Say what you will about Central Florida's claims to last year's national championship (and many have), but they haven't lost a game since December 17, 2016 and are without peer in keeping their mid-major program in the public eye.
As long as college football maintains the current Division I playoff system, UCF and teams like it will have an unimpeachable point: Determining which four teams play in the CFP is a flawed process that puts reputation and brand recognition over on-field performance. It's the only system in American sports that functions like this.
Heck, even in the NCAA the CFP stands out for all the wrong reasons. Lower level classifications -- Division III, Division II, and FCS -- clearly define which teams qualify for the post-season, have tournaments that run into December and beyond, and end with a clear-cut winner.
The CFP's standards are still, um, murky. That'll happen in a popularity contest.
(In an apples-and-oranges comparison, the NCAA Division I basketball tournament casts a wide net guaranteed to bring in a haul of Cinderella teams that only want an opportunity to play against the big names, prove they belong, and be celebrated for it. It's a big reason why March Madness has become a greater-than-sports cultural event that captivates the country every year. It also gives us a clear-cut championship. [Before you object, know that I understand football and basketball are very different sports.])
But despite the advent of the BCS in 1998, and the CFP in 2014, Division I football still doesn't clearly produce an undisputed titlist. Which allows programs like UCF the wiggle room to declare itself a national champion ("mythical" or otherwise) in a practice from the earliest days of the college football ... in 1869.
Hampered by an archaic, nearly 150-year old system, and denied a chance to directly prove themselves against other teams, UCF taken to the playing field of public opinion. They might not always win there, but at least they get a chance to compete.
As long as college football maintains the current Division I playoff system, UCF and teams like it will have an unimpeachable point: Determining which four teams play in the CFP is a flawed process that puts reputation and brand recognition over on-field performance. It's the only system in American sports that functions like this.
Heck, even in the NCAA the CFP stands out for all the wrong reasons. Lower level classifications -- Division III, Division II, and FCS -- clearly define which teams qualify for the post-season, have tournaments that run into December and beyond, and end with a clear-cut winner.
The CFP's standards are still, um, murky. That'll happen in a popularity contest.
(In an apples-and-oranges comparison, the NCAA Division I basketball tournament casts a wide net guaranteed to bring in a haul of Cinderella teams that only want an opportunity to play against the big names, prove they belong, and be celebrated for it. It's a big reason why March Madness has become a greater-than-sports cultural event that captivates the country every year. It also gives us a clear-cut championship. [Before you object, know that I understand football and basketball are very different sports.])
But despite the advent of the BCS in 1998, and the CFP in 2014, Division I football still doesn't clearly produce an undisputed titlist. Which allows programs like UCF the wiggle room to declare itself a national champion ("mythical" or otherwise) in a practice from the earliest days of the college football ... in 1869.
Hampered by an archaic, nearly 150-year old system, and denied a chance to directly prove themselves against other teams, UCF taken to the playing field of public opinion. They might not always win there, but at least they get a chance to compete.
RSS Feed