Now that the dust has settled...
I had the opportunity today to learn a little bit more about how the UCF-UF series came to be, via campus sources, which offered some invaluable perspective into the process.
If UCF had their way, I think they would have preferred to make the announcement themselves because context is key here. There are some nuances and details I wasn't aware of (I am now) and I think the timing of Mike Bianchi's scoop caught them off guard.
The reaction was predictable as this has been a hot-button issue debated among the fanbase for going on 3-4 years. Should UCF only do home-and-home deals even if the attractiveness of the schedule suffers and always reject 2-for-1s? Is it worth it for a program like Florida? If so, does that set a bad precedent?
Look, I'm not a fan of these unequal scheduling agreements. I totally supported Danny White's philosophy to the point of being publicly critical of a couple AAC peers, namely South Florida and Memphis, for starting the league trend of signing these 2-for-1 deals. I'm not backing down on that - I think those schools put UCF in a really tough spot and made the situation only much more difficult.
For all UCF has accomplished over the last decade, I just think it's a bad look. And I don't think the current administration necessarily disagrees - they'd rather have upcoming schedules filled with home-and-home deals against attractive P5-caliber opponents. But UCF's success has made that incredibly difficult.
That's the reality, and it really has nothing to do with the 2-for-1 (or not) situation. I'm told UCF hasn't turned down prior 2-for-1 offers from schools (besides UF), the bigger issue is that schools just don't want to play. They look at what happened to Stanford and Pittsburgh, coming down to UCF and getting blown out. The "elite" schools (think top 10-15) would never play a non-P5 team in a home-and-home anyway, and most teams below that level just doesn't want to risk a loss to UCF.
Maybe there are some schools that would be receptive, but their schedules have been filled out 10 years in advance. There's no room to play anyway.
And there have been times UCF thought they had a deal as it was verbally agreed upon by administrators, only to have football coaches lobby and nix the deal. I know I posted about the Tennessee rumor a couple years ago.
So here's a few more details regarding the UF game...
The conversation began because UCF was striking out in finding opponents for 2024. Currently, UCF has a road game at BYU and a home game against Liberty that season. The goal has always been to play two P5 opponents per season (BYU and Boise were considered "P5 caliber"), one at home and one away, and there were almost no options available. There were maybe a couple P5 teams with availability, but those schools steadfastly refused to play. They wanted no part of UCF.
Florida really needed another home game for 2024. They already have FSU (road), Miami (home) as well as Samford (home) and they didn't want to play a second FCS team.
UCF just needed a game, period. Though not yet announced, UCF was already planning to host a FCS team in 2024.
I'm not entirely sure what G5 options there were for a series... I see a handful on FBSchedules.com that *might* have had 2024 availability, but I'm not aware of any specific discussions with any particular team.
Florida, whom UCF had been in discussions with since Terry Mohajir's arrival, was offering a future "home and home" series if UCF filled their 2024 gap.
Gus Malzahn was also involved in these discussions. He wants every opportunity to play schools like Florida and was lobbying for this game every step of the way. The entire coaching staff is pumped about this series and anxious to start talking about it in recruiting.
So again, the only options for 2024 were perhaps a second FCS game, a slight possibility of a G5 team, or playing Florida.
Since the home non-conference schedule will be incredibly lacking in 2024 (Liberty and FCS), I think UCF administration also thought the fanbase would appreciate the opportunity to see UCF play Florida a few miles up the road over the other options.
And Florida has shown they are very serious in fulfilling every game of the series. I know some have stated their concerns about the 2030/2033 games, that UF may try to "back out" after UCF plays in this 2024 game. The contract will likely be released as soon as the game is official, but I'm told the buyout penalties are quite hefty. "UF is not backing out of the future games," I was told.
And UF is expecting the game to be played at the Bounce House. Not Camping World.
There is a chance the UF series is officially announced tomorrow (Friday). If not, it should be early next week. There are just some i's to dot and t's to cross.
But will scheduling a 2-for-1 set a bad precedent in regards to future scheduling? That was always my No. 1 concern.
I'm told UCF believes this will have no impact on future scheduling deals in terms of other schools expecting a 2-for-1 as well.
The one exception may be FSU and Miami... South Florida of course signed a recent 2-for-1 with Miami, and they'd likely want the same deal from UCF... but those schools haven't been receptive to playing UCF anyway. UCF, I'm told, will not entertain 2-for-1 deals with FSU or Miami. If there is another 2-for-1 or unequal arrangement somewhere down the road, it would be reserved for elite, blueblood type schools. Florida is considered to be in that category and those other schools are not.
And this is big: UCF has another series on the verge of being announced. It is a home-and-home series with another P5 school. It will help fill gaps in the 2025 (road) and 2028 (home) schedules. Now, it's not a program that will knock your socks off but it is P5.
I think that's important, especially since this series should be announced in short order, probably sometime next week. Even if the name isn't super exciting, it will at least show a P5 team is willing to play UCF on an equal basis, which will be quite significant since UCF hasn't signed a P5 home-and-home series since March 2018 (Louisville).
So to recap:
UCF was running out of options. They were always hoping some team would perhaps have an unanticipated opening or another team would eventually yield and come back to the bargaining table, but that never happened. Even though 2024 is three years away, that's nothing in college football scheduling when many teams already have schedules filled for the rest of the decade.
Florida, especially with the terms offered for the back-end "home and home" offer, was deemed to be the best option. It was also fully supported and endorsed by Gus Malzahn.
There is a P5 home-and-home deal on the verge of being announced, which should perhaps allay some fears UCF was going to have issues scheduling anything less than a 2-for-1 going forward.
Scheduling is still very difficult as schools just don't want to play UCF. There's still plenty of work to do. UCF has zero games in 2026 and just the road game at UNC in 2027.
