Coach Saban Addressed UCF's "National Championship"
- Thread starter selmaborntidefan
- Start date
The "how to determine the college football champion" discussion is the closest thing to eternal life any of us will ever see here at TideFans.
Just to be clear: I think four is PERFECT and anything else will reduce everything.
This is where when krazy and I disagreed, I saw his basic point, which is correct: the ENTIRE debate over head-to-head national title games concerns THE THIRD TEAM that might possibly get left out. It is NOT an issue of whoever the fourth team is.
We have four simply because you have to equalize preparation and opponents. And in general terms - save for this year - there has been a team get blown out every single year and prove they had no business being there.
2014 - FSU got blown out
2015 - Mich St got blown out
2016 - Ohio St got blown out
While none of those was ranked #4, the fact remains that ONE of the four teams generally doesn't even belong there.
Most of the complaints we had were REALLY because 1 didn't play 2 back in the day. The BCS eliminated most of that but - honestly - what were the REAL beefs with the BCS?
2000 - OU, Miami, FSU, Washington (rare four team claim)
2001 - Miami, Nebraska, Oregon, Colorado (reality is only Miami and Oregon had legit claims and would likely have been the game but for 9/11)
2002 - Miami, Ohio St - nobody else (funny how nobody can even name #3 without looking them up)
2003 - LSU, OU, USC
2004 - OU, USC, Auburn (Utah was a joke with no legit claim)
2005 - Texas, USC
2006 - Ohio St, Michigan, Florida (and it was correct to toss out UM since they lost head to head)
2007 - Ohio St, Kansas, and a bunch of two-loss teams (and KU lost to OU so.....)
2008 - Florida, Texas, Texas Tech, OU, Alabama (eliminate UA due to UF loss and Tech due to huge blowout loss)....three teams
2009 - Alabama, Texas - the rest were jokes
2010 - Auburn, Oregon - the rest were jokes
2011 - LSU, Alabama, Okie St (once again, three teams)
2012 - Alabama, Notre Dame
2013 - FSU, Auburn
Fact is that in ONLY 2000 and 2007 was there even really any beef beyond the three teams.
The four-team playoff's biggest asset is that a #3 that MIGHT be a title winner is not denied their chance; an eight-team playoff's biggest joke is that the eighth best team can win three games and win it all just so long as they get in.
Who was #8 in the final playoff poll each time?
2014 - Michigan St (10-2, with losses to TWO of the four playoff teams - so why should they be there?)
2015 - Notre Dame (10-2, with a loss to Clemson, who made it)
2016 - Wisconsin (10-3, with losses to Michigan, Penn State and playoff team Ohio State)
2017 - USC (11-2, with losses to N Dame and Wash St)
So in the first three years, #8 lost to teams that were in the playoff; in 2017, #7 Auburn ALSO lost to a team in the playoff (UGA).
We already have a playoff for teams 5-8, it's called the REGULAR SEASON.
This is where when krazy and I disagreed, I saw his basic point, which is correct: the ENTIRE debate over head-to-head national title games concerns THE THIRD TEAM that might possibly get left out. It is NOT an issue of whoever the fourth team is.
We have four simply because you have to equalize preparation and opponents. And in general terms - save for this year - there has been a team get blown out every single year and prove they had no business being there.
2014 - FSU got blown out
2015 - Mich St got blown out
2016 - Ohio St got blown out
While none of those was ranked #4, the fact remains that ONE of the four teams generally doesn't even belong there.
Most of the complaints we had were REALLY because 1 didn't play 2 back in the day. The BCS eliminated most of that but - honestly - what were the REAL beefs with the BCS?
2000 - OU, Miami, FSU, Washington (rare four team claim)
2001 - Miami, Nebraska, Oregon, Colorado (reality is only Miami and Oregon had legit claims and would likely have been the game but for 9/11)
2002 - Miami, Ohio St - nobody else (funny how nobody can even name #3 without looking them up)
2003 - LSU, OU, USC
2004 - OU, USC, Auburn (Utah was a joke with no legit claim)
2005 - Texas, USC
2006 - Ohio St, Michigan, Florida (and it was correct to toss out UM since they lost head to head)
2007 - Ohio St, Kansas, and a bunch of two-loss teams (and KU lost to OU so.....)
2008 - Florida, Texas, Texas Tech, OU, Alabama (eliminate UA due to UF loss and Tech due to huge blowout loss)....three teams
2009 - Alabama, Texas - the rest were jokes
2010 - Auburn, Oregon - the rest were jokes
2011 - LSU, Alabama, Okie St (once again, three teams)
2012 - Alabama, Notre Dame
2013 - FSU, Auburn
Fact is that in ONLY 2000 and 2007 was there even really any beef beyond the three teams.
