UCF May Force The Issue

[Machinator 32103]

7 minutes ago, Mileslong said:

As far as the schedule, I have no idea what the hell your blathering about. You don’t have to predict the future to schedule good teams. You play the odds obviously. You keep scheduling historically good teams and chances are you will have a good matchup. That’s hard to understand?

The point he's making is that UCF doesn't have the leverage to consistently schedule good teams like P5 teams.

[linux 1787]

Blacklisting aside, I am pretty sure that unless you have scheduled Alabama you are crapshooting, scheduling 8 years in advance and demanding a consistent schedule is BS.

ND can do it because they schedule a lot of OOC teams.

In short don't cry a river for UCF but don't argue with a straight face that the system is fair.

Edited October 16, 2018 by linux

[hpslugga 4097]

19 minutes ago, Mileslong said:

I don’t have time to read all that

That’s all I needed to know. 

20 minutes ago, rickyspub said:

 UCF controls what division they play in. If they want to compete for national titles then they need to move down to a lower level.

That’s not realistic. You know that. In fact there’s only been one team in FBS history since the Division 1 split in the late 1970s that voluntarily moved down, and that was Idaho this past year. There’s more to consider than just winning national titles when it comes to the classification question.

Edited October 16, 2018 by hpslugga

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

18 minutes ago, Mileslong said:

Well I’m saying anyone with an SOS of 124 +/- doesnt deserve to play in it. It’s that simple.

This seems pretty reasonable 

[rickyspub 801]

4 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

There’s more to consider than just winning national titles when it comes to the classification question.

Exactly. UCF has to play by the same rules everyone else plays by. Their schedule should never allow them to get near the Top 4. Shut up, cash your checks, and be happy with your conference titles and exhibition wins. If we ever went to 8, then I supposed the rules would guarantee them a spot, though I don't think they deserve one no matter their record.

[hpslugga 4097]

6 minutes ago, rickyspub said:

Exactly. UCF has to play by the same rules everyone else plays by. Their schedule should never allow them to get near the Top 4. Shut up, cash your checks, and be happy with your conference titles and exhibition wins. If we ever went to 8, then I supposed the rules would guarantee them a spot, though I don't think they deserve one no matter their record.

And if that really is the case, I'd definitely be in favor of splitting FBS (again) so as to remove the possibility of an undefeated team from being snubbed in the way that they (and many others) have. The mere thought of going undefeated in the regular season plus your CCG and not even being close to making it to the national playoff is a flat out fraud, and if creating a new division is what it's going to take to prevent such a fraud, I'm in favor of it 100%. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by hpslugga

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

11 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

That’s all I needed to know. 

That’s not realistic. You know that. In fact there’s only been one team in FBS history since the Division 1 split in the late 1970s that voluntarily moved down, and that was Idaho this past year. There’s more to consider than just winning national titles when it comes to the classification question.

Is it even an option?  I mean they have one of the largest enrollments of all DI universities, so I would think moving down isn't even an option.

[rickyspub 801]

1 minute ago, hpslugga said:

And if that really is the case, I'd definitely be in favor of splitting FBS (again) so as to remove the possibility of an undefeated team from being snubbed in the way that they have. The mere thought of going undefeated in the regular season plus your CCG and not even being close to making it to the national playoff is a flat out fraud, and if creating a new division is what it's going to take to prevent such a fraud, I'm in favor of it 100%. 

It isn't a fraud if you didn't play a schedule that was of similar quality to that of the other teams trying to make the playoffs. If a G5 team wants to be part of a playoff they either need to drop down to FCS or vote to move with the other G5 to a new division. Simple as that. Trying to act like their undefeated record compares to the gauntlet teams like Texas face is a similar fraud.

[JBJ 3828]

22 minutes ago, Machinator said:

The point he's making is that UCF doesn't have the leverage to consistently schedule good teams like P5 teams.

Yes they do.  Silly thought is silly. 

They consistently play GT.  They played Michigan two years ago and both Penn St/USCe 3-5 years ago.  They are halfway through a home-home with Stanford.  Their schedule is trash the past two years and it seems to be on purpose.

