I’ll recap again.
The hoops only schools controlled the 2/3rd vote to dissolve the conference.
Then created their own.
UConn wasn’t invited .
UCF is going to get in a P5 conference
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
The hoops only schools controlled the 2/3rd vote to dissolve the conference.
Then created their own.
UConn wasn’t invited .
Uconn was absolutely discussed for BE membership with football elsewhere. They would have gone to CUSA or MAC for football only. They have so far decided to see if the AAC can work for all sports. Andy Katz even talked about it a couple years ago as renewed interest for both sides, after the split. The B12 isn't the only reason Uconn won't give up 3rd tier rights.
No person outside of a mental institution thinks like you!
If that was the case there would be no BIG10 it would be the Little NoBodies.
We claim to have 9 national championships. Look up some of those NCs and the validity of those self proclaimed championships.
We are the last fan base to mock others for claiming mythical championship seasons
Here is an example the type of NC Pitt does not claim
1980
Despite losing one game, the Panthers were named national champion by NCAA-designated major selectors DeVold System, Football Research, and the NY Times), while also named co-national champion by Rothman (FACT) and Sagarin.[1]The university does not claim a national championship for this season...
Wikipedia
You should look them up and read some history of the era. You clearly are in need of it.
UCF is really in the spot Alabama was in back in decades ago, not many titles yet.
Alabama, after Bryant retired, started to claim all sorts of wacky titles that are not just 'Consensus,' but are not even NCAA recognized. Now that Saban has delivered so many 'Consensus' NCs, it makes little sense to claim some of the 'very questionable' titles.
I.e., Alabama claims 17 NCs, only 11 are Consensus, and 3-4 of the 6 remaining are 'very questionable.'
UCF does not claim a 'Consensus' title, and UCF's AD was explicit about 2017, that Alabama was THE 'Consensus' National Champion. UCF's AD also stated they were unlikely to claim a 2018 title, if they won the Fiesta Bowl, and double-downed on that when the two (2) finalists as of 12/29 were both undefeated.
2017 was like a 'perfect storm' of circumstances, especially with UCF being ranked top 3 in so many computer rankings before the bowl season, thanx to a strong AAC, as well as no other undefeated FBS teams.
The same was not true of 2018, with the AAC not being as good (and injury decimated for the most part). UCF was ranked in computers no higher than #6 (S&P+), and usually (for rankings that were field-based, only 2018-based) no lower than #9 (including Sagarin RECENT, although not multi-year Sagarin at #18, or HS recruiting heavy ESPN FPI, at #23 -- 7-5 Miami was #21, BTW).
SIDE NOTE: UCF also does not claim a NC for 2013 either, but it held a parade at Disney (which only costs Disney, not UCFAA, Inc. or the taxpayers). Disney holds a parade for UCF every time it wins a NY bowl (2014 for 2013, 2018 for 2017).
1917
Pitt 10-0, Pop Warner Head Coach, outscored their opponents 260-31
Pitt does not claim a NC in 1917
Pitt 10-0, Pop Warner Head Coach, outscored their opponents 260-31
Pitt does not claim a NC in 1917
And Florida doesn't claim several either, and gives Alabama crap about their claims.
The PAC-12 attempts to be relevant by claiming even just BCS games, the non-title (non-#1 v. #2) games, along with NCAA Major Selectors. E.g., their last is 2008 Utah, using the same logic as UCF, NCAA Major Selectors.
PAC-12 Football National Championships
UCF deserves to be questioned. Unfortunately, some of the people questioning UCF are fans of programs claiming NCs with the same, or worse, logic.
In any case, UCF and only 9 other P5 programs have been to at least 3 NY bowl games in the past 6 seasons. And for those that keep saying UCF has 'participation trophies,' UCF winnings its first 2 out of 3 (2014 Fiesta - #5-6 B12 Champ ; 2018 Peach - #6-7 SEC West Champ) are really ignoring the fact that winning the game is more than just 'participation.'
Everyone likes to talk about how LSU had players out, and how Auburn wasn't motivated, but no one talks about how UCF had more players out than Auburn (2-deep RBs, half their O-line, a couple on defense), among other things.
