(05-15-2019 01:11 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(05-15-2019 11:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-15-2019 11:04 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(05-15-2019 10:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-15-2019 10:33 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its still kind of a pretend title. Until the 1990's they literally prefaced the words "national championship" with the word "mythical". Now we have something thats less mythical---but it clearly excludes any possible access by half the teams in the division---so its still an imperfect vestige of the old bowl system that may or may not have #1 and #2 play each other in the final game of the year. Until every team begins the year with a realistic path to the playoff, it wont really be totally legit. Instead of having polls and bowl committees create the playoff---we now have largely eliminated the public sector national polls and gone to a selection committee made up of the same kind of guys that make up bowl committees. Its kinda more of the same. Right now its a bit like the early Bowl Coalition where the Rose Bowl didnt participate (meaning the system could never match #1 and #2 if either were in the Big10 or Pac12). Now, all the power conferences are included, but that still excludes over half the teams in the division. As long has a huge portion of the division is completely frozen out, its cant be considered completely legit FBS champion--regardless of what its defenders say. Virtually every national sports writer alive knows that no G5 has a chance to get into the playoff. It is what it is. Are we really going to use an "agreement" signed with essentially a gun to their head as proof of legitimacy? C'mon. It is what it is.

Until the 1990s, the title was called "mythical" by the media, because it was mythical - the schools themselves did not recognize any process or entity as conferring a national title, even though informally, schools did recognize the AP and Coaches polls as conferring a title, and celebrated them as such.

Since then, a formal agreed-on system has been put in place by all the FBS conferences to crown a champion.

I mean, the CFP agreement is a fact.

If you want to talk informally, there's also no basis for calling the title "pretend", because even if one agrees that the G5 is excluded (I don't, but if), it only excludes those schools and conferences from which the actual national champion *never* comes. I mean, if you look back over the history of college football, the only time a non-P5 has been the best team was BYU, 35 years ago. Before that, you have to go back basically forever, because e.g. when teams like Army won the title in the 1940s, they were a power program of that era.

It's like if the NCAA tournament suddenly excluded the Sun Belt, MAC, MWC, etc. from the tournament. That wouldn't make the tournament a "pretend" title because schools from those schools literally never are the best anyway. No "non-power" school has ever won the NCAA hoops tournament. Ever.

So there's nothing worth mentioning being excluded. Proof of this is your claim that the G5 signed the CFP "with a gun to their head". How on earth could that happen, if the G5 were in fact a legitimate contender for the national title? E.g., the P5 know that Notre Dame is a valid threat and are viewed as such by the public, so they can't hold a gun to ND's head in these negotiations. They know their playoffs would be regarded as invalid by large swathes of the public if ND was somehow excluded.

But the G5 aren't, and thus have no sway in the matter.

So saying the CFP winner is 'pretend' would be like me claiming that the Warriors were a "pretend" basketball world champion because my local club team was excluded from the NBA playoffs. Absurd.

Plus, look at the results of the processes: Is there more doubt in your mind that Clemson was the 'real' best football team last year or UVA was the 'real' best hoops team?

I'm a lot more confident about Clemson, the product of the CFP. I think if we look back, we would see that the CFP produces a champ that passes the smell test at least as often as the NCAA tournament does.

No, it's like proclaiming the Warriors champions after the WCF because a committee of western conference teams declared the East unworthy years before.

That's a very poor analogy, because teams from the East are obviously on an equal footing competitive-wise and every other way with teams from the West. Teams from the Eastern conference have won about as many NBA titles, etc.

The same is totally untrue of the G5 conferences vs the P5 conferences. There's never been a year, ever, where a G5 team has been the best team in the country.

Ever. So you're not excluding anything worth mentioning.

So let's go with a different analogy if you don't like that one. A bunch of teams are in the same grouping. They play by the same rules. They get players the same way. But even if the Marlins go 162-0 they aren't worthy to play in the post-season because the Yankees have more money. That's the system we've set up in FBS.

That analogy fails as well. You have to remember that FBS was never set up to *have* a system to have playoffs that produce a champion. It was actually set up for the *opposite* reason, by conferences that did not want playoffs.

And importantly, if it had been, no way would a good half of the schools that are in FBS have been allowed to join. In leagues where there is big money and prestige involved, the leagues have extremely strict control over membership. In contrast, to be FBS, all you have to do is declare you want to be FBS and then average like 15,000 fans a year for three years, then voila, you are FBS!

Would the NFL or the NBA or MLB ever have that kind of membership situation?

But the reason FBS requirements are so low is precisely because it doesn't entitle you to anything more than merely existing as FBS. If it did - like an equal chance with Notre Dame at a playoff, equal money with Notre Dame, equal time on national TV with Notre Dame, etc. - then of course the entrance requirements would be FAR more stringent.

It is really absurd thinking that schools that never have contributed to the brand value of college football can meet the minimum requirements of being FBS and then say "Hey! We're here! We're FBS just like Alabama and Notre Dame! So we are entitled to everything they are".

I mean, is that nutso or what?