Who would win between Bama and UCF?

[itsofficial101]

We'll never know. The only thing we do know is that undefeated UCF handled the Auburn team that beat Bama by 2 scores.

Who wins in a Bama - Georgia game that is officiated correctly?

Admittedly, I did not watch the game. But I saw the posts here discussing how Georgia was hosed in an overtime game multiple times. But I didn't realize until I read the article attached just how bad and how critical the biased officiating was. Crazy. I'm not sure how anyone can even claim that Bama is any kind of champion with the game appearing to be fixed.

https://247sports.com/college/penn-...lls-went-against-Georgia-vs-Alabama-113446611

Would Bama beat Ohio St, Wisconsin, and Penn St?

So the B1G went 7 wins and 1 Michigan during the bowl season and 3-0 in NY6 while the SEC had a losing record in the bowls. The SEC plays 1 less conference game which equals 1 more crème puff style bye week late in their season instead of back to back games against quality opponents. Bama didn't play back to back ranked teams the entire regular season, they didn't play a championship game, and they dodged Georgia in their cross-over games. Meanwhile, Ohio $t had to follow their lucky a$$ win over Penn St with a night road trip to Iowa where top 5 teams have gone down just about every year. Penn St had @ Northwestern, Michigan, @ Ohio St, and @ Mich St in consecutive games. No team in the nation would have been unscathed. Meanwhile, Bama lost to one of the few teams it played that was decent but never had 2 weeks in a row of good opponents. I don't think Bama would have been in the playoff if it was in the B1G East division.

Conclusion, the season is over and we really have no idea who the best team would be. UCF has the best claim being undefeated and beating the team that handled Alabama easily. Georgia possibly with honest officiating. Ohio St, Wisconsin, and Penn St (lost by fewer combined points than any team with a loss) all very well could have been the best team from the best conference that was conveniently dodged in the "playoff". I guess we will never know. Until it's changed, there really is no need to watch college football, as much as I love it, outside of Penn St games. It is perhaps going the way of the NFL.

 

[djr4rebs]

With or without Tua?

 

[PSU Dave]

With or without Tua?

Better question is how much would Bama win by?

 

[GreggK]

Doesn’t matter if they won.

I swear to you there are morons, Herbie leading the pack that would still say Bama is better

 

[itsofficial101]

Doesn’t matter if they won.

I swear to you there are morons, Herbie leading the pack that would still say Bama is better

With Bama's schedule next year we probably ought to just give them a bye to the championship game. Why risk injury playing a regular season when we already know the committee's desires?

 

[Erial_Lion]

With Bama's schedule next year we probably ought to just give them a bye to the championship game. Why risk injury playing a regular season when we already know the committee's desires?

Lol and propping up UCF and complaining about Bama's schedule in the same thread.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

With Bama's schedule next year we probably ought to just give them a bye to the championship game. Why risk injury playing a regular season when we already know the committee's desires?

I agree. The Committee should just come out and say they are inviting four SEC teams so that we all know what we are playing for before the season starts. This political dog and pony show at the end of the year where Alabama is gifted someone else's spot, and then gets the benefit of whomever they play getting hosed, is absolutely ruining College football.

I'd be absolutely elated if Franklin announced that we are playing for the Rose Bowl this year, and the CFP Committee can just go screw themselves.

 

[psu00]

We will never know. If I had to bet I’d say Bama beats UCF.

That said, most would have predicted the same about Miami over Penn State in the 87 Fiesta Bowl, or Miami over Bama in the 1993 Sugar Bowl (IIRC), or Oklahoma over Boise St in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl, etc.

Until there’s a true 8 or 16 team playoff there will always be a question of who is the real champion.

 

[PSUoh90]

According to former Vegas Odds Makers:



I realize also that Auburn was a significant favorite against UCF, however, I think there is a reason non-P5 schools have favored well in the NY6 over the years. Often times, they are playing to finish off an undefeated season against a more talented team who may be coming off a loss in their conference championship (missing out on the playoff or BCS Championship), who feels their season is over and the bowl game has little meaning. I don't want to take away too much from teams like Boise, Utah (2008 - Beat Bama in Sugar Bowl), and UCF, because they deserve a ton of credit for what they've done, but I suspect had Auburn won the SEC championship and played UCF in the CFP, the result may have been different.

