Go back to 16 team playoff or stay at 24 or maybe move it to 20?

[BisonBacker]

So much has been made of this years playoff field so the question is obvious. Is the 24 team playoff format to much and should the playoffs move back to 16? I know this has been talked about before in many threads but given the time of year and this years playoff field its worth another look just to discuss. Do teams with a record 1 game above 500 belong? Would the 24 team format be ok if the Ivy's and SWAC participated or wouldn't that make any difference to you? Asking due to the questions that's always brought up about conference champions not being able to prove they belong given they don't participate. Or would that just create more division with fans who are complaining about teams in this years playoffs that they think don't belong because of soft schedules or what is perceived as soft anyway (see San Diego ect as an example. Please discuss respectfully so this doesn't get moved to smack. I'm more interested in peoples opinions on the playoff format and what they believe is the correct number.

[MR. CHICKEN]

...........YAWN!..............BRAWK!!

[BisonBacker]

...........YAWN!..............BRAWK!!

Well that was informative xcoffeex

[BisonBacker]

...........YAWN!..............BRAWK!!

So you are ok with 6-5 teams making the playoffs?

[Reign of Terrier]

stay at 24. I'd rather debate over 6-5 teams getting in than debating over which 8-3 or 9-2 teams get left out.

with 24 teams you're less likely to leave a team out that could possibly go on a run.

[clenz]

Can't go to 16

20 is possible but you'd have to play that game almost yearly to pick a field size

Stay at 24

Quit being a bunch of ****ing babies

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[BisonBacker]

Can't go to 16

20 is possible but you'd have to play that game almost yearly to pick a field size

Stay at 24

Quit being a bunch of ****ing babies

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Hey many (not just NDSU fans) have questioned the field being what it is in size and should it go back to 16. It's a relevant topic this time of year especially given the field this year. Don't like it nut up and stay out of the thread.

[clenz]

Not. It's not a topic

We literally can't go to 16.



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[BisonTru]

Can't go to 16

20 is possible but you'd have to play that game almost yearly to pick a field size

Stay at 24

Quit being a bunch of ****ing babies

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Plus a 20 game field you are still gonna need a play in round. Instead of 8 games it would be four play in games.

8 games > 4 games imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ElCid]

24 is a lot in some years, but it is fine most. But it can never get bigger even if all the wayward children enter, or come back, into the fold. That is the upper limit.

[BisonBacker]

Not. It's not a topic

We literally can't go to 16.



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

16 wasn't the only option. Are you the topic god who say's what can and can't be discussed? Clearly the thread title includes the comment "maybe move it to 20" but apparently that is lost on you. Coming from a fan of one of the 6-5 teams who got in I can see getting a unbiased opinion from you isn't going to happen.

[clenz]

16 wasn't the only option. Are you the topic god who say's what can and can't be discussed? Clearly the thread title includes the comment "maybe move it to 20" but apparently that is lost on you. Coming from a fan of one of the 6-5 teams who got in I can see getting a unbiased opinion from you isn't going to happen.

That last sentence is funny.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

I like 24 teams. More football is good in my book.

[lionsrking2]

32

[Professor Chaos]

I like 24 teams. More football is good in my book.
Yep.

First off, I think it's important to give every conference that wants one an autobid. It's not a truly national playoff without that *cough*talkingaboutyouCFP*cough*. So that said they need at least 20 and 24 is just as good if not better in that it gives us more football this opening weekend. The real title contenders are in the top 8 anyway and for them the 24 team format is the same as the 16 team format except that they all get valuable byes (meaning they avoid playing on the traditionally lightly attended Thanksgiving weekend) and they all get seeded (only the top 4 were seeded in the 16 team format) so homefield is more based on merit rather than bidding once we get to the 2nd weekend.

[F'N Hawks]

64.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

I see the idiots do not listen to Ursus.

[Schism55]

64.
CATS AND DOGS LIVING TOGETHER!!!

[dbackjon]

1) As Clenz as alluded to, 16 is NOT POSSIBLE. NOT AN OPTION.

Why? NCAA Rules. You have to have at LEAST the same number, or more at-large bids as there are auto-bids. There are 10 auto-bid conferences right now. Minimum field size is 20. Any poll that gives less than 20 as an option is being made by someone that doesn't understand the rules.

[F'N Hawks]

CATS AND DOGS LIVING TOGETHER!!!
LOL. Just kidding, I like 24. This year was a mess though.