Edited October 16, 2018 by JBJ

[hpslugga 4097]

1 minute ago, rickyspub said:

It isn't a fraud if you didn't play a schedule that was of similar quality to that of the other teams trying to make the playoffs. If a G5 team wants to be part of a playoff they either need to drop down to FCS or vote to move with the other G5 to a new division. Simple as that. 

Conceptually, yes, it's a fraud. It perpetuates this idea that college football needs to be a sport that uses stupid horseshit like "the eye test" a polls conducted by bad comedy writers as a formula for determining a champion. And again, it's not just UCF. The same thing happened to Auburn in the BCS days, and precious little has been done to remedy that. All they really have now is the BCS +1; let's not kid ourselves. Again, that's why I'm definitely in favor of the G5 being carved out in order to prevent such shenanigans from ever taking place...ever.

[Mileslong 4811]

24 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

That’s all I needed to know. 

That’s not realistic. You know that. In fact there’s only been one team in FBS history since the Division 1 split in the late 1970s that voluntarily moved down, and that was Idaho this past year. There’s more to consider than just winning national titles when it comes to the classification question.

that should tell you all you need to know.  less words, better content. let me break down very quickly and easy for you understand.  you say UCF doesn't have the leverage to schedule good OOC games.  this little list shows all my points.  Just a sample starting at 2010, didnt look at their entire history.

1) they can schedule good OOC teams if they want to. 

2) When they do play good teams they lose 90% of the time.

Shows regular season games and results of any decent non OOC games.  they typically have one OOC and the rest are scrubs from CUSA, Sun Belt, FCS, MAC Etc.

2010: Kansas State - L

2011: Boston College - W

2012: Ohio State - L

2013: Penn State - W, South Carolina - L

2014: Penn State - L, Mizzou - L

2015: Standford - L, South Carolina - L

2016: Michigan - L, Maryland - L

2017: Pitt - W

Not one win against a good team and all losses against any good teams.  Their one signature win was against an Auburn team that didn't show up after getting blown out in the SEC champ to Georgia.

Again and for the last time, when you play a schedule ranked 124th +/- you don't deserve a playoff spot.  if you want a spot, keep scheduling G5 teams and start beating them. do it enough and you will be considered possibly.  it there were 8 teams then last years team should have gone possibly.  put them in the big 12 and they would never win it.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Mileslong

[F250 29203]

We've had this argument before, just replace UCF with Boise or TCU and the discussion is pretty much the same. Anyways, we have a playoff system now which should provide a roadmap to addressing the Boise States and TCU' of the world.

8 team playoff with P5 champions, highest ranked G5 and 2 at large teams. Everyone wins. No one should be able to claim a G5 stole their spot. Win your fucking conference championship or shut up.

 

 

[linux 1787]

5 minutes ago, rickyspub said:

It isn't a fraud if you didn't play a schedule that was of similar quality to that of the other teams trying to make the playoffs. If a G5 team wants to be part of a playoff they either need to drop down to FCS or vote to move with the other G5 to a new division. Simple as that. Trying to act like their undefeated record compares to the gauntlet teams like Texas face is a similar fraud.

This is ridiculous and you know it, 2017 UCF flat out said we "we demand to increase our SOS by playing the #1 seed in the playoff" the committee said no, and they embarrassed the system regardless. They should sue and put every single CFB head honcho under oath vs Congress. Let them sweat.

 

[hpslugga 4097]

11 minutes ago, JBJ said:

They consistently play GT.  

No they don't. Those two teams have played each other a grand total of 3 times. In fact, they haven't played them in almost 20 years.

Edited October 16, 2018 by hpslugga

[rickyspub 801]

Just now, hpslugga said:

Conceptually, yes, it's a fraud. It perpetuates this idea that college football needs to be a sport that uses stupid horseshit like "the eye test" a polls conducted by bad comedy writers as a formula for determining a champion. And again, it's not just UCF. The same thing happened to Auburn in the BCS days, and precious little has been done to remedy that. All they really have now is the BCS +1; let's not kid ourselves. Again, that's why I'm definitely in favor of the G5 being carved out in order to prevent such shenanigans from ever taking place...ever.

