Believe it or not, one former polling format would reportedly have Central Florida ranked higher than Alabama.
Videos by FanBuzz
According to Dr. Peter Wolfe's ratings, which were part of the formula for the now-defunct BCS format, the Tide would rank third behind Georgia and the Knights.
The BCS format began in 1998 and lasted until the 2013 season before the NCAA switched to the College Football Playoff in 2014. Since the change, Alabama has made the playoff every year, which included a national championship victory during the 2015 season and consecutive appearances in the title game during the past two seasons.
Entering Week 9, both teams have perfect records, although it's clear that Alabama's holds much more weight.
While UCF's 6-0 start is impressive, its biggest wins are against the likes of Memphis and Navy. While both are good teams with winning records, neither is a member of a Power 5 conference.
Alabama, on the other hand, shouldn't be faulted because the teams on its schedule turned out to be disappointments. Tennessee — who was routed by the Tide last weekend — was coming off three consecutive winning seasons, including a 9-win season in 2016.
Florida State was expected to be a national contender, but hasn't been the same since losing starting quarterback Deondre Francois during its Week 1 matchup against Alabama.
Even still, the Tide's five SEC victories — including one against Texas A&M — are still more impressive than being a 6-0 team from the AAC.
FanBuzz's Take
Of course, Wolfe's ratings are tremendously flawed as they don't take into consideration the fact that UCF is a non-power 5 team with only two wins against teams that currently hold a winning record. "WHO DO THEY PLAY, PAWWWWLLLLL?"
That's far less impressive than defending SEC Champion and College Football Playoff runner-up Alabama who, despite going undefeated during the regular season last year, may look even more dominant in 2017.
Thankfully, we now have the College Football Playoff rankings, although it's hard to believe that whatever other factors were used in formulating the BCS wouldn't have counteracted the nonsense coming from Wolfe's ratings.
