A Mod can't handle the UCFacts - Which everyone wants to discuss

Discussion in 'College Baseball Clubhouse' started by UCFhonors, Oct 7, 2018.

?

Will UCF host the ESP5N Cartel’s College Gameday this year?

  1. Yes

    12 vote(s)
    16.7%
  2. No

    53 vote(s)
    73.6%
  3. Idk, I’m a tshirt bandwagoner

    2 vote(s)
    2.8%
  4. I’m an Uncle Rico who remembers cfb before College Gameday

    5 vote(s)
    6.9%
  1. UCFhonors

    UCFhonors Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    21,759
    Likes Received:
    27,144
    Location:
    The Most Magical Place on Earth
    I listen to the message, and don’t just pay attention who the messenger is.

    Steve brought the UCFacts in that particular minute in a half. I’m sure you agree.

    #UCFacts

    SmokinSmile
     
    tiger3232 likes this.
  2. MelbBamaFan

    MelbBamaFan Moderator
    Moderator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    43,293
    Likes Received:
    40,302
    Location:
    IHB
    I agree that you listen to the messages you like.
     
    tiger3232, bullg8r52 and bamaman1952 like this.
  3. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    Actually that's not true. SOS is sufficient to admit them, assuming they win out, which I doubt they will .But an undefeated G-5 does merit selection. Particularly if its an AAC. That's a fairly straight-forward proposition. Frankly I'm getting tired of presenting it. An undefeated G-5 qualifies. There isn't anything to discuss that's a simple truth.
    40% cumulative proficiency admits a G-5.
     
  4. maxpower024

    maxpower024 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    69,283
    Likes Received:
    42,747
    Does your son have a split personality or something?
     
  5. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    I thought they had to be 13-0 and not have you declare wins as ties?
     
  6. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    I was giving suffiicent basis for inclusion. you're citing UCF. They didn't play N. Carolina. They won't be 13-0. It's going to be hard for them to qualify. But I personally don't think they will, so unless they do beat USF they're not getting in. This isn't exactly rocket science. While I've taken a lot of heat for my method, it's not that complicated. It's relatively simple. That's the beauty of it. I'm not going through each game can making a determination pro or con about the legitimacy of each win. What qualifies UCF (or USF, or Cincinnati) if any of those teams merit inclusion, isn't really anything other than being good.

    Good obvouisly is a subjective term. But it can be quantified. Remember CFP sets the rules, they determine what's fair and what's not. 60% therefore is the baseline for admission (for any team really). That's the irony. Here's something that's even more ironic. UCF met that stipulation a year ago. They're relative proficiency (independent of conference affiliation) was 60%. That's a result of their having played a schedule commensurate with CFP.

    I'm aware they weren't admitted to the "playoff" (there is no playoff but I'll play along). It's kind of ridiculous to have to suggest UCF was "denied" a NC. They weren't. CFP isn't the only way to select a champion. Also, beginning this year, it should be apparent that a G-5 qualifies if 13-0 (to CFP). Not the "playoff". There isn't a playoff. For UCF (or any other team) to be admited, what qualfies them isn't whether they are undefeated, but if they're admitted to the two participating bowl championship pairings (Orange, Cotton) this year. That's not decided by a committee, but a bowl.

    I don't really want to argue it, but if UCF to be admitted they necessarily must either be ranked #1 or #2, or admitted to either the Cotton or Orange.
    Simple as that. A MWC would likely have a difficult time in that configuration, but there's not going to be an undefeated MWC. So, it's a moot point. But if there were, if one of the preliminaries were the Fiesta, the chances might actually be pretty good that they'd be included within it.

    That's the procedure. You're asking me what admits a G-5? I think I outlined it. 40% is the basis for inclusion/exclusion. At this point, only AAC merits inclusion. They're the only G-5 meeting the requirement. Barely. They're at .396 (cumulative). Effectively 40% cumulative relative proficiency. That's the baseline. That's the minimum from my perspective.

    P-5 is based on a 60% cumulative relative proficiency rating. That doesn't remove the AAC one bit. Why? Simple. They're entitled to Big East's exemption (valid through 2012) and carried forward merits a 58% cumulative. Sufficient to qualify them (barely). It's actually quite interesting.