I am in complete agree about the G5 having their own division. I am not so concerned about some supposed unfairness that a team like UCF suffers. In fact, I am more worried about UCF or another G5 team that plays a weak schedule bumping out Texas. While the new super conferences make it unlikely there won't be ample 1-loss P5 teams, it is possible for a 2-loss Texas team to get jumped by an undefeated UCF for a 4th playoff spot. The likelihood that UCF would have navigated Texas's schedule with 2-loss is probably less than zero, but the 'eye test' also includes the 'magic' of the undefeated, schedule be damned.

[Mileslong 4811]

3 minutes ago, linux said:

This is ridiculous and you know it, 2017 UCF flat out said we "we demand to increase our SOS by playing the #1 seed in the playoff" the committee said no, and they embarrassed the system regardless. They should sue and put every single CFB head honcho under oath vs Congress. Let them sweat.

 

right, any team should  demand to play the top team in the playoff and if rejected then sue.  that's the silliest thing i've ever read.  like any school can just demand who they play...

[rickyspub 801]

4 minutes ago, linux said:

This is ridiculous and you know it, 2017 UCF flat out said we "we demand to increase our SOS by playing the #1 seed in the playoff" the committee said no, and they embarrassed the system regardless. They should sue and put every single CFB head honcho under oath vs Congress. Let them sweat.

 

What's ridiculous? Why do they get to make that demand? Let Congress get involved and watch the P5 just vote to start their own division. The G5 can cry all they want and Congress will follow the money and not do anything to the P5.

[linux 1787]

6 minutes ago, Mileslong said:

right, any team should  demand to play the top team in the playoff and if rejected then sue.  that's the silliest thing i've ever read.  like any school can just demand who they play...

But it negates the argument that they are trying to coast with a weak SOS

CFB scheduling has three glaring holes.

A) it is done years in advance, meaning an entire organization from the coaches on down can be screwed from literally no fault of their own. 2017 UCF had no choice in the matter and they did demand a tougher schedule in the playoffs.

B) Scheduling is not fair and schools get blacklisted

C) Scheduling 3 teams only and predicting how good they are is difficult so far in advance.

The solution is simple 8 team playoffs and a spot reserved for the most deserving G5, have them host their own playin game.

Edited October 16, 2018 by linux

[JBJ 3828]

 

22 minutes ago, F250 said:

We've had this argument before, just replace UCF with Boise or TCU and the discussion is pretty much the same. 

It's really not.

TCU beat Oregon St, Stanford, Oklahoma, Clemson in non-conf.

Boise St beat Oregon, Oregon St, VT, Georgia, Washington in non-conf.

And they each lost a few high profile matchups as well.

Plus they played Fresno and the Utah and Nevada schools in conf.  The MW was as good as or better than the Big East back then.  Certainly better than the AAC is today.

Edited October 16, 2018 by JBJ

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

24 minutes ago, Mileslong said:

that should tell you all you need to know.  less words, better content. let me break down very quickly and easy for you understand.  you say UCF doesn't have the leverage to schedule good OOC games.  this little list shows all my points.  Just a sample starting at 2010, didnt look at their entire history.

1) they can schedule good OOC teams if they want to. 

2) When they do play good teams they lose 90% of the time.

Shows regular season games and results of any decent non OOC games.  they typically have one OOC and the rest are scrubs from CUSA, Sun Belt, FCS, MAC Etc.

2010: Kansas State - L

2011: Boston College - W

2012: Ohio State - L

2013: Penn State - W, South Carolina - L

2014: Penn State - L, Mizzou - L

2015: Standford - L, South Carolina - L

2016: Michigan - L, Maryland - L

2017: Pitt - W

Not one win against a good team and all losses against any good teams.  Their one signature win was against an Auburn team that didn't show up after getting blown out in the SEC champ to Georgia.