[ElCid]

1) As Clenz as alluded to, 16 is NOT POSSIBLE. NOT AN OPTION.

Why? NCAA Rules. You have to have at LEAST the same number, or more at-large bids as there are auto-bids. There are 10 auto-bid conferences right now. Minimum field size is 20. Any poll that gives less than 20 as an option is being made by someone that doesn't understand the rules.

Unless they also suggest to eliminate some auto bids......

I don't like that, but some might.

[JSUSoutherner]

Freeeeeee fooootballllllllll

[DFW HOYA]

Unpopular opinion: You could run it like the I-A folks do and take the top eight teams regardless of conference.

[Bisonwinagn]

Current format is great. Only 2 6 wins teams have made it prior to this year. Also don't forget you could have an 8 or 9 win MEAC team get in over a 7 win valley team. Be careful what you wish for.

[DCWIU11]

I know ill get torn apart for this belief but I actually think we should expand it. 32 team playoff, seeded tournament, no matter the distances from the prospective schools. (also, just because you are a auto-qualifier doesn't mean you wouldn't be a #32 seed) Why I believe this is as followed, there would be less complaining about why certain conferences get a 6-5 team in the post season from X conference, compared to a 8-3 team from another. FCS football, needs more branding, more tv time, the players need it too so they can make the next step in their careers. More football, more chances for them to do it. Plus, I love football and another week of it doesn't seem too bad to me. Crap, I am not crazy to say a "March Madness" amount of teams but I'd love that too. Just more football, more teams playing schools they normally don't. At the end of the day, the #1 ranked team shouldn't be worried about 25-32 making it into a potential playoff bracket. Finally, a 32 team bracket would only add one more week to the tournament.

[dewey]

Unpopular opinion: You could run it like the I-A folks do and take the top eight teams regardless of conference.

Maybe I missed something but the FBS is the top 4 teams regardless of conference.

Dewey

[woffordgrad94]

As I said in another thread, I think 24 is the correct number of teams. Yes, you will have disagreements over who should get the final spots, but you would have that with 16,20, 32, or any other number of teams. 24 teams is enough to keep a lot of people interested in late-season football and believing their team has a shot at playing in the postseason, but its not so many that the field could possibly have losing teams in it. Plus, the 24 team setup gives the top 8 an advantage they have earned on the field of a bye week. Keep things as is.

[taper]

1) As Clenz as alluded to, 16 is NOT POSSIBLE. NOT AN OPTION.

Why? NCAA Rules. You have to have at LEAST the same number, or more at-large bids as there are auto-bids. There are 10 auto-bid conferences right now. Minimum field size is 20. Any poll that gives less than 20 as an option is being made by someone that doesn't understand the rules.

Or, you know, change the rules to go to 16. I don't understand why certain people get their panties in twist about these rules. Any NCAA rule can be changed, including autobid vs at-large. Or, to use caps so you understand it, THERE IS NOTHING PREVENTING THE NCAA FROM GOING TO 16 TEAMS IF IT WANTS TO.

[ST_Lawson]

I think most years 24 is fine. More football is good, and we can pretty much be assured that the legitimate champ contenders are in, plus a bunch of teams get a bit of bonus football.

I would like to see autobids for all conferences, but I know that's up to those conferences to decide. I know that it's entirely possible that my team gets left out in a year because of the extra couple of autobids, but I'm ok with that.

This year is just a wierd one where it didn't seem like there were really enough good teams, but that's generally not been the case most years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bisonwinagn]

As I said in another thread, I think 24 is the correct number of teams. Yes, you will have disagreements over who should get the final spots, but you would have that with 16,20, 32, or any other number of teams. 24 teams is enough to keep a lot of people interested in late-season football and believing their team has a shot at playing in the postseason, but its not so many that the field could possibly have losing teams in it. Plus, the 24 team setup gives the top 8 an advantage they have earned on the field of a bye week. Keep things as is.

This is correct.

[Bisonwinagn]

I know ill get torn apart for this belief but I actually think we should expand it. 32 team playoff, seeded tournament, no matter the distances from the prospective schools. (also, just because you are a auto-qualifier doesn't mean you wouldn't be a #32 seed) Why I believe this is as followed, there would be less complaining about why certain conferences get a 6-5 team in the post season from X conference, compared to a 8-3 team from another. FCS football, needs more branding, more tv time, the players need it too so they can make the next step in their careers. More football, more chances for them to do it. Plus, I love football and another week of it doesn't seem too bad to me. Crap, I am not crazy to say a "March Madness" amount of teams but I'd love that too. Just more football, more teams playing schools they normally don't. At the end of the day, the #1 ranked team shouldn't be worried about 25-32 making it into a potential playoff bracket. Finally, a 32 team bracket would only add one more week to the tournament.

