16 Team Playoffs in '08, 20 in '10

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/?title=proposal-would-add-four-spots-to-fcs-pla-2010&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1


The Argus Leader’s Terry Vandrovec discusses the latest proposals to expand the playoffs.

Playoff expansion might still happen in the Football Championship Subdivision, just not this year, South Dakota State’s first as a postseason-eligible member.

In one of three proposed major format changes, the NCAA Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet has recommended that the FCS postseason field be expanded from the current 16 teams to 20 in 2010. Rather than start the season early or let it run late, bye weeks would be eliminated.

[LU73]

It seems that the total elimination of byes for all teams would further complicate regular season scheduling. What do you think?

[grizband]

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/?title=proposal-would-add-four-spots-to-fcs-pla-2010&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
I don't like the proposed elimination of bye weeks, but I guess that is the only way to expand the playoffs without lengthening the entire season.

[aceinthehole]

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/?title=proposal-would-add-four-spots-to-fcs-pla-2010&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

It doesn't suprise me that 2010 is the year the Big South would be eligible for the AQ. I'm assuming they will add 2 AQs (for the NEC and BSC), and 2 at-large bids.

I'm not excited about waiting 2 more years, but I would like to have the NCAA come out and award the AQ to the NEC now, even if it does start until 2010, so we can use that to improve recruiting and scheduling.

Throw us a bone!

[UNHWildCats]

I think its better to add a week then to lose the bye week. Having an extra week on the sechedule for a few schools is better then forcing all the students at the 120 or so schools to play a whole season without rest.

[UNHWildCats]

It doesn't suprise me that 2010 is the year the Big South would be eligible for the AQ. I'm assuming they will add 2 AQs (for the NEC and BSC), and 2 at-large bids.

I'm not excited about waiting 2 more years, but I would like to have the NCAA come out and award the AQ to the NEC now, even if it does start until 2010, so we can use that to improve recruiting and scheduling.

Throw us a bone!
Maybe they will once the finalize playoff expansion.

[grizband]

If two AQs are created, are the Big South and NEC locks for the bid? Are any other conferences eligible?

[TexasTerror]

They can't add an AQ to the NEC right now -- it would throw off the balance between AQs and at-larges...won't happen.

NEC needs to continue upgrading the scheduling...they need to continue to do what it takes to play at the highest level or the OVC may get knocked out of the cellar for the NEC...

[danefan]

If two AQs are created, are the Big South and NEC locks for the bid? Are any other conferences eligible?

SWAC, Ivy and PFL.......xcoffeex

I don't mind waiting until 2010 so long as its publicized early that we will have the AQ in 2010 so we can recruit with it.

I also say this because if we win 9 or 10 games with our schedules in the next two years we'll be a sure shot for an at-large anyway.xthumbsupx

[TheValleyRaider]

Aren't autobids technically renewed before each season?

If that's the case, then the NCAA can't grant the NEC the autobid for 2009 now because they haven't even gotten through 2008 yet. What if in 2008, the NEC Champ loses to the PFL Champ in the GIC, the NEC has a horrible non-conference record, and suddenly the PFL decides they actually want to apply for that extra autobid. Same story if the Ivy/SWAC changes their position. Very hypothetical? Yeah. Totally impossible? Well, no. As far as the NCAA is concerned, there's too much that can happen between now and when the autobids are "officially" given to just say the NEC is guaranteed the next one that pops up xtwocentsx

[danefan]

They can't add an AQ to the NEC right now -- it would throw off the balance between AQs and at-larges...won't happen.

NEC needs to continue upgrading the scheduling...they need to continue to do what it takes to play at the highest level or the OVC may get knocked out of the cellar for the NEC...


They could, they would just need to add another at-large. This article speaks about the third proposal....which infers the other two are still viable (although unlikely).

[aceinthehole]

The proposal for 18-teams was for 1 additional AQ (NEC) and 1 additional at-large.

By expanding the playoffs by 4 team in 2010 allows the NCAA to add 2 AQs and 2 at-larges.

The only other eligible conferences in 2010 would be the Ivy, SWAC, and PFL. There has been no publlic indications that they would apply for the AQ.

Only the NEC and BSC have publicly stated a desire for the AQ.

[aceinthehole]

Aren't autobids technically renewed before each season?