Again and for the last time, when you play a schedule ranked 124th +/- you don't deserve a playoff spot.  if you want a spot, keep scheduling G5 teams and start beating them. do it enough and you will be considered possibly.  it there were 8 teams then last years team should have gone possibly.  put them in the big 12 and they would never win it.

fewer words

[Loco 3754]

I never thought I'd see such a robust thread about a Florida directional commuter school on Shaggy Surly

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

Is it wrong to believe UCF has no legitimate claim yet hope they prevail so we can get an 8-team playoff?

[Mileslong 4811]

Is it wrong to believe UCF has no legitimate claim yet hope they prevail so we can get an 8-team playoff?

UCF isn’t going to have any effect on going to an 8 team playoff. Few enough words for you?

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

Is it wrong to believe UCF has no legitimate claim yet hope they prevail so we can get an 8-team playoff?

1 minute ago, Mileslong said:

UCF isn’t going to have any effect on going to an 8 team playoff. Few enough words for you?

I couldn’t care less what you think. 

[linux 1787]

If they end up leading to to the arrest of all the clowns for perjury, then they might.

[Mileslong 4811]

Is it wrong to believe UCF has no legitimate claim yet hope they prevail so we can get an 8-team playoff?
I couldn’t care less what you think. 

Sick burn

[rickyspub 801]

7 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

Is it wrong to believe UCF has no legitimate claim yet hope they prevail so we can get an 8-team playoff?

I think 8 teams happens on its own, but I guess getting the G5 behind the move along with some Congresscritters wouldn't hurt getting the ball rolling. I do worry that the move to 8 is hindered by the very likelihood that the G5 will demand at least one spot and I am not sure ESPN is really interested in trying to price that out. The P5 won't move to 8 unless there is big money involved and adding a G5 doesn't help that proposition over the long term.

[hpslugga 4097]

11 minutes ago, JBJ said:

Plus they played Fresno and the Utah and Nevada schools in conf.  The MW was as good as or better than the Big East back then.  Certainly better than the AAC is today.

-Boise moved to the MWC when the Big East was about to fold (2011)

-Nevada's entire history of non-doormat status can be summed up with two words: Colin Kaepernick. If you look at the years where he wasn't their QB, they weren't all that great. In fact, aside from that awesome 2010 season they had, they lost at least 5 games a year both before (aside 2005 when they went 9-3) and since. They're 36-46 since moving to the MW. I don't know why you felt the need to add them.

-The same is pretty much true, albeit slightly better, of Fresno State when their QB wasn't a Carr. 45-39 since moving to the MWC.

-As to Utah, Boise never played them in conference play. They moved to the Mountain West in the same season that Utah started playing in the PAC 12. They've only played each other 7 times and the last was a bowl game 8 years ago.

[JBJ 3828]

The move to 8 happens when 1-loss conf champs in multiple conferences get left out.  Having a G5 in the playoff might do that, but it's more likely to happen other ways.

['stache 22145]

11 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The move to 8 happens when 1-loss conf champs in multiple conferences get left out.  Having a G5 in the playoff might do that, but it's more likely to happen other ways.

We went from 2 to 4 after OKST was excluded by the narrowest of margins in favor of a crappy SEC rematch.  I agree, a G-5 exclusion won't move the needle.  A more likely change agent would be if three P-5 conferences are excluded if the SEC gets two teams, Notre Dame goes undefeated, and the PAC, Big XII, BIG, and ACC have only one bid between them.

[Disco Missile 456]

1 hour ago, Mileslong said:

that should tell you all you need to know.  less words, better content. let me break down very quickly and easy for you understand.  you say UCF doesn't have the leverage to schedule good OOC games.  this little list shows all my points.  Just a sample starting at 2010, didnt look at their entire history.

1) they can schedule good OOC teams if they want to. 

2) When they do play good teams they lose 90% of the time.

Shows regular season games and results of any decent non OOC games.  they typically have one OOC and the rest are scrubs from CUSA, Sun Belt, FCS, MAC Etc.