There's a lot of P5 fans who are practicing pure hypocrisy out there, while too many of the fans of P5 programs that aren't being hypocritical, focus on UCF, instead of both UCF + the P5 fans of hypocritical programs. It gives UCF fodder to continue, because enough P5 programs are doing it too.
When/ if the current structure goes through a radical revamping and the current conference structure disappears into the top-whatever number of football programs ... UCF likely will be part of it. Pitt, probably not, give or take the "probably". Maybe voluntarily! Whatever number of years, decades etc., that it takes for that. But until then, no.
Consensus titles are not something that are "claimed". They have been defined, by the NCAA, as national championships that have been awarded by at least one of the four following selectors of national championships: AP poll, Coaches' poll, Football Writers Association of America (FWAA), and the National Football Foundation (NFF). The FWAA and NFF were combined with the advent of the playoff and automatically award their trophy to the winner.
There are no such thing as a "Consensus" national championship prior to 1950, the year the two poll system came into being with the first coaches' poll. The NCAA also defines what "Consensus" All-Americans mean, etc.
The NCAA has never, and does not currently, recognize or certify national championships in the highest level of play of college football. It only lists in its records book the historic annual selections of other independent "selectors"of national championships. The selectors listed in the records book are those that were deemed to be "major" in scope of their publication or national prestige as determined by a couple of respected and published football historians, one of which was a contributor to the College Football Data Warehouse website. This list of selectors and their selections was originated in the NCAA records book about 15 or 20 years ago and the records book has annually added to that list, somewhat inconsistently depending on who is editing it. Included in these post-hoc updates were some of the computer polls that were once part of the BCS rankings, and some of these listings have continued despite it not being contemporaneously appropriate to do so if one is actual concerned with the accuracy of their status of being major selectors, or selectors at all.
Alabama has never claimed a national title that was not listed among the selections of "major" selectors in the NCAA records book.
UCF claim, well past not just the implementation of the two poll system, but post BCS and playoff, has zero contemporaneous or retrospective recognition outside the university, so it is very much different than Alabama's past or current claims.
Last edited:
Pitt's weakest claim is 1934. It is really the only one that is highly questionable, but Pitt's claims have always been based on a 1970 Sports Illustrated study (early version here) that compiled one of the first all-time lists of national titles. 1934 was listed by Sports Illustrated because it was a "Parke Davis" selection. Parke Davis was one of the foremost college football authorities and historians of the early 20th Century and his selections were published in the Spalding's Annual Football Guide. The only problem was Parke Davis died the year before and the 1934 selection was merely published under his byline. 1934 is not listed in the NCAA's records book, nor at College Football Data Warehouse. However, it remains claimed by Pitt because Pitt has consistently based its claim on the SI study since the study was published (Pitt has only added the consensus 1976 championship since). Nearly every evaluator of national championships recognizes 1910 as a Pitt title, so Pitt could, if it wanted, easily replace 1934 with 1910, but to Pitt's credit, it has maintained the consistency of the source of its title claims for nearly 50 years.
It's also worth noting that bowls were very much considered exhibition games for most of their history, and there wasn't a permanently post-bowl AP poll/champion until 1968. Bowls weren't considered in the Coaches' Poll until 1974.
Last edited:
I think the American is a better conference than some people give it credit for being. I don’t see it as being like the other non-power conferences at all. I do think they over-expanded and they will regret that decision in the long run – if they’re not already regretting it now. However, when I look at some of the teams in the American, and when I consider some of their long-term potential, they are absolutely of power five quality:
# Central Florida
# South Florida
# Temple
# Connecticut
# Cincinnati
# Houston
# Southern Methodist
# Memphis
Personally, I think those schools, with the right leadership in place, could compete in any conference in all three major sports (football, men’s and women’s basketball).
I’m a little bit less bullish on schools like Navy, Tulsa, East Carolina, and Tulane for varying reasons.
Still, I could definitely see a day where that is considered a major conference. I know a lot of people disagree with me but I could certainly see it. However, to get to that point, schools like Temple, Memphis and South Florida are definitely going to have to build on campus stadia that much better fit the size of their actual fan base, not their aspirational fan base.