If that's the case, then the NCAA can't grant the NEC the autobid for 2009 now because they haven't even gotten through 2008 yet. What if in 2008, the NEC Champ loses to the PFL Champ in the GIC, the NEC has a horrible non-conference record, and suddenly the PFL decides they actually want to apply for that extra autobid. Same story if the Ivy/SWAC changes their position. Very hypothetical? Yeah. Totally impossible? Well, no. As far as the NCAA is concerned, there's too much that can happen between now and when the autobids are "officially" given to just say the NEC is guaranteed the next one that pops up xtwocentsx

Technically, you are 100% correct.

However, lets be real - this is a political decsion. Why has expansion been pushed back to 2010 instead on 2008 - becasue that's when the BSC is eligible. It was more palatable to the committe to add 2 conferences, instead of just 1.

[bobbythekidd]

Glad to see you posting up here again Ace.xthumbsupx

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Aren't autobids technically renewed before each season?

If that's the case, then the NCAA can't grant the NEC the autobid for 2009 now because they haven't even gotten through 2008 yet. What if in 2008, the NEC Champ loses to the PFL Champ in the GIC, the NEC has a horrible non-conference record, and suddenly the PFL decides they actually want to apply for that extra autobid. Same story if the Ivy/SWAC changes their position. Very hypothetical? Yeah. Totally impossible? Well, no. As far as the NCAA is concerned, there's too much that can happen between now and when the autobids are "officially" given to just say the NEC is guaranteed the next one that pops up xtwocentsx

I believe the GIC had a 2-game contract which expired this year, and there has been no talk of a third - someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

And there was some rumblings about the Ivy League in particular softening its position on the postseason, so an Ivy playoff team isn't out of the realm of possibility..

[aceinthehole]

I believe the GIC had a 2-game contract which expired this year, and there has been no talk of a third - someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

And there was some rumblings about the Ivy League in particular softening its position on the postseason, so an Ivy playoff team isn't out of the realm of possibility..

Again, while it is a possiblity, there has been no confirmed interest in the playoff from the commissionsers of the Ivy, SWAC, or PFL. The possibility of their intrest in the AQ is very, very remote.

If fact the article further states that 2 AQs would be awarded to the NEC and BSC.

If the field does jump to 20, the bids will be split evenly between at-large selections and automatic qualifiers. In that event, the Big South and the Northeast Conference would gain automatic-qualifier status, meaning their respective champions would be guaranteed a place in the bracket.

[Syntax Error]

Aren't autobids technically renewed before each season?That's right, there is no guarantee for any league in writing.
I think its better to add a week then to lose the bye week. Having an extra week on the sechedule for a few schools is better then forcing all the students at the 120 or so schools to play a whole season without rest.Any decision would affect all schools.

[bluehenbillk]

I can't stand bye weeks so that part doesn't bother me at all.

[grizband]

Ideally, I would have liked NDSU and SDSU to remain in the Great West. It would have taken some years, but with UND and USD making the transition, the GWFC could have made a cause for AQ status. Might have been nice for another conference out west to have an automatic berth. I do understand that reasoning for the the XDSU schools making the transition, and can't really fault them for their choice.

[ngineer]

I agree. Although I understand the 'luxury' of having a bye week. Sometimes it helps getting healthy, but many times they come early long before the need for any healing arrives, so it's just a matter of luck of the draw on the timing. Part of the challenge of football is the physicality and how deep a team is to deal with injuries. So if you're not deep enough to handle the bumps, bruises and fractures that come along, then it goes to test how good your really are overall. A great team is only as good as it's bench who is pushing the starters into greatness, and when those guys get their chance to shine when a starter goes down, it's a great thing to see.

[UNHWildCats]

That's right, there is no guarantee for any league in writing.

Any decision would affect all schools.

Teams that dont make it to the Championship game wouldnt be playing for an extra week so while at the beggining of the season it could effect most teams, in reality only two teams would be playing beyond the season time frame that has been in play in recent years.

[Syntax Error]

Teams that dont make it to the Championship game wouldnt be playing for an extra week so while at the beggining of the season it could effect most teams, in reality only two teams would be playing beyond the season time frame that has been in play in recent years.I'm thinking that if they add a round to the playoffs by eliminating the bye week, they will be moving the start of the playoffs to what is now the last week of the season. That would affect all teams.

