Did we act like whiny sore winner [hundinnen ] after winning the Rose Bowl like UCF fans have been doing?

[MAcFroggy]

I am very glad that TCU and CDC did not act like this after the Rose Bowl. As fans we were able to just enjoy our win and know that we had a perfect season. We did not go around justifying that we thought we should claim a [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ] national championship. We were able to fully enjoy what our team had done. UCF fans are now being forced to deal with all of this bullcrap.

I am 100% against UCF claiming this title just like I am 100% against TCU claiming the 2010 title. The BCS system in place at the time and the CFP system in place now did not make us champions just like it did not crown UCF champions. It sucks. Better luck next year.

I do not want some [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ] computer formula national championship. I have always said TCU should not claim the 1935 national championship because it is fake, but at least there was not really a system in place that was agreed to by the different conferences. Back then it was a total free for all. However, in modern college football every FBS single conference has agreed to this CFP process.

 

[Wexahu]

The new AAC is better top-to-bottom than the MWC ever was. The highs may not be quite as high but are very comparable (TCU/ Utah vs. UCF/ USF/ Good Memphis or Houston) and there is a much more tolerable middle (Air Force? SDSU? vs. Average Memphis/ Average Houston/ Navy clownball).

Not sure I agree but you make a decent point. What decent P5 schools did any AAC team beat this year? Just at a glance, Memphis barely beat a very average UCLA team at home. USF barely beat Tech in the Bowl game. Houston beat Tech and Arizona.

That's it I think. I mean, outside of UCF's win over Auburn in the Bowl game, the whole conference didn't beat one what I would call anywhere above-average P5 team all year, and the average ones they beat they barely won, primarily in home games.

 

[Pharm Frog]

First of all, I disagree with you but there's no way to prove it so let's just agree to disagree. Winning three games is WAY harder than winning one.

I thought the "proof" was that they didn't win it. Seems to be irrelevant as to whether or not they were allowed the opportunity. And I disagree with your contention that it's WAY harder to win three games than win one. I would agree that it would be WAY harder to win three games at the same time but typically games are played one at a time and in an eight-team tournament, someone has to win three.

 

[MAcFroggy]

Not sure I agree but you make a decent point. What decent P5 schools did any AAC team beat this year? Just at a glance, Memphis barely beat a very average UCLA team at home. USF barely beat Tech in the Bowl game. Houston beat Tech and Arizona.

That's it I think. I mean, outside of UCF's win over Auburn in the Bowl game, the whole conference didn't beat one what I would call anywhere above-average P5 team all year, and the average ones they beat they barely won, primarily in home games.

Tech actually beat Houston this year.

The AAC did very poorly in non conference games this year: This is the record against P5 conferences:

Acc: 0-3
Big 10: 2-1
Big 12: 0-5
Pac 12: 2-0
SEC: 0-1
Notre Dame: 0-2

That is a total record of 4-12. The wins were against Arizona who finished the season 7-6 (UH), Illinois who finished the season 2-10 (USF), UCLA who finished the season 6-7 (Memphis), and Maryland who finished the season 4-8 (UCF).

That is a total of one conference win against a P5 team with a winning record and that team finished the season 7-6. UCF had a great season, but to even try to compare their schedule to the CFP participants is crazy.

 

[Uncle_Frog]

Tech actually beat Houston this year.

The AAC did very poorly in non conference games this year: This is the record against P5 conferences:

Acc: 0-3
Big 10: 2-1
Big 12: 0-5
Pac 12: 2-0
SEC: 0-1
Notre Dame: 0-2

That is a total record of 4-12. The wins were against Arizona who finished the season 7-6 (UH), Illinois who finished the season 2-10 (USF), UCLA who finished the season 6-7 (Memphis), and Maryland who finished the season 4-8 (UCF).

That is a total of one conference win against a P5 team with a winning record and that team finished the season 7-6. UCF had a great season, but to even try to compare their schedule to the CFP participants is crazy.

