Scheduling debate pointless
Bianchi: Why are we wasting our time talking about a UCF-UF game that’s never going to happen?
Don’t we have better things to do than discuss fictional football scheduling?
Can we please just quit talking about something that’s never, ever going to happen?
Why are we wasting our time and energy debating whether Florida Gators athletics director Scott Stricklin would actually agree to a football series with
UCF and whether UCF athletics director Danny White should amend his scheduling policy to make such a series materialize? It’s not going to happen.
It’s never even been close to happening.
And it probably never will be close to happening.
“This is silly and was never about actually playing a football game,” White says. “Football games don’t get scheduled in public or on social media.”
White was referring to the latest iteration of the UCF-UF controversy, which happened earlier this week when some members of the self-described UCF “Twitter Mafia” began once again badgering Stricklin about the No. 3-ranked Gators scheduling the No. 11-ranked Knights.
As we all know by now, UF has a long-standing policy of not scheduling home-and-home series with Group of 5 schools like UCF, while UCF has a policy [implemented by White] about not scheduling two-for-ones with anybody. There has been an ongoing narrative out there that if somehow White did make an exception and agreed to a twofor-one (two games in Gainesville, one in Orlando) series with UF that Stricklin would only do it if UF’s road game were played as more of a neutral-site game at Camping World Stadium, where the Gators would be guaranteed a bunch more tickets than if the game were played at UCF’s smaller on-campus stadium.
When presented with this narrative Sunday by trolling UCF fans on Twitter, Stricklin responded that he made no demands on where UCF’s home game would be played.
“Actually, UF did offer a true 2-for-1,” Stricklin posted on Twitter. “I never said anything about the 1 having to be a neutral … not sure where that came from.”
Stricklin went on to tweet that if the two schools had reached a two-for-one agreement, he fully expected the Knights’ home game would be played at the Bounce House on UCF’s campus.
“We would have played [ours] in the Swamp just as I’m sure UCF would have played [theirs] on campus,” Stricklin tweeted. “Just wanted to clear up that misperception.”
And, so, the UCF-UF debate ignited yet again after Stricklin’s Twitter response — something UF’s AD kinda wishes now he had resisted.
“It happens every now and then that they [UCF fans] will jump on my [Twitter] timeline,” Stricklin says. “I should have just ignored it … but they [UCF fans]
were spouting off about how our road game in the two-for-one was actually a neutral-site game in Orlando. I don’t know where that narrative came from. I never said that to anybody. Danny [White] and I never talked about that. All I ever said is we were open for a two-for-one.
“I immediately regretted it because my whole timeline the rest of the afternoon was about UCF,” Stricklin added. “I should have just left well-enough alone. … It just bothered me that people were intimating that we weren’t acting in good faith. There was no hidden agenda on our part. We weren’t trying to pull a bait-andswitch.”
To be clear, White and Stricklin say there have never been any serious, substantive talks about ever scheduling a football series between the two schools. No offers have been made or contract details discussed. There have only been a couple of cursory, exploratory exchanges.
The back-and-forth between the two schools started right after the College Football Playoff selection committee announced the bowl matchups (Florida vs. Michigan in the Peach Bowl and UCF vs. LSU in the Fiesta Bowl) two seasons ago. It seemed illogical to many fans to have the Gators play a Michigan program they had played multiple times in recent years. It seemed more logical to match UCF and UF in nearby Atlanta and LSU vs. Michigan — two storied programs that had never played each other — in the Fiesta Bowl.
As I wrote back then:
White went on to give Stricklin a list of future dates during which the two schools might be able to begin a home-and-home series, including the season opener on Sept. 3, 2022. Stricklin emailed back and said he was aware of White’s philosophy of only scheduling home-and-home series with Power 5 opponents but reiterated UF’s long-standing scheduling philosophy regarding schools outside the Power 5.
“UF isn’t in the market for homeand-home or a neutral site games against non-Autonomy 5 opponents,” Stricklin wrote. “However, we would be open to a series similar to what we’ve agreed to with USF … two games in Gainesville and one in Orlando. We are in need of a home opener for the 2022 season, so the 9/ 3/ 2022 date you mention would be a perfect date to begin the series, and we can fill in the remaining games from there.”
White then seemed to take umbrage with Stricklin grouping UCF in with other “non-Autonomy 5 opponents” and sent a lengthy email urging Stricklin to help him change an unfair system.
“You mention not playing a neutral site contest versus a non-autonomy 5 opponent, but a UF vs. UCF game held in our state would certainly be a sellout, which would be a positive for both of us financially,” White wrote. “I think that our team has shown on the field that we are far from a typical ‘non-autonomy 5’ opponent.”
Now, here we are two years later, and absolutely nothing has changed. White’s stance is the same and so is Stricklin’s. White rightfully contends that UCF has proven it is better than many Power 5 programs and should be treated as part of the “Power 6.”
“As a top 25 program with a sold out stadium, we are open to playing a home-and-home with any Power 6 program in America,” White says. “We’ve been consistent with our stance, and won’t back down from playing anybody. Our kids are competitors, that’s the UCF way.”
Likewise, Stricklin points out that UF’s policy of not playing home-and-homes with Group of 5 programs hasn’t changed.
“We have not done that and I don’t know that we will start doing that,” Stricklin says. “We didn’t do it with USF; it would be hard politically to do it now with UCF. I know UCF’s program is in a different place [than USF’s], but in the eyes of a lot of people in the state, the programs are very similar. They’re in the same league, they’re both in metropolitan areas and they have a rivalry with one another. I don’t know why we would treat one different than the other.”
As much as I’d love to see Florida and UCF play, the bottom line is this: The Gators don’t need to play the Knights and the Knights don’t need to play the Gators.
UCF is already the premier Group of 5 program in the country and has been to three New Year’s Six bowl games in the last six years (more than Florida, Florida State and Miami). The Knights have built an impressive season-ticket base and don’t need to be giving up home games [and the $3 million of revenue that comes with playing at home] — especially during these financially challenging times.
And the Gators obviously don’t need UCF. They are the richest school in the state, compete in the toughest conference in college football, play FSU every year and aren’t in the market for another tough opponent (especially an in-state opponent with a mouthy fan base) that might prevent them from reaching their goals of winning SEC and national championships.
“Just because our scheduling priorities don’t sync up doesn’t mean someone is the ‘bad guy,’ ” Stricklin notes.