[UNHWildCats]

well ya but if the reasoning to do that is to not cause the season to run a week later.... Then only 2 teams would be playing beyond what the time frame currently is, whereas all teams would be effected losing the bye week.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

well ya but if the reasoning to do that is to not cause the season to run a week later.... Then only 2 teams would be playing beyond what the time frame currently is, whereas all teams would be effected losing the bye week.

The cause is ESPN, plain and simple.

[UNHWildCats]

The cause is ESPN, plain and simple.
can we sell Connecticut to Cuba and implement sanctions on them xcoolx

[grizband]

The cause is ESPN, plain and simple.
Agreed. Under the current format, the championship game is finished before the bowl season is fully underway. If the game were pushed to the week after Christmas, it would interfere with the ESPN coverage of "Bowl Week."

[Bluehenfan08]

I guess 20 teams is a good idea. It will let the weaker teams have decent chance to get in or it will let more powerful conferences get more teams in. I think that the second part is more likely.

[Mountaineer]

I guess 20 teams is a good idea. It will let the weaker teams have decent chance..

Precisely why expansion, IMO, is a terrible idea. It's called the National Championship for a reason. The idea is to take the best 16 (or possibly 20..meh) teams year in and year out. Letting in the practice squad from Non-Scholly U (or whatever school) waters down the postseason. xreadx

/I-AA Old Guard xrulesx

[danefan]

Precisely why expansion, IMO, is a terrible idea. It's called the National Championship for a reason. The idea is to take the best 16 (or possibly 20..meh) teams year in and year out. Letting in the practice squad from Non-Scholly U (or whatever school) waters down the postseason. xreadx

/I-AA Old Guard xrulesx


The "old guard" argument no longer holds weight. When you let teams from the Patriot League and OVC in, you have no argument to not let teams from the NEC (or the PFL if they want to) in.

xpopcornx

[Mountaineer]

The "old guard" argument no longer holds weight. When you let teams from the Patriot League and OVC in, you have no argument to not let teams from the NEC (or the PFL if they want to) in.

xpopcornx

I'd take away the auto there, too. xthumbsupx :p :D

[danefan]

I'd take away the auto there, too. xthumbsupx :p :D

Then I have no problem with your argument. I don't agree, but at least it's logical.xthumbsupx

[Mountaineer]

Then I have no problem with your argument. I don't agree, but at least it's logical.xthumbsupx

Actually I like the idea that's been discussed here before - rotating the autobids around while keeping the field at 16. If a conference doesn't meet criteria for the AQ (such as not winning games - OVC/MEAC) then another should be given a shot. In that situation I'd have no problem with, and would very much like to see, teams from the NEC, PFL, Ivy, or even the SWAC playing. xnodx

[BDKJMU]

The 1st round playoffs are usually the last Sat in Nov. There usually 12 weeks in Sept-Nov prior to that, leaving time for 11 games and a bye week. Now this season the 1st Sat games will be on Aug 30, leaving 13 weeks, so teams can either have 11 games and 2 bye weeks, or 12 games and a bye week.

If they go to a 20 game playoffs there will be 5 rounds, with 12 getting a bye in the 1st round. If they move the opening round to the Sat before the last Sat of Nov (could be the 3rd or 4th Saturday, depending on how the calendar falls), again, in most seasons that will only leave 11 weeks Sept-Nov for 11 games. Bye bye bye week, and you could have a team that didn't get a 1st round bye make the title game and play 16 games in 16 weekends/15 weeks/104 days if the NC game remained on a Fri. Wow.

The only way teams would get a bye week would be a season like this (08') that happens about once every 7 years where they played their 1st game in Aug if that Sat fell on Aug 30th or 31st. (last 5 seasons opening Sat was Sept 5th, Sept 4th, Sept 3rd, Sept 2nd, and last season Sept 1st). This season is Aug 30th due to LEAP year. I think the next (09') season it will be Sept 5th again.

The only way they would get a 12th game would be again that once every 7? seasons if that 1st game could be played on the last Sat in Aug that fell on Aug 30 or 31st, which would mean no bye week and the potential to play 17 straight games.


DIII has 5 playoff rounds, but they only have 10 regular season games. Bottom line is if they start the playoffs a week earlier, you can kiss the option for a 12th game goodbye, and majority of seasons there would be 11 game regular season, no bye week.