 

[Erial_Lion]

We will never know. If I had to bet I’d say Bama beats UCF.

That said, most would have predicted the same about Miami over Penn State in the 87 Fiesta Bowl, or Miami over Bama in the 1993 Sugar Bowl (IIRC), or Oklahoma over Boise St in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl, etc.

Until there’s a true 8 or 16 team playoff there will always be a question of who is the real champion.

Hoops has 68 and you still have fans complaining that their team wasn't included, the committee is biased, etc (i.e. Syracuse fans "boycotting" the tourney last year after they were left out).

It goes to 8 and PSU would have still been on the outside looking in (so everyone here would cry when a team with UCF's schedule gets in over us), you could have three SEC teams had Auburn won the title game (wahhh, that's not fair that the SEC got 37.5% of the spots), etc.

Regardless of the solution, you'll have people complaining and questioning who the "real champion" is that year (short of blowing everything up).

 

[itsofficial101]

Lol and propping up UCF and complaining about Bama's schedule in the same thread.

Well they had 1 common opponent and UCF was 20 points better against them than Bama was.

So, yes, I think undefeated UCF is your national champion in absence of a true playoff that includes all conference champions and any undefeated non-power 5 deserving such as UCF.

 

[Erial_Lion]

According to former Vegas Odds Makers:

View embedded media

I would have guessed the 17.5-19.5 zone.

 

[Erial_Lion]

Well they had 1 common opponent and UCF was 20 points better against them than Bama was.

So, yes, I think undefeated UCF is your national champion in absence of a true playoff that includes all conference champions and any undefeated non-power 5 deserving such as UCF.

Great point, why look at the other 12 games when the transitive property gives you such a clear result.

 

[PSUoh90]

I would have guessed the 17.5-19.5 zone.

Yep. I don't think you're wrong. 17-18 is closer to what books would have used to attract more action on Alabama, IMO.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

Hoops has 68 and you still have fans complaining that their team wasn't included, the committee is biased, etc (i.e. Syracuse fans "boycotting" the tourney last year after they were left out).

It goes to 8 and PSU would have still been on the outside looking in (so everyone here would cry when a team with UCF's schedule gets in over us), you could have three SEC teams had Auburn won the title game (wahhh, that's not fair that the SEC got 37.5% of the spots), etc.

Regardless of the solution, you'll have people complaining and questioning who the "real champion" is that year (short of blowing everything up).

Simple solution. Either a Plus One after the Bowl Games are completed, or Conference Champs only. Alabama didn't prove crap.

Number one, Georgia obviously got hosed, and number two, no one except the Pac 12 Champ, USC, had to face the best team from the best Conference in the Country, Ohio State. And we all know how poorly that ended for USC.

Alabama now has two illegitimate Championships since that LSU fiasco where Oklahoma State got screwed.

 

[psu00]

Hoops has 68 and you still have fans complaining that their team wasn't included, the committee is biased, etc (i.e. Syracuse fans "boycotting" the tourney last year after they were left out).

It goes to 8 and PSU would have still been on the outside looking in (so everyone here would cry when a team with UCF's schedule gets in over us), you could have three SEC teams had Auburn won the title game (wahhh, that's not fair that the SEC got 37.5% of the spots), etc.

Regardless of the solution, you'll have people complaining and questioning who the "real champion" is that year (short of blowing everything up).

True to a degree. Basketball is a different animal but you’re right about the arguments of who is in/ out.

However, it should be noted that those arguments are generally over non title contenders and usually why an average Syracuse team is out but an average Iowa St or Sienna are in. Much of that debate revolves around reserved spots for champions of every conference, (no matter how minor), that ends up taking a spot from a mid to lower level team from a major conference.

If you had a 16 team football playoff, there would be very little outcry that #17 should have been in as a serious national title contender (this year it would have been MSU in at #16 and LSU out as #17).

You’re never going to find a perfect system that pleases everyone but you can get a system much better than the one we currently have.