2010: Kansas State - L

2011: Boston College - W

2012: Ohio State - L

2013: Penn State - W, South Carolina - L

2014: Penn State - L, Mizzou - L

2015: Standford - L, South Carolina - L

2016: Michigan - L, Maryland - L

2017: Pitt - W

Not one win against a good team and all losses against any good teams.  Their one signature win was against an Auburn team that didn't show up after getting blown out in the SEC champ to Georgia.

Again and for the last time, when you play a schedule ranked 124th +/- you don't deserve a playoff spot.  if you want a spot, keep scheduling G5 teams and start beating them. do it enough and you will be considered possibly.  it there were 8 teams then last years team should have gone possibly.  put them in the big 12 and they would never win it.

They beat #7 Auburn last year in the Peach Bowl. Calling Auburn demoralized is a cop out. Beating Florida in a bowl made Charlie Strong's career.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Disco Missile

[rickyspub 801]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

We went from 2 to 4 after OKST was excluded by the narrowest of margins in favor of a crappy SEC rematch.  I agree, a G-5 exclusion won't move the needle.  A more likely change agent would be if three P-5 conferences are excluded if the SEC gets two teams, Notre Dame goes undefeated, and the PAC, Big XII, BIG, and ACC have only one bid between them.

I think we end up with 8 in the next playoff contract regardless, but having the Big 10 miss at least once more and getting the ACC to finally miss wouldn't hurt. If the SEC misses, ESPN might just panic and pony up before the end of the contract. 

[ztejas 44236]

On 10/10/2018 at 10:06 AM, ChickenSandwich said:

If you want to stagger the season a bit and have the lower division winner a guaranteed spot in the Semi-final of an 8 team playoff, that’s ok. The G5 team etc will clearly have earned their shot  

This makes no sense. They have to play through an entire tournament just to play in another tournament? Against a team that hasn't played in 3 weeks?

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

4 minutes ago, Disco Missile said:

They beat #7 Auburn last year in the Peach Bowl. Calling Auburn demoralized is a cop out. Beating Florida in a bowl made Charlie Strong's career.

Bowl games only mean something when they feature a coach we could potentially hire.

[hpslugga 4097]

11 minutes ago, 'stache said:

We went from 2 to 4 after OKST was excluded by the narrowest of margins in favor of a crappy SEC rematch.  I agree, a G-5 exclusion won't move the needle.  A more likely change agent would be if three P-5 conferences are excluded if the SEC gets two teams, Notre Dame goes undefeated, and the PAC, Big XII, BIG, and ACC have only one bid between them.

The most likely would be for all 5 of the P5 champions to finish the CCG's with identical records because at this point, the qualities of those teams would be so close together that it'd be patently dishonest to say that one absolutely knows how to rank them and that they therefore absolutely know which one of the five to leave out.

[El Diablo 4232]

1 hour ago, Mileslong said:

 I’m saying anyone with an SOS of 124 +/- doesnt deserve to play in it. It’s that simple.

If that was all that you had said I don't think the conversation would have continued much further. 

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

1 hour ago, linux said:

They should sue and put every single CFB head honcho under oath vs Congress

Now here is someone with a keen grasp of the legal system 

[Mileslong 4811]

If that was all that you had said I don't think the conversation would have continued much further. 

I said that in my first post I believe.

[Zavala 1384]

1 hour ago, rickyspub said:

I am in complete agree about the G5 having their own division. I am not so concerned about some supposed unfairness that a team like UCF suffers. In fact, I am more worried about UCF or another G5 team that plays a weak schedule bumping out Texas. While the new super conferences make it unlikely there won't be ample 1-loss P5 teams, it is possible for a 2-loss Texas team to get jumped by an undefeated UCF for a 4th playoff spot. The likelihood that UCF would have navigated Texas's schedule with 2-loss is probably less than zero, but the 'eye test' also includes the 'magic' of the undefeated, schedule be damned.

Don't worry. The $ is a factor as well as the popularity. They can't even get their own fans to fill up their tiny stadium.