You can bet the coaches and ADs while many being for a playoff expansion, will be adamtly against moving the playoffs back a week. Last season the 1st round was on Nov 24. Could anybody see the playoffs stating as early as Nov 17th? Don't think so, no matter what ESPN says. They will find a slot for a weekend later. If it remained on a Fri instead of Dec 14-19 as it was:
03' Dec 18th
04' Dec 17th
05' Dec 16th
06' Dec 15th
07' Dec 14th
08' Dec 19th

the NC could simply be held between Dec 21-26. xcoffeex

[89Hen]

I think everyone knows my position on this, but 20 is asinine. Why go to an odd number like that? So you'd have four games in week one and 12 teams with a bye. So do the 10 autos and 2 at-large teams get the bye? You think we have problems fighting about the #16 team chosen now, wait until we start having fights about the #20 team AND the #13 who has to play a first round game.

We already have teams in the field that really don't belong. Now we add two more autos to conferences that will go 1 and done and two more at-large so teams that are 7-4 can get in? No thanks. This is not a good solution IMHO. xsmhx xcoffeex

[lizrdgizrd]

I think everyone knows my position on this, but 20 is asinine. Why go to an odd number like that? So you'd have four games in week one and 12 teams with a bye. So do the 10 autos and 2 at-large teams get the bye? You think we have problems fighting about the #16 team chosen now, wait until we start having fights about the #20 team AND the #13 who has to play a first round game.

We already have teams in the field that really don't belong. Now we add two more autos to conferences that will go 1 and done and two more at-large so teams that are 7-4 can get in? No thanks. This is not a good solution IMHO. xsmhx xcoffeex
Seconded. xpeacex

[401ks]

Letting in the practice squad from Non-Scholly U (or whatever school) waters down the postseason. xreadx

/I-AA Old Guard xrulesx

Let's see if I can get this straight... xcoffeex

BCS teams look down their noses at non-BCS FBS teams.

Non-BCS FBS teams look down their noses at FCS teams.

"Full Scholarship" FCS teams look down their noses at "Limited-Scholarship" FCS teams.

"Limited Scholarship" FCS teams look down their noses at "Non-Scholarship" FCS teams.

Everyone should always "play up" in their non-conference schedule to prove that they are deserving of ... whatever. (If no one is ever supposed to play a team that's "beneath them", how would any "lower" team ever get the opportunity to "play up"? xconfusedx )

But some odd facts keep messing up this elitist logic...

ASU (FCS) beats UM (BCS) in "The Big House". (But Michigan should NEVER be playing an FCS team because it is beneath their dignity! xrolleyesx )

The "non-scholarship" PFL champ (handily) beats the "limited scholarship" NEC champ for the second year in a row. (But the NEC deserves an AQ and those non-schollie scrub teams in the PFL will NEVER be good enough to play for the FCS Championship. xrolleyesx )

The "non-scholarship" PFL champ beats the ("we got equivalencies") PL champ, but the PL champ goes on to the FCS playoffs while... see above. xrolleyesx )

Etc., Etc., Etc............


Look, I know the whole PFL "strength of schedule" thing. I get it. I even agree with it to a certain extent. (If Butler, for example, is serious about upgrading their program - and I believe that they are - Ivy, Gateway, PL, and even MAC teams are going to have to replace some of the DII and DIII teams on their schedule.)

I"m sure that Michigan fans were shocked to be beaten by a team (as I read somewhere) "from Hillbilly U". I am sure that the fine folks at ASU would be just as shocked to get beaten by a team from "Non-Scholly U".

But "stuff" happens! xeekx

The assumption that the players from non-scholarship leagues are less qualified than players from scholarship conferences holds about as much water as the assumption that FCS players don't belong on the same field with BCS FBS players. Both assumptions are pure, unadulterated bull-pucky.

[89Hen]

Everyone should always "play up" in their non-conference schedule to prove that they are deserving of ... whatever. (If no one is ever supposed to play a team that's "beneath them", how would any "lower" team ever get the opportunity to "play up"? xconfusedx )

But some odd facts keep messing up this elitist logic...
Actually there are many more facts that keep messing up the freebie's logic. Many teams have advanced to the playoffs without being in an autobid conference. NONE of the people who espouse autos for more conferences have ever addressed it.

