I watched the UCF game and they lost a close hard fought game.  Now everyone will say told you so they are not worthy of a playoff or to be mentioned with the big boys. If Milton played they would’ve dominated LSU, their defense was aggressive but left on
the field for too long while offensively Mack played timidly.  I think they they are Power 5 ready and the American essentially is a poor mans Power 5 conference.  Even though they lost they have raised the stakes on what considerations should be looked at for the Playoff for a mid major Group of 5 team. I know we are far from where UCF is, but winning consistently can change a lot. As a group of 5 school do you think the system will change?  What would a Group of 5 team need to do to get considered for the Playoff? What do you guys think would be the best setup or system  for a Group of 5 team that is fair?  

You have four opportunities to play power-five schools every season. UCF had options over the off-season; they elected to spend their money on parades and championship bonuses, instead of buying-out their FCS game. And maybe that wouldn't have been enough this year (they also didn't re-schedule their missed game because, "Playing on a short-week, away is too hard [THAT'S THE POINT!]"). But you've got four chances. They won't be "fair deals" (two-for-ones and season openers away) but you've got to take them.

That said… UCF is a great team and they deserved a real look (and who knows if they got it…). Expansion doesn't fix this specific problem (but boy will it create more).

The selection process is subjective and takes place behind closed doors. If we're adjusting according to our wishes, I'd push for an objective and transparent, point-based system. I'm an idiot, and even I've scribbled-out better systems on the back of rye-stained cocktail napkins.

UCF should have taken the 2-1 deal with UF the second it was offered.

They also would have won the game yesterday with Milton IMO.

I hate UCF but the winning streak they went on is incredibly tough to do.  They faced some tough times to get there…2 defeated seasons.  

All you can do is tip your cap to them at this point.

Now its time to get FAU on the same trajectory.  We have everything in place to do it.  We need Lane to do better.

I agree with ya Walty. I hate that the SYSTEM puts the Power5 in such control as to demand 2 for 1 deals, one of the the very reasons for the unlevel playing field in college sports but it is what it is.

UCF should have taken it and set their goal to win ALL 3!

WE should pursue that deal IMHO!!!!!

GeorgiaOwl said

I agree with ya Walty. I hate that the SYSTEM puts the Power5 in such control as to demand 2 for 1 deals, one of the the very reasons for the unlevel playing field in college sports but it is what it is.

UCF should have taken it and set their goal to win ALL 3!

WE should pursue that deal IMHO!!!!!

Posted On: Jan 2nd 2019, 9:44 AM #384487

Right now what really separates P5 and G5 football is the TV contract revenue.  That's really it.

Basically, UF gets a check to start every year for $50m and FAU gets a check for $250k.  Those aren't made up numbers.

The reason UCF can tell UF to shove it is simple, they have 55,000+ students to draw athletic fees from to generate revenue to support athletics and dont care about the UF payday.

on the flip side...it was an opportunity to play a SEC team 100 miles from your campus and have UF who NEVER travels OOC (especially to a G5 program) do so.  It was an opportunity to go into the Swamp and beat them with a lot of your fans there.  They were fools to pass that up.

Easy solution: expand playoff to 8. Every P5 gets an auto tie in. Highest ranked G5 gets a spot. Then 2 at larges. 

Keep the rest of the bowl system. And you can keep the NY6 but use the playoffs as the NY6 games. Everyone wins. 

Have a feeling when the next media contracts come up we will expand and see a bit of realignment. 

Regarding UCF, if they really want to be at the top, they have to take that old FSU back when they were independent (or Boise State) attitude of "anybody anywhere".  I understand they want to beat their chest and say a top-10 team shouldn't have to accept 2-for-1 deals.  But until they do, they are going to have a hard time getting many marquee games to make their resume good enough.

As for the LSU game, if you are going to give UCF Milton, just like the announcers I would argue that you could play the same game and say how much better would LSU's defense been with all their starters?  I saw a game that got close at the end, but LSU's defense really dominated them the second half until they went into that God-awful prevent at the end.  I think I heard them say that UCF had 2 first downs in the second half before that drive - both were from penalties.  I didn't check that, but do remember that Alabama beat LSU 29-0 - and if there were 8 my guess is Alabama would have been the Knights's dancing partner in the first round.

walty12 said

UCF should have taken the 2-1 deal with UF the second it was offered.

Posted On: Jan 2nd 2019, 9:24 AM #384485

My understanding of the 2-1 deal with UF was the 1 at UCF was not at UCF but at a neutral site. No one hears that part of it.

The score was close, the game was not.  LSU had their way with UCF, I don't think Milton would have changed both of their lines getting dominated.

fauowl said

walty12 said

UCF should have taken the 2-1 deal with UF the second it was offered.

Posted On: Jan 2nd 2019, 9:24 AM #384485

My understanding of the 2-1 deal with UF was the 1 at UCF was not at UCF but at a neutral site. No one hears that part of it.

Posted On: Jan 2nd 2019, 8:58 PM #384502

I wasn’t aware of that.  That a known fact?  What would a neutral site be between Gainesville and Orlando?