CSNbbs

Since the start of 2017, when UCF exploded as a G5 supernova, what is their record against G5 and FCS opponents?

24 - 0

What is their record against P5 opponents?

4 - 2

That's right, Mighty UCF, with all the undefeated streaks and whatever, is a whopping 4-2 vs the P5 since the start of 2017.

Does 4 - 2 vs P5 get any P5 team a sniff at the playoffs? No it doesn't.

And it's not like UCF has played a murderer's row. Here are the six P5 teams they've played, and their records:

Maryland (4-8)
Auburn (10-4)
Pitt (7-7)
LSU (10-3)
Stanford (1-2)
Pitt (2-2)

That's two teams with winning records, two with losing records, and two with .500 records. And Stanford is going to be 1-3 before I'm done typing this.

That's UCF vs the P5 over 2 years and 1/3 of a third. But it's just a typical 6-game stretch in a single season for most P5 schools, and 4-2 against it might not even get you ranked in the top 25, much less the playoffs.

UCF has never had any kind of claim to sniff the CFP. Ever.

lol...feel better?

Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

I'm pretty sure if I said what I want to say, I'd end up with more than a "warning."

So, in the best southern tradition, "Oh bless your heart."

It takes a special kind of ******* to make a post like this.

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

So is it the best 4 teams or the 4 best resumes? Of course, with you P5 circle jerkers, it’s a constant case of moving the line to whatever screws over the G5 teams, so it’s really an irrelevant question I suppose.

UCF did deserve playoff inclusion last year, all AAC fans know it
Boise deserved BCS bowls many years, No AAC fans want to admit it
We all are a part of the same hypocrisy

(09-21-2019 09:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]lol...feel better?

Lol

Lol

Lol

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

USF fan talks down UCF...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(09-21-2019 10:11 PM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

So is it the best 4 teams or the 4 best resumes? Of course, with you P5 circle jerkers, it’s a constant case of moving the line to whatever screws over the G5 teams, so it’s really an irrelevant question I suppose.

For me, it’s the best 4 teams, but how can you not include resume in the analysis? You should consider the opponents teams play, no matter the circumstances, to decide who are the best of the best. Undefeated teams should usually be considered first, but it depends on their strength of schedule.

Quo, we get it. You hate the G5. Dude, seriously find something else to post about

(09-21-2019 10:13 PM)billybobby777 Wrote: [ -> ]UCF did deserve playoff inclusion last year, all AAC fans know it
Boise deserved BCS bowls many years, No AAC fans want to admit it
We all are a part of the same hypocrisy

UCF only deserved playoff inclusion last year by AAC fans, but no one else.

(09-21-2019 10:21 PM)panama Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

USF fan talks down UCF...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I don't know if he realizes he is arguing against USF ever making the playoff if they ever go undefeated, but maybe he's just accepted that USF will always be inferior to UCF as a program and wants to try to hold UCF down so UCF doesn't continue to rise so far ahead of his team.

(09-21-2019 08:49 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]Since the start of 2017, when UCF exploded as a G5 supernova, what is their record against G5 and FCS opponents?

24 - 0

What is their record against P5 opponents?

4 - 2

That's right, Mighty UCF, with all the undefeated streaks and whatever, is a whopping 4-2 vs the P5 since the start of 2017.

Does 4 - 2 vs P5 get any P5 team a sniff at the playoffs? No it doesn't.

And it's not like UCF has played a murderer's row. Here are the six P5 teams they've played, and their records:

Maryland (4-8)
Auburn (10-4)
Pitt (7-7)
LSU (10-3)
Stanford (1-2)
Pitt (2-2)

That's two teams with winning records, two with losing records, and two with .500 records. And Stanford is going to be 1-3 before I'm done typing this.

That's UCF vs the P5 over 2 years and 1/3 of a third. But it's just a typical 6-game stretch in a single season for most P5 schools, and 4-2 against it might not even get you ranked in the top 25, much less the playoffs.

UCF has never had any kind of claim to sniff the CFP. Ever.

Which UCF football player banged your woman.

(09-21-2019 10:11 PM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

So is it the best 4 teams or the 4 best resumes? Of course, with you P5 circle jerkers, it’s a constant case of moving the line to whatever screws over the G5 teams, so it’s really an irrelevant question I suppose.

The best 4 teams. But honestly, how can anyone look like one of the best 4 teams beating only G5?

24-0 vs 4-2. That's a big difference.

(09-21-2019 10:28 PM)Jugnaut Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:21 PM)panama Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

USF fan talks down UCF...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I don't know if he realizes he is arguing against USF ever making the playoff if they ever go undefeated, but maybe he's just accepted that USF will always be inferior to UCF as a program and wants to try to hold UCF down so UCF doesn't continue to rise so far ahead of his team.

Well.played.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(09-21-2019 10:45 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:11 PM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 10:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-21-2019 09:10 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, finally some proof.

Since UCF lost to Pitt in 2019, that means the 2017 team should never have been considered for the CFP. I am glad this finally settles that argument.

It does show how silly it is to argue CFP inclusion for any team that has only a bunch of G5 wins to their credit. Those games mean very little by that standard.

So is it the best 4 teams or the 4 best resumes? Of course, with you P5 circle jerkers, it’s a constant case of moving the line to whatever screws over the G5 teams, so it’s really an irrelevant question I suppose.

The best 4 teams. But honestly, how can anyone look like one of the best 4 teams beating only G5?

24-0 vs 4-2. That's a big difference.

Mannnn...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Imagine having to wait two years just to make this thread... just sad.