(01-04-2018 12:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 10:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 09:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 07:33 PM)UCFBS Wrote:  Here's the 1-2 reality ...

1) No UCF fan believes UCF should have been top 4 pre-bowl, but #12 was a direct insult

2) UCF President Dr. Hitt agreed to the "National Championship" as a direct result of the CFP's post-Peach Bowl comments "re-justifying" UCF's #12 ranking

Most UCF fans thought #6-9 pre-Peach. Even BCS had UCF #7 -- #3 for computer, #10 in AP. Putting UCF #18, then #14, and even considering a 4 loss team head of UCF at #12, before they finally put UCF #12, was exactly what Scott Frost meant by, "They didn't want to rank UCF too high, in case more losses came."

Although UCF AD Danny White jokingly mouthed the "National Championship" claim on TV, it was UCF's President Dr. Hitt that caused this to really go forward. Dr. Hitt, after hearing the CFP head honcho directly say UCF deserved its #12 ranking, and should basically be thankful they got the Peach Bowl, further insinuating UCF wouldn't even make a 8 team playoff, was beyond pissed off.

Dr. Hitt is a soft-spoken and very witty man. He does do things lightly. You really have to piss him off before he'll go off on you to make a point. And now he is ...

Everyone at UCF is ... and UCF is big, really, really freak'n big, and only growing in the nation's 3rd most populous state. UCF may be 100,000+ students projected by 2030, with thousands of acres set aside that wraps from the east side and down towards Lake Nona and the airport.

"The University of Central Florida, or UCF, is an American public state university in Orlando, Florida. It is the largest university in the United States by undergraduate enrollment,[8] as well as the largest by enrollment at a single campus.[3]"

Yup. The CFP played this completely wrong. Should have just admitted they blew it and "promised" to reassess the way they judge G5's (in other words, do nothing different going forward). Instead--they brainlessly insisted they were right---when everyone in the audience knows they were not. Now they have just exposed themselves to be the arrogant buffoons they are really are and they are rightfully getting called out for it. I guess they just couldnt hide their true nature.

It's amazing that UCF fans think that because UCF beat a 3-loss Auburn team that this means the committee really did blow it and they deserved a spot in the top 4, the playoffs.

Then, many of these same UCF fans make another Snake River Canyon leap and say that because UCF deserved to be in the playoffs but wasn't invited this means that beating this same 3-loss Auburn team, a team absolutely nobody thought belonged in the playoffs, means that they not only deserved to be in the playoffs but are in fact National Champions, even though they did not win the two playoff games against top-4 teams that would be needed to claim that!

It's the most bizarro sequence of logic ever posted to this board.

I mean, imagine if in the NFC divisional playoffs, the Rams are playing the Eagles, and on the last play of the game a critical call goes against the Rams and as a result the Eagles win the game. The NFL then issues a statement saying yes, the call was wrong and the Rams should have won the game, but the game results are final and so the Eagles still advance to the NFC title game not the Rams.

Would it be reasonable for Rams fans to say "we should have been in the NFC title game but were robbed of it, therefore we are declaring ourselves Super Bowl Champions!" even though they didn't actually play and win either the NFC title game or Super Bowl?

It would beggar belief. But that's what we have going on here from some people.

Heck, we actually have an NFL precedent for that: Millions of Raiders fans will forever believe that the Tuck Rule call robbed them of a victory over New England in the 2001 divisional playoffs. But while I've heard hundreds of them say over the years that this means the Raiders, not the Patriots, should have advanced to the AFC title game, I've never heard a single one claim that this means the Raiders actually deserve to be called the Super Bowl Champions for that year.

Because even dumb Raiders fans know that well, even if they had advanced to the AFC title game like they think they should have, that by no means guarantees they would have actually won the AFC title game, and then the Super Bowl.

Whats amazing is your are entirely missing the point. This isnt like the committee had them ranked #6 and #7. The committee had a 3 loss Auburn ranked twice as high as an undefeated UCF. There was absolutely ZERO reason for that. NONE. ZIP. Tell me which UCF loss that indicated Auburn was twice as good. I'll wait you figure it out. While your figuring it out, I'll just tell everyone else. The committee assumed that a 3-loss SEC team MUST be twice as good as a G5---because their bias tells them it must be so. They believe that even though #18 Houston beat #9 Florida St. They still believe that even though a UCF ranked in the high teens knocked off a top ten Baylor. They just keep making the same mistake over, and over, and over, and over again. And then you defend it--as if there is no track record of it being wrong.

I really dont know what else to say. When a model is constantly proven wrong--it means the model doesnt work.

As for the rest of this silliness you posted--there would be no reason for the Rams or any other NFL team to declare themselves champion. If they finished an entire season and post season undefeated---the NFL (and every other sport 20th century sport) has the good sense to declare them champion. Its only college football that still uses ice skating judges and chicken blood to determine their champion.

WTF? You are missing MY point. I wasn't addressing those who are debating the technical details of the current playoff model. I was addressing those UCF fans - and there are many - who are saying UCF is justified in claiming a "national championship" as a result of being excluded from the playoffs and then beating Auburn in the Sugar Bowl.

That is a ridiculous idea, and that was what i was addressing.

As for the CFP rankings, as i said, I thought they ranked UCF a little low. Should have been around #9. Wasn't the only example, I thought Notre Dame was ranked low, and Auburn a little too high (they were also ranked ahead of several two-loss Power teams, including PAC champ USC). But why keep yammering about these minor quibbles? Who cares if UCF should have been #9 and Auburn #11 as they probably should have been? They play in the Peach Bowl anyway, and no there is no 'precedent' set that matters in the future.

And there's no silliness, my analogy is spot-on: It doesn't matter what the Rams record was going in to the playoff game, they could have been 9-7 or 16-0, what matters is the Rams were 'robbed' of a spot in the Final 4, just like UCF claims it was robbed of a spot in the Final 4 (they weren't, but that's the claim).

But even if you are robbed of a spot in the Final 4 doesn't mean you can claim that you are champions, as if you not only got in but then won it, which you didn't.