If you think (hope?) the College Football Playoff is expanding anytime soon, don't be so sure. Despite a recent brouhaha about the size of the playoff -- a discussion that has been percolating for a while -- the sport's decision-makers sound content with the status quo. Speaking to USA Today's George Schroeder, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby was one of many power conference commissioners who repeated that there was no widespread need among university presidents to expand the playoff from four to eight. 

The Power Five conference commissioners -- who created the system and would make any alterations -- say they remain largely satisfied, that it is working as intended. And although some say they would not be opposed to considering something different at some point, they see no reason – and insist there is no impetus – to explore significant change now.

"Four works," Bowlsby told USA TODAY by text message on Sunday, reiterating a point he has consistently made. "It was hard to get to four with lots of compromises. We should be thoughtful, but shouldn't refuse to discuss."

Of course, it's easy for Bowlsby to find the positive spin in this. Big 12 champion Oklahoma is in the playoff for the third time in four years, and will take on top-seeded Alabama in the Orange Bowl on Dec. 29. Moreover, the return of the Big 12 Championship Game ended up being beneficial this season in the Sooners' playoff campaign. Theoretically, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, whose conference has missed the playoff for two straight seasons and whose champion has been omitted in three straight years, and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott should be the ones grandstanding for an expanded field. Combined, those two conferences had just three teams appear in the past four years and have been shut out in two straight years. 

However, Scott told reporters as recently as this month "Felt then, feel now, four is absolutely the right number," and Delany echoed a similar sentiment following the announcement of this year's playoff field. Then again, Delany is a well-documented advocate for the Rose Bowl being the biggest end game of them all. Even in disappointment of being left out, the men who should be the playoff's biggest critics find ways to toe the line. 

There's an understandable reason as to why. The playoff was created and shaped to increase revenues for power conferences, not grant access to more teams, especially those from outside the chosen few. Moreover, there's almost nothing a Group of Five team can do to make the top four, try as it may. And UCF, the poster child for college football's postseason inequality, has most certainly been trying in the form of scheduling a nonconference series against Florida. 

A series of emails from UCF athletic director Danny White to Florida athletic director Scott Stricklin were conveniently obtained by the Orlando Sentinel via public records request showing the scheduling impasse between a program from a power conference and one from a non-power conference. In short, UCF was interested in scheduling either a home-and-home with the Gators, or playing a game at a neutral site. Florida wasn't interested in either of these options, adding instead that it would be open to a pair of games in Gainesville with a third in Orlando. 

What followed was a blunt retort by White that took on not just the frustrations in scheduling key nonconference games, but the playoff system as a whole. 

"If this type of scheduling is what is required for teams like UCF to make the final 4 of the CFP (College Football Playoff), we must consider expansion of the playoff to include non-autonomy 5 schools so we avoid the system operating like a monopoly. I am open to playing anyone in the country, but shouldn't have to put my team at a severe disadvantage by being forced to play two for ones or guarantee games.  

"The system should be such that we can schedule home and homes. As someone who sits on the CFP Committee, I am asking for your help in fixing a broken model by expanding the playoff and putting an end to unfair scheduling practices."  

The struggle for programs like UCF to find legitimate nonconference matchups vs. power conference opponents without a blatant disadvantage, such as a two-for-one, is real and unfair. Unfortunately for them, that's the nature of the game and there's little incentive for a program like Florida to alter its stance. 

But in the spat between UF and UCF there is a failure to see the big picture. As long as the playoff stays at four teams, it's unlikely that a game between, say, UF and UCF would mean anything substantial in the Knights' quest for a spot in the playoff no matter where it would be played. UCF's strength of schedule, per Sagarin's ratings, was 89th at the end of the season, more than 40 spots behind each one of this year's playoff teams. While strength of schedule doesn't determine how good a team is, it is one of many factors in how the committee ranks teams. (In this case, it's also held against UCF.) One game against Florida, for example, probably isn't going to help the No. 8 Knights gain four spots -- not without help from around the landscape (which they'd need anyway). 

Besides, what all this foot stomping from UCF amounts to a grab for attention, which, it should be noted, it's done successfully. We're at the start of bowl season, the playoff is still nearly two weeks away and people are talking about UCF. If nothing else, White has done a masterful job of keeping his program in the headlines by taking on all (figurative) challengers with the us-against-the-world mentality coupled with the "national champions" moniker. And if people are talking about UCF, they're talking about the system and whether it is broken.  

White literally said it himself: "I am asking for your help in fixing a broken model by expanding the playoff and putting an end to unfair scheduling practices." That's what UCF wants more than a series with Florida because it would make their path to a playoff spot more attainable depending on the format (i.e. an automatic bid for the highest-ranked Group of Five team). And in that case, a game with Florida may not even need to happen. Nobody wants to take the toughest route the playoff if it doesn't have to, which is why UCF is pushing back on Florida's proposed series. 

But if there's a fight to get the playoff to eight, the right people need to be on board. According to Bowlsby, there simply isn't enough of a push from those people. "I don't sense we're there," he told USA Today. 

Until then, the UCFs of the world are going to be at a disadvantage regardless of whether they get the right games on the schedule.