Also, the regular season is the place to play up or down. It's rather easy. Your team schedules up and wins, you make the playoffs. Your team either refuses to schedule up, or schedules up and loses, you don't make the playoffs. xcoffeex

[Mountaineer]

Actually there are many more facts that keep messing up the freebie's logic. Many teams have advanced to the playoffs without being in an autobid conference. NONE of the people who espouse autos for more conferences have ever addressed it.

Also, the regular season is the place to play up or down. It's rather easy. Your team schedules up and wins, you make the playoffs. Your team either refuses to schedule up, or schedules up and loses, you don't make the playoffs. xcoffeex

Much appreciated on saving me some time in response, 89. xbowx xnodx

401ks: The Non-Scholly U quip has nothing to do with the quality of the institution. I'm strictly speaking of football matters. xpeacex

[BDKJMU]

Seconded. xpeacex

I third that. Make it 4th since Mountaineer was the 1st on this thread to say expansion was a dumb idea.

My earlier post was just to lay out in detail given what I feel is the inevitable (expansion) why
1. The playoffs won't be moved back a week
2. If they are moved back a week it would be a HORRIBLE idea.

[lizrdgizrd]

Actually there are many more facts that keep messing up the freebie's logic. Many teams have advanced to the playoffs without being in an autobid conference. NONE of the people who espouse autos for more conferences have ever addressed it.

Also, the regular season is the place to play up or down. It's rather easy. Your team schedules up and wins, you make the playoffs. Your team either refuses to schedule up, or schedules up and loses, you don't make the playoffs. xcoffeex


Much appreciated on saving me some time in response, 89. xbowx xnodx

401ks: The Non-Scholly U quip has nothing to do with the quality of the institution. I'm strictly speaking of football matters. xpeacex
I think the real problem of non-scholly teams isn't that their football is weak - several teams have shown the opposite lately - it's that their prowess is an unknown. They don't play enough teams that are a known quantity. If the PFL teams would each schedule several games with the well-established conferences (Big Sky, Gateway, Socon, CAA, Southland, Patriot) then the committee would have a better way to measure them.

And playing DII games is inadvisable if you're hunting for an at-large.

[Mountaineer]

I think the real problem of non-scholly teams isn't that their football is weak - several teams have shown the opposite lately - it's that their prowess is an unknown. They don't play enough teams that are a known quantity. If the PFL teams would each schedule several games with the well-established conferences (Big Sky, Gateway, Socon, CAA, Southland, Patriot) then the committee would have a better way to measure them.

And playing DII games is inadvisable if you're hunting for an at-large.

I have seen the future. We'll be moving into Touchy-Feely PC Land where everyone gets to participate and we hand out trophies to all. xnodx

Every school will want one of these to show off right? :D

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/4810/dontwanttrophyly6.jpg

[401ks]

I think the real problem of non-scholly teams isn't that their football is weak - several teams have shown the opposite lately - it's that their prowess is an unknown. They don't play enough teams that are a known quantity. If the PFL teams would each schedule several games with the well-established conferences (Big Sky, Gateway, Socon, CAA, Southland, Patriot) then the committee would have a better way to measure them.

And playing DII games is inadvisable if you're hunting for an at-large.

I agree with you. The relative "prowess" is unknown.

However, I look at how the playoffs are handled here in California by the CIF (California Interscholastic Federation):

Each league has (for lack of a better term) "AQs". There are also a number of "at large" or "wild card" qualifiers. In the CIF Southern Division/Southern Section one league, the Empire League ended up with four teams in the quarterfinals. Is the Empire League (currently) the dominant league in the Southern Division? No doubt. Does the Orange Coast League, who's champion has never done better than one-and-done in the playoffs deserve a place in the playoffs? In my humble opinion, yes. The champion of the Orange Coast League deserves its shot. Maybe one day they'll win a CIF title. But unless they are given the chance, no one will ever know.

Dayton, for example, beat two FCS league champions (Fordham and Albany) in 2007. It seems to me that "the committee" has more than enough information from the past few years to conclude that an 11-1 PFL Champion now deserves to be in the playoffs in spite of the presence of a DII team or two on their schedule.

You have to realize that I'm coming at this entire issue primarily as an outsider. I had my own "elitist" ideas about "DI-AA" ball a few years ago. While my son turned down scholarship offers from FCS programs, and turned down numerous walk-on offers from full-scholarship FCS and FBS programs to attend a non-scholarship school in the PFL, that doesn't make him any less of a player. And I've discovered that the level of play in non-scholarship FCS football is FAR above anything I believed before we began the whole recruiting process.

