Agreed. Anymore than 6-8 and you have to change the whole system and run it like D2 does. Ten reg season games, no conference championships, guaranteed spots, etc.
College Football Playoff Rankings & CFP Scenarios for UCF Foootball
- Thread starter UCFKnightsCFP
- Start date
I guess I’m not seeing how who you play matters if there’s auto qualifiers for conference championships. How would it? As long as you win your conference you’re in. So if we accept that as true there’s zero incentive to schedule games against top opponents. Even for teams in lesser conferences. It would only matter for those teams outside a Power 5 battling for those 3 at large spots.
Agreed. And full disclosure I’m not a UCF hater, they were probably my favorite team in the whole country to watch last year, I loved watching that team. And I like rooting for the under dog, I was a big fan of those Boise State teams too. But I’m over the whining on UCF’s behalf. Boise didn’t whine...they decided they wanted a seat and the table and scheduled the big boys and beat them.
I don’t want to hear the excuse that the big boys won’t schedule UCF...they will, UCF might just not get a home game in return. But so what? FSU built their program by doing exactly that, going on the road and beating big boys. Miami did it early on. Boise State did it. Why can’t UCF?
Is anybody going to schedule a home and home with UCF? Would anybody schedule a neutral site game with them? Your point of Boise State traveling to Athens is understood, but as far as the entire competitive spirit thing goes I would argue it an unfair proposition to give a team already chocked full of higher rated recruits automatic home field advantage.
Would UCF accept a bid to play in the Big 12 or SEC and play the tougher schedules annually? I believe they would, except they didn't begin playing division 1 ball till the late 90's. They don't have the built up equity Florida has.
I would love to see us schedule a 2 for 1 or neutral site game against them. I believe we win 8 out of 10, but that is never going to happen until they build up their prestige. Having a chance to play an Alabama tough would accelerate that process.
Their claim to the title last year is absurd, but it did buy them publicity and raised a sprinkle of doubt as to whether they should have been given a shot.
I am tired of hearing the debate of whether Michigan or Oklahoma is better, I want to see them play. An 8 game playoff would give us more clarity, it would silence the controversy dramatically.
Tennessee didn’t need to play UCLA in the mid to late 90s. They did it for money and if they win the SEC they were playing for a title. That game only hurt their chances if it’s their only loss but they still win the SEC. Those scenarios have always been at play. By incentivizing with at large bids teams continue to make money, expose themselves nationally to recruits, and make stronger cases if they slip up in conference during the regular season. Pac12 and ACC still need marquee matchups. Everyone is chasing the SEC in a four team set up. They’ll do the same in a 6-8 team playoff as well.
100% agreement. It takes work and years to build your brand. I think if they were in a closer state to other Power 5 teams like Utah is they would be in the Big12 or Pac12 right now.
*quick edit* If Boise were closer to the epicenter of those conferences I.e. L.A. and Texas.
Last edited:
At 4 teams yes, but at 8 they would have a shot to earn it. Imagine if you were a pitchman and your boss always handed out the Big dollar presentations to your coworker Larry. Now you have been a very solid employee with a good portfolio of lower dollar deals because those are the jobs you get. Imagine a big deal opportunity coming up and you really want it, you walk into your bosses office and request the chance, in walks Larry and your boss just hands him the job. You complain about it but your boss reads through the Big deals Larry has closed. Why should he ever choose you over him? Never mind the fact Larry always got the shot, he is better than you and that is that.
UCF needs to show some longevity. Boise maintained notoriety through three different coaches beating legit power five teams. If Heupel can continue winning like Frost did they can start to talk more but if Heupel wins like Frost he’ll be gone in two years to coach USC or some other traditional power team. Boise had comitted coaches to building that program. UCF is a stepping stone.
If UCF was pounding their opponents NOW, they would be in contention for a playoff spot NOW. The fact that they have barely beaten multiple BAD teams is why they aren't making the playoffs. If you play a bad schedule, you gotta dominate it, and they aren't.
