National Championship

[Gutter Cobreh]

Just when you think the NCAA can't get any more ludicrous - it looks like they have officially recognized UCF as a National Champion, based on their undefeated record last year.

https://sports.yahoo.com/official-ncaa-recognizes-ucfs-national-championship-record-book-234835087.html

My question is where doe we display our 1940 National Championship banner/sign in DWS? We were undefeated that year, so might as well pull a Bammer and go ahead and appoint ourselves since the NCAA is recognizing undefeated season as champions.

[thf24]

I presume the + next to their name means that there's an accompanying paragraph conveniently left out of the frame explaining why they're mentioned but not the official national champion.

[Gutter Cobreh]

I presume the + next to their name means that there's an accompanying paragraph conveniently left out of the frame explaining why they're mentioned but not the official national champion.

It's because the Colley poll had UCF ranked as #1 at the end of the bowl season. We just need to find some sort of ranking that showed us #1 in 1940 ahead of Minnesota. Since there weren't any and there were also no bowls, we simply hang the banner.

In the "participation trophy" era we are in, we might as well give ourselves credit for something that happened 78 years ago...

[Quaoarsking]

If the NCAA recognizes the Colley Matrix as a valid NC selector, and Colley had UCF as #1, the NCAA can't really not include them, silly as it is.

The proper thing for the NCAA to do is say that there was no NC before 2014, and since then the only NC is the winner of the playoff.

[TUSK]

Sweet.... Now I can add 2016 to my NC Collection (along with '45, '66, '75, '77)... Bringing the total to 847 Bajillion...

I'll allow it.

[TUSK]

It's because the Colley poll had UCF ranked as #1 at the end of the bowl season. We just need to find some sort of ranking that showed us #1 in 1940 ahead of Minnesota. Since there weren't any and there were also no bowls, we simply hang the banner.

In the "participation trophy" era we are in, we might as well give ourselves credit for something that happened 78 years ago...

I think you're thinking 1941, Buddy....

[Quaoarsking]

I think you're thinking 1941, Buddy....

No, 1940 is the year we have a legitimate case. 1941 is shade at Alabama for claiming that year when they actually were #20

[TUSK]

No, 1940 is the year we have a legitimate case. 1941 is shade at Alabama for claiming that year when they actually were #20

ahhhhh, thanks for the correction, Q... (I'm still claiming 937 NCs, though)...*

[Bothrops]

We beat San Francisco in Kezar stadium in 1941. The date of the game was Dec, 6 1941.

[Lord McBuckethead]

ahhhhh, thanks for the correction, Q... (I'm still claiming 937 NCs, though)...*

The fake claim cheapens all of them, in my opinion.

[TUSK]

The fake claim cheapens all of them, in my opinion.

I agree with this.... Bammer shouldn't claim '41, IMO... I think we should claim '66, instead...

[Outsider]

I like that UCF claims it. Alabama did not even win the west. Auburn beat Alabama and UCF beat Auburn. The "playoff" should have been 8 teams instead of 4 and we wouldn't even have these types of debates.

[Outsider]

I think it should be a prerequisite for the playoffs that you win your conference. If you cannot be divisional or conference champions, how can you be the national champion?

[I am Jack's failing liver]

I think it should be a prerequisite for the playoffs that you win your conference. If you cannot be divisional or conference champions, how can you be the national champion?

The "champion" used to be almost entirely a beauty contest. Now it's just partially one, but still hugely flawed. Until every D1 school has a clear path to the playoffs, it's majorly flawed. You're right though, every major conference champ should be in it (every one of those teams knows the clearly defined path), then at least 1 G5 school should get in. Let them decide who and how, so it's not out of their hands. That portion would/could be a beauty contest, but it's their call how they do it. Then a couple other at large teams. That is definitely a beauty contest, but if you didn't get the at large, you can't complain as you should have won your conference and not let your fate be decided by someone else. It's the only real way to have it be legit. I'd listen to a 16 team playoff argument too (although I'm not in favor of it). Four teams is too small.

[Quaoarsking]

I think it should be a prerequisite for the playoffs that you win your conference. If you cannot be divisional or conference champions, how can you be the national champion?

Do you apply the same principle to professional sports?

[TUSK]

I think it should be a prerequisite for the playoffs that you win your conference. If you cannot be divisional or conference champions, how can you be the national champion?

2018 Hypothetical:

#4 MSU goes 11-1 this year, with a last second loss at #1 Alabama (who finishes 12-0 & wins the SECC).

The #2 ACC Champ goes 13-0 and the #3 Big Ten Champ goes 11-2 including a 2 TD loss.

The #5 Big 12 Champ goes 12-1 including a home loss to a bad team.