[RoyalBevo21 946]

Middle of the road P5 teams that would have less than 2 losses with their schedule:

Iowa St

TCU

Oklahoma St

Baylor

Boston College

NC State

Syracuse

Duke

Maryland

Indiana

Purdue

Minnesota

Illinois

Cal

Utah

ASU

SCAR

Tennessee

Ole Miss.

Mizzou

[kopp0e 1135]

On 10/16/2018 at 12:45 PM, Zavala said:

Don't worry. The $ is a factor as well as the popularity. They can't even get their own fans to fill up their tiny stadium.

I think that's more or less why UCF was "gifted" a NYD6 bowl, but couldn't get a top slot in the CFP, as the committee doubted the fans showing up for the Knights...

[MrPhlegm 3413]

 

Their stadium seats 48k and is in Orlando.  That might not attract a home-and-home with tOSU or Texas, but the majority of P5 schools would jump all over that.

It already attracted at home and home with Texas.

 

And their stadium seats 45,301.

 

[Valmy77 13626]

On 10/16/2018 at 12:19 PM, El Diablo said:

If that was all that you had said I don't think the conversation would have continued much further. 

Well I would disagree anyway. There should be no undefeated team at the end of the season except the champ. If that is not the case then the way the championship is decided does not work. Deserving has nothing to do with it. If they suck then all they earned was an opportunity to get blown out. But what if they don't? Then something cool might happen.

I don't think 2017 UCF would have beaten any of the teams in the playoff but I didn't expect Auburn to beat Alabama or UCF to beat Auburn either. That is why you play the games and not just have some jerk on the internet declare how the game would have gone and not actually play it.

Edited October 18, 2018 by Valmy77

[kopp0e 1135]

This guy has a point, and I feel we will be closer to what the division 2&3 use, within the next dozen years...
 

 

[Nivek 17417]

They beat #7 Auburn last year in the Peach Bowl. Calling Auburn demoralized is a cop out. Beating Florida in a bowl made Charlie Strong's career.

Remember when Cal lost to Tech, oh they were demoralized so it didn’t count.

[Shmitty 112]

36 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Remember when Cal lost to Tech, oh they were demoralized so it didn’t count.

That game was alot of fun and I remember some of y'all on Hornfans warning the Cal fans after the Rose Bowl selection was made that if they weren't careful, Tech was going to hang 50 on them.   

[mulletpelini 5225]

On 10/16/2018 at 11:09 AM, Disco Missile said:

They beat #7 Auburn last year in the Peach Bowl. Calling Auburn demoralized is a cop out.

No, you're wrong, there was absolutely no reason they should have been fired up about that bowl game.

https://www.al.com/auburnfootball/index.ssf/2017/12/ucf_remarks_about_sec_speed_au.html

Quote

 

There was no denying it, Auburn's defenders have heard and read the various comments made by UCF players leading up to the Peach Bowl.

Knights running back Adrian Killins Jr.'s remarks about the SEC not having a lot of speed and that "Auburn hasn't seen any speed" comparable to UCF was the first shot over the collective bow and the Tigers took notice.

"It's really just giving us bulletin board material," safety Tray Matthews said. "I could say maybe some guys were kind of asleep or weren't really into the game or wasn't just focused. That woke everybody up. Coach didn't even have to say anything this week after that comment, but when that comment was said, everybody's been up since. ...

"I don't want to put any comments out there to go back at them, but I mean, we just laugh at it. It's not like we're playing. We play on Monday, and all that talk and stuff doesn't matter at all; we talk with our pads. It doesn't bother us at all."

 

 

[Loco 3754]

There's no reason Auburn should be a dumpster fire this year, yet, here we are.

It's funny that ucf's justification rests on one game last year with a different head coach...  seems legit

[hpslugga 4097]

20 minutes ago, Loco said:

There's no reason Auburn should be a dumpster fire this year, yet, here we are.

It's funny that ucf's justification rests on one game last year with a different head coach...  seems legit

Who said they were stating their case based solely on that game?

[Loco 3754]

6 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Who said they were stating their case based solely on that game?

Maybe you can point out any other argument I missed for why ucf is a legit contender ...