There are only 5 or 6 teams a year who have a chance of winning it all. Adding teams to the playoff's won't change that.

[DCWIU11]

There are only 5 or 6 teams a year who have a chance of winning it all. Adding teams to the playoff's won't change that.

While I 100% agree with you on paper, this blog site is literally "anygivensaturday" and there are plenty of giants that have been taken down by teams that on paper or 9 out of 10 times they'd beat. It only takes one time to do shake the bracket. But, that is not my intention about expanding the playoffs at all. Also, for a 32 team playoff system to actually work the NCAA would have to be willing to pay to have teams travel to make it a reality. So, that will never happen. Plus, if the Ivy league ever decides to play in the playoffs again, that one more AQ and more than likely one more at-large slot taken every year from the field.

[TheKingpin28]

Seed the field and go back to 20.

16 won't happen so there's that. If they stay at 24, seed the damn field.

[stevdock]

While I would like to not spend my time and money watching my team absolutely destroy our first round opponent and some years more, I also absolutely love watching our kids every chance we get so I'm happy spending my time and money ;). 24 is the right amount. If 6-5 teams get in and they don't deserve it they will get destroyed. Or in the case of a certain 6-5 team this year I could see them going on a run. Make it bigger and you've got some teams playing 17 games a year, which in my opinion is not ok for 18 year olds. And remember that could now give a kid 68 college football games. That sounds cool and all but we've seen this up here that it is such a taxing on the body that great players have nothing left to even try the next level with.

Changes I would like to see made:

Seed the top 16. Top 8 get a bye, next 8 get a home game. NCAA is going to lose money anyways, just let basketball pay for it ;)

Have a little more say when these games are being played. Nobody says you have to start at 9 AM or 11 PM, but staggering them throughout the day would give us more of a chance to watch more games. You let ESPN do it, so why not do it for more of them.

There is absolutely no reason why you can't say what criteria you are going to judge by before the season starts. I heard many times from the chairman of this committee that they gave extra points for earning the AQ. The AQ just means they are automatically in. Did Maine do more than the other teams they are tied with? I haven't looked but to give them a seed because they won the AQ isn't necessarily right. Some conferences tie breaker rules are really messed up. In fact some conferences have one of their tie breakers as whoever has not won the AQ in the longest time will win it (that might be the MVFC). Why does that matter??

[MTfan4life]

As long as they keep things the way they did this year, I'm happy with the 24 teams. It's the seasons like 2015, where I believe there were 6 round of 16 rematches where it makes you hate the new format. If they commit to avoiding any sort of conference rematch or even non-conference until the quarterfinals, then it's a much more balanced field. Having games like Richmond/William & Mary, SDSU/NDSU, EWU/Montana, Illinois State/WIU, New Hampshire/Maine, The Citadel/Wofford, etc in the round of 16, just takes the fun out of what makes that round really exciting.

[clenz]

Or, you know, change the rules to go to 16. I don't understand why certain people get their panties in twist about these rules. Any NCAA rule can be changed, including autobid vs at-large. Or, to use caps so you understand it, THERE IS NOTHING PREVENTING THE NCAA FROM GOING TO 16 TEAMS IF IT WANTS TO.

You change it for one, you change it for all. And that's a **** storm just waiting to be unleashed.



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Sycamore62]

if you dont like 24 team tournament, make it a 1 team tournament. Ill email you who won the championship in mid january

[ElCid]

If I could make one change, it would be to forbid any 1st round rematches regardless of conf affiliation. The exception to allow rematches simply because teams were an OOC opponent is annoying. Wouldn't be as annoying in the second round or later.

Also, I hate the idea of seeding the field. There is no reason to. Top 8 seeds is sufficient.

[Schism55]

LOL. Just kidding, I like 24. This year was a mess though.
Concur on both points ;)

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

I'll be in the minority and say 16 teams and no at larges. Instead, i'd use some sort of poll to ensure conference champions are included so long as they meet reasonable minimum requirements. This would keep subpar teams like 2013 Lafayette and 2017 Lehigh out while making sure respectable winners from the NEC, PFL, PL and Big South are included.