There are a LOT of "old school" attitudes that could use changing. It just seems very odd to me that elitist FCS fans (who are looked down upon by elitist FBS fans) would go out of their way to denigrate other FCS programs because of some misplaced perception of athletic superiority. xconfusedx I would've thought that FCS fans knew better, and weren't ones to make the same mistake as their low self-esteem FBS brethren. xeyebrowx

[401ks]

I have seen the future. We'll be moving into Touchy-Feely PC Land where everyone gets to participate and we hand out trophies to all. xnodx

Everyone ASSUMED that ASU had NO CHANCE to beat Michigan.

FCS elitists ASSUME that non-scholarship FCS teams have NO CHANCE to win the FCS Championship.

Yeah, right. xrolleyesx :D :D :D

[Syntax Error]

... There are a LOT of "old school" attitudes that could use changing. It just seems very odd to me that elitist FCS fans (who are looked down upon by elitist FBS fans) would go out of their way to denigrate other FCS programs because of some misplaced perception of athletic superiority. xconfusedx I would've thought that FCS fans knew better, and weren't ones to make the same mistake as their low self-esteem FBS brethren. xeyebrowxxthumbsupx xnodx xbowx

[GOKATS]

The 1st round playoffs are usually the last Sat in Nov. There usually 12 weeks in Sept-Nov prior to that, leaving time for 11 games and a bye week. Now this season the 1st Sat games will be on Aug 30, leaving 13 weeks, so teams can either have 11 games and 2 bye weeks, or 12 games and a bye week.

If they go to a 20 game playoffs there will be 5 rounds, with 12 getting a bye in the 1st round. If they move the opening round to the Sat before the last Sat of Nov (could be the 3rd or 4th Saturday, depending on how the calendar falls), again, in most seasons that will only leave 11 weeks Sept-Nov for 11 games. Bye bye bye week, and you could have a team that didn't get a 1st round bye make the title game and play 16 games in 16 weekends/15 weeks/104 days if the NC game remained on a Fri. Wow.

The only way teams would get a bye week would be a season like this (08') that happens about once every 7 years where they played their 1st game in Aug if that Sat fell on Aug 30th or 31st. (last 5 seasons opening Sat was Sept 5th, Sept 4th, Sept 3rd, Sept 2nd, and last season Sept 1st). This season is Aug 30th due to LEAP year. I think the next (09') season it will be Sept 5th again.

The only way they would get a 12th game would be again that once every 7? seasons if that 1st game could be played on the last Sat in Aug that fell on Aug 30 or 31st, which would mean no bye week and the potential to play 17 straight games.


DIII has 5 playoff rounds, but they only have 10 regular season games. Bottom line is if they start the playoffs a week earlier, you can kiss the option for a 12th game goodbye, and majority of seasons there would be 11 game regular season, no bye week.

You can bet the coaches and ADs while many being for a playoff expansion, will be adamtly against moving the playoffs back a week. Last season the 1st round was on Nov 24. Could anybody see the playoffs stating as early as Nov 17th? Don't think so, no matter what ESPN says. They will find a slot for a weekend later. If it remained on a Fri instead of Dec 14-19 as it was:
03' Dec 18th
04' Dec 17th
05' Dec 16th
06' Dec 15th
07' Dec 14th
08' Dec 19th

the NC could simply be held between Dec 21-26. xcoffeex

12 game seasons aren't necessarily a 7 year pattern- following this year both 2012 and 2013 are 12 game seasons. It all boils down to whether there are 12 or 13 Saturdays from the season start date and end date as determined by the NCAA.

[Dane96]

I'd take away the auto there, too. xthumbsupx :p :D

Maybe we should take away your hoop autobid...and all the other non Top 12 Conferences.
xcoffeex

[bench]

Everyone ASSUMED that ASU had NO CHANCE to beat Michigan.

FCS elitists ASSUME that non-scholarship FCS teams have NO CHANCE to win the FCS Championship.

Yeah, right. xrolleyesx :D :D :D

Appalachian didn't just sit back and say Oh yeah, we can hang with the big boys, and then promptly lined up a non-conference schedule of D-II's and lower-tier FCS teams. They actually went through the trouble of scheduling and playing an elite FBS school, and they won. They proved themselves.

