Do we have to get “legal” to get anything done?

[Mazuru]

Another week, another BS ranking. Now UF passes us by. Waiting for realignment is unrealistic, as is scheduling all big name school games (years in advance, mind you) when we’re not playing conference games.

What do you think? Do we stand a better chance by NOT being in a conference (Miami of old), scheduling four big OOC games instead of two, or by bringing the whole system to court and suing for a change (not even sure if this is possible, they might have signed their rights away when the system was created)?

Thoughts? I like being in the AAC, it’s just hurting more than helping these days...

 

[firm_bizzle]

Independent with Olympic sports in the Big East and a Citrus Bowl tie in.

 

[Knight Strength]

Start a CFP lawsuit fund

 

[Stetson_1883]

Going from an independant, to the MAC, to the CUSA...I'm happy to be in the AAC. Yeah it's an obstacle to our football aspirations but it's pretty solid else where. It's just a matter of time until we get into a "major" FB conference.

For now. I say enjoy it and be happy we're in the AAC. BBALL should be fun this yeae!

 

[Happy Hands]

It's the AP poll. It has no power anymore. It's just shock jocks and print media dinosaurs.

 

[80'sKnight]

The positives about the AP poll 1. We're going to be much lower in the invitational poll, and 2 It shows sports media outside of ESPN think more positively about UCF than ESPN morons. Other than that, it is pretty meaningless as it's just a rubber stamp for the invitational winner.

 

[80'sKnight]

Oh, and I am one of the few who believe the only way Utah got into the P6 was thanks to Sen. Hatch's involvement threat.

 

[sonnyt23]

Oh, and I am one of the few who believe the only way Utah got into the P6 was thanks to Sen. Hatch's involvement threat.

Dead on!

 

[Poolside Knight]

Let's dispel the notion the Cartel doesn't know what it's doing

 

[B R Knightz]

No legal action....JWB!!!!
Charge On

 

[knightraveler]

Start a CFP lawsuit fund

GoFundMe for all G5 schools to join a class action lawsuit.

 

[Crazyhole]

Hahahhahahaha. Im sorry, but this is funny. So you're suggesting that you sue because you feel like your claim to a MYTHICAL national title is more valid than what you're given credit for? That somehow there actually is a P5 structure and it is illegally working to keep your team from attaining some sort of subjective success.

Ok. What exactly are the damages that you want a judge to reconcile? And whatever that is, please explain how Alabama, Ohio St , Nebraska, etc gains some sort of benefit from going undefeated that UCF doesn't in terms of unfair practice. Does UCF have a fanbase that is large enough to match what other teams have for money? If not, then why? Has UCF created a market for consumer appeal, made an attempt in goodwill to produce revenue for exposure for advertisers and broadcasters, and proven to be a good investment for them? If so, good lawsuit. If not, its sour grapes

 

[adamucf]

Hahahhahahaha. Im sorry, but this is funny. So you're suggesting that you sue because you feel like your claim to a MYTHICAL national title is more valid than what you're given credit for? That somehow there actually is a P5 structure and it is illegally working to keep your team from attaining some sort of subjective success.

Ok. What exactly are the damages that you want a judge to reconcile? And whatever that is, please explain how Alabama, Ohio St , Nebraska, etc gains some sort of benefit from going undefeated that UCF doesn't in terms of unfair practice. Does UCF have a fanbase that is large enough to match what other teams have for money? If not, then why? Has UCF created a market for consumer appeal, made an attempt in goodwill to produce revenue for exposure for advertisers and broadcasters, and proven to be a good investment for them? If so, good lawsuit. If not, its sour grapes

Oh sh*t, random internet guy says there's no case. Well, I'm convinced.

 

[knightraveler]

Hahahhahahaha. Im sorry, but this is funny. So you're suggesting that you sue because you feel like your claim to a MYTHICAL national title is more valid than what you're given credit for? That somehow there actually is a P5 structure and it is illegally working to keep your team from attaining some sort of subjective success.