Exactly! It takes years to build your brand. Consistent winning against the best of the best. You don’t get to just come on the scene and start demanding things, especially when you’re not making an effort to play the better teams. They don’t even have to go that far. Schedule UF, FSU, or Miami. Go to Gainesville, Tallahassee, or Miami and win. You think that wouldn’t earn them respect? It’s like they’re trying to bypass what every other mid major that became a power had to go through. Doesn’t work that way.
But you can always murder Larry in his bathroom. Which is what Boise did to Oregon, Oklahoma, UGA, and Virginia Tech. In fact they lost in Larry’s Athens house in 2005 and came back for more in his backyard in ‘11.
Yep. Boise played UGA at UGA one year, then played UGA in Atlanta a few years later. Basically two games on the road. Was it fair? Of course not. But they realized that they were the mid major team with no leverage. They wanted a seat at the table with the big boys so they took whatever deals they could get and won when they played. That earned them the respect they needed. To the point where they actually were being considered for a spot with the Big 12 when they split up. Even started a year or two in the top 5 if I remember it right. There’s a blueprint for UCF to follow. The choice is theirs.
Wins and losses, they keep winning . They won't ever get consideration in a 4 team playoff. There is a ceiling they can't break through.
They beat Memphis 31-30
FAU 56-36
Temple 52-40
They are barely beating bad teams while playing an AAC schedule.
Meanwhile, Bama is scoring 50 a game against an SEC schedule.
They won't ever get consideration because they are barely beating bad teams. Hell Memphis might beat them next week.
When you don't play anyone, you gotta beat everyone by a mile. They don't.
So we are admitting all are not starting from the same point. Fair enough... Teams like UCF have to take any and all chances, go through the Fire Swamp.
There is no ceiling. Again, Houston was all the way at #6 in the playoff rankings just two seasons ago, had they won out and not dropped two games they’d have made it. Because they played a formidable out of conference schedule. Those Boise teams were routinely in the top 5 because they scheduled and beat top teams. The only reason UCF won’t make the top 4 is because they haven’t schedule anybody worth a damn. That’s not a system problem, that’s a them problem. I mean they had the worst strength of schedule in all of college football as of last week. Numerous teams would be undefeated with that schedule.
Correct. Just like every team that wants to establish themselves on the same level as the established. And has done so in the past. Miami, FSU, Boise, TCU. I could keep going. This isn’t a difficult concept. You have to earn respect. Two years of beating everyone’s homecoming games and weekend before Thanksgiving opponents doesn’t put you on par with the big boys. UCF needs to commit itself to building their brand. Start playing with the anytime anywhere mentality and continue throwing money at great head coaching hires. Preferably someone that wants to be at the school for around ten years. Right now they are two years into establishing their brand. They’re off to a solid start, beating Auburn was a great way to launch. But they need those wins in the regular season and the bowl season.
I would recommend hitting up Miami and start trying to beat them on a regular basis if they’re willing to play them. And right now I’d jump all over FSU. And if they refuse to schedule UCF in Tallahassee or Miami I’d make a public spectacle of it as the AD. They’ve got a ripe situation in front of them. Pouting and whining isn’t taking advantage of anything. Go beat someone other than a bowl game.
I would recommend hitting up Miami and start trying to beat them on a regular basis if they’re willing to play them. And right now I’d jump all over FSU. And if they refuse to schedule UCF in Tallahassee or Miami I’d make a public spectacle of it as the AD. They’ve got a ripe situation in front of them. Pouting and whining isn’t taking advantage of anything. Go beat someone other than a bowl game.
I think the fact they’re #9 now despite their schedule is proof there’s no bias against them. Once some teams lose they’re likely gonna finish around #5 or so despite how bad their schedule is. If anything they’re being given a huge benefit of the doubt based on what they did last year. They haven’t even been as impressive as they were a year ago.
That’s a good point. People like fresh blood. Underdogs always getting rooted for. I hate to keep bringing them up but people liked Boise for the most part because there was admiration for how they were going about their business and Pederson was a class act. Take advantage of every opportunity and go make opportunities for yourselves.