Non-scholly teams say they can play with the rest of FCS, but they haven't shown the slightest interest in proving it. They have absolutely no chance of winning a national championship as long as they refuse to do what they have to in order to be considered.

[89Hen]

Dayton, for example, beat two FCS league champions (Fordham and Albany) in 2007. It seems to me that "the committee" has more than enough information from the past few years to conclude that an 11-1 PFL Champion now deserves to be in the playoffs in spite of the presence of a DII team or two on their schedule.
Please site some of the information from the past few years. San Diego blowing through the PFL only to lose to an unranked Cal Davis? Or the year before when Drake plowed through the PFL but lost to a mediocre Gateway team? Or the year before that when the PFL champ Valpo lost 34-0 to a 4-8 OVC team?

401ks, the stats are NOT on your side in this one. Nor are the records or the scheduling (in the case of USD especially).

[Mountaineer]

Maybe we should take away your hoop autobid...and all the other non Top 12 Conferences.
xcoffeex

Refill?? xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex

I don't quite see the correlation. The basketball teams in the SoCon actually schedule up.

Davidson this year has played Carolina, Duke, and UCLA.
College of Charleston played Arkansas, Temple and Houston.
Chattanooga played Southern Illinois and Tennessee.
Georgia Southern played Florida.

Last year Appalachian beat Virginia and Vanderbilt. We beat Arkansas this year.

Conferences like the SoCon have virtually no shot of an at-large in the tournament without an autobid.

The same isn't true with football. As has been stated NUMEROUS times around here - put together a good, competitive schedule and win some games. The invite will take care of itself.

xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex

[Hansel]

scheduling will be especially difficult for conf's with odd numbers of team- I think they should add a week

[Dane96]

Refill?? xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex

I don't quite see the correlation. The basketball teams in the SoCon actually schedule up.

Davidson this year has played Carolina, Duke, and UCLA.
College of Charleston played Arkansas, Temple and Houston.
Chattanooga played Southern Illinois and Tennessee.
Georgia Southern played Florida.

Last year Appalachian beat Virginia and Vanderbilt. We beat Arkansas this year.

Conferences like the SoCon have virtually no shot of an at-large in the tournament without an autobid.

The same isn't true with football. As has been stated NUMEROUS times around here - put together a good, competitive schedule and win some games. The invite will take care of itself.

xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex xcoffeex

Newsflash, the NEC has scheduled up. They are a league you dont want in.

We scheduled up and won.

Second newsflash, Dayton beat Albany this year.

So, clearly the top of the PFL is good....and the NEC is more than serviceable.

Considering the NEC has scheduled up and won games, how is this different than what you pose as your argument to my question.

Back at ya...

[Mountaineer]

Back at ya...

Quoting the esteemed Mr. 89Hen:


Please site some of the information from the past few years. San Diego blowing through the PFL only to lose to an unranked Cal Davis? Or the year before when Drake plowed through the PFL but lost to a mediocre Gateway team? Or the year before that when the PFL champ Valpo lost 34-0 to a 4-8 OVC team?

401ks, the stats are NOT on your side in this one. Nor are the records or the scheduling (in the case of USD especially).

When is this going to be answered? Every year it's the same old song and dance. xviolinx

And, what it's worth, I think Albany played a very commendable schedule last year. xnodx

[401ks]

Appalachian didn't just sit back and say Oh yeah, we can hang with the big boys, and then promptly lined up a non-conference schedule of D-II's and lower-tier FCS teams. They actually went through the trouble of scheduling and playing an elite FBS school, and they won. They proved themselves.

Non-scholly teams say they can play with the rest of FCS, but they haven't shown the slightest interest in proving it. They have absolutely no chance of winning a national championship as long as they refuse to do what they have to in order to be considered.

Wow!

Boy, I should've expected this, I guess. :o Well, I'll have to answer each one of these posts individually to give them each the answer they deserve (but may not want to hear).

"They have absolutely no chance of winning a national championship as long as they refuse to do what they have to in order to be considered."

I guess I'm unclear on the concept. Who's butt does Dayton have to kiss in order to be considered? Dayton went out and, 1.) Won their FCS League Championship; 2.) Beat the FCS Patriot League Champion (a league with an AQ); 3.) Beat the FCS Northeast Conference Champion (a league about to be awarded an AQ, from what I understand); and 4.) ended up with an 11-1 record.

