Their campus looks pretty nice, I would be down

iirc UCF beat Auburn "this year" have not beaten anybody this season

Aggie MHA said:

---

In their defense, they tried joining power 5 conferences.

Posted this in another thread... Boise 06 over OU & UCF over Auburn last year doesn't help...

Two years in a row undefeated definitely changes the conversation a bit too.

I think a NY 6 bowl might be fitting. The bigger issue here is we need a 6 or 8 team playoff though.

---

Maybe a 6 team playoff. I think 8 allows too many teams. But even then, would an undefeated UCF be justified in making the playoffs?

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Teams will be arguing that even if you have a 16 team playoff...number 17 will be butt hurt just like number 5 is now

---

I personally like 6 teams. #1 & #2 get a bye round 1.

Hypothetically allows for power 5 & 1 wildcard. No locked spots by conference though.

At 6 this year... you'd have to choose ND or UCF... or leave a power 5 out.

I think the 16 arguement isn't the best. There a 5 power conferences and usually 1 "darling" or independent (freaking ND...). 4 was always going to leave 1-2 teams out.

I've believe it's beaten, an adverb, not beat, a verb.

Zero issue with a leader fighting for his school. There is no other reason we'd have a UCF thread on TexAgs, yet here we are - it works.

Saint Pablo said:

---

Their campus looks pretty nice, I would be down

---

It's not. I went to grad school there.

Aggie MHA said:

---

I personally like 6 teams. #1 & #2 get a bye round 1.

Hypothetically allows for power 5 & 1 wildcard. No locked spots by conference though.

At 6 this year... you'd have to choose ND or UCF... or leave a power 5 out.

I think the 16 arguement isn't the best. There a 5 power conferences and usually 1 "darling" or independent (freaking ND...). 4 was always going to leave 1-2 teams out.

---

One of the problems with this scenario is the *****ing, arguing, etc. that would occur from any team and their fans voted #3 or #4 that believe they should be #2.

And, more importantly, IMHO a bye is just too much of an unfair advantage for the top two teams.

If the playoffs expand within the next 5-10 years, it will be to 8 teams.

Saint Pablo said:

---

Their schtick is getting incredibly old. They haven't beat a single team with a winning record this year. How can anyone actually believe they deserve playoff consideration?

---

I do.

But then again, I think the playoff should be minimum 8 teams, preferably 10 with a couple of "buy in" type games like basketball has.

IMO it's not just about expanding the playoff, though going to 8 teams would lessen the "beauty contest" aspect of it.

It's that football is a tough, physical sport and teams that play a tough schedule undergo a physical beating and also suffer from attrition over a 12-game season.

So a team that plays a light schedule against losing and non-physical teams doesn't go through the same grind that an SEC team does.

I think 4 times out of 5 the tougher schedule prepares you better, but a lightly tested team can win because they aren't as beat up, they match up well, or the other team isn't motivated about playing in a meaningless bowl game (which expanding the playoffs could fix).

Until they can force teams to play a tough schedule I think injecting the Playoff Committee's subjective judgment into the playoff selection process is a reasonable "check and balance" on the process.

With all of that said there's no doubt the system is inherently rigged in favor of Power 5 conferences.

ABattJudd said:

---

Saint Pablo said:

---

Their campus looks pretty nice, I would be down

---

It's not. I went to grad school there.

---

It used to look nice. Now it's overcrowded and growing for the sake of growth.

And a lot of their administration are a bunch of idiots.

Sept article on the subject:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/24815987/cfp-director-bill-hancock-says-there-path-ucf-knights-reach-playoff

Dread Pirate Roberts said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Dread Pirate Roberts said:

---

This would be solved with an 8 team playoff. Even if its not a hard rule, it would be easy to have the 5 Power 5 champs, a Group of 5 team, and then 2 more teams that didn't win their championship.

While a team could argue it should be #7 or #8, it would be hard for the #9 team to argue that its actually the best team in the country like we get now.

---

Teams will be arguing that even if you have a 16 team playoff...number 17 will be butt hurt just like number 5 is now

---

The big difference is that no one cares about #17. People will find sympathy with #5 who legitimately could be the best team.

---

Right now #5 is Michigan, so no sympathy here and certainly not the best team. "We see 'em, we're not watching them, but we see em."

bert harbinson said:

---

Predmid said:

---

Now it's overcrowded and growing for the sake of growth.

And a lot of their administration are a bunch of idiots.

---

Hmm!

---

While A&M has a larger total enrollment (68k vs 66k), UCF has a larger undergraduate population (56k vs. 53k)

More details and an update on numbers with respect to our fall 2018 enrollment:

https://today.tamu.edu/2018/10/08/texas-am-shows-1-1-percent-enrollment-increase-for-fall-2018-moves-closer-to-hsi-designation/

They would not go undefeated in a single power 5 conference and will all know it. In fact that wouldn't have a prayer of only having 1 loss. At a minimum they would have 2 losses.

Let us not forget Auburn was coming off a devasting loss in SEC championship...that team thought they were about to play for national championship...might not get up for nonplayoff bowl after that versus that was the UCF Super Bowl for the ages! I've always contended that non playoff bowl games are not a good conference indicator. Regular season wins and losses between conferences matter. Nonplayoff bowl games don't mean nearly as much.

Just another entitled whiner!

Had UCF called every good P5 program and offered to play a guarantee* game for $500k, they would have found a taker. That game would have been their super bowl, and if they won, they would have been in the conversation.

They did not.
They feel entitled to home/home with P5 programs.
Or they feel entitled to a big payday.

Instead, they scheduled UNC, which most experts had barely getting bowl eligible. So boo-hoo!

..but,but we need the operating revenue
-then fire a few administrators, or cut some money-losing sports
...but, but we feel that we need the money-losing sports as part of our marketing mix
-then pick your poison, there is no free lunch in this world





*For those who dont know, bad/average FCS programs typically get $500k for a guarantee game. Good mid-majors typically get $1.5 mil. An average mid-major typically get a mil.

Most good programs do not want UCF, because they will be punished more heavily for a loss and given less points for a win. BUT, UCF would have been a good home game for a P5 program with a weak home schedule that was not likely to make a run at the playoffs.

Dread Pirate Roberts said:

---

This would be solved with an 8 team playoff. Even if its not a hard rule, it would be easy to have the 5 Power 5 champs, a Group of 5 team, and then 2 more teams that didn't win their championship.

While a team could argue it should be #7 or #8, it would be hard for the #9 team to argue that its actually the best team in the country like we get now.

---

I don't know about "solved," but it is definitely a start. I fully agree with the set-up. And, they couldn't take the wussy way out and pit the two G5s against each other like they did to TCU and Boise State back in the BCS days. That was such a bunch of sheet.