Governor Scott has declared UCF as national champions

Zambo

Founding Member
Poo Flinger
Lifetime Member
Jun 12, 2014
12,898
32,444
Founding Member
Imagine a scenario, easily could happen, where Auburn doesn't beat Bama and the SECCG is dwags v gumps. 1 vs 2. Suppose the loser of the SECCG only falls to 4 in the rankings. The very next game would be a rematch. Depending on the SEC schedule, it could possibly be the 3rd time the two teams have played in a single season.

The real fly in the ointment with this whole thing is that the obvious best team in the land wasn't playing in a championship game. So basically they had a bye week since none of the other possible suitors to the 4th spot would qualify for the playoff according to the opinions of many. That is just a bogus setup.

If you want a real playoff, IMO the best way to do it is to get rid of the conference championship games and replace them with the first round of an 8 team playoff. Whoa whoa whoa you say! There's too much money at stake, they'll never go for it. Well I think there would be a hell of a lot of money generated by an extra round of playoffs so the answer is to make sure that money gets to the people who could say no. For years we determined the conference champions without divisions and playoffs. I think it would be better to have more of a round robin SEC schedule than playing only the east or west every year with a couple of crossover games. There would never be a year when a weak-ass team from one division catches lightning in a bottle in the CG and wins the conference.

The the 5 highest ranked conference champs and 3 wild cards make up the first round of the playoff. No more than 2 teams per conference. This year the final regular season top 10 was
1 Clemson
2 Auburn
3 Ok
4 Wisky
5 Bama
6 Dwags
7 Miami
8 Ohio St
9 Penn St
10 USC

I'd get rid of Dwags and Pedos since they are 3rd best in their conference, and seed the remaining 8 teams
Clemson v USC
Barn v OSU
OK v Miami
Wisky v Bama

As for UCF I would also put a note that any conference champ in the top ten gets in before a second place team from another conference, which they didn't do. But it does open the door for the occasional good team like Boise St or TCU to crash the party.

I would much rather watch those four games than what the B12 put together this year and damn sure before the meaningless Pac12 game. Heck the SECCG was pretty much meaningless with the best team in the country sitting at home watching.
 

Zambo

Founding Member
Poo Flinger
Lifetime Member
Jun 12, 2014
12,898
32,444
Founding Member
Pretty easy vote. One team has 1 loss and the other has 2. There has to be some kind of judging or voting. Even in a 68 team college basketball tournament/ playoff there's a freakin committee.
Here's the conundrum with your "one team has one loss and the other team has 2 losses" soda straw view of the system: There is a team with zero losses in the thread title that didn't get to the playoff.

So which is it? The team with the least losses goes to the playoff? Or is the team with the best wins? Hmmmm, I guess it all depends on which team you're arguing against. Pretty hard to maintain intellectual honesty when you claim that team x should go ahead of team y because y has two losses but they should also go ahead of undefeated team z because team z doesn't have enough good wins. Obviously what gets overlooked in such mental masturbation is the fact that team y with two losses BEAT BOTH OF THE TEAMS WHO ARE IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME.
 

t-gator

Founding Member
too sexy for my shirt
Lifetime Member
Jun 13, 2014
15,670
17,973
Founding Member
Here's the conundrum with your "one team has one loss and the other team has 2 losses" soda straw view of the system: There is a team with zero losses in the thread title that didn't get to the playoff.

So which is it? The team with the least losses goes to the playoff? Or is the team with the best wins? Hmmmm, I guess it all depends on which team you're arguing against. Pretty hard to maintain intellectual honesty when you claim that team x should go ahead of team y because y has two losses but they should also go ahead of undefeated team z because team z doesn't have enough good wins. Obviously what gets overlooked in such mental masturbation is the fact that team y with two losses BEAT BOTH OF THE TEAMS WHO ARE IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME.
Holy crap zambo. There's a huge difference in a zero loss team that didn't play one freakin power 5 team all year than a one loss team who plays in the sec west. It's pretty simple, bama and auburn played a very similar schedule and bama had one loss and auburn had 2. You can say the same about ohio State. They play a power 5 schedule, one team has 1 loss the other has 2. In ohio state's case one of their losses was a curb stomping from an awful team.
 

Zambo

Founding Member
Poo Flinger
Lifetime Member
Jun 12, 2014
12,898
32,444
Founding Member
Somehow you must think I’m interested in debating who the better team is. I’m not.
 

NVGator

Founding Member
Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 11, 2014
14,903
20,210
Founding Member
Imagine a scenario, easily could happen, where Auburn doesn't beat Bama and the SECCG is dwags v gumps. 1 vs 2. Suppose the loser of the SECCG only falls to 4 in the rankings. The very next game would be a rematch. Depending on the SEC schedule, it could possibly be the 3rd time the two teams have played in a single season.

The real fly in the ointment with this whole thing is that the obvious best team in the land wasn't playing in a championship game. So basically they had a bye week since none of the other possible suitors to the 4th spot would qualify for the playoff according to the opinions of many. That is just a bogus setup.

If you want a real playoff, IMO the best way to do it is to get rid of the conference championship games and replace them with the first round of an 8 team playoff. Whoa whoa whoa you say! There's too much money at stake, they'll never go for it. Well I think there would be a hell of a lot of money generated by an extra round of playoffs so the answer is to make sure that money gets to the people who could say no. For years we determined the conference champions without divisions and playoffs. I think it would be better to have more of a round robin SEC schedule than playing only the east or west every year with a couple of crossover games. There would never be a year when a weak-ass team from one division catches lightning in a bottle in the CG and wins the conference.

