Jump to content

  • Announcements

    • Joshua Wilson

      Rules of the Forums   09/02/2017

      Please be sure to read the rules of the forums. This is only to help all of us have a good time and we want to keep this board as fun as possible. 
    • SportsNut25

      Talking Other Sports   11/08/2017

      For those interested in talking about other sports, you can talk about them here. 
Sign in to follow this  
Cat_Scratch

Why UCF isn't 2017 National Champions Excuse thread.

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Cocoa2010 said:

When was there an official offer that UCF supposedly turned down? And "garbage Pitt" that played PSU to a 7pt loss that they probably should have gone at least to OT with if Narduzzi isnt a moron.

 

UCF is still in the top 25 and still in the run for a NY6 Bowl. Have fun listening to your own bitching when UCF is still good this year and for years to come. Your salt over UCF is hilarious.

Pizza pizza!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are only a few ways to get UCF or any G5 team included in the playoff.

1) Expand the current four team format to include enough teams so the highest ranked G5 team might get in.  

2) Get invited to join a P5 Conference.

3) Go Independent and play a Notre Dame type schedule (See BYU).

Last year, I put together some data to show why it's impossible for the committee to include G5 schools in the final four. I went back to 2008 and got some negative feedback saying I had too much historical data and teams that are now P5 were G5 back then (Louisville, TCU) which skewed the results. So, I narrowed the historical scope down to 2014 - 2018. This represents the 5 years since we started the four team playoff.

To begin, everyone must realize that knowingly or not, the NCAA helped create the issue back in 1995 when it declared any football playing school that plays D1 basketball, must also play D1 football. This meant that many, many schools playing D2 and D3 football had to compete at least at the 1AA level. Division 1 has been in a state of chaos ever since. What was D1A and D1AA has now evolved into three distinct levels of Division 1.

Division 1 now consists of FBS Power 5 (traditional D1programs), FBS Group 5 (Former 1AA schools mixed with old traditional D1 programs that rarely excelled in football in the modern age), and FCS (a mixture of traditional 1AA schools mixed with D2 and D3 schools forced to play D1 football as a result of the 1995 NCAA Ruling.

Over the past 5 seasons (2014-2018) the numbers tell the story:

Power 5  is 429-101 (81%) vs. Group 5  (Average Game Score: P5 38, G5 20

Group 5 is 254-32 (89%) vs. FCS (Average Game Score: G5 42, FCS 16)

For those interested in how things look thus far in 2019 here's the info through Sept 21:

Power 5 is 56-19 (75%) vs. Group 5  (Average Game Score: P5 38, G5 19)

Group 5 is 56-2 (97%) vs. FCS (Average Game Score: G5 40, FCS 17)

I'd have to say the data is holding and there are three (3) distinct levels of NCAA Division 1 College Football

Like it or not, I still hold to my statement that Division 1 football is comparable to boxing and at this time should not be treated as one entity:

Power 5 = Heavyweight

Group 5 = Cruiserweight

FCS = Light Heavyweight

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LAZ said:

There are only a few ways to get UCF or any G5 team included in the playoff.

1) Expand the current four team format to include enough teams so the highest ranked G5 team might get in.  

2) Get invited to join a P5 Conference.

3) Go Independent and play a Notre Dame type schedule (See BYU).

Last year, I put together some data to show why it's impossible for the committee to include G5 schools in the final four. I went back to 2008 and got some negative feedback saying I had too much historical data and teams that are now P5 were G5 back then (Louisville, TCU) which skewed the results. So, I narrowed the historical scope down to 2014 - 2018. This represents the 5 years since we started the four team playoff.

To begin, everyone must realize that knowingly or not, the NCAA helped create the issue back in 1995 when it declared any football playing school that plays D1 basketball, must also play D1 football. This meant that many, many schools playing D2 and D3 football had to compete at least at the 1AA level. Division 1 has been in a state of chaos ever since. What was D1A and D1AA has now evolved into three distinct levels of Division 1.

Division 1 now consists of FBS Power 5 (traditional D1programs), FBS Group 5 (Former 1AA schools mixed with old traditional D1 programs that rarely excelled in football in the modern age), and FCS (a mixture of traditional 1AA schools mixed with D2 and D3 schools forced to play D1 football as a result of the 1995 NCAA Ruling.

Over the past 5 seasons (2014-2018) the numbers tell the story:

Power 5  is 429-101 (81%) vs. Group 5  (Average Game Score: P5 38, G5 20

Group 5 is 254-32 (89%) vs. FCS (Average Game Score: G5 42, FCS 16)

For those interested in how things look thus far in 2019 here's the info through Sept 21:

Power 5 is 56-19 (75%) vs. Group 5  (Average Game Score: P5 38, G5 19)

Group 5 is 56-2 (97%) vs. FCS (Average Game Score: G5 40, FCS 17)

I'd have to say the data is holding and there are three (3) distinct levels of NCAA Division 1 College Football

Like it or not, I still hold to my statement that Division 1 football is comparable to boxing and at this time should not be treated as one entity:

Power 5 = Heavyweight

Group 5 = Cruiserweight

FCS = Light Heavyweight

 

 

 

 

So you're telling us that Wake Forest, Vandy, Kansas, llinois, Indiana, Rutgers, etc. are heavyweights and UCF, Boise State, and the rest of the very good G5 teams are only cruiserweights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 From a strictly football perspective I agree with you. Wake Forest, Vandy, Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Rutgers, etc. were grandfathered in. They belong to the establishment and to the conferences that hold the 81% advantage in head to head competition. You can thank those grandfathered institutions for helping keep the margin at 81%. If those schools were in the G5 it would be more like 90%.

But the answer to your statement lies in the revenue those schools generate for their conferences from other sports and other sources. Not just football. Otherwise, we would wouldn’t be having this conversation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, LAZ said:

 From a strictly football perspective I agree with you. Wake Forest, Vandy, Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Rutgers, etc. were grandfathered in. They belong to the establishment and to the conferences that hold the 81% advantage in head to head competition. You can thank those grandfathered institutions for helping keep the margin at 81%. If those schools were in the G5 it would be more like 90%.

But the answer to your statement lies in the revenue those schools generate for their conferences from other sports and other sources. Not just football. Otherwise, we would wouldn’t be having this conversation.

 

 

There are only two real revenue sports in college, football and men's basketball. Those two sports support all other college sports. Perennial basketball powers like Kansas, Connecticut, and UCLA do not come close to matching what football brings to the Power 5 conferences in TV money. As for being "grandfathered in", Rutgers and Maryland recently joined the Big 10; Louisville and others did the same in the ACC, Texas A&M and Missouri to the SEC, etc. The Power 5 is a consortium of older, established schools who find it mutually beneficial to isolate newer Division I football schools and minimize their access to TV revenue and thereby limit competition based upon a level playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×