# Central Florida
# South Florida
# Temple
# Connecticut
# Cincinnati
# Houston
# Southern Methodist
# Memphis
Personally, I think those schools, with the right leadership in place, could compete in any conference in all three major sports (football, men’s and women’s basketball).
I’m a little bit less bullish on schools like Navy, Tulsa, East Carolina, and Tulane for varying reasons.
Still, I could definitely see a day where that is considered a major conference. I know a lot of people disagree with me but I could certainly see it. However, to get to that point, schools like Temple, Memphis and South Florida are definitely going to have to build on campus stadia that much better fit the size of their actual fan base, not their aspirational fan base.
Last edited:
pittdan77
Athletic Director
There's little to no reason for anyone to add them or anyone else. If expansion was even possible for the TV networks, it would have happened a couple of years ago with the Big 12.
Why wouldn't the upgrade help their recruiting to enable them to improve even further and be competitive? They are in a desirable place, huge enrollment, big alumni, and will have tremendou$ re$ource$ at their disposal to pay recruits.
I know, that improvement is what was supposed to happen with Pitt, and it seems the opposite has... it's harder than ever for basketball and football. But we're a ... special case. As in, we don't eSPECIALlly care about winning.
With proper aligned commitment from top down as happens at the best programs, the positive jolt of P5 membership would have a significant impact for UCF.
But as i mentioned, the current setup is insular and locked in and allows for too many deadbeat programs to freeload (eyes upwards and whistling innocently in my Pitt polo). Eventually when real Power Football conferences emerge deadwood will be replaced by serious players. That'll be awhile, so UCF will be chomping at the bit for some time yet to come. Schools like ourselves, Wake, Purdue, Vandy et al can still breathe easy.
conference's are really only looking for teams that move the needle right now and no one outside the P5 really does that. the closest is byu. If expansion happens again and the b12 doesn't get picked apart UCF has a shot, but I don't see them being added on their own other pieces would have to fall.
I don’t disagree with you. In the Power Five winning 20+ games in a row is hard for Saban so if that’s the expectation of their fans who are now used to instant success, they’re going to be sorely mistaken. No reason UCF can’t be a good team or a respected team in a bigger conference but it’s not the same as the AAC or Conference USA, etc.
UCF isn't remotely likely to get a P5 invite unless it's as a back-fill down the road. It's all about big brands and big markets. UCF doesn't put nearly enough eyeballs on TV's. I could see the B12 having them as a Plan B option...but that would be about it (and would probably be only when the B12 was no longer a true P5 due to further attrition). You're not going to suddenly get a B12 Network added to Florida cable bills because of the Knights. And UCF just isn't a national brand that's going to be a huge digital draw. And as far as "butts in seats" fan base...the school opened its doors in 1963 and is very new to the game of big time athletics. Love the Knights but they're on the outside looking in right now.
^^^ This is utter BS. Take one look at UCF's TV ratings this decade, and that's just utter BS. Compared to the bottom of the P5, who are 'collecting checks' compared to UCF making ESPN massive amounts of money.
No, the problem is that UCF was a decade 'too late.'
ESPN is laying off and telling the Big XII that it won't give it another dime if it adds a team. No P5 conference is going to expand as long as media is telling everyone that right now.
If this was 2003, it's no question.
But the Big XII has known UCF has been beating its median average viewership since 2013. And now it'd be in the top 3, ratings-wise.
UCF overtook Miami as the #3 team in the state where people name their #1 team, and its alumni outnumber. Even Miami's own AA admitted this by 2015.
Yes, UCF is young, and its FBS program has only been around since '96. Back then UCF had no more than 4 home games/year, spent only $1M on football, and got huge paychecks from P5 teams to visit.
But UCF is massive, and is pumping out graduates at a massive rate. The first generation of high wealth boosters are now just hitting, and they were the ones that re-defined the program 2003+ with going 100% private, and building privately funded facilities.
