michibull

The NCAA is a for profit entity, which makes it a business, which makes them a company. This is why there is such a bias to the large programs, because they generate MONEY!!! The way they make MONEY is to parade the best and most profitable two teams onto a national stage. The season is used to find the best 4 teams, so yes, the season means something. As I stated earlier, football is not a sport that lends itself to have a long playoff, as of now, the KIDS play 5 months out of the year, i personally don't think it's fair to have the season stretch into 6 months just so FAU can get blown out by Clemson because they won their conference.

Um, it's called statistics. I like how people grab one or two examples of the exceptions and try to apply it as if it's a standard. We can all agree that there are years that a G5 upsets a P5 in a major bowl, but we are talking about having a system (business model) to make sure you have the 2 best teams in the country and a couple wild cards. Should a G5 get a wild card spot like last year? Sure, but the statistics strongly shows that these are exceptions and if your running a company, what will you invest in, statistical established norms or the once in a blue moon under dog (which nobody cares about anyways).

Yeah, because they're not good enough. Football is not like basketball. Basketball is about match ups more than anything, you consistently get small schools beating big schools, it happen all of the time. Football, not so much. Football is almost always who is bigger, stronger and faster, unless you have horrible coaches and bad luck. All of the best recruits go to the same 5-10 schools, they are over packed with talent. Basketball talent gets more spread out and 1 and dones, small schools with seniors and juniors can play smarter and more disciplined games to win over the more talented ones. If you can tell me any teams at the end of the year ranks #5 and higher, that was legitimately better than the two teams who played in the natty that year, we can talk; because OSU, UCF, Wis, PSU and TCU were not better than Ala, UGA, Okl or Clem, therefore, the CFP did its job.

But my question is, why is it the problem? Just because our school or conference doesn't have a seat at the CFP dinner table, doesn't mean we deserve one. If we made the CFP as a 4 team playoff and lose, that is really special, if we make it as an 8 team playoff, well, it just means we won our conference. We talk about how UCF winning the AAC is not as difficult as it was when we were in the BE, it's because we know that it's way harder to play well week in and week out. We know that just the top few teams in the AAC are as good as most P5 conferences, so there is some truth to an 11-1 Bama getting in over a 13-0 UCF who had to play Tulsa, Tulane, UCONN, ECU etc. I have great pride in our school and conference, but I'm also a realist. If you take an objective view of the system, it's actually not bad at all. For the most part every CFP game has been great, sure there's been a Mich State game here or there, but overall, the best teams have been there; that's all we can really ask for as college football fans.

That's right, the better team loses in the playoffs and regular season alike, for example: Alabama lost to Auburn, Auburn lost to LSU and UCF, LSU lost to Troy, Troy lost to South Alabama, South Alabama lost to Georgia State, Georgia State lost to Tennessee State therefore Tennessee State would beat Alabama. Just because someone loses 1 game, doesn't mean they are not the best team. Again, one of the main reasons for a 4 team playoff is to ensure you do have the 1 or 2 best teams and a wild card or two. I don't understand the fascination with always wanting to expand the playoff. If the only reason you desire to expand the playoff is to "let" someone in that otherwise wouldn't get in, that's a bit of a problem in of itself. I think we can all agree that 99/100 times, the best team in the country isn't #5 or higher; they are somewhere in the 1-4. This isn't the NCAA tourney where we can have 168 teams and a Butler can come out of nowhere; College Football isn't like that.

The system maybe flawed but I have two question's: has there been a team left out of the CFP that would have won the National Championship? For the most part, hasn't the best team won the National Championship? Before you start throwing out a bunch of teams that "on any given Saturday" could win, I don't want to hear that garbage. Anybody with a half, rational brain will tell you that it has done a better job than any system we have had. Expanding the CFP will only dilute the process and then you'll get 2 and 3 loss teams in there. The point of the 4 team CFP is money and to ensure you at least have the best team in the country (not to give out participation ribbons); and it does that. Period.

Well, UGA won their conference so by your logic they're in; and also by your logic, the actual national champion (Alabama) should never have been given a chance. I'm no genius, but your logic seems a little flawed. You can say anything you want about how unfair it was, Alabama proved that they deserved the national championship by beating the best teams.

Fair enough, I understand your point. I for one was not arguing the feminization point. I was just trying to explain what Bausfkid was saying. I can agree that you want to look good and respectable, but I would still disagree with comparing a sports fashion uniform to an actual uniform that means distinction or honor. There is so much more meaning to it. The color of a beret means something, something you earned and demands respect from everyone, black and lime green football uniforms mean nothing.

Soooooooooooooo, you are trying to compare military uniforms to football uniforms? Please, please tell me this is not real. One pays homage to fallen soldiers and to honor the country for which it fights for, the other is a fashion statement.

You missed the point. To keep this general and to avoid this from going out of control; traditionally, men care less about how they look and more about function, women usually care more about the appearance and less on function. I think that was the point that was trying to be made.