The the 5 highest ranked conference champs and 3 wild cards make up the first round of the playoff. No more than 2 teams per conference. This year the final regular season top 10 was
1 Clemson
2 Auburn
3 Ok
4 Wisky
5 Bama
6 Dwags
7 Miami
8 Ohio St
9 Penn St
10 USC

I'd get rid of Dwags and Pedos since they are 3rd best in their conference, and seed the remaining 8 teams
Clemson v USC
Barn v OSU
OK v Miami
Wisky v Bama

As for UCF I would also put a note that any conference champ in the top ten gets in before a second place team from another conference, which they didn't do. But it does open the door for the occasional good team like Boise St or TCU to crash the party.

I would much rather watch those four games than what the B12 put together this year and damn sure before the meaningless Pac12 game. Heck the SECCG was pretty much meaningless with the best team in the country sitting at home watching.
Nailed it. The new era for college football and the College Football Playoffs will be to do away with the Conference Championship Games. Championship Games changed the landscape for college football in the 90s. Now, the Playoffs will take priority and define what the landscape will be which won't be Championship games.

Think about this, teams with great records could lose the Championship Game and not be in the Playoffs. Could you imagine in Bama went through the entire season undefeated only to lose the SECCG and not be in the Playoffs?
 

NVGator

Founding Member
Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 11, 2014
14,903
20,210
Founding Member
Here's the conundrum with your "one team has one loss and the other team has 2 losses" soda straw view of the system: There is a team with zero losses in the thread title that didn't get to the playoff.

So which is it? The team with the least losses goes to the playoff? Or is the team with the best wins? Hmmmm, I guess it all depends on which team you're arguing against. Pretty hard to maintain intellectual honesty when you claim that team x should go ahead of team y because y has two losses but they should also go ahead of undefeated team z because team z doesn't have enough good wins. Obviously what gets overlooked in such mental masturbation is the fact that team y with two losses BEAT BOTH OF THE TEAMS WHO ARE IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME.
You just blew his mind. No way will he be able to keep up with all that math.
 

Theologator

Enchanter
Lifetime Member
Aug 11, 2015
8,248
15,806
Isn't their stadium something like no more than 8-10 years old, too? Hard to believe they didn't have better foresight in building something bigger and better.

I also seem to recall there was some snafu when the stadium first opened, like they forgot to put water fountains anywhere inside the stadium. Any insight Theo if I am remembering correctly on that issue?

It's 10 years old and they are suing the architects, engineers & contractors because they used the wrong bolts and coatings to protect the metal from the elements. It is designed to add upper decks and they are also talking expansion.

I only began to take interest when my son began there in 2010 so I don't know about the water fountains. I do recall they played Texas that first year in (I think) their first home game and very nearly beat them.

I attended the first event at the Thunder Dome in St. Pete - a Billy Joel concert. They didn't have bathrooms so they brought in a mass of portapotties which thankfully I did not need to use.
 

Slevin

Law’s Alter-Ego
BANNED
Aug 12, 2014
5,846
15,818
It's 10 years old and they are suing the architects, engineers & contractors because they used the wrong bolts and coatings to protect the metal from the elements. It is designed to add upper decks and they are also talking expansion.

I only began to take interest when my son began there in 2010 so I don't know about the water fountains. I do recall they played Texas that first year in (I think) their first home game and very nearly beat them.

I attended the first event at the Thunder Dome in St. Pete - a Billy Joel concert. They didn't have bathrooms so they brought in a mass of portapotties which thankfully I did not need to use.
Yep. Can confirm no water fountains. It was incredibly bizarre. Had a friend living in the towers on campus and stayed with him all the time and went to the games. Went to their first CUSA conference title game and the stadium bent and swayed when they jumped. Its a glorified high school stadium. Awfully built. They had it done And up in like 6 months or something.
 

Jbossgator8

Founding Member
Senior Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 11, 2014
4,706
4,299
Founding Member
UF now named 2017 National Champs! UF beat Vandy who beat MTSU who beat Syracuse who beat Clemson who beat Auburn who beat Alabama! Go Gators!!
 

Jbossgator8

Founding Member
Senior Member
Lifetime Member
Jun 11, 2014
4,706
4,299
Founding Member
UCF President appoints himself President of the United States now...
 

Durfish

Feed me!
Lifetime Member
Nov 13, 2017
1,234
2,271
"College Football National Champions in Florida".
Let's see how we can pick this apart...
 

EyeDocGator

Politically Incorrect
Lifetime Member
Oct 26, 2015
4,058
14,182
Apparently, the idiot politician/ hospital administrator in Tally doesn't realize there are millions of fans of three Florida schools that have won real National Championships who may not appreciate those real accomplishments being denigrated by having a BS National Championship touted for UCF.
 

soflagator

Senior Member
Lifetime Member
Sep 4, 2014
21,131
78,737


The moment you go transitive property in college football, you've already lost the argument. He would be better served distinguishing them as the only unbeaten team, while side-noting that two teams who lost by a combined 32 points in their two defeats, are playing for it "all".

Poorly done.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.