 

[LionDeNittany]

According to former Vegas Odds Makers:

View embedded media

I realize also that Auburn was a significant favorite against UCF, however, I think there is a reason non-P5 schools have favored well in the NY6 over the years. Often times, they are playing to finish off an undefeated season against a more talented team who may be coming off a loss in their conference championship (missing out on the playoff or BCS Championship), who feels their season is over and the bowl game has little meaning. I don't want to take away too much from teams like Boise, Utah (2008 - Beat Bama in Sugar Bowl), and UCF, because they deserve a ton of credit for what they've done, but I suspect had Auburn won the SEC championship and played UCF in the CFP, the result may have been different.

I agree. For an example closer to home look at the Penn State bowl game vs. Houston.

Coaches mailed it in. Was embarrassing, but the players had fun.

Or for a more recent performance... Penn State vs. Michigan State.

LdN

 

[LionDeNittany]

Simple solution. Either a Plus One after the Bowl Games are completed, or Conference Champs only. Alabama didn't prove crap.

Number one, Georgia obviously got hosed, and number two, no one except the Pac 12 Champ, USC, had to face the best team from the best Conference in the Country, Ohio State. And we all know how poorly that ended for USC.

Alabama now has two illegitimate Championships since that LSU fiasco where Oklahoma State got screwed.

Alabama beat Clemson who was the #1 seed.

They also beat FSU early in the year before FSU lost their QB and imploded.

The idea that Alabama didn't prove anything is a joke.

LdN

 

[PSUSignore]

In a one game sample UCF might have a shot. If they played 10 times I'd take Bama in 8 or 9 out of 10.

 

[Erial_Lion]

If you had a 16 team football playoff, there would be very little outcry that #17 should have been in as a serious national title contender (this year it would have been MSU in at #16 and LSU out as #17).

It depends on the format. If you're giving auto-bids to conference winners, you need to slide it up another 5 spots for the cut-off. I'm sure that we would hear plenty from fans of Notre Dame, TCU, Washington, Miami, or whoever just missed the cut.

 

[LuvDaLions]

Let's put it this way, they would have just about the same chance of beating them as Penn State's 1986 team had against Miami. I think we were just about as big of an underdog for that game. Unfortunately, nobody will ever know. On paper, nobody would think they should be on the same field, but the game isn't played on paper, just ask our '86 team.

 

[JWB389]

Here's the thing for me. If you did not win your conference, you are not the conference champion. I take the approach that the national champion is not necessarily the best team in the country if they are not their conference champion. Bama is simply the tournament winner, that is all.

 

[psu00]

It depends on the format. If you're giving auto-bids to conference winners, you need to slide it up another 5 spots for the cut-off. I'm sure that we would hear plenty from fans of Notre Dame, TCU, Washington, Miami, or whoever just missed the cut.

You’ll always hear it from fans of teams that missed the cut but if the goal is to have the best team have to win it in the field (rather than in a Dallas conference room) then a 16 team playoff is the way to go IMO.

Yeah, LSU fans will think they were better than MSU but the chances of either of those teams winning is pretty low compared to #5-10 (or so).

I’d just rather have it won on the field with all serious contenders given the opportunity, not be told by “experts” who should win it.

The ‘expert’ committee told us it would be a Clemson vs Oklahoma championship game this year with Clemson repeating. That didn’t work out so well.

 

[rohrmd9]

UCF but the result wouldn't count because Bama wasn't motivated.

 

[mgkpsu]

3+ touchdown Bama victory.

 

[nittnee]

Simple solution. Either a Plus One after the Bowl Games are completed, or Conference Champs only. Alabama didn't prove crap.

Number one, Georgia obviously got hosed, and number two, no one except the Pac 12 Champ, USC, had to face the best team from the best Conference in the Country, Ohio State. And we all know how poorly that ended for USC.

Alabama now has two illegitimate Championships since that LSU fiasco where Oklahoma State got screwed.

We already have a plus one system. The only way is a real playoff with predetermined inclusion (conference champions). Add wild cards if you like. You know, like every other sport on the entire planet has figured out.

 

[john4psu]

Let's put it this way, they would have just about the same chance of beating them as Penn State's 1986 team had against Miami. I think we were just about as big of an underdog for that game. Unfortunately, nobody will ever know. On paper, nobody would think they should be on the same field, but the game isn't played on paper, just ask our '86 team.

Miami was a touchdown favorite over Penn State in the Fiesta Bowl.