Until a outsider actually crashes the party I will believe a ceiling exists. For all the pathways Boise State paved, they still never even got a sniff. You say Houston was #6, if they won out you believe they would have gotten in. 100 percent right?
They beat Oklahoma in a neutral site game, they played Louisville in a neutral site game as well. They played nobody on the road, oh they finished 9-4 so they weren't close to crashing the party.
UCF has played at Michigan two years ago, I'm not going to argue for their inclusion in the 4 team playoff because I agree with everybody that they don't deserve it.
My argument is for an 8 team playoff, you don't like it. I like it, we aren't ever going to convince the other of the benefits outweighing the negatives of our respective points.
I want a 6-8 team playoff too. We definitely agree on that but guaranteeing a G5 team a spot would be bad because historically there hasn’t always been a G5 team worthy of an at large bid. Houston is a great example. The year they got to 6 they blew it and another undeafeated G5 team goes and loses to a three loss Wisconsin team in the Cotton. They would have taken a spot of a more deserving P5 team. You can only guarantee so many spots before Oozie’s fears become a reality and then no one is going to schedule the up and comer and there is definitely no incentive for UCF or Houston or Memphis to attempt to schedule Texas, Oklahoma State, or Virginia Tech.
Neutral site is a best case scenario for teams building into the establishment. If no one wants to play UCF in Atlanta or Dallas then play them on their turf. A win over the big boys is crucial and it’s even more crucial to get it before the bowl game. The stigma that Oklahoma lost because they were disinterested in playing is impossible to argue in September.
Neutral site is a best case scenario for teams building into the establishment. If no one wants to play UCF in Atlanta or Dallas then play them on their turf. A win over the big boys is crucial and it’s even more crucial to get it before the bowl game. The stigma that Oklahoma lost because they were disinterested in playing is impossible to argue in September.
Boise never got a sniff because they lost at inopportune times. One year they were #3 before getting upset. That’s not a system issue. Same with Houston, after beating OU and Louisville they were all the way up to #6 and would have gotten in based on how other teams finished. They didn’t get it because they lost a bunch of games after those key wins. So again not a system issue, which is your argument, that the system is holding them out. There’s no evidence for that. The system has allowed Group of 5 teams who scheduled well to be highly ranked and in the conversation, that’s all you can ask for. They have to finish the deal. Not sure how the system is responsible for them losing games and being used as proof of a ceiling on what they can do.
Let's just say until something definite happens that everything is hypothetical. You claim Houston would have made it had they not lost, they were never ranked #6 in the playoff rankings, it was the A.P.
We think Boise State would have gotten in, maybe not. They never got a chance to prove whether a ceiling does exist because they lost. Just because you schedule a tough game at Georgia and get housed but win the rest of your mediocre schedule doesn't prove a thing. Give me an instance where a outsider won the tough road game and made the playoff.....
There isn't one, therefore no roadmap has been drawn and no ceiling has been disproved. Hypothesis...
That doesn’t make much sense. By that logic because a Group of 5 team with a tough schedule and undefeated has not been left out because it hasn’t happened yet, there’s no hypothetical ceiling. So why are you so certain there is one? The fact those type of teams have been ranked highly despite poor schedules aligns closer with my view than yours. They’ve been given the benefit of the doubt that Power 5 teams don’t get for playing such schedules. If what you say is true they should be dismissed completely. UCF will be top 7 come Tuesday despite the worst schedule in the country, that wouldn’t be the case for any Power 5 team.
I f they did move UCF up to # 7 this week and 4, 5 and 6 all lose what happens if they do somehow beat Memphis with the backup QB?
Unlikely all 4 things happen but Georgia is expected to lose and Texas already beat Oklahoma earlier this year?
Unlikely all 4 things happen but Georgia is expected to lose and Texas already beat Oklahoma earlier this year?
If the 'outsiders' played an SEC caliber schedule, they wouldn't be undefeated and they wouldn't be in any manner of discussion for the playoffs. Even when you win SEC games easily, the physicality of the game still wears on you. UCF doesn't have to deal with that. If they did, you would see 12-0 records evaporate into 6-8 wins easily.