Ok. What exactly are the damages that you want a judge to reconcile? And whatever that is, please explain how Alabama, Ohio St , Nebraska, etc gains some sort of benefit from going undefeated that UCF doesn't in terms of unfair practice. Does UCF have a fanbase that is large enough to match what other teams have for money? If not, then why? Has UCF created a market for consumer appeal, made an attempt in goodwill to produce revenue for exposure for advertisers and broadcasters, and proven to be a good investment for them? If so, good lawsuit. If not, its sour grapes

It's pretty simple. The agreement with the G5 schools guaranteed them a "path to the playoffs". There is no path because there are no rules. They are nebulous and subjective. They use the preseason rankings to elevate all P5 teams even when the data clearly shows that it is purely subjective. The preseason rankings right out of the gate gives the P5 teams a big lead to secure a playoff position over G5 teams. If you could prove collusion between the Committee and ESPN to keep the G5 teams out of the playoff that could be argued as breach of contract or racketeering because of all the money that the P5 benefits from keeping the G5 teams out of the playoff. While there is a lot on money to be made on the backs of college football and basketball athletes all the athletes deserve a legitimate chance at playing for the championship in their division. This is what sports should be about.

 

[sonnyt23]

As is the case with the NCAA Basketball 64 tourney, every conference champion in football should have the right to compete for a national championship. The P5 teams, in concert with their media partners, most notably ESPN, has conspired to ensure their "money party" shall not be interrupted by any G5 team. Our (UCF and G5 teams, to be used interchangeably) complaint/cause is no different then when Senator Hatch urged the Justice Department to investigate this (BCS at the time ) bullshit setup back in 2009, due to violations to Antitrust laws, concerning his hometown Utah Utes exclusion from the BCS/Pac12. Coincidentally (I think not) less than 1 year later the University of Utah got an invite to join the Pac12. Anyone who doesn't believe this (threatened Justice Department investigation) didn't result in the Utes getting to the "Big Boy Table" is delusional. UCF and all G5 teams need someone in the Justice Dept. to look into this situation once again...hopefully we get someone to step forward that has legal influence that can champion our cause.
Here's the link concerning Senator Hatch/Utah Utes story back in 2009:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=4311694

 

[thespiritof1976]

Oh, and I am one of the few who believe the only way Utah got into the P6 was thanks to Sen. Hatch's involvement threat.

Absolutely. TCU got in the B12 due to Rick Perry getting involved. What we need is a powerful Senator to take up our case. Maybe Rick Scott if he gets elected ? (And FTR, if getting into a power conference means electing a particular individual from either party, then I am all for it)

 

[SCKnight]

It's the AP poll. It has no power anymore. It's just shock jocks and print media dinosaurs.

IF you do not think the committee does not take into account the AP polls in their SOS arguments you are kidding yourself

 

[KnightLife1]

As is the case with the NCAA Basketball 64 tourney, every conference champion in football should have the right to compete for a national championship. The P5 teams, in concert with their media partners, most notably ESPN, has conspired to ensure their "money party" shall not be interrupted by any G5 team. Our (UCF and G5 teams, to be used interchangeably) complaint/cause is no different then when Senator Hatch urged the Justice Department to investigate this (BCS at the time ) bullshit setup back in 2009, due to violations to Antitrust laws, concerning his hometown Utah Utes exclusion from the BCS/Pac12. Coincidentally (I think not) less than 1 year later the University of Utah got an invite to join the Pac12. Anyone who doesn't believe this (threatened Justice Department investigation) didn't result in the Utes getting to the "Big Boy Table" is delusional. UCF and all G5 teams need someone in the Justice Dept. to look into this situation once again...hopefully we get someone to step forward that has legal influence that can champion our cause.
Here's the link concerning Senator Hatch/Utah Utes story back in 2009:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=4311694

Very interesting.

 

[UCFBS]

Yep, Utah AG and US DoJ got Utah and TCU into P5s, respectively.

But that's back when TV contracts were still growing in size. That's no longer the case.