I had the opportunity today to learn a little bit more about how the UCF-UF series came to be, via campus sources, which offered some invaluable perspective into the process.
If UCF had their way, I think they would have preferred to make the announcement themselves because context is key here. There are some nuances and details I wasn't aware of (I am now) and I think the timing of Mike Bianchi's scoop caught them off guard.
The reaction was predictable as this has been a hot-button issue debated among the fanbase for going on 3-4 years. Should UCF only do home-and-home deals even if the attractiveness of the schedule suffers and always reject 2-for-1s? Is it worth it for a program like Florida? If so, does that set a bad precedent?
Look, I'm not a fan of these unequal scheduling agreements. I totally supported Danny White's philosophy to the point of being publicly critical of a couple AAC peers, namely South Florida and Memphis, for starting the league trend of signing these 2-for-1 deals. I'm not backing down on that - I think those schools put UCF in a really tough spot and made the situation only much more difficult.
For all UCF has accomplished over the last decade, I just think it's a bad look. And I don't think the current administration necessarily disagrees - they'd rather have upcoming schedules filled with home-and-home deals against attractive P5-caliber opponents. But UCF's success has made that incredibly difficult.
That's the reality, and it really has nothing to do with the 2-for-1 (or not) situation. I'm told UCF hasn't turned down prior 2-for-1 offers from schools (besides UF), the bigger issue is that schools just don't want to play. They look at what happened to Stanford and Pittsburgh, coming down to UCF and getting blown out. The "elite" schools (think top 10-15) would never play a non-P5 team in a home-and-home anyway, and most teams below that level just doesn't want to risk a loss to UCF.
Maybe there are some schools that would be receptive, but their schedules have been filled out 10 years in advance. There's no room to play anyway.
And there have been times UCF thought they had a deal as it was verbally agreed upon by administrators, only to have football coaches lobby and nix the deal. I know I posted about the Tennessee rumor a couple years ago.
So here's a few more details regarding the UF game...
The conversation began because UCF was striking out in finding opponents for 2024. Currently, UCF has a road game at BYU and a home game against Liberty that season. The goal has always been to play two P5 opponents per season (BYU and Boise were considered "P5 caliber"), one at home and one away, and there were almost no options available. There were maybe a couple P5 teams with availability, but those schools steadfastly refused to play. They wanted no part of UCF.
Florida really needed another home game for 2024. They already have FSU (road), Miami (home) as well as Samford (home) and they didn't want to play a second FCS team.
UCF just needed a game, period. Though not yet announced, UCF was already planning to host a FCS team in 2024.
I'm not entirely sure what G5 options there were for a series... I see a handful on FBSchedules.com that *might* have had 2024 availability, but I'm not aware of any specific discussions with any particular team.
Florida, whom UCF had been in discussions with since Terry Mohajir's arrival, was offering a future "home and home" series if UCF filled their 2024 gap.
Gus Malzahn was also involved in these discussions. He wants every opportunity to play schools like Florida and was lobbying for this game every step of the way. The entire coaching staff is pumped about this series and anxious to start talking about it in recruiting.
So again, the only options for 2024 were perhaps a second FCS game, a slight possibility of a G5 team, or playing Florida.
Since the home non-conference schedule will be incredibly lacking in 2024 (Liberty and FCS), I think UCF administration also thought the fanbase would appreciate the opportunity to see UCF play Florida a few miles up the road over the other options.
And Florida has shown they are very serious in fulfilling every game of the series. I know some have stated their concerns about the 2030/2033 games, that UF may try to "back out" after UCF plays in this 2024 game. The contract will likely be released as soon as the game is official, but I'm told the buyout penalties are quite hefty. "UF is not backing out of the future games," I was told.
And UF is expecting the game to be played at the Bounce House. Not Camping World.
There is a chance the UF series is officially announced tomorrow (Friday). If not, it should be early next week. There are just some i's to dot and t's to cross.
But will scheduling a 2-for-1 set a bad precedent in regards to future scheduling? That was always my No. 1 concern.
I'm told UCF believes this will have no impact on future scheduling deals in terms of other schools expecting a 2-for-1 as well.
The one exception may be FSU and Miami... South Florida of course signed a recent 2-for-1 with Miami, and they'd likely want the same deal from UCF... but those schools haven't been receptive to playing UCF anyway. UCF, I'm told, will not entertain 2-for-1 deals with FSU or Miami. If there is another 2-for-1 or unequal arrangement somewhere down the road, it would be reserved for elite, blueblood type schools. Florida is considered to be in that category and those other schools are not.
And this is big: UCF has another series on the verge of being announced. It is a home-and-home series with another P5 school. It will help fill gaps in the 2025 (road) and 2028 (home) schedules. Now, it's not a program that will knock your socks off but it is P5.
I think that's important, especially since this series should be announced in short order, probably sometime next week. Even if the name isn't super exciting, it will at least show a P5 team is willing to play UCF on an equal basis, which will be quite significant since UCF hasn't signed a P5 home-and-home series since March 2018 (Louisville).
So to recap:
UCF was running out of options. They were always hoping some team would perhaps have an unanticipated opening or another team would eventually yield and come back to the bargaining table, but that never happened. Even though 2024 is three years away, that's nothing in college football scheduling when many teams already have schedules filled for the rest of the decade.
Florida, especially with the terms offered for the back-end "home and home" offer, was deemed to be the best option. It was also fully supported and endorsed by Gus Malzahn.
There is a P5 home-and-home deal on the verge of being announced, which should perhaps allay some fears UCF was going to have issues scheduling anything less than a 2-for-1 going forward.
Scheduling is still very difficult as schools just don't want to play UCF. There's still plenty of work to do. UCF has zero games in 2026 and just the road game at UNC in 2027.