    They are meeting the eligibility requirement in either circumstance (barely).
    Either as a G-5 (40%) or as a P-5 (60%). They're meeting the requirement.
    So there shouldn't be some kind of long-winded debate whether they qualify. They qualify. There might be more deserving teams eligible. If everyone undefeated wins out I suspect a UCF might be excluded entirely But as far as being eligible they'd be eligible, actually any undefeated G-5 is eligible. it's sad to have to remove a team (any team) based on conjecture.

    But particularly an AAC. They're meeting (not exceeding) either standard. Within 2%. i was taught in university 2% was acceptible. 58% therefore admits a G-5 (AAC) and actually is marginally better (.575) than the ACC.

    People might dispute that. Well, ACC vs. AAC is virtually identical. So, I don't have to defend that position AT ALL. HTH they're virtually tied. FACT. Knowing people here I will have to PROVE that, too. Fine.
    http://mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/americanathletic/index.shtml 40.9% cumulative vs. the ACC.
    That should tell you everything you need to know about it. AAC is qualified. The other thing that people frequently forget collectively the MAC and MWC actually aren't that far away from being exempted either. And C-USA isn't that far removed, either, if they'd simply do better. Those are things any conference can simply build upon to make improvement.

    So, the "exemption" isn't necessarily exclusive to the AAC, but this year it is. Because they're the only conference meeting the requirement (40%).
    Which by the way is a MAXIMUM. not a miniumum, although I suppose it might be viewed as such given it's significantly higher for a P-5 (60%).
     
  7. TheBarnacle

    TheBarnacle Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2015
    Messages:
    12,649
    Likes Received:
    12,705
    Location:
    The real south
    UCF is laundering money for Russian Oligarchs?
     
    GarzaJ likes this.
  8. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    I don't run CFP (obviously) but a person can gather an inference about how it works. W. Michigan was admitted with a 13-0 record. I am of the opinion they were slighted only because had they beaten Wisconsin (lost 16-24) they'd have had an advantage over anyone else, including Clemson for a NC. Luckily (I suppose) they lost. Usually one loss doesn't eliminate. But in this circumstance it might. Only because G-5 is substantially less competitive. 13-0 therefore is the requirement necessary for a G-5 to be given priority status.

    These are difficult ideas to understand. I sympathize. But the reality is there's a large differential between what admits a G-5 and what admits a P-5. always.

    We can't really debate it. The only thing we can do is take what we know as use it to whatever end result we feel might apply. 40% is the basis for G-5 inclusion. That's based on the fact BYU qualfied in 1984 (after going 12-0-1 and beating B. College in the following year's Kickoff Classic). Were admitted to play U.C.L.A. in the Belt (CFP) championship game. BYU lost 24-27. The Belt NC therefore was won by U.C.L.A. Alabama won the Belt NC (beat USC 24-3 in the Aloha Bowl). The Belt is actually more particular to the following year's championship. That's why I keep arguing in favor of Oregon (2014), Clemson (2015), Alabama (2016) and Georgia (2017). Belt is redundant.

    Before the Belt, we had the KOC (Kickoff Classic). When Miami FL and Auburn played that was a Belt NC (Miami, FL won the Belt against Nebraska).
    Florida therefore lost a Belt title game (20-32) to Miami, FL, who lost to Michigan. Miami, FL played U.C.L.A. (1985) for the Belt. Lost 35-37. U.C.L.A (9-3) was the Belt NC. BYU defeated U.C.L.A. 37-35 in 1983. That wasn't a Belt NC but it was a Rose Bowl championship. That BYU won.

    So, people who want to argue against BYU have to address that they beat (in reverse order) BOTH teams (U.C.L.A., Michigan) who beat NC Miami, FL. Most people would admit if you beat BOTH teams that's a NC. If people want to claim otherwise they have to address that inconsistency.
     
  9. VaultHunter

    VaultHunter Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2014
    Messages:
    3,104
    Likes Received:
    3,452
    Location:
    Pandora
    You mean like Georgia has played?
     
  10. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    There is a playoff and you are always wrong.
     
    Diego Roll Tide and CB3UK like this.
  11. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    13-0 is not required for a G5 to be selected for a Big Six bowl.
     