UCF gets a minority of its revenue from athletic fees, unlike any other huge G5. With P5 money -- just amounts equivalent to its TV ratings share this decade (even considering the dumpster fire of 2015) -- it'd be running a huge surplus.
Within another generation, the question won't be, "How did UCF get in?" but "Why wasn't UCF included decades earlier?"
The New York Times argued that ... back in 1997.
Remember, this was 2014 ... after UCF's first NY bowl win over an even higher ranked opponent, who was predicted to be in the NC (before 3 injuries, and all were back for UCF). UCF never trailed that game (and only 10 minutes of the 120 minutes of its first 2x NY Bowls).
For those that don't watch it, here's the punchline ...
Wining a 1st NY bowl over the #5/#6 Big XII Champion was one thing. Winning a 2nd NY bowl over the #6/#7 SEC Divisional Champion was just a 'follow-up' -- especially when neither Florida nor Miami had won any in a long time (at that point in the case of Florida), changed a lot.
SIDE NOTE: In fact, #4 Florida got spanked by #22 Louisville in 2012, which UCF would beat a very good Louisville team the next year, who spanked Miami even harder in 2013. Between the Louisville and UCF in the AAC, it would have been tough to beat either -- and even the eventual, final AP #4 SEC East Champ learned that (barely escaped UCF with a 3 point win, trailing most of the game).
Winning not just championships -- but major bowl games and away games against Top 10 teams -- changes things, when you do it multiple times. And when you do it more than Miami has in 15+ years, or Florida in the last 10 (Florida just finally equalized UCF in the past 10 years), causes a huge shift.
Every time UCF knocks off a Top 10 team, people make excuses, or say they cannot do it continually. But you start looking at how UCF has done it, and with how many injuries at times (no one covers when UCF has injuries or sit-outs), everyone starts to recognize the reality.
And let's face it ... the AAC is getting 3-4x as much TV media as the rest of the G5 ... combined. And that includes current deals in talks.
All UCF wants to do is built its program on what it has earned on-the-field and in the TV ratings. It cannot help with the ignorance of others.
Like UCF fans not only outnumbering Auburn, who is 4x closer, at the Peach, but outnumbering LSU 2-to-1, who is half as close, at the Fiesta. UCF isn't just traveling better than G5s, but many P5s. Even back in 2013, UCF traveled better to the Fiesta better than all the Big East's prior teams ... combined.
Same with the TV ratings. There are a lot of P5 programs out there 'collecting paychecks.' Everyone speaks of UCF 2015 ... but forgets UCF 2013. 2017 isn't the start of UCF ... far from it. And the past decade of UCF's TV ratings speaks for itself.
UCF, and its fanbase, is not going away. Even the Fiesta bowl committee members I spoke to in January recognizes this, and they all want UCF not only as their G5 rep, but over a lot of P5 teams! This is for both the ticket sales as well as the TV ratings.
Some call UCF a 'cinderella.' The joke is, it's actually not. It's massive with a huge following. UCF boosters just finally became numerous enough to change things. It already has a huge alumni fanbase.
And the AAC is quickly being referred to as the 'New Big East,' for its football and fun ... with many watching it while the P5s disappoint.
SIDE NOTE: Ironically this is actually a misnomer ... because the AAC is legally the Big East, who just sold the name and basketball records, all other Big East records remain in the AAC.
For those that don't watch it, here's the punchline ...
"Come see what we can't do next"
(after a list of things G5s are never supposed to be able to do)
(after a list of things G5s are never supposed to be able to do)
Wining a 1st NY bowl over the #5/#6 Big XII Champion was one thing. Winning a 2nd NY bowl over the #6/#7 SEC Divisional Champion was just a 'follow-up' -- especially when neither Florida nor Miami had won any in a long time (at that point in the case of Florida), changed a lot.
SIDE NOTE: In fact, #4 Florida got spanked by #22 Louisville in 2012, which UCF would beat a very good Louisville team the next year, who spanked Miami even harder in 2013. Between the Louisville and UCF in the AAC, it would have been tough to beat either -- and even the eventual, final AP #4 SEC East Champ learned that (barely escaped UCF with a 3 point win, trailing most of the game).