 

[Crazyhole]

It's pretty simple. The agreement with the G5 schools guaranteed them a "path to the playoffs". There is no path because there are no rules. They are nebulous and subjective. They use the preseason rankings to elevate all P5 teams even when the data clearly shows that it is purely subjective. The preseason rankings right out of the gate gives the P5 teams a big lead to secure a playoff position over G5 teams. If you could prove collusion between the Committee and ESPN to keep the G5 teams out of the playoff that could be argued as breach of contract or racketeering because of all the money that the P5 benefits from keeping the G5 teams out of the playoff. While there is a lot on money to be made on the backs of college football and basketball athletes all the athletes deserve a legitimate chance at playing for the championship in their division. This is what sports should be about.

Ok, so this is a pretty decent argument. At the same time, inclusion to the NCAA and to the playoff committe is voluntary. Both parties agreed to what we have in place, so pretty much end of story unless you can prove that there is a breach of contract AND damages were incurred. Thats pretty much impossible considering it is understood by both parties that selection is entirely subjective. Seriously, i get it and it pisses me off too. UCF should have been in the playoff last year and as long as the team remains undefeated there should be no reason they arent included this year. That being said, talk of lawsuits is just silliness at this point. The season is only half over, the complaints revolve entirely around polls that mean jack squat, and quite honestly there are 4 other teams currently who have the same record with 3 of them being clearly superior to UCF by any objective measure. Shit, your own fanbase even questions the quality of this team. Im sorry but this talk about lawsuits is just stupid. Just enjoy the fact that your team is undefeated and is getting more respect than 120+ other teams. If you're seriously worried about a subjective poll that puts you in the same category as Alabama, Michigan, Notre Dame and the like then you need to step back and get some perspective.

 

[Happy Hands]

IF you do not think the committee does not take into account the AP polls in their SOS arguments you are kidding yourself

The committee is the upmost of humans and would never be swayed by such nonsense.

 

[SublimeKnight]

For those clamoring for a lawsuit, it's unlikely. The "playoff" was created, in the way that it was, to lower legal exposure.

Here's an article from 2012 explaining exactly what we're seeing. These BCS guys aren't fools and nothing is left to chance

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/college-footballs-final-four-could-quell-antitrust-fight/

 

[rainman614]

I have no problem if the CFP picks the best teams, as long as it’s by record. Last year, we should have been in the playoffs. This year, we are told we just need to schedule better teams and win out all of our games. If Alabama, ND, and Clemson are all undefeated, I have no reason to argue that all 3 of those teams belong there too. But when you’re in the “Top 4”, there shouldn’t be any discussion about “Quality Losses” unless there are no undefeated teams. Was Purdue a “Quality Loss” for Ohio State?

 

[SublimeKnight]

I have no problem if the CFP picks the best teams, as long as it’s by record. Last year, we should have been in the playoffs. This year, we are told we just need to schedule better teams and win out all of our games. If Alabama, ND, and Clemson are all undefeated, I have no reason to argue that all 3 of those teams belong there too. But when you’re in the “Top 4”, there shouldn’t be any discussion about “Quality Losses” unless there are no undefeated teams. Was Purdue a “Quality Loss” for Ohio State?

You have to realize, this is not a "playoff" this is an old company trying to act new and hip. The CFP is the BCS, which is just the old bowl guard trying to hold on to the past. In their view, the perfect conclusion to the season is #1 Ohio State playing #2 USC in the Rose Bowl like it's 1969 every year.

The whole elaborate narrative they've created is flawed at its core. They say they're looking to crown "the best team", there is no such thing and a playoff isn't the vehicle to do it. A playoff determines a winner. That is all.

So to determine a winner, with no post arguing, you have to seed it with the most deserving, not a subjective "best".

 

[rainman614]

The “playoff” turned out to be an invitational instead of the playoff we were promised. This happened because they ditched the BCS formula, which included the computer rankings, in favor of a human poll conducted in secret by self titled “power five” conference reps. They control the CFP Poll, they invite the teams, they set the rules which change yearly based on what’s most beneficial.

This new system didn’t quell antitrust concerns, it dramatically increased them. Tax payer funded universities who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars have no opportunity to achieve a return on that investment. D1 FBS football is a multibillion dollar industry that crosses every state line except Alaska.

I expect to hear far more about it from far smarter people in the coming months/years.