    Diego Roll Tide likes this.
  12. RTR...USN (ret)

    RTR...USN (ret) Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2013
    Messages:
    7,454
    Likes Received:
    14,334
    Location:
    Colorado
    You know, the odds of a flying donkey shooting out of your ass is higher than trying to make sense of what he types. In addition, the odds are also higher than you changing his mind. Bless your heart for trying.
     
    bamaman1952 and DTP2 like this.
  13. BlueGlasses12

    BlueGlasses12 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2016
    Messages:
    1,331
    Likes Received:
    1,279
    I agree. How ya doin UCFHonors?
     
    UCFhonors likes this.
  14. bullg8r52

    bullg8r52 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,600
    Likes Received:
    11,033
    Location:
    Hotlanta
    I have 3 nephews/nieces who graduated from UCF. They are enraged. The rest of us are skeered.
     
    UCFhonors and MelbBamaFan like this.
  15. bullg8r52

    bullg8r52 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,600
    Likes Received:
    11,033
    Location:
    Hotlanta
    I realize you are on first name basis and consult with the leadership and coaching staff of UCF, but you are to refer to the HBC as Coach Spurrier, His Gatorness, the HBC, etc.

    @MelbBamaFan, it's HBC not OBC :):D;)
     
    UCFhonors and MelbBamaFan like this.
  16. CB3UK

    CB3UK Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    20,771
    Likes Received:
    28,806
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    You heard it here first. Memphis beats UCF Saturday. Pony up now.
     
  17. MelbBamaFan

    MelbBamaFan Moderator
    Moderator
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    43,293
    Likes Received:
    40,302
    Location:
    IHB
    I stand corrected!
     
    bullg8r52 likes this.
  18. Bama Believer

    Bama Believer Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    9,667
    Likes Received:
    5,469
    a hard shell taco is the worst delivery device known to man.. it crumbles and falls apart, and unless you have a really big mouth, one bite is all lettuce and the other bite is all meat.
    No number 1 for you :mad:
     
  19. sheluvsbama

    sheluvsbama Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    47,856
    Likes Received:
    38,148
    Location:
    with The Robot Devil
    Honors, you are just too adorable. Winking
     
    UCFhonors likes this.
  20. tooslick4ya

    tooslick4ya Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    18,954
    Likes Received:
    12,439
    Maybe because they haven't beaten a ranked team, I don't think they even played a ranked team.
     
    PC Roberto and sheluvsbama like this.
  21. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    Again the rules seem to limit participation to teams within the top-12. That's what it was with the BCS. I know that's not what they're telling us. I'm asking you to suspend disbelief for a minute. It might do you some good. What you're not aware of is that I jockeyed for the BCS, to the point I think I even prevented CFP (playoff) from being implemented or at least delayed it 4 years. Obviously that wasn't my decision. But I petitioned to keep the BCS.

    You can make whatever you want to make of it. It might have happened anyway, but there was an attempt to remove the BCS and replace it, before CFP existed, with what I'm guessing would have been a 4-team playoff. I think what I did was give leverage to the BCS. It's gone, but CFP isn't a playoff. I won. I say that with as much humility as I can. I know the BCS isn't here, but neither is the playoff, so I did win. I'm grateful for that because I'm convinced a playoff would ruin the sport. If it were done properly it might enhance it, but people are already complaining (wrongly, IMO) about a cartel. That's not what is happening. I'll try my best to outline what I think is going on. What I know.

    At the center (or at least the middle) of what was the BCS was the bowl structure. Why it probably didn't work was people wanted access to the NC.
    That was specific to one game and obviously two teams, apart from the rest.

    I tried to outline the method applied whereby a team could earn a NC bid. That required that a consensus of opinion (whatever method applied) agreed.
    In general that wasn't a big problem. In fact, by-and-large there really wasn't a lot of controversy surrounding the national championship, itself. What happened were there were people hoping a Rose Bowl champion (Penn St, for example) might get top billing in an extended playoff.

    That would (of necessity) warranted 8 teams. That's what ESPN wanted. In fact they tried to alter the BCS (before it added an additional game) to a playoff because initially it was simply 8 teams, prioritized in a championship.
    I had nothing to do with the 5th game idea, I doubt I would have endorsed it. But, it gave greater emphasis on participation (10 teams admitted). Not 8.

    That gave additional teams immediate access. A year prior to it being implemented, two teams (Louisville and Boise St) were admitted to the Liberty Bowl. Both teams likely would have qualified to a BCS title pairing.