The #6 Pac Champ goes 12-1 and #7 Notre Dame finishes 10-2.

#7 UCF goes 12-0.


Give me YOUR CFP bracket, please.

[MSUDAWGFAN]

2018 Hypothetical:

#4 MSU goes 11-1 this year, with a last second loss at #1 Alabama (who finishes 12-0 & wins the SECC).

The #2 ACC Champ goes 13-0 and the #3 Big Ten Champ goes 11-2 including a 2 TD loss.

The #5 Big 12 Champ goes 12-1 including a home loss to a bad team.

The #6 Pac Champ goes 12-1 and #7 Notre Dame finishes 10-2.

#7 UCF goes 12-0.


Give me YOUR CFP bracket, please.

In this case, it would be
1 Bama
2 ACC champ (presumably Clemson)
3 Big 12 champ
6 PAC 12 champ

It pains me to say it, but MSU should be left out in that case. I have to put my own bias aside. I have said now for as long as I can remember that if you can't win your own conference, you can't win a national title.

In other sports where the format is different, I don't think that way. In NCAABB there is a 68 team tourney. Every team in America can win the natty on day 1. Hey, even if they are winless in february they can still win it. In College baseball, it's the same thing. There is a tournament. In football there is no real tournament. There is jsut a plus 1.

[TUSK]

In this case, it would be
1 Bama
2 ACC champ (presumably Clemson)
3 Big 12 champ
6 PAC 12 champ

It pains me to say it, but MSU should be left out in that case. I have to put my own bias aside. I have said now for as long as I can remember that if you can't win your own conference, you can't win a national title.

In other sports where the format is different, I don't think that way. In NCAABB there is a 68 team tourney. Every team in America can win the natty on day 1. Hey, even if they are winless in february they can still win it. In College baseball, it's the same thing. There is a tournament. In football there is no real tournament. There is jsut a plus 1.

Thanks for the honest response... In the unlikely event that all of the non-SEC conference champs had more than one loss, I assume you would feel the same, yes?

[RocketDawg]

They need to go back and pick up Tulane from 15 or so years ago if they recognize UCF. And even Ole Miss's championships (they were probably more legitimte than UCF's claim).

[Outsider]

Do you apply the same principle to professional sports?

No, because they have more than 4 slots. With only 4 slots, you would think the most logical thing to do would be to eliminate teams that did not win their conference.

[TUSK]

No, because they have more than 4 slots. With only 4 slots, you would think the most logical thing to do would be to eliminate teams that did not win their conference.

I get what your point is, and I appreciate that. I'd just prefer to see the 4 best teams, myself.

Now, if we went to an 8 team playoff with 5 conference champions and then the 3 best non-conference champs as at large bids, I could get behind that, as well... that would certainly guarantee us to have the best 4-5 teams in, every year, while throwing a bone to a 9-3 shitty conference champ or undefeated BYU/Tulane/UCF on occasion....

although the results likely wouldn't be any different than what we've seen since the inception of the CFP.

[TUSK]

They need to go back and pick up Tulane from 15 or so years ago if they recognize UCF. And even Ole Miss's championships (they were probably more legitimte than UCF's claim).

1984 BYU has been vindicated!!!!

Gawd, that was freakin' horrible...

[MSUDAWGFAN]

Thanks for the honest response... In the unlikely event that all of the non-SEC conference champs had more than one loss, I assume you would feel the same, yes?

Yes, because the reality is we don't TRULY know objectively which conference is the best in any given year. Maybe there is a year the Big 10 is the best. Maybe the PAC 12 is the best one year. Nobody wants to hear this, but the SEC can have down years. We simply don't play enough games across conferences to be able to determine which conference is truly the best. We may get each SEC team playing 1 P5 team. That simply isn't enough data points. But, the problem is if we played more out of conference games to determine that, there would have to be less games within the conference.

[Gutter Cobreh]

I get what your point is, and I appreciate that. I'd just prefer to see the 4 best teams, myself.

Now, if we went to an 8 team playoff with 5 conference champions and then the 3 best non-conference champs as at large bids, I could get behind that, as well... that would certainly guarantee us to have the best 4-5 teams in, every year, while throwing a bone to a 9-3 shitty conference champ or undefeated BYU/Tulane/UCF on occasion....

although the results likely wouldn't be any different than what we've seen since the inception of the CFP.

Did you think Utah was better than Alabama in '09 prior to the kickoff of the Sugar Bowl? They were ranked #6 going into that game versus a #4 Bama team. In the current format, they wouldn't have made the playoff and thus wouldn't have opportunity to show it on the field that they were, in fact, one of the best teams in country because they played in a "weaker" conference.