 

[SublimeKnight]

The “playoff” turned out to be an invitational instead of the playoff we were promised. This happened because they ditched the BCS formula, which included the computer rankings, in favor of a human poll conducted in secret by self titled “power five” conference reps. They control the CFP Poll, they invite the teams, they set the rules which change yearly based on what’s most beneficial.

This new system didn’t quell antitrust concerns, it dramatically increased them. Tax payer funded universities who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars have no opportunity to achieve a return on that investment. D1 FBS football is a multibillion dollar industry that crosses every state line except Alaska.

I expect to hear far more about it from far smarter people in the coming months/years.

No offense taken

 

[rainman614]

No offense taken

Didn’t mean to cause any offense . I’ve been a long time lurker on the boards and decided to sign up and get involved in these discussions. I have enjoyed this season more because I got in on these boards. It gives me an outlet to vent, to chat, to worry (dang Memphis game), and to celebrate. I did laugh at your tweet that DW replied to

 

[knightraveler]

For those clamoring for a lawsuit, it's unlikely. The "playoff" was created, in the way that it was, to lower legal exposure.

Here's an article from 2012 explaining exactly what we're seeing. These BCS guys aren't fools and nothing is left to chance

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/college-footballs-final-four-could-quell-antitrust-fight/

According to the Justice Dept. the biggest concern was the disparity of monetary disbursements to the conferences not included in a playoff system. So the way the playoff committee (also ESPN) got around this is to state "there is a path to the playoff" when everyone now knows this is next to impossible. Everyone that plays the "MegaMillions" jackpot has "a path to winning it" but the odds are 1-300,000,000 or slightly less than a G5 team being in the playoffs. And remember, intent is 99 percent of the law. You just have to prove it. Seems easy to me.

 

[bignow]

So if UCF could prove it tried to improve its' SOS by scheduling more P5 teams and there was collusion to not schedule UCF that is a start.
I could easily see an Anti-Trust lawsuit stirred up since there is no path to P5. It is completely subjective and has inherent bias. The lawsuit below is going to open Pandora's box

https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...usher-in-new-round-of-conference-realignment/

 

[rainman614]

According to the Justice Dept. the biggest concern was the disparity of monetary disbursements to the conferences not included in a playoff system. So the way the playoff committee (also ESPN) got around this is to state "there is a path to the playoff" when everyone now knows this is next to impossible. Everyone that plays the "MegaMillions" jackpot has "a path to winning it" but the odds are 1-300,000,000 or slightly less than a G5 team being in the playoffs. And remember, intent is 99 percent of the law. You just have to prove it. Seems easy to me.

There is intent and what actually happens. If a team goes undefeated for 2 years, is their National Championship claim invalidated because the team couldn’t get an invite to the playoffs? Then again, It’s not fair unless there are at least 3 SEC teams and Ohio State. The rest of college football is just sub par per ESPN, the primary money makers on this sport. If UCF isn’t in the CFP, I’m not going to watch it again this year. I’d rather watch the current system burn. Expand the playoffs and let Conference Champions for D1 schools play for the glory - or the top 2 Or 3 G5 schools. Are the biggest schools upset that they might have to play a good mid major team? All conferences would benefit. ESPN would benefit. The biggest losers would be the traditional powers as recruits could see themselves make it to the playoffs and not be a kid who backs up another 5 Star kid on a big time program. The NFL would be the biggest winner as they would see so much more talent on the field rather than sitting on the pine.

 

[Knight Strength]

There is intent and what actually happens. If a team goes undefeated for 2 years, is their National Championship claim invalidated because the team couldn’t get an invite to the playoffs? Then again, It’s not fair unless there are at least 3 SEC teams and Ohio State. The rest of college football is just sub par per ESPN, the primary money makers on this sport. If UCF isn’t in the CFP, I’m not going to watch it again this year. I’d rather watch the current system burn. Expand the playoffs and let Conference Champions for D1 schools play for the glory - or the top 2 Or 3 G5 schools. Are the biggest schools upset that they might have to play a good mid major team? All conferences would benefit. ESPN would benefit. The biggest losers would be the traditional powers as recruits could see themselves make it to the playoffs and not be a kid who backs up another 5 Star kid on a big time program. The NFL would be the biggest winner as they would see so much more talent on the field rather than sitting on the pine.