    So, again there's simply misunderstanding of what the BCS actually was. Believe it or not, it included the Cotton Bowl. (not formally) but more typically there was a BCS pairing (top-12) within their grasp. The rules gave the Cotton a BCS title pairing nearly every year, so when they changed the rules to accomodate more teams (6 pairings). it obviously gave Cotton the seeding it wanted, without altering the format much, if at all.

    It took me a long time to figure it out, but the selection process is virtually identical to what it was before. #1 and #2 are simply separated. Rather than being paired in a championship, they're separated into two pairings. From which one championship is given priority. In a rotation. 2014, the Rose selected first, selected Oregon (to play Florida St). That's a title game. The Sugar Bowl selected Ohio St (to play Alabama). As far as rankings, TCU was simply the last team taken in the rotation. To the Peach Bowl. It had nothing to do with a ranking. Clearly the Peach simply wanted TCU. And the Cotton wanted Baylor. Don't ask me to explain why, I frankly don't know.

    But that's the metric. I believe (like before) every bowl has an AQ. I know that because they renegotiated contracts to secure top pairings. Orange Bowl has an agreement with the ACC and I'm guessing the Big XII. But there's still a rotation, so whatever team they might have is conditional upon a higher seeded bowl not selecting, but if they do, Orange gets alternative.

    Not complicated. You're over-complicating this. Teams are admitted based solely upon what a bowl pairing wants, and absolutely nothing else. You can keep telling me I'm wrong, but I'm positive that's the process within it.
     
  22. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    What do you think a playoff looks like?
     
  23. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    I was against a playoff because it's exclusionary. I've really tried hard to outline why it's a bad idea. You all seem to think the NFL has the best game going. I think you're wrong. I think college has the best game going. I think the NFL sucks. I don't want to have to tell you why. If you really want to make collegiate athletics like professional sports then you're opening a can of worms. CFP obviously isn't a playoff. It's a compromise. What it is, is something I suggested (modified by someone else). I said the BCS should consider adding a 6th game, exclusive to the NC. That's what CFP is. It isn't run by my rules, because I'd have paired #1 vs. #2 in that game. Not have a championship pairing, but a title game, post BCS. Might sound like the same thing, but it's not. A four team playoff (2008) doesn't include Utah. A post-season NC does. I said have a post-season NC.
     
  24. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    I've heard that argument before. They beat the #7 team (Auburn) that should (IMO) be given impetus to any argument presented against them. Similarly, when BYU challenged, 1984, while admittedly their SOS wasn't exceptional, I think the reality was it was sufficient for the circumstance they were presented. BYU had few options. Washington wasn't obligated to anyone. They could have played BYU simply opted not to in favor of playing Oklahoma. BYU didn't have the option of playing Oklahoma. Nobody did, really. The Bowl Alliance was initiated to address that inconsistency. I'm not sure it really worked, but it might have given BYU that option. It's a stupid argument, because really a NC is never about one game, anyway. That's why it's ridiculous (IMO) to speculate about any year, about what didn't happen.

    BYU can't magically present themselves as something else. That's stupid. Why it's equally dumb to include Florida is simply that wasn't an option. I've heard people say "I saw Florida play and I saw BYU play and I think UF beats them by three touchdowns." So, what? Game isn't decided on a make-a-wish.

    So even if Nintendo College Football 1984 gives UF the NC its' IRRELEVANT. They can award UF a national title however, if they choose to. All I care about (for any team, in any season) are actual results. UF lost to Miami, FL. I'm just supposed to pretend that game didn't happen? UF didn't mean to lose? They weren't interested in winning? (for whatever reason). So what? Losing means Miami, FL was a better team in that circumstance, and the reality is a championship was on the line that game.

    BYU faced a similar (nearly identical) circumstance the following year, lost.
    All an honest person can do, is say they were co-champions. Seriously. I think that's generous but that's all an honest person can say about it. IMO.
     
  25. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    The CFP format includes a four team playoff. The word playoff is in the name format. And you oppose a format because it is exclusionary? So you be for a 130 team playoff where no one is ever eliminated?
     