Thank you for this post. I didn't think it was an excuse either. As you stated, it was a statement/observation. We won, so there was no need for excuses. We are 7-0 and people need to stop looking for any and everything to complain about, my goodness. By the tone of this board, you would think we were 2-5; and before I hear "but we are only a couple plays away from being 2-5", we are not, we are 7-0. We play to win and we have won every game, period. It's not that long ago we were going 2-10 with a horrible team to watch, have we forgotten that? Has a couple of consecutive good seasons really spoiled us to a point where just winning is no longer good enough? I guess I missed all of those 5 star recruits we got, the Nick Saban type of coach we have, or the Oregon/Nike training facility. I am personally happy with what we have. As a school in a G5 conference and beautiful yet modest facilities, we have it good. How many G5 schools have it better than us? That can be counted on one hand. I'm as competitive as anyone, but I also see reality. Top of the class teams come around in waves. For once can we just be thankful to have a team that wins again? Let's take one game at a time and work toward that Conference Championship; I don't care if we win by one point every single game, it means we are 13-0. I for one am extremely proud of our team. They have won despite playing poorly and having to work hard to come from behind. I am more proud of that, than a team that blows people out, then lose when things get a little hard. This season is a process and this program is a process. These kids are learning a lot this year. They are young and nobody expected them to win the Conference this year; we knew that next year would be more feasible, so let's cut them some slack and let them grow and mature. Our coaches are human and as long as they are learning and understanding this team better, the more polished performances will come. Lets put this week behind us and look forward to Houston. Go Bulls!!

You took the words right out of my mouth. I am so sick of everyone being so down on this team. We are 7-0, and have done just enough to win EVERY game. Are we a top 10 team, no, but Houston is NOT Alabama either. We are good enough to go undefeated, will we? Who knows, depends on how we play. We have shown we can be amazing and we have shown we can struggle and still win. To say we don't have a chance is ridiculous. I say we win another close game, but it could easily go the other way too.

I think it's naive to believe the kids were not thinking about how the new uniforms looked. You can see by their reactions that they were jacked up for it. It probably wasn't a major issue, as it was stated, they played about the same as normal; but I'm sure they were a little distracted by it. I think CCS was responding to a direct question about the kids and the uniforms and he was just answering the question, not making excuses.

So, from what I have gathered from CCS, he is not the excuse kind of guy. I don't feel he blamed the new uniforms on their poor play, it sounded more like they may have been more focused on the new uniform than the normal uniforms. CCS has been coaching for a long time and I'm sure he notices different behaviors under different circumstances, i.e. Bowl game prep, rivalries, "different uniforms". It's a fair assumption that there is a different vibe knowing your gonna be wearing a "special" jersey for an upcoming game, as a young man, I was the same. When you know you wear one jersey for home games and one jersey for road games, that's one less thing to think about and I think that is all he was getting at. I think it's fair to say that he spends more time in the locker room than we do, so he has a better gage of his players, and can tell when something's off or different. We have played sub par all year, so I'm not making excuses. I just don't think CCS was either; I think he was just making an observation or it may have been a direct question asked about the uniform change and he was answering the question honestly.

This, there will always be wiggle room for teams who bring more money. Typically, the AAC champion will get the G5 bid unless there is a much better team out there. Hence, we shouldn't worry about rankings, and just focus on our conference championship and if we take care of our out of conference, everything else will fall into place.

True, I can agree with that.

Look, the bottom line is that this shouldn't surprise anyone. I've always said that we shouldn't care about the rankings because as a G5 conference, we won't get into the CFP unless there are multiple 2 loss teams or more. All we need to focus on is winning our conference and beating every P5 school we play. College Football has always been about money and always will be. The AAC is a higher quality conference than the PAC 12 this year and usually better than the Big 12 and ACC, but since we don't have the cash and clout, performance is secondary. The CFP will always have "reasons" why the P5 schools get in over G5. The sooner we accept that and focus on what we can control, the happier we will be. If we continue to build our program, facilities, fan base, endowment, brand and as many conference championships as possible, we will be in a good position for P5 expansion; until then, we are where we are and let's try and dominate it.

Yeah, I totally understand, I used to get so upset watching games. I guess over the years I've gotten a different perspective. I look at it as a source of entertainment now and realize I can't control any of it, so I try not to get upset or stressed. These are kids and they'll have good days and bad days, our coaches are human and make mistakes. Overall they do a good job and at the end of the day a win is a win and a loss is a loss. We knew it would be an uphill battle to win the conference, so a struggle here and there is ok. Let's just try to win all of the games and we will see where we are at the end.

I personally don't care who we lose ugly to, a win is a win is a win. Plenty of teams play down to their opponent; the key is not to get caught. We have had a few close ones, but we are 6-0. Sometimes Alabama doesn't look overly dominate during regular season, but they get the job done when it matters. The level of negativity in this community is unbelievable. I understand this is a sports board and we want to talk about sports, and that it's fitting to analyze and discuss things, but let's keep things in perspective. We have all seen up and down eras, let's just appreciate the good streak we're on and get upset over "bad" wins over bad teams; just win baby!!!!

Maybe if they would refer to us as South Florida, it wouldn't be as easy to mix up USF/UCF

I don't really care about rankings, but it is funny that the AAC has just as many teams in the Top 25 as the ACC and Pac12; also, there are no other G5's listed either. From a national perspective, that looks good for our Conference.

Cool dude, well that struck a nerve with you. I would apologize for my ignorance, but I just don't care enough about who donates what or what they do with their money; all I'm saying is if it's fair to ask students, alumni and local investors to help with the bill, then it's fair to ask former athletes to do the same.

I am really happy you brought this up. I think this is something that has rarely been discussed. It seems like a lot of NFL players give back to their schools, Charles Woodson paid for a new wing of UM's medical building to be built. I think that there have been a few players who could afford to give back, cough, cough, JPP, haha.

Yes, Michigan raised student ticket prices to help pay for renovations and enhancements to their facilities, on top of other baked in fees. I wouldn't want that to happen on top of the increase in tuition.

I only stated that because I know Michigan students have to pay $25/game or $175/season for their tickets and I wouldn't want that to happen.