 

[rohrmd9]

I agree. For an example closer to home look at the Penn State bowl game vs. Houston.

Coaches mailed it in. Was embarrassing, but the players had fun.

Or for a more recent performance... Penn State vs. Michigan State.

LdN

The players didn't have much fun that game either, given the circumstances.

 

[Grant Green]

In a one game sample UCF might have a shot. If they played 10 times I'd take Bama in 8 or 9 out of 10.

Thank you. I'm glad someone gets this. Asking who would win in a one game situation is a silly proposition. It's how the general public approaches handicapping. The better way to look at it is what would the record be after thousands of games and what would be the average margin of victory (which should be pretty close to the spread). I would guess Bama would win about 85 to 90% of the time, which correlates to a spread of 15-17.

 

[LionDeNittany]

The players didn't have much fun that game either, given the circumstances.

At the game probably not. That is correct.

But being at a bowl yes.

LdN

 

[Nitt1300]

A similar question was posed in 1969 and in 1970, and the supporters of the "major conferences" had similar opinions, even though in 1970 the team they were trying to denigrate had just finished undefeated and beaten the Big 8 champ in a bowl game two years in a row.

The answer was then as it is now, was "we'll never find out" because the powers that be didn't- and don't- want to see a game to decide it.

 

[78SweetRevenge]

UCF is getting way too much credit for beating Auburn in a meaningless bowl game

 

[itsofficial101]

UCF is getting way too much credit for beating Auburn in a meaningless bowl game

You may be on to something here. The SEC was horrible this year. Losing bowl record. Losses to teams like Troy from their top tier teams.

Obviously too much credit is given in beating an SEC division chump this year.

 

[crm114psu]

Like it or not, Alabama is the 2017 National Champion.

It's Official.

 

[crm114psu]

A similar question was posed in 1969 and in 1970, and the supporters of the "major conferences" had similar opinions, even though in 1970 the team they were trying to denigrate had just finished undefeated and beaten the Big 8 champ in a bowl game two years in a row.

The answer was then as it is now, was "we'll never find out" because the powers that be didn't- and don't- want to see a game to decide it.

Penn State declined an invitation to play the National Champion in 1969. That wasn't decided by the "powers that be".

 

[Doc-M]

BAMA of course!

 

[nits74]

Penn State declined an invitation to play the National Champion in 1969. That wasn't decided by the "powers that be".

Well, wrong. They didn't know at the time that it would be a National Championship game. Ohio State was undefeated and thought to be on its way to the mythical title. No one saw their loss to Michigan coming. At that time bowl invitations went out before the conclusion of the schedule. The players decided they'd rather spend their time again in Miami instead of Dallas. In no way did they duck Texas. And looking at the relative talent (see subsequent NFL rosters post 1969) from both teams, Texas is lucky they didn't play Penn State. Also, I believe at that time the Big Ten champion could not repeat Rose Bowl appearances, so the argument that Penn State could hope for an OSU bowl loss and a win over Texas is moot.

 

[PennStateNate]

Bama may score 100 vs UCF D.. Didn't Austin Peay score 40 vs them?

SMU, Navy. and Memphis hung with them, Bama is 1000 better then all of them.

 

[BBG65]

It doesn't matter if UCF is capable of winning an individual game. Playing in their conference with their schedule, they deserve no post-season accolades beyond their conference.

 

[crm114psu]

Well, wrong. They didn't know at the time that it would be a National Championship game. Ohio State was undefeated and thought to be on its way to the mythical title. No one saw their loss to Michigan coming. At that time bowl invitations went out before the conclusion of the schedule. The players decided they'd rather spend their time again in Miami instead of Dallas. In no way did they duck Texas. And looking at the relative talent (see subsequent NFL rosters post 1969) from both teams, Texas is lucky they didn't play Penn State. Also, I believe at that time the Big Ten champion could not repeat Rose Bowl appearances, so the argument that Penn State could hope for an OSU bowl loss and a win over Texas is moot.

Not wrong, it is a fact that Penn State made the decision to decline the Cotton.

The fact that "they didn't know" does not change who made the decision. It was not the "powers that be", the decision was made by PSU. You can't put the responsibility for that decision on anyone else.