I'm simply not of the belief the more is better when it comes to playoff football. I don't think the pool of potential title winner is ever more than 10-12 teams. Most years it's truly not more than 4-5. And that's considering the recent NDSU factor.

[POD Knows]

If the conferences, teams, coaches, players and the NCAA are OK with 24, then so be it. I think 16 or 17 games for the guys that end up in the Natty is a lot of football at the college level. Going to 12 regular season games, plus the 4 or 5 in the playoffs is a haul.

[caribbeanhen]

put Princeton and Dartmouth in from the Ivy and North Carolina AT from the MEAC this year and purge SEMO, East Tenny State and Duquense and you have a much better playoff field..... I know it wont happen so save your key strokes

Rhode Island would whip San Diego
Villanova would beat Lamar
New Hampshire would beat Careless Word

I would like to see the best 24 teams in

16 would be OK if FCS split in 2
Put the following Conferences in a lower Division
Pioneer
Big South
MEAC
SWAC
NEC
Patriot

Ohio Valley is on the fence

Ivy has taken a giant leap forward and joins the higher FCS
CAA
MFVC
Big Sky
Southern
Southland
Ivy

[PAllen]

Would require an NCAA rule change that the big basketball conferences would never allow, but back to 16. Conference champ from each conference, plus a few spots for situations where the second place team is seen as the better team, but missed the autobid (tiebreaker, ineligible), an exceptional independent, and any remaining go to the power conference non champs. It should be about determining who the single best team is on the field. Not trying to pick those who are among the best in a conference room. 6 win teams should not be in the discussion unless they won their conference auto bid. Honestly, 7 win teams shouldn't either. If you don't have a good argument for being the best team in your conference, then you don't have an argument for being the best team in the country.

[Sader87]

Anything above 8 is an absurdity....

[UCABEARS75]

16

[SochorField]

stay at 24. I'd rather debate over 6-5 teams getting in than debating over which 8-3 or 9-2 teams get left out....

I agree with this.

[Thumper 76]

Plus a 20 game field you are still gonna need a play in round. Instead of 8 games it would be four play in games.

8 games > 4 games imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ding ding ding. Nailed it. Even dropping it to 16 games only drops one potential game for the championship teams. I guess I don’t understand all the griping about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thebootfitter]

Or, you know, change the rules to go to 16. I don't understand why certain people get their panties in twist about these rules. Any NCAA rule can be changed, including autobid vs at-large. Or, to use caps so you understand it, THERE IS NOTHING PREVENTING THE NCAA FROM GOING TO 16 TEAMS IF IT WANTS TO.You say that like it would be easy. You do realize you're messing with March Madness when you say that, don't you? What do you think the odds are that the NCAA will change the regulation that says there must be at least as many at-large teams in an NCAA tournament as there are auto-bids? Pretty much zero. Go ahead and push for it, though. I'll wait to see what comes of it. (Just kidding... I'll just go about my life comfortable with the fact that it is extremely unlikely to change.)

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Anything above 8 is an absurdity....


xrolleyesx

No

[taper]

You say that like it would be easy. You do realize you're messing with March Madness when you say that, don't you? What do you think the odds are that the NCAA will change the regulation that says there must be at least as many at-large teams in an NCAA tournament as there are auto-bids? Pretty much zero. Go ahead and push for it, though. I'll wait to see what comes of it. (Just kidding... I'll just go about my life comfortable with the fact that it is extremely unlikely to change.)

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Who said anything about basketball? Just add a line in the rulebook saying FCS playoffs use a different system. Not saying they will do it, and I agree it's unlikely they will, but everytime this comes up certain people scream in saying it's impossible so don't even talk about it. That's simply not true.

[JayJ79]

I know ill get torn apart for this belief but I actually think we should expand it. 32 team playoff, seeded tournament, no matter the distances from the prospective schools. (also, just because you are a auto-qualifier doesn't mean you wouldn't be a #32 seed) Why I believe this is as followed, there would be less complaining about why certain conferences get a 6-5 team in the post season from X conference, compared to a 8-3 team from another. FCS football, needs more branding, more tv time, the players need it too so they can make the next step in their careers. More football, more chances for them to do it. Plus, I love football and another week of it doesn't seem too bad to me. Crap, I am not crazy to say a "March Madness" amount of teams but I'd love that too. Just more football, more teams playing schools they normally don't. At the end of the day, the #1 ranked team shouldn't be worried about 25-32 making it into a potential playoff bracket. Finally, a 32 team bracket would only add one more week to the tournament.

