Link: UCF AD Danny White Not Happy With Scott Stricklin’s Scheduling Idea

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
In a nutshell, the P5 schools are telling UCF they won't play them (in a home-home scenario) and they won't let them into a P5 conference, then turning around and telling them that they can't be in their football country club because they didn't play enough P5 schools and aren't in a P5 conference.
Exactly. And that's perfectly fine. UCF wants their home games, and since the refuse to do what they need to do in order to prove themselves, they'll stay where they are and continue to whine.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Nobody remembers 1998 Tulane.

A few may remember 1999 Marshall because of a couple of big names.


And once UCF finally loses, nobody will remember them outside the Orlando city limits, either.


What's bizarre is they MAY cause a backlash of people refusing to schedule them for the lean years ahead when they're gonna need the money.


But what do I know, I didn't go to a bastion of academic superiority and intelligentsia like UCF.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Nobody remembers 1998 Tulane.

A few may remember 1999 Marshall because of a couple of big names.


And once UCF finally loses, nobody will remember them outside the Orlando city limits, either.


What's bizarre is they MAY cause a backlash of people refusing to schedule them for the lean years ahead when they're gonna need the money.


But what do I know, I didn't go to a bastion of academic superiority and intelligentsia like UCF.
But I think you know why Tulane and Marshall didn’t make a big deal about it.

Tulane: because the KSU rule didn’t exist

Marshall: because the KSU rule didn’t apply to them in 1999.

The KSU rule made these types of teams relevant in FBS rankings. It’s one of the huge problems made by the BCS, and why the committee is superior to the BCS rankings.
 
Last edited:

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
But I think you know why Tulane and Marshall didn’t make a big deal about it.

Tulane: because the KSU rule didn’t exist

Marshall: because the KSU rule didn’t apply to them in 1999.

The KSU rule made these types of teams relevant in FBS rankings. It’s one of the huge problems made by the BCS, and why the committee is superior to the BCS rankings.
Tulane didn't make a big deal about it because their own coach - Tommy Bowden - said that having coached in the SEC, he could not justify the gauntlet teams like Tennessee (who, of course, went unbeaten that year) as being the same as Tulane's own piddly schedule.

Scott Frost basically said the same thing about UCF.

They just chose to not get the memo.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Nobody remembers 1998 Tulane.
A few may remember 1999 Marshall because of a couple of big names.
I'd point one thing out, since attributions are being made.

I believe it was 1992 when they reduced the scholarship limit to 85. The 90s also saw an influx of programs joining what was then known as D1 (including Troy, UAB, UCF, Boise St., etc...), because after all the NCAA made accommodations for them to quote one coach, by "leveling the playing field". At the time there were less than 100 teams in D1, and there hadn't been an irrelevant undefeated team since the 70s (when Division 2 was created), if I recall my research on the subject.

So, basically we had two full decades of no irrelevant undefeated teams. The scholarship limits and an influx of football welfare programs brought that to an end.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Tulane didn't make a big deal about it because their own coach - Tommy Bowden - said that having coached in the SEC, he could not justify the gauntlet teams like Tennessee (who, of course, went unbeaten that year) as being the same as Tulane's own piddly schedule.

Scott Frost basically said the same thing about UCF.

They just chose to not get the memo.
Yeah but the BCS in the beginning was very strict against the inclusion of non BCS conferences. The KSU rule of 1998 started the movement of the inclusions of Non BCS AQs. The KSU rule in 2004 put Texas in the Rose Bowl being ranked #4 because the Rose was given the first choice. They were forced to take the #4 team due to Sugar having the SEC AQ who was ranked #3. It denied California the BCS invite and forced the Fiesta to take Utah at #6 because the Rose was forced to take Texas instead of the PAC 10 runner up. It also forced a non BCS AQ from 2005- present because Utah ended up winning.

The order of matchups in 2004:

Orange (NCG): #1 USC vs #2 Oklahoma

Rose: Big 10 champ vs Top atlarge if in Top 5 then PAC 10 alternate

Sugar: SEC champ vs at large

Fiesta: Big East vs at large

Point is neither Tulane or Marshall ever sniffed an opportunity to voice a semi legitimate opinion like Utah in 2004. After Utah went undefeated the BCS started giving highly ranked non BCS teams a chance. Point is had the KSU rule not existed then California would’ve been in the Rose and Texas would’ve been in the Fiesta and we would’ve never worried about Utah or Boise.
 
Last edited:

BradtheImpaler

All-American
Nov 16, 2010
2,001
0
0
Sugar Hill, GA
Hey, UCF... TWO of your "quality" wins this year took an L to a 6-6 Wake Forest in their bowl game.
It also doesn't help your case that the co-champion in the other division in your conference took a 70-14 curb-stomping to Army.
Your conference is lukewarm garbage.
Hot garbage is too good.
Take every opportunity you can get to upgrade your schedule.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.