Playoffs are done wrong in CFB.
For every other sport, you play all the playoff games on the home site of one of the teams. Only the title game is played on a neutral site. It's hard on fans travelling to two sites, three including the conference title games. To go to an 8 team playoff would mean 3 or 4 trips for fans.
If we are really going to go to 8 teams, we need to start by setting up 4 conferences of 16 teams each, the first round is the conference title game, then the final 4. Still too much travelling, but at least it is the same as now, and doesn't make it worse.
For every other sport, you play all the playoff games on the home site of one of the teams. Only the title game is played on a neutral site. It's hard on fans travelling to two sites, three including the conference title games. To go to an 8 team playoff would mean 3 or 4 trips for fans.
If we are really going to go to 8 teams, we need to start by setting up 4 conferences of 16 teams each, the first round is the conference title game, then the final 4. Still too much travelling, but at least it is the same as now, and doesn't make it worse.
One of the major reasons I want to see the playoff expanded. I want to see these teams play a real 3 round gauntlet. Some will say it's not fair that they would get in with a weak schedule.....Life isn't fair, I would argue with anybody who says they were fluke champions after beating 3 top 8 teams in a row.
Actually, I would say that, if you can get to the CFP just by winning your conference, there is no DISincentive to playing a tougher OOC. Go 9-3 with losses to 2 OOC top ten teams or 11-1 with a 1-AA OOC, if you still win the conference, you still make the playoff. Plus you have played some great teams and know what to expect.
And we are viewing this in a bubble. Most teams have attendance issues. A great OOC schedule will drive ticket sales. Or at least eliminate the 25K+ empty seats you get from playing 1AA opponents. I know the theory of no return game = more home games = more money, but if you fail to sell 20K tickets, and pay a million bucks to the rent-a-win team, did you really make any more money? And the big OOC opponent is going to bring a lot of fans to stay in area hotels and eat at area restaurants, so for the community the good OOC is a boon.
This would also be for the best for the rent-a-win teams. A lot of them set their sights higher than they should because of the extra revenue these games bring. End them and you let these programs find their natural level, which is more sustainable in the long run.
You want to expand the playoffs so we can see if the AAC teams of the world are as good as the Power 5 teams? Man, not my wish.
Why don't the AAC teams start scheduling better teams then we can see for ourselves if they are good or not.
Again....when you only play 2 tough games a year, you cannot compare that to Power 5 teams that are playing 6-8 tough games a year. Power 5 athletes are bigger, more physical, and the games are more taxing.
When you play AAC teams every week, you aren't pushed like you are when you play SEC teams. Add that up over a 12 game schedule and SEC teams are whipped by the end of the year while AAC teams are still fresh cause they haven't played anyone.
Let UCF play an LSU-caliber team just 3 times a year, and they would suddenly go from 12-0 to 7-5.
Probably, I still want to see it happen. You say they would lose and lose badly, well ok then let's say they do. The best teams still advance and win the championship, but if they do prove you and all the pundits wrong the perception of what constitutes a true contender changes. More teams get regular season cracks at the Big dogs, maybe we see even more intriguing matchup instead of late season division 2 foes.
I am sick of hearing them debate what if team x wins or team y loses. There is such a thin division separating teams each and every year that we still get more controversy than we should with a playoff. It's bullcrap that this is the only postseason where we get this bull every year.
No less than 8, no more. UCF gets it's shot to back up their claim or get forever sent to the corner.
Is the only reason everyone but me is aginast the 6 team format is the obligatory BYE week for the top two seeds?
I think it helps protect against teams giving up on a week.
It would follow the NFL system of rewarding teams, the only issue is that you would then shift the debate to who deserves those two byes. In the pros teams get byes by having a better record, winning your division, having a higher winning percentage in conference, head to head , and strength of schedule.