I agree with this and under the current format they shouldn't have gotten in. I think where I am miffed is if the committee were deciding an 8 team playoff they would have missed it by 4 spots and that's pretty ridiculous.

I just hope someday there is an 8 team playoff and it isn't decided by a biased committee.

 

[Chongo94]

Per the actual original point of this thread, I just don't understand why it's a big deal and annoys people so much....people who aren't even associated with that school. People need to relax a bit.

You've lived in Texas, you should be used to way way WAY more annoying and stupid behavior from Aggies.

 

[dawg]

UCF, IMHO, has every right to claim an MNC this season. Hell, Oklahoma State just this past offseason claimed a MNC for 1945, a season in which they played in the Missouri Valley Conference. Nevermind that the 1945 season also featured the undefeated Army team of "Mr. Inside and Mr Outside," one of the most storied teams of all-time.

The difference between UCF and us after the Rose Bowl is the BCS title game that season pitted two undefeated teams. There was an undefeated major conference champion. There isn't one this year. UCF is the only FBS team to finish this season undefeated, and they defeated the team that defeated both the CFP finalists (and no secsecsec [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ] about "Auburn didn't want to be there." There was a game, a marquee bowl game, both teams showed up, and UCF beat them).

 

[MAcFroggy]

Per the actual original point of this thread, I just don't understand why it's a big deal and annoys people so much....people who aren't even associated with that school. People need to relax a bit.

You've lived in Texas, you should be used to way way WAY more annoying and stupid behavior from Aggies.

I find it annoying as a fan of college football because everybody knew the rules before the season started. 4 teams make the playoff based on SOS, conference championships, games against common opponents, and head to head competition. It is not like UCF was number 5 or number 6. The committee did not even think they were a top 10 team based on those elements. That shows me a lot. The committee goes pretty in depth looking at how games are won and lost, and how teams look with various advanced stats. They did not even think they were a top 10 team.

The one thing your program has control of before the season starts is SOS. UCF intentionally and willingly scheduled a bad non-conference schedule. It is no different than what Baylor has done in the past. They played a bad sunbelt team, a bad B1G team, and an FCS school. They intentionally scheduled a bad non-conference schedule and now they complain that they got left out despite knowing that SOS is one of the main factors the committee looks at. They can not make the claim the they thought FIU, Maryland, or Maine would be great. None of those schools are ever good. It is not like Alabama with FSU. Alabama went out and scheduled a top 5 program expecting them to be a top 5 team. Instead they got a 6-6 team.

It just takes away from the college football season when there is some school in the corner complaining about the results despite knowing the rules.

 

[Zubaz]

The committee did not even think they were a top 10 team based on those elements. That shows me a lot. The committee goes pretty in depth looking at how games are won and lost, and how teams look with various advanced stats. They did not even think they were a top 10 team.

So now we're FOR the committee's ability to pick the four best teams? I'm trying to keep up here.

Besides, the committee names the participants in the CFP, but the CFP is not the NCAA, it's a separate entity. The CFP being only one of the methods by which national titles are recognized in the FBS. The other major selector is the AP, which has absolutely nothing to do with the CFP and is free to name its own champion (as it did in 2003 when it broke with the BCS and named USC the AP National Champion). Now, in practice it almost assuredly won't do that in the playoff era, as the CFP winner will won back-to-back games against Top 4 teams, but it is possible. So we know that there's at least one other recognized title beyond the CFP.

Similarly, there are smaller, less recognized systems that name national champions. We generally ignore these because pretty much everyone only recognizes the AP and the Coaches poll / CFP as the "major" selectors, but they do exist (Of note, TCU was named NC by one of those systems in 2010, we just don't claim it as a national title).

So really, who cares. They aren't claiming to be CFP or AP National champions, they have the best record in college football, and a minor selector very well may name them national champs. If they want to claim that as a national title, let them.