Winning not just championships -- but major bowl games and away games against Top 10 teams -- changes things, when you do it multiple times. And when you do it more than Miami has in 15+ years, or Florida in the last 10 (Florida just finally equalized UCF in the past 10 years), causes a huge shift.
Every time UCF knocks off a Top 10 team, people make excuses, or say they cannot do it continually. But you start looking at how UCF has done it, and with how many injuries at times (no one covers when UCF has injuries or sit-outs), everyone starts to recognize the reality.
And let's face it ... the AAC is getting 3-4x as much TV media as the rest of the G5 ... combined. And that includes current deals in talks.
All UCF wants to do is built its program on what it has earned on-the-field and in the TV ratings. It cannot help with the ignorance of others.
Like UCF fans not only outnumbering Auburn, who is 4x closer, at the Peach, but outnumbering LSU 2-to-1, who is half as close, at the Fiesta. UCF isn't just traveling better than G5s, but many P5s. Even back in 2013, UCF traveled better to the Fiesta better than all the Big East's prior teams ... combined.
Same with the TV ratings. There are a lot of P5 programs out there 'collecting paychecks.' Everyone speaks of UCF 2015 ... but forgets UCF 2013. 2017 isn't the start of UCF ... far from it. And the past decade of UCF's TV ratings speaks for itself.
UCF, and its fanbase, is not going away. Even the Fiesta bowl committee members I spoke to in January recognizes this, and they all want UCF not only as their G5 rep, but over a lot of P5 teams! This is for both the ticket sales as well as the TV ratings.
Some call UCF a 'cinderella.' The joke is, it's actually not. It's massive with a huge following. UCF boosters just finally became numerous enough to change things. It already has a huge alumni fanbase.
And the AAC is quickly being referred to as the 'New Big East,' for its football and fun ... with many watching it while the P5s disappoint.
SIDE NOTE: Ironically this is actually a misnomer ... because the AAC is legally the Big East, who just sold the name and basketball records, all other Big East records remain in the AAC.
Last edited:
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I can't tell if the FSU post was just a troll post so the UCF guys can start at it again or what is going on. Maybe it's because Houston is suddenly the sexy G5 school in a real media market that's getting attention?
Would rather have had the thread revived on the new cathedral uniform font, and if it was less or more hideous than the old cathedral font.
So you're saying that your school is a glorified diploma mill. Well, at least thank you for making so that we didn't have to point it out.
Don't worry, UCF, if they keep winning at a similar rate, will be in the Big 12, ACC, or Big Ten. That's a guarantee. What? The Big Ten? Cant be? Yep. They added Rutgers so......and years ago I said Rutgers would get a Big Ten invite before Pitt at a time when a faction of the Pitt fanbase thought we'd eventually be in the Big Ten.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I think the problem for UCF is where do they fit? Yeah, winning is cool but we all know that TV holds the reins.
Please don't give SMF a challenge.
But look at the tomato-can schedule that got UCF into those New Year's Day bowls. Enough said.
They are in one of America's largest cities and it only has 1 major pro team and 0 major college teams. It's only a matter of time for UCF......if they keep winning 10+ games every year.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I don't think UCF into the ACC would affect either school really. The state is already divided amongst the "Big" 3 and UCF has built their own base. TV is a non-issue.
Likely nothing.
If anything, it hurts their chances
Think Ohio State and Michigan want to add a legit opponent to gunk up their season and ruin their chances of reaching the playoffs? Nope
Think the Purdue’s and Indiana’s of that league want another obstacle to reaching a bowl? Nope
Rutgers and Maryland have been perfect for them
Bottom line is, if the Big ten or anyone else thinks Ucf will make them more money, they’ll be invited
Though frankly, I think Ucf is better off under their current situation
Of course it would impact both schools.
There’s a reason why schools are against adding in-state schools to their conference.
No that was PSU, most welcome rivalries. Virginia welcomed in Virginia Tech
No they didn’t. Not willingly at least
They were forced by their governor
And Virginia Tech was a BCS school before joining the ACC.
Ucf is not, so the situation really isn’t the same.