That setup would cost a heck of alot more money, which the NCAA would never agree to, given that many of these playoff games are lucky to draw even 5000 for attendance, and these games barely even move the needle in terms of TV ratings (hence why many of them don't make TV, but are webstream only), thus don't bring in advertising money. The NCAA didn't even fully seed the 16 team field, let alone the 20 or 24 team field. They certainly aren't going to want to expand to 32 and fully seed that. Too much travel expense.

[JayJ79]

Also, I hate the idea of seeding the field. There is no reason to. Top 8 seeds is sufficient.
Seeding the field reduces the frequency of teams facing the same opponent in the early rounds year in and year out, which frequently happens with the regionalization.

But the NCAA won't be seeding the entire FCS field any time soon.

[Redbird 4th & short]

I voted for current 24 team format. I think it is perfect given autobids.

So the first thing is to preface this by saying, with current autobid structure ... I'm all for finding the best 24 teams in 100+ team field ... if one of them is 6-5, so be it and that is right thing to do. Whatever they do, they should not reward 9-2 or 8-3 teams with 90th ranked SOS, who don't earn a playoff spot.

But if they get rid of autobids and incorporated an objective SOS "consideration", I wouldn't object nearly as much to dropping to 20 team format with 4 byes for top seeds, and 8 playin games. But as long as we have autobids, I don;t see how they can drop to 20 much less 16 teams. The "real" top 20 should always be rewarded with a shot in post season. Players, coaches, and fans deserve to be rewarded.

[ElCid]

Seeding the field reduces the frequency of teams facing the same opponent in the early rounds year in and year out, which frequently happens with the regionalization.

But the NCAA won't be seeding the entire FCS field any time soon.

You can do that without seeding. They just don't for $ reasons. I actually don't like the entire concept of seeding.

[UpstateBison]

You can do that without seeding. They just don't for $ reasons. I actually don't like the entire concept of seeding.

I like 24 teams and seed them all. The money issue seems the main stumbling block for seeding all 24. What does it cost to charter a plane for the team? I think with the 75% of the gate that the NCAA takes from NDSU playoff games, the “non-profit” NCAA could pay for plane charters to seed all 24 teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BisonBacker]

1) As Clenz as alluded to, 16 is NOT POSSIBLE. NOT AN OPTION.

Why? NCAA Rules. You have to have at LEAST the same number, or more at-large bids as there are auto-bids. There are 10 auto-bid conferences right now. Minimum field size is 20. Any poll that gives less than 20 as an option is being made by someone that doesn't understand the rules.

Do you even know how to read? Read the thread title again and also look at the poll again. Oh forget it don't bother I don't expect you to get it.

[BisonBacker]

While I would like to not spend my time and money watching my team absolutely destroy our first round opponent and some years more, I also absolutely love watching our kids every chance we get so I'm happy spending my time and money ;). 24 is the right amount. If 6-5 teams get in and they don't deserve it they will get destroyed. Or in the case of a certain 6-5 team this year I could see them going on a run. Make it bigger and you've got some teams playing 17 games a year, which in my opinion is not ok for 18 year olds. And remember that could now give a kid 68 college football games. That sounds cool and all but we've seen this up here that it is such a taxing on the body that great players have nothing left to even try the next level with.

Changes I would like to see made:

Seed the top 16. Top 8 get a bye, next 8 get a home game. NCAA is going to lose money anyways, just let basketball pay for it ;)

Have a little more say when these games are being played. Nobody says you have to start at 9 AM or 11 PM, but staggering them throughout the day would give us more of a chance to watch more games. You let ESPN do it, so why not do it for more of them.

There is absolutely no reason why you can't say what criteria you are going to judge by before the season starts. I heard many times from the chairman of this committee that they gave extra points for earning the AQ. The AQ just means they are automatically in. Did Maine do more than the other teams they are tied with? I haven't looked but to give them a seed because they won the AQ isn't necessarily right. Some conferences tie breaker rules are really messed up. In fact some conferences have one of their tie breakers as whoever has not won the AQ in the longest time will win it (that might be the MVFC). Why does that matter??

Thank you for a well thought out post.

[BisonBacker]

You change it for one, you change it for all. And that's a **** storm just waiting to be unleashed.



Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Like the NCAA isn't already familiar with and responsible for any ****storms? Yeah right.