 

[flyfishingfrog]

I'd have to see who they scheduled first, but their odds wouldn't be good at all. Call it less than 5%. The odds would obviously be 100% if they were required to go. I'd put the odds of a G5 winning 2 games at somewhere between 5-10%. I'd put their odds of winning 3 games at somewhere between 0-2%. I don't know, what are the odds of a team winning 2 and/or 3 straight games in which they are double-digit underdogs?

Now, I think going into a season the odds of an Alabama or Ohio State winning the title would be measurably higher if there were an 8-team playoff than a 4-team playoff. I'd feel a lot more comfortable making that bet because I'd be much more sure about their ability to just get into the playoff. I'd worry much more about that than i'd worry about their ability to win a quarterfinal game.

So basically you think the odds were 20:1 that we could have beat one of the remaining 6 of top 8 teams in 2010 after we beat wisky in the Rose Bowl?

 

[flyfishingfrog]

Everyone else's

As opposed to now? Where a small group of schools make it every year already?

Give it up - your logic is flawed with no way to demonstrate how having more teams means less options for winners when the teams that you are talking about get in 50-100% already

 

[Chongo94]

I find it annoying as a fan of college football because everybody knew the rules before the season started. 4 teams make the playoff based on SOS, conference championships, games against common opponents, and head to head competition. It is not like UCF was number 5 or number 6. The committee did not even think they were a top 10 team based on those elements. That shows me a lot. The committee goes pretty in depth looking at how games are won and lost, and how teams look with various advanced stats. They did not even think they were a top 10 team.

The one thing your program has control of before the season starts is SOS. UCF intentionally and willingly scheduled a bad non-conference schedule. It is no different than what Baylor has done in the past. They played a bad sunbelt team, a bad B1G team, and an FCS school. They intentionally scheduled a bad non-conference schedule and now they complain that they got left out despite knowing that SOS is one of the main factors the committee looks at. They can not make the claim the they thought FIU, Maryland, or Maine would be great. None of those schools are ever good. It is not like Alabama with FSU. Alabama went out and scheduled a top 5 program expecting them to be a top 5 team. Instead they got a 6-6 team.

It just takes away from the college football season when there is some school in the corner complaining about the results despite knowing the rules.

Tone down the caffeine and relax a little...it's not a huge deal.

 

[Wexahu]

I find it annoying as a fan of college football because everybody knew the rules before the season started. 4 teams make the playoff based on SOS, conference championships, games against common opponents, and head to head competition. It is not like UCF was number 5 or number 6. The committee did not even think they were a top 10 team based on those elements. That shows me a lot. The committee goes pretty in depth looking at how games are won and lost, and how teams look with various advanced stats. They did not even think they were a top 10 team.

The one thing your program has control of before the season starts is SOS. UCF intentionally and willingly scheduled a bad non-conference schedule. It is no different than what Baylor has done in the past. They played a bad sunbelt team, a bad B1G team, and an FCS school. They intentionally scheduled a bad non-conference schedule and now they complain that they got left out despite knowing that SOS is one of the main factors the committee looks at. They can not make the claim the they thought FIU, Maryland, or Maine would be great. None of those schools are ever good. It is not like Alabama with FSU. Alabama went out and scheduled a top 5 program expecting them to be a top 5 team. Instead they got a 6-6 team.

It just takes away from the college football season when there is some school in the corner complaining about the results despite knowing the rules.

The 2nd paragraph is spot on. If I'm a G5 program and I really want to make the playoffs, I offer to go to any teams place and play them there. That can happen if they want it to. Yes, it'll be really hard to win on the road against elite programs and they'd probably get their asses kicked quite often, but guess what, that's what every P5 team has to do from time to time each year. We had to go to Norman. Penn State had to go to Ohio State. So did Oklahoma. Auburn had to go to LSU and Clemson. A G5 does that and wins those games, they'd absolutely have a claim to a playoff spot just like any P5 team would. Meanwhile, UCF plays at Maryland, Cincinnati, Navy, SMU and Temple....that's their road games. Lots of hostile environments there, huh? National Championship banner? Give me a break. It just reeks of avoiding the fight, letting all the big boys slug it out and beat each other up, and then coming out from behind the couch claiming you're the baddest guy on the block when all the dust settles.