Six teams would eliminate the debate of whether a 1 loss Alabama gets in over an Oklahoma or Ohio State, but it would still lock out a group of 5 team most likely. At 8 you can legitimately say "prove it".
You're coming at this from the point of believing teams like UCF are at an unfair disadvantage in the playoff selection process. If anything, they have an unfair advantage.
If we stick UCF in the playoffs now, we're effectively forcing Power 5 teams to play a much fresher and less injured UCF team. It will be like UCF had to play 3-4 fewer games than a Clemson or Bama did. That's a huge ADVANTAGE for UCF, not disadvantage.
If Bama played UCF's schedule, most of our starters would never see the 2nd half. We could give the freshmen an insane amount of experience, and injuries would be kept to a minimum.
All of those are advantages UCF has now if they are rewarded for playing a terrible schedule by getting a spot in the playoffs against teams that earned their spot there by playing a Power 5 schedule.
You say let's give UCF a chance. I say let's let UCF EARN their chance like the Power 5 teams have to. Let UCF play 6-8 tough, physical games a year, not the 1-2 they play now.
If they can play a big boy schedule and come out with a 11-1 or 12-0 record, more power to them when it comes to the playoffs. But let's don't GIVE them anything. They have to EARN it like everyone else.
You don't think beating 3 top 8 teams in a row would be earning it? You think those 3 teams would just lay down and applaud the little engine that could? You think they would get more than a laugh at their false bravado if they didn't show up to back up the claim?
Problem with your point is UCF will never play the schedule Alabama does. They can't get a home game with anybody noteworthy nor should they, but coming from a point of everything being equal is crazy.They play in the American, they are obligated to play a full league schedule. That leaves like 3 OOC. games, you think they can get three teams like Alabama, Ohio State, or Oklahoma to play them consecutively? They would have to play 3 tough road games in a row and that still wouldn't meet your criteria of 6 in a row. Let Ohio State or anybody go through that gauntlet undefeated, not gonna happen. There is a reason Alabama and the rest of the SEC plays patsys on the second to last week, physicality takes it's toll.
UCF is a no win scenario for the Big boys, they just aren't worth the risk.
You speak of the advantages a UCF would have because they wouldn't be as beat up as Alabama, I don't think football is easy at any high level. They just lost their starting QB for the season, they play football and get smashed. Their injury report is like most others, their medical room is most likely filled with the same ice baths and athletic tape.
Again it isn't fair that UCF or anybody has to start from two laps down because of stigma people keep saying "just schedule tougher", ok how about we have more neutral site games. " Well they have to come play us at home". Why? That seems a bit unfair that you won't schedule a game against them on a neutral site. " Life isn't fair, all things aren't equitable. There is no financial gain to playing them at a neutral site. If we lose to them our reputation takes a hit, it isn't worth the risk."
Well how is paying Akron 2 million dollars profitable? How can they ever improve their reputation if they aren't given the chance to play you annually?
" Life isn't fair!"
If Alabama or Ohio State can't beat UCF on a month's rest with all that talent advantage , they don't deserve to be called champions. This isn't about your or I's perception of their ability or bad out of conference. This is about beating the team in front of you.
No more debates, let's just see them play the game. Every other sport settles it on the field, there is always going to be a team who plays a tougher schedule and that isn't fair, life isn't either.
Last edited:
I don't think you're getting my point.
Let's say Bama and UCF switched schedules. Both teams played the other team's schedule, and at the end of the season, both teams would face each other in the playoffs, regardless of record.
Just from a health standpoint: Which team is going to be healthier?
Which team is going to be fresher?
Which team is going to have better chemistry from having fewer injuries and letting their starters work together more?
The answer to all will be Alabama. Alabama will come into the playoffs with a huge advantage, because while Bama was playing cupcakes every single week, UCF was having to play LSU then Miss State, then aubarn, then Georgia.
Bama got to rest its starters, who will come in fresh as a daisy. UCF's starters will either be out for the year, or dealing with nagging injuries if they can still play.
Bama wins by 40.
Now have Bama and UCF play the same schedule, and see what happens........that was my point.