[TUSK]

Did you think Utah was better than Alabama in '09 prior to the kickoff of the Sugar Bowl? They were ranked #6 going into that game versus a #4 Bama team. In the current format, they wouldn't have made the playoff and thus wouldn't have opportunity to show it on the field that they were, in fact, one of the best teams in country because they played in a "weaker" conference.

That's a really good point. While I don't believe Utah would have beaten Bammer or Florida (and maybe a couple others) in a playoff format, it does make one wonder where the line is between 1) having a great record in a shitty conference and B) getting a shot at the Big Enchilada...

[MSUDAWGFAN]

That's a really good point. While I don't believe Utah would have beaten Bammer or Florida (and maybe a couple others) in a playoff format, it does make one wonder where the line is between 1) having a great record in a shitty conference and B) getting a shot at the Big Enchilada...

How much does playing in a good conference really matter? I mean, Miami in 2000 was clearly the best team in the country, and I don't think anybody would have said the Big East was the best football conference. In basketball, UNLV won the tournament in 1990 and I don't even know what conference they play in. If you are the best team, you should get a shot.

[TUSK]

How much does playing in a good conference really matter? I mean, Miami in 2000 was clearly the best team in the country, and I don't think anybody would have said the Big East was the best football conference. If you are the best team, you should get a shot.

We agree on this... I also believe that the "best team" doesn't always win every game.

[Gutter Cobreh]

We agree on this... I also believe that the "best team" doesn't always win every game.

You know what, I agree with you... which is why after we hang our 1940 NC banner, we'll start working on our 1913 and 1917 banners as well. In those years, we lost a game each season but clearly everyone during that era knew we had the "best team"***

I like your influence and presence on the board Tusk!! You're Bammer way of thinking has helped me realize that State has AT LEAST 3 National Championships that we should honoring!

[TUSK]

You know what, I agree with you... which is why after we hang our 1940 NC banner, we'll start working on our 1913 and 1917 banners as well. In those years, we lost a game each season but clearly everyone during that era knew we had the "best team"***

I like your influence and presence on the board Tusk!! You're Bammer way of thinking has helped me realize that State has AT LEAST 3 National Championships that we should honoring!

I say hang em up!

If you want, I'll refer you to my "NC Banner" guy... There's a long turn-around time, as you might imagine, but his experience shows in his work...

[Token Bammer]

I say hang em up!

If you want, I'll refer you to my "NC Banner" guy... There's a long turn-around time, as you might imagine, but his experience shows in his work...

He's all tied up making UCF banners at the moment.

[RocketDawg]

I say hang em up!

If you want, I'll refer you to my "NC Banner" guy... There's a long turn-around time, as you might imagine, but his experience shows in his work...

Is he the same guy who had to glue the National Championship crystal football back together after it was knocked over at Wal Mart?

[TUSK]

Is he the same guy who had to glue the National Championship crystal football back together after it was knocked over at Wal Mart?

Actually, it was knocked over within the Bryant Museum... Some kinda catastrophic "trophy avalanche"... It was terrible...

Then this happened after the 2017 season:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4McW2_-j9g

[RocketDawg]

Actually, it was knocked over within the Bryant Museum... Some kinda catastrophic "trophy avalanche"... It was terrible...

Then this happened after the 2017 season:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4McW2_-j9g

The story sounds better when you say it happened in Walmart though. :) Say it enough times and it becomes a fact.

[TUSK]

The story sounds better when you say it happened in Walmart though. :) Say it enough times and it becomes a fact.

LOL... I'll allow it.

Didya see what happened to the 17 trophy????

[RocketDawg]

LOL... I'll allow it.

Didya see what happened to the 17 trophy????

I saw it but assumed it was a fake. I guess after you have so many though ....

[TUSK]

I saw it but assumed it was a fake. I guess after you have so many though ....

Nope that was the actual 2017 CFP Runner Up Trophy....

I can get you a piece of it professionally mounted on an elephant hair necklace (or bracelet) for 19.95 + S&H, if interested...

[RocketDawg]

Nope that was the actual 2017 CFP Runner Up Trophy....

I can get you a piece of it professionally mounted on an elephant hair necklace (or bracelet) for 19.95 + S&H, if interested...

Ah, a runner up trophy. No wonder it was smashed. How much is S&H .... ? Is this a one-time offer?

[MSUDAWGFAN]

We agree on this... I also believe that the "best team" doesn't always win every game.

You aren't the "best team" if you don't even win your conference.

[TUSK]

You aren't the "best team" if you don't even win your conference.

2011 & 2017 say “Hi!”....

[mparkerfd20]

No, because they have more than 4 slots. With only 4 slots, you would think the most logical thing to do would be to eliminate teams that did not win their conference.

That is flawed logic that is only logical if strength of each conference is pretty equal across the board...And it is not.