The four-team playoff's biggest asset is that a #3 that MIGHT be a title winner is not denied their chance; an eight-team playoff's biggest joke is that the eighth best team can win three games and win it all just so long as they get in.
Who was #8 in the final playoff poll each time?
2014 - Michigan St (10-2, with losses to TWO of the four playoff teams - so why should they be there?)
2015 - Notre Dame (10-2, with a loss to Clemson, who made it)
2016 - Wisconsin (10-3, with losses to Michigan, Penn State and playoff team Ohio State)
2017 - USC (11-2, with losses to N Dame and Wash St)
So in the first three years, #8 lost to teams that were in the playoff; in 2017, #7 Auburn ALSO lost to a team in the playoff (UGA).
We already have a playoff for teams 5-8, it's called the REGULAR SEASON.
Except any expansion renders the regular season more and more moot.
Super Bowl XLVI says hi.
If this is the strongest point in your argument for a six to eight team playoff, you're better off going on a search for Bigfoot and rainbow colored unicorns.
Last edited:
Giants won the east and had a decent season and the Pats were #1 in the AFC. Unless you are just spitting sour grapes because the Packers choked like they usually do then I don’t see your point in that example.
40,45, and 47 are maybe what you are thinking about.
Last edited:
Frost has backed off the UFC as NCs talk because he's at Nebraska now. If he were to win a NC at Nebraska he doesn't want another team like UCF to try and claim the title. If he were still at UCF he'd be towing the same line as the UCF administration. IOW, he's just saying what will potentially benefit him and his future. No real problem with that but let's not act like he'd be saying the same thing if he stayed at UCF..
Giants were 9-7 - barely above .500. They won a crappy division and then got hot in the playoffs.
IOW, the regular season essentially didn't matter.
It is that way in all f the major professional sports. The playoffs are monster money makers. And there is a ton of parity. In college sports there is a huge gap between a 7 loss team and a 2 loss team. Not so in professional sports.
Fans complain about who gets left out of that 68-team monstrosity every March; the idea that if we expand it fewer will complain is the exact opposite of what has happened.
Ohio St fans were louder during the 4-team debate last year than you’d have heard in the BCS days. They would have accepted that their 31-point loss was an eliminator but then 4 teams and they suddenly want to ignore that.
Tide fans too but at least we only had one loss. It would have been hard to argue UGA.
Its not my argument for switching its one of the reasons I can get behind the idea. As I said, there will always be disagreement but the more defined the qualifications for making the playoff are the harder it is for complaints to gain traction and force another change. Specifically, it will be harder for the media to join a bandwagon like UCF.
Look at their schedule and You’ll only see one deplorable loss. They played one of the hardest schedules in the league
Maybe I should have clarified with "legitimate complaints." There may be more teams complaining about getting left out but they won't be as loud or invasive. But I also think its wildly inaccurate to say Ohio State was louder than various other BCS controversies. The loudness was only enhanced by the fact that Ohio State is a premier program unlike an Oklahoma State.
March Madness is everyone's example but really who cares if the 69th team is left out besides that team. There isn't some huge controversy every year because that 1 or 2 teams that got left out. People complain sure but nothing comparable to UCF or Ohio State.
Last edited:
Of course it mattered. If the Giants don't make the playoff they don't win a super bowl. How much does the regular season have to matter? If we want the regular season to be the end all be all then why even have a playoff and just do rankings at the end of the season?
Very well said. Still, you have to admit that individual games are far less important.
Hey....let Coach say what he wants.....it keeps people from talking about Tua/Jalen --
I'm guessing his statement was a "rat poison - antidote" - (or "anecdote" if you prefer)
I'm guessing his statement was a "rat poison - antidote" - (or "anecdote" if you prefer)
Even though I'm against expanding it, I struggle with using the NFL playoff format as an example as to why not expand the CFP.
NFL teams are much more equal top to bottom than those in college. The comparison just isn't equal.
NFL teams are much more equal top to bottom than those in college. The comparison just isn't equal.
Absolutely. And that definitely has its issues. I just don't know that its the biggest concern IMO. But I understand different fans value different aspects of sports. Especially college football.
Latest threads
-
US Army replacing 5.56mm rifle with a 6.8mm for infantry- Started by Tidewater
- Replies: 6
-
-
Game One of Alabama-Texas A&M Alabama Series Moved to Friday as Part of Doubleheader- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Bama Game Thread: Bama Gymnastics - NCAA Championship Semi-finals (ESPN2 | 4/18 @ 8pm CT)- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 32
-
No. 1 Visits Tuscaloosa for Second Straight Week as Alabama Hosts Top-Ranked Texas A&M
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-