 

[CountryFrog]

I would be willing to bet significant money that either 2004 Utah, 2006 Boise State, 2008 Utah (beat Bama btw), 2009 Boise State, 2009 TCU, 2010 TCU, 2015 Houston, or 2017 UCF would have been able to win it all.

That's 8 teams that would have had a legit shot in the last 14 years so I'm certain you would see more than one in your lifetime.

Wrong! They actually have a better chance under the current format where they weren't even allowed into the playoff than a system that would allow them in.

 

[CountryFrog]

The major problem with the logic of "G5 teams just need to beef up their schedules with 3 or 4 really good P5 teams to have a chance at the playoff" is that you don't get to make your schedule after summer workouts when you know that you'll have a really good team.

A G5 team would either have to know 8-10 years in advance when they're going to have a great team and then start working to load up their schedule or they would just have to load the schedule up every single year in preparation for those one or two special seasons. Both of those things are impossible to expect of any program.

Then, of course, even if you tried to implement either strategy you'd also have to accurately project which P5 teams will be really good 8 years in advance. AND those teams have to have openings that match yours and agree to play you.

So while it's easy to tell G5 teams to go schedule better teams, it's a totally implausible request in reality.

 

[gohornedfrogs]

I’m tired of hearing the SEC wasn’t motivated to play bowl games. If they don’t want to play, then the bowls should find another quality team that does want to play.

 

[Jet Set Frog]

I’m tired of hearing the SEC wasn’t motivated to play bowl games. If they don’t want to play, then the bowls should find another quality team that does want to play.

That would work if they didn't wait until AFTER they lost to say they didn't want to be there.

 

[LSU Game Attendee]

I don't think UCF's MNC claim is legitimate, but I appreciate the noise Danny White is making to expand the playoff to eight teams.

 

[Pharm Frog]

I’m tired of hearing the SEC wasn’t motivated to play bowl games. If they don’t want to play, then the bowls should find another quality team that does want to play.

Agree. Need to sever all non-CFP bowl tie in’s for the SEC immediately. If you are an SEC team that does not make the invitational tourney, enjoy the holiday season and we’ll see you at spring practice

 

[Wexahu]

The major problem with the logic of "G5 teams just need to beef up their schedules with 3 or 4 really good P5 teams to have a chance at the playoff" is that you don't get to make your schedule after summer workouts when you know that you'll have a really good team.

A G5 team would either have to know 8-10 years in advance when they're going to have a great team and then start working to load up their schedule or they would just have to load the schedule up every single year in preparation for those one or two special seasons. Both of those things are impossible to expect of any program.

Then, of course, even if you tried to implement either strategy you'd also have to accurately project which P5 teams will be really good 8 years in advance. AND those teams have to have openings that match yours and agree to play you.

So while it's easy to tell G5 teams to go schedule better teams, it's a totally implausible request in reality.

Yes, you're right, you can't make a schedule up at the last minute based on how good a team you might have, that would be impossible. But there's a reason why K-State played a bunch of nobodies in OOC back in the early Snyder years and Baylor played nobody in the Briles' era. It was a deliberate attempt to make the schedule as easy as possible to ensure easy wins and Bowl eligibility. Dodging competition would be another word for it. And for an AAC school like UCF who already plays a weak conference schedule relative to every P5 school out there, if they really want to compete for national championships they should have drastically changed their scheduling philosophy years ago. This playoff system has been in place for 4 years now and I see that they haven't scheduled any games further than 2020 so the idea that you have to know 8-10 years in advance isn't valid. I see they are scheduling the Georgia Tech and North Carolina types too and no Clemsons, Florida States, Penn States, Ohio States.

What they really want is to kind of dodge the really good teams but still get all the fruits everyone else does. Lame.