Also wont watch again this year.
Agree it needs to be at least 8 teams, selected by computer poll. I like S&P+(even though I dont think it's meant for this) but it can be anything that eliminates bias as much as possible.

 

[Crazyhole]

So if UCF could prove it tried to improve its' SOS by scheduling more P5 teams and there was collusion to not schedule UCF that is a start.
I could easily see an Anti-Trust lawsuit stirred up since there is no path to P5. It is completely subjective and has inherent bias. The lawsuit below is going to open Pandora's box

https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...usher-in-new-round-of-conference-realignment/

Even then, it doesnt matter. UCF would have to be able to prove that it is economically advantageous for other teams to schedule you, which is easy to argue against. You would also have to prove that there are monetary damages incurred based on some sort of illegal collusion, which is impossible to do based on the subjective nature of it. In the most basic of terms, can UCF prove that more people would spend more money supporting the program if it had been included in the playoff last year? If so, provide evidence. The counter argument to it would be that of Penn St. in 1994. They went undefeated and were not awarded a national championship trophy by the 2 major rankings outlets, but continued to generate a ton of income based on the fact that they have a large consumer base. Notre Dame can go winless but still have one of the largest athletic department budgets in the country. BYU won a national championship trophy in 1984 and were not part of a power 5 conference. In all of those scenarios there is not a cash windfall that came from a group that can be regulated and determined to be part of a cartel of any kind. Im just playing devils advocate here because I do believe that last year UCF should have been included in the playoff but there are no guarantees or proof that Alabama wouldnt have won the title regardless, and there is no way to prove that if UCF had won those games that income would have been elevated because of it. The question remains, IF that scenario did play out how can you prove that consumers would have spent more money on the product that UCF puts out? Its why Ive said several times that if you want to be validated with some sort of trophy then you have to start by purchasing more gear, donating more to the program, and fill up the stadium for every single game. Do that, and the media income will increase and the national respect and exposure will follow.

 

[bignow]

Even then, it doesnt matter. UCF would have to be able to prove that it is economically advantageous for other teams to schedule you, which is easy to argue against. You would also have to prove that there are monetary damages incurred based on some sort of illegal collusion, which is impossible to do based on the subjective nature of it. In the most basic of terms, can UCF prove that more people would spend more money supporting the program if it had been included in the playoff last year? If so, provide evidence. The counter argument to it would be that of Penn St. in 1994. They went undefeated and were not awarded a national championship trophy by the 2 major rankings outlets, but continued to generate a ton of income based on the fact that they have a large consumer base. Notre Dame can go winless but still have one of the largest athletic department budgets in the country. BYU won a national championship trophy in 1984 and were not part of a power 5 conference. In all of those scenarios there is not a cash windfall that came from a group that can be regulated and determined to be part of a cartel of any kind. Im just playing devils advocate here because I do believe that last year UCF should have been included in the playoff but there are no guarantees or proof that Alabama wouldnt have won the title regardless, and there is no way to prove that if UCF had won those games that income would have been elevated because of it. The question remains, IF that scenario did play out how can you prove that consumers would have spent more money on the product that UCF puts out? Its why Ive said several times that if you want to be validated with some sort of trophy then you have to start by purchasing more gear, donating more to the program, and fill up the stadium for every single game. Do that, and the media income will increase and the national respect and exposure will follow.

All of your examples occurred before the CFP was assembled and colluded.

 

[SublimeKnight]

Didn’t mean to cause any offense . I’ve been a long time lurker on the boards and decided to sign up and get involved in these discussions. I have enjoyed this season more because I got in on these boards. It gives me an outlet to vent, to chat, to worry (dang Memphis game), and to celebrate. I did laugh at your tweet that DW replied to

I'm just giving you a hard time

 

[SublimeKnight]

According to the Justice Dept. the biggest concern was the disparity of monetary disbursements to the conferences not included in a playoff system. So the way the playoff committee (also ESPN) got around this is to state "there is a path to the playoff" when everyone now knows this is next to impossible. Everyone that plays the "MegaMillions" jackpot has "a path to winning it" but the odds are 1-300,000,000 or slightly less than a G5 team being in the playoffs. And remember, intent is 99 percent of the law. You just have to prove it. Seems easy to me.

