming a fake title in a year they won it all.
They ain't played nobody Paaawwwlllll!
I do think UCF should have been in the #4 slot instead of Bama. And I think they proved it with the win vs Auburn (admittedly, I didn't watch the game, as I was skiing at the time, so I have no idea how ugly/fluky it might have been, but either way, they beat Auburn. Bama didn't.)
So, I guess, good for them.
I can't agree but can respect your point.
Bama didn't have a great win on their schedule but UCF played nobody... They played a bad P5 team during the season, and had a second P5 game cancelled. The best win they had was in their championship game versus Memphis (who already had a couple of losses).
Should they have been in a playoff of eight, 100%. In a playoff of the top 4, no based on their schedule. Their schedule was probably weaker than that of Wisconsin and the committee was having a hard time debating if they would have been in if they had won the B1G championship.
Both of Memphis's losses prior to bowl season came from UCF.
Bama didn't have a great win on their schedule, but they did lose to Auburn, who beat two playoff teams in total, but in turn lost of UCF, who finished the season undefeated.
Should rename the college football playoff to the 'Power 5 College Football Playoff', until a G5 school makes the cut. In my opinion, if you are a D1 program and finish undefeated and win your conference championship, you deserve a shot in the playoff.
I think the inevitable 8 team playoff will please the masses, assuming the spaces are divvied up rationally. Allot 1 space to each p5 conference champion, allot the last 3 spaces to undefeated conference champions from the G5 if they exist, rounded out by the best 'at-large' teams from either P5/G5, whatever order the rankings say.
With that in mind, I think UCF has a fair point the CFBP committee rankings. The committee releases their own rankings, hopefully not entirely devoid of consideration for the BCS like metrics. Some consistency here would be nice, as you need more than gut feeling to pick the top 4 teams. Much like in modern business, it would seem the CFBP committee cherry picks what metrics are important to support their decision, when it is inevitably questioned.
Kind of hard to justify counting UCF's win over Auburn and not counting Alabama's win over Clemson from the same day.
It's all amidst playing captain hindsight, realistically both teams got their best win of the season last weekend. It's just particularly poignant that it was Auburn that UCF was able to cap an undefeated season against, when Auburn had knocked off two playoff bound teams.
If we still had the BCS, UCF would have finished at #9. Them being undefeated is a great story, but as a whole, they weren't deserving of a playoff spot.
That makes sense, considering they sit at a similar ranking in the AP/Coaches polls. BCS rankings were a weighted algorithm after all.
My ideal playoff would be an 8 team playoff, based on a BCS style ranking system. The first 5 spots would go to conference champions, first to the highest rated undefeated conference champions (If more than 5 teams finish as undefeated champions, then they get in over At large teams, if more than 8, the 8 highest ranked undefeated champions get in), and then to the highest conference champions with 1 or more losses, the other 3 spots would go to at large teams which would be the only avenue to the playoffs for independent teams like Notre Dame, and the playoff would be seeded by ranking. So for example in the highly chaotic year of 2007, the conference champions were (highest rated/best record for conferences with co-champions):
ACC: Virginia Tech #3
BE: West Virginia #9
B10: Ohio State #1
B12: Oklahoma #4
CUSA: UCF
MAC: Central Michigan
MW: BYU #17
P10: USC #7
SEC: LSU #2
Sun: Florida Atlantic/Troy
WAC: Hawaii #10
So the Teams making the playoff for that year would have been:
C1 Hawaii (12-0, WAC Champion, BCS #10)
C2 Ohio State (11-1, B10 Champion, BCS #1)
C3 LSU (11-2, SEC Champion, BCS #2)
C4 Virginia Tech (11-2, ACC Champion BCS #3)
C5 Oklahoma (11-2, B12 Champion, BCS #4)
A1 Georgia (10-2, BCS #5)
A2 Missouri (11-2, BCS #6)
A3 USC (10-2, P10 Champion, BCS #7)
The first round would have been #1 Ohio State vs. #10 Hawaii, #2 LSU vs. #7 USC, #3 Virginia Tech vs. #6 Missouri, & #4 Oklahoma vs. #5Georgia.
I wouldn't say that UCF played nobody. They beat Memphis twice and USF once. Both teams were ranked by the AP and Coaches at the end of the season, and lost a combined 2 games to teams other than the Knights. (USF to Houston, and Memphis to Iowa State in the bowl game). After seeing UCF beat Auburn (who did beat both Bama and Georgia this year) in the bowl game, I think it solidified for me that they deserved to be in the playoff.
I love this. UCF should've been in over bama, and the committee intentionally kept them out. UCF should claim a National Champion, and I hope AP writers give it to them.
They played one power 5 team during their season my friend. I wish the playoff was bigger so they would get a shot, but my goodness, they were not deserving of a top 4 ranking.
They had more top 25 wins than Wisconsin who was given a chance to play their way in.
To be fair, they scheduled a second P5 team (GT), which got cancelled due to the hurricane.
This is true.
Leg for Larissa Oleynik
Well we beat OSU in 2014 when they won the national championship...if only ECU, Ga Tech, Miami, Pitt, Wake Forest and BC didn't beat us. I would have gladly lost to OSU if it meant beating all of those other teams.
I love that UCF is doing this, they were overlooked and if Bama can claim bogus titles where they were ranked 20th, UCF can sure as hell claim years they want undefeated...but pining for the BCS days is just asinine. It was neither fair nor objective and would have screwed UCF over just as much (in fact, simulated BCS rankings have them at 9th)
Simulated BCS rankings also picked the same 4 for the playoff. I also like that they are doing it, it's petty and hilarious and drumming up tons of conversation.
I saw those rankings, but are those just the computer averages, or are they factoring in the polls as well?
They were fully simulated BCS rankings including polls. It was close between Bama and Ohio St though, like crazy close.
Did they use the AP poll to replace the no-longer-existing Harris poll?
Here is the tweet, it has computers listed below, they do pretty regular simulated BCS rankings. They mention the Harris poll in their bio on twitter but not explicitly stated on this graphic.
yes
http://www.colleyrankings.com/foot2017/bcsLike/bcsLike14.html
UCF will pay their coaching staff the national championship bonuses. Baller move.
Wow, how much is that? I imagine that is a good sized bonus for a G5 team.
Gotta do something with that buyout money
That is a Baller move.
I think that may be a joke. As in they will pay the bonus to all coaches currently on staff (there are none, Frost done took 'em)
You and I think alike.
And the coaches are getting national championship bonuses tooedit: to slow...*drinks*
Troll on UCF. I love it.
If UCF can win a National Championship, we surely can!
(Ducks and Covers)
We already did. See above.
Seems legit, go for it
Fuck the $EC, I support this PAWWWL
Personally, I would have waited until one of the minor championship selectors chose UCF (if they did). That would have given them the slightest amount of legitimacy.
Also, Dan Le Batard was pushing HARD for this on his program yesterday.
Supposedly there is one that it looks like might actually name them a co-champion but obviously wont know for a week.
I love it, this is going to be at least as legit as a few of Bama's, or even Pitt's title claims, why should newer younger programs not copy a long established precedent?
This is a sport defined in almost every way by lurching from one extreme of absurdity to another, and in 1000 years it will have all crumbled to dust and myth, whats one more championship banner on the pile?
If UNC grads can claim that they have degrees, why can't UCF claim a national title?
Great post on /r/CFB about how UCF does have a legitimate claim to the national title
And in the vein of what's good for the goose is good for the gander:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/21954302/ucf-not-first-s...