[Bisonator]

Who said anything about basketball? Just add a line in the rulebook saying FCS playoffs use a different system. Not saying they will do it, and I agree it's unlikely they will, but everytime this comes up certain people scream in saying it's impossible so don't even talk about it. That's simply not true.
This. I don't know why people seem to think everything is tied to everything else. The FCS playoff system is already unique and basically set up by the schools that participate in it. Not tied to any other programs that aren't involved in FCS FB. The member schools can set it up however they want just like the big wigs with the CFP.

[uni88]

I voted for current 24 team format. I think it is perfect given autobids.

So the first thing is to preface this by saying, with current autobid structure ... I'm all for finding the best 24 teams in 100+ team field ... if one of them is 6-5, so be it and that is right thing to do. Whatever they do, they should not reward 9-2 or 8-3 teams with 90th ranked SOS, who don't earn a playoff spot.

But if they get rid of autobids and incorporated an objective SOS "consideration", I wouldn't object nearly as much to dropping to 20 team format with 4 byes for top seeds, and 8 playin games. But as long as we have autobids, I don;t see how they can drop to 20 much less 16 teams. The "real" top 20 should always be rewarded with a shot in post season. Players, coaches, and fans deserve to be rewarded.Math doesn't work. With 4 byes and 8 play-in games you end up with 12 teams. You need 12 byes and 4 play-in games to get to 16 teams.

[dgtw]

31. NDSU gets the only bye.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

Math doesn't work. With 4 byes and 8 play-in games you end up with 12 teams. You need 12 byes and 4 play-in games to get to 16 teams.
brain cramp .. my bad.

[Winterborn]

I like the 24 arrangement. There is always going to be crying no matter what format is chosen. Play the games and let the results speak for themselves.

[Silenoz]

Well if I'm being honest with myself I couldn't really care less about any of the matchups this weekend, and barely cared about any first round UM games anymore. Call that the 24 team effect or the NDSU effect, but I'm not tuning in. So I say 16. Or **** it, go with 4 or 8 even.

[Bisonwinagn]

Well if I'm being honest with myself I couldn't really care less about any of the matchups this weekend, and barely cared about any first round UM games anymore. Call that the 24 team effect or the NDSU effect, but I'm not tuning in. So I say 16. Or **** it, go with 4 or 8 even.

When your team sucks nobody cares. Same for every fan.

[Catbooster]

Math doesn't work. With 4 byes and 8 play-in games you end up with 12 teams. You need 12 byes and 4 play-in games to get to 16 teams.


Errmmm, if I'm not mistaken, 8 play-in games would need 16 teams...plus 4 byes would be 20 teams. 12 byes and 4 play-in games (8 teams) would also be 20 teams. Am I missing something? xdrunkyx

[Silenoz]

When your team sucks nobody cares. Same for every fan.

Nah, when my team sucks I have to keep an eye on MSU and EWU and make sure they don't win it all. But there's no longer any risk of that.

[Sycamore62]

Don’t worry. At some point they will increase it to zero and we will all be watching soccer

[BisonTru]

Hey look, one agonizing week for the "playoffs are too big crowd" and boom we are down to 16 teams. Now you can get back to probably not watching football.

[Sycamore62]

If NDSU wins this year, we should expand the playoffs to 25 teams. Seed 1 to 25. Home game goes to the team who hasnt had less home games.

The first round will be NDSU vs the 25 seed. If NDSU wins, tbey play the 24 seed, likely on the road because 24 wouldnt have a home game yet. In week 3 of the playoffs they play the 23 seed and so on until They play the 2 seed, likey on the road. If NDSU loses the brackets will be redrawn and the teams that are left will play a single elimination tournament. If there are time constraints more than 1 game can be played in a week. For example, NDSU could play at Maine on saturday and then at eastern washington on monday. Its recommended that they not play in the same time zone the same 2 weeks in a row

- - - Updated - - -


Hey look, one agonizing week for the "playoffs are too big crowd" and boom we are down to 16 teams. Now you can get back to probably not watching football.

Lets be honest. Its a 23 team playoff for 2nd place

[thebootfitter]

This. I don't know why people seem to think everything is tied to everything else. The FCS playoff system is already unique and basically set up by the schools that participate in it. Not tied to any other programs that aren't involved in FCS FB. The member schools can set it up however they want just like the big wigs with the CFP.Ha ha!