Ahhh... but that's the genius.
Playoff teams get the same payout as G5 teams that play in the "throw them a bone" NY6. So there's no financial disparity to sue over.

 

[SublimeKnight]

Also wont watch again this year.
Agree it needs to be at least 8 teams, selected by computer poll. I like S&P+(even though I dont think it's meant for this) but it can be anything that eliminates bias as much as possible.

We've all been institutionalized by shitty FBS postseasons.

There are 10 conferences and some independants. So the minimum legit playoff is 12 teams. 10 conf champs + 2 at-large

"But that's 2 more games! Think of the children Sublime"

Fine, drop 2 OOC games, when you have auto-bids for all conference champs, conference games are really all that matter anyway.

 

[Husk in butt]

There is really an incentive for the conferences to buy out someone in the committee. It is just the "eye test" so it is all subjective. None are from a non power conference.

 

[Mazuru]

Did Aresco sign off on the G5/P5 thing? They must have gotten the conference's consent at the beginning, correct?

 

[knightraveler]

Even then, it doesnt matter. UCF would have to be able to prove that it is economically advantageous for other teams to schedule you, which is easy to argue against. You would also have to prove that there are monetary damages incurred based on some sort of illegal collusion, which is impossible to do based on the subjective nature of it. In the most basic of terms, can UCF prove that more people would spend more money supporting the program if it had been included in the playoff last year? If so, provide evidence. The counter argument to it would be that of Penn St. in 1994. They went undefeated and were not awarded a national championship trophy by the 2 major rankings outlets, but continued to generate a ton of income based on the fact that they have a large consumer base. Notre Dame can go winless but still have one of the largest athletic department budgets in the country. BYU won a national championship trophy in 1984 and were not part of a power 5 conference. In all of those scenarios there is not a cash windfall that came from a group that can be regulated and determined to be part of a cartel of any kind. Im just playing devils advocate here because I do believe that last year UCF should have been included in the playoff but there are no guarantees or proof that Alabama wouldnt have won the title regardless, and there is no way to prove that if UCF had won those games that income would have been elevated because of it. The question remains, IF that scenario did play out how can you prove that consumers would have spent more money on the product that UCF puts out? Its why Ive said several times that if you want to be validated with some sort of trophy then you have to start by purchasing more gear, donating more to the program, and fill up the stadium for every single game. Do that, and the media income will increase and the national respect and exposure will follow.

This logic is like what came first "the chicken or the egg". I personally believe that if all d1 conferences have realistic chance at winning a real national championship their fan base would greatly increase. It might take decades to get to the levels of many of the p5 schools but it would happen. We have evidence to prove it. Look at how Cinci and USF drew large crowds when they were in the old Big East. The first home game when UCF joined the Big East was a sellout over 45000. Then you have to look at how ESPN pumps up the fans of the P5 with their marketing. Their game day program and college game day final and don't even mention UCF when we win by 27 points with our backup QB with his first start. If the playing field was level it wouldn't take long for many of the larger schools to compete financially imo.

 

[Stormthecourt?]

This logic is like what came first "the chicken or the egg". I personally believe that if all d1 conferences have realistic chance at winning a real national championship their fan base would greatly increase. It might take decades to get to the levels of many of the p5 schools but it would happen. We have evidence to prove it. Look at how Cinci and USF drew large crowds when they were in the old Big East. The first home game when UCF joined the Big East was a sellout over 45000. Then you have to look at how ESPN pumps up the fans of the P5 with their marketing. Their game day program and college game day final and don't even mention UCF when we win by 27 points with our backup QB with his first start. If the playing field was level it wouldn't take long for many of the larger schools to compete financially imo.

Fan base increasing and number of butts in the seats at games are two different things. Attendance will continue to drop at almost every school going forward