    Diego Roll Tide likes this.
  26. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    Like I said as best as I can tell the CFP is yet another variation to the BCS, in fact I'm sure about that. There are differences, some bowls ate given preference but in general they are similar. #1 and #2 are prioritized. There is a rotation within the bowls I believe it will be the Cotton and Orange Bowls, We can probably even use existing bowl agreements against where teams go. Try that. Last year the Rose had to forfeit the Rose in favor of what the Cotton wanted (as weird as that might be). I think it proved that a Rose Bowl would have chosen Ohio St. That's my theory. No committee deliberated. The Rose Bowl effectively deciFed who went. I believe that's a simple enough explanation. An an adequate explanation.
    It wasn't something people argued about.
     
  27. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    So is there no playoff committee or just 13 people pretending to vote for something that mirrors the bowls' wishes?
     
  28. mal_kav

    mal_kav Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    3,230
    Likes Received:
    2,839
    Location:
    Democratic People's Republic of Maryland
    UCF is 5-0 and most of the other lossless teams are 6-0. If UCF hadn't dodged UNC then they would be 6-0 and have a better record. (Of course their SOS would have taken a serious hit. :) )
     
  29. Diego Roll Tide

    Diego Roll Tide Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2011
    Messages:
    87,182
    Likes Received:
    71,419
    Location:
    Florence, AL
    But you see, you and the sane universe know the Big 6 and the CFP are not the same thing.
     
  30. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    Nope no playoff. If it was a playoff there'd be 8 teams admitted, first of all. They wouldn't limit access to 4/12 (1/3) for another (barely qualifying either).
    1/3 I determined was the thinnest measure possible for a national title. So, what we have is the lamest excuse for a national championship possible.
     
  31. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    There is no 4 of 12. The other 8 teams are irrelevant in NC race.

    That said, when the top four teams are paired 1v4 and 2v3 and the winners play a week plus later, what do you call that format?
     
  32. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    CFP is simply a way to pair a title game apart from the bowl championship. The fact there are four teams is mostly accidental. It isn't by design
    As I indicated #1 and #2 are still the basis from which a championship follows. In two preliminary title games. Yheyre separated. Rather than being united they're separated.
    That lends itself to uniting two parts of a whole. Its coincidental to the Belt. CFP isn't a playoff. I helped design it. I helped recommend the logistic but what I asked for wasn't a divided championship. I wanted a United championship pairing #1 vs. #2. They took my idea and simply put it into place a week before. Otherwise it's my idea to the T.
     
  33. Rooster_Sideburns

    Rooster_Sideburns Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    Messages:
    2,905
    Likes Received:
    4,892
    Because they suck!
     
  34. DTP2

    DTP2 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Messages:
    20,342
    Likes Received:
    6,236
    Seek help.
     
  35. BamaKlingon

    BamaKlingon Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    4,763
    Location:
    Pensacola
    #nonUCFacts
     
  36. septimusgreen

    septimusgreen Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    Messages:
    17,735
    Likes Received:
    37,676
    Location:
    Anchorage via BR
    Join the SEC and get some of that privilege.
     
    MelbBamaFan and BamaKlingon like this.
  37. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    I thought I did a pretty decent job explaining it. Yeah, there's a committee. They're appointed. By the bowls they represent. Two per bowl, or twelve. Clearly each one knows their responsibility to secure the best pairing possible. Bowls work in concert with the committee, they listen and to a degree are obligated but only to the degree it suits them. Pretty straight forward. The chair simply signs on to what the committee says.
     
  38. collegefbfan2017

    collegefbfan2017 Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    16,385
    Likes Received:
    4,080
    Location:
    Alamosa, Colorado
    Big six? The power six? No they aren't the same. Assuming we can use the Big East exemption (cumulative 59.3%) as leverage, the AAC becomes a 58% cumulative (including Big East figures) eligible!
    Without they're 40% but that defines 'major' relative to what the WAC was. 40%. Most actually consider the WAC as a major conference. So the AAC is a major also.
     
  39. IrktogBuff

    IrktogBuff Well-Known Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2011
    Messages:
    4,418
    Likes Received:
    7,485
    Location:
    Boulder, CO
    There are 13 members on the selection committee not 12 and they are not appointed by the bowls.
     
  40. hailtoyourvictor

    hailtoyourvictor Well-Known Member
    Gold Member
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2012
    Messages:
    36,457
    Likes Received:
    17,150

Share This Page