The FCS playoffs are an NCAA sanctioned championship tournament. Just like basketball. Just like baseball. Etc. The "FCS" can't just decide to do something different from other tournaments. Unless they want to have a separate "tournament" not sanctioned by the NCAA -- like the FBS College Football Playoffs. But then they wouldn't be part of the "FCS."

So, I guess it depends how far you carry this hypothetical question. But until the current FCS teams decide to break away and do something different like the FBS teams have done, there will always be at least as many at-large participants as there are auto-bids.

As I alluded previously, you can feel free to get the NCAA to change that rule. Or make an exception for FCS football. But I don't think you'll get very far. If you give it a go... Good luck!

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[uni88]

Errmmm, if I'm not mistaken, 8 play-in games would need 16 teams...plus 4 byes would be 20 teams. 12 byes and 4 play-in games (8 teams) would also be 20 teams. Am I missing something? xdrunkyxYes. Redbird's post was about having 20 teams and how it would work. He's usually very thorough and missed that with 4 byes and 8 play-in games you would have 12 teams left and would need 4 second round byes too. With 12 byes and 4 play-in games you have 16 teams left after round 1 so no extra byes needed.

[Catbooster]

Yes. Redbird's post was about having 20 teams and how it would work. He's usually very thorough and missed that with 4 byes and 8 play-in games you would have 12 teams left and would need 4 second round byes too. With 12 byes and 4 play-in games you have 16 teams left after round 1 so no extra byes needed.
Oops. I see what you mean. I was skimming threads and thought you were talking number of teams. xdrunkyx

[TypicalTribe]

Guys, call me crazy, but the way that passage reads is that you have to give at least 50% to the AQs since they always want to prioritize the conference champions. Then it says to give the rest (up to 50%) to the at-large bids. Well, if you drop back to 16 and give 10 AQs that clearly works within the rules. As things stand, there are less than 50% (10 out of 24) given to AQs.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

16, and 9 of them have zero chance of winning it all

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Sycamore62]

16, and 9 of them have zero chance of winning it all

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

your 1 key is making a 9

[The Boogie Down]

Less is more, especially when it comes to mediocrity. 16 teams is enough. But I'm cool w/being tricked into supporting 24 by simply calling last Saturday's games the "Play-In" round and calling next Saturday's slate the "First Round." Do that and I have no problems with most of last Saturday's crap.

[walliver]

I voted "other" as a 20 team field seems adequate. 12 teams get a first round bye.

[Professor]

Current format is great. Only 2 6 wins teams have made it prior to this year. Also don't forget you could have an 8 or 9 win MEAC team get in over a 7 win valley team. Be careful what you wish for.

As if thats the worst thing in the world lol

[Professor]

I say 32 and everyone plays every week

[Redbird 4th & short]

Yes. Redbird's post was about having 20 teams and how it would work. He's usually very thorough and missed that with 4 byes and 8 play-in games you would have 12 teams left and would need 4 second round byes too. With 12 byes and 4 play-in games you have 16 teams left after round 1 so no extra byes needed.
Actually, I've been a little off since US starting use the metric system ... I'm pretty sure my 20 team idea would work perfectly in Europe.

xconfusedx

[Sycamore62]

Actually, I've been a little off since US starting use the metric system ... I'm pretty sure my 20 team idea would work perfectly in Europe.

xconfusedx

I'd like to stay at XXIV teams

....when in Rome

[polsongrizz]

Twenty teams sounds just about right.

[WestCoastAggie]

When the WAC splits up the Big Sky eventually, I fully suspect to see a 28 team tournament, with the top-4 seeds getting a bye.

I also anticipate a full-fledged regionalization bracket set-up as best as possible.

[BEAR]

Since my experience with the FCS playoffs only really started happening in 2010 it hasnt' really mattered how many teams get in. There has been one team that has dominated for multiple years. Before NDSU it was APP. Who cares if 20, 24, or 28 get in? I mean the best teams usually are in the championship game. xlolx

[Sycamore62]

what if we had a system where you had all the teams that had 6 wins just play 1 game against another team that was somewhere in the neighborhood of their skill caliber. we would have the best few teams play each other but not the best 2 teams. they would play one of the top 7 or so teams. then after it's all over, we would just have people who write stories and the sports information directors pick who the best team was.

[deez_na]

This was a tough year but I like it at 24. I like more football and like I read earlier, you don't have as much of an issue with teams around 9-2 or 8-3 getting in.