The last time I looked, the Championship is the Division I (FCS) Football Championship. It is not the "Who's Played the Most Impressive Non-Conference Schedule in Division I (FCS) Championship". Or the "Who Won the Toughest Conference in Division I (FCS) Championship". Even AQs are awarded purely on league/conference play. To say that one FCS league or conference is not worthy of a chance is pure elitism.

I don't care if Dayton played The Little Sisters of the Poor Teachers College in their pre-league schedule. They WON their league, and they beat two other FCS league/conference CHAMPIONS on their way to an 11-1 record.

"Lurking Dog", a poster on the Pioneer Football League forum posted the following humorous, but true observation about our "National Champion":

Dayton beat...
Fordham who beat...
Colgate who beat...
Towson who beat...
Richmond who beat...
Wofford who beat...
Appalachian St who beat...
Michigan who beat...
Florida who beat...
Kentucky who beat...
LSU

Dayton for "National Champion"?? :D

I cannot and will not defend some of the weak schedules that are out there. Teams DO need to step up the level of competition in their schedules. I absolutely agree. However...

Whether any of you dislike the fact that "non-scholarship" programs are playing in the same division as your mighty scholarship programs is immaterial. The "Division I (FCS) Football Championship" is NOT a "true" championship if certain members are summarily excluded. I have a bit of a beef with the leagues/conferences that "choose" not to take part, but that is completely different discussion.

This is NOT the FBS. The FCS should NOT rely on "polls" and computers and "opinions" to choose its champion. The championship should be won ON THE FIELD. If you summarily exclude certain FCS programs from their opportunity to prove themselves ON THE FIELD, the FCS Championship is no better than the joke that some call the BCS "National Championship".

What are some of the "elite" FCS programs afraid of? That they might actually get beat by some obviously-not-good-enough-to-get-a-scholarship guys from a non-scholarship program? It seems that way. I hope I'm wrong. That would be INCREDIBLY lame. :p

[mvemjsunpx]

Technically, you are 100% correct.

However, lets be real - this is a political decsion. Why has expansion been pushed back to 2010 instead on 2008 - becasue that's when the BSC is eligible. It was more palatable to the committe to add 2 conferences, instead of just 1.

Wait, I thought the Big South wasn't eligible until 2011. Isn't one of the rules that 6 teams must have been together in the same conference for 3 years before a conference can get an auto-bid? That won't be true for the Big South until 2011 (unless Stony Brook's independent status in 2007 somehow counts).

[401ks]

Please site some of the information from the past few years. San Diego blowing through the PFL only to lose to an unranked Cal Davis? Or the year before when Drake plowed through the PFL but lost to a mediocre Gateway team? Or the year before that when the PFL champ Valpo lost 34-0 to a 4-8 OVC team?

401ks, the stats are NOT on your side in this one. Nor are the records or the scheduling (in the case of USD especially).

Okay, let's see...

2007: Dayton beats Fordham the playoff-bound Patriot League Champion; beats Albany the Northeast Conference Champion; and beats a very strong league opponent in San Diego. Finishes 11-1

2006: San Diego beats the Ivy League Co-Champion Yale; and beats the Northeast Conference Champion Monmouth. Finishes 11-1

2007: BCS "National Champion" LSU lost TWO games to "unranked" opponents. Yet, somehow xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx they end up being "National Champions". Michigan lost to that "lower division" school, ASU and still ended up playing in a New Year's Day Bowl Game and beating Florida. Yet, San Diego losing one game to UC Davis in 2006 somehow totally invalidates their ENTIRE season? xrolleyesx

I'm not going to go back any further. I don't care what happened back then. It's completely immaterial. (Butler was 0-11 in 2005. My son would not be going to Butler if he thought that Butler was going to be going back to their 0-11 days!)

The Pioneer League and the Northeast Conference are FCS leagues/conferences. To summarily exclude them from the FCS playoffs because some old-guard elitists feel that they are, somehow, not worthy is inexcusable and indefensible.

As I said before, I expected more from FCS fans. There is simply no place for that sort of misplaced elitism here. xsmhx I told a USC fan/alum about this discussion and he LITERALLY could not stop laughing. "Who the hell do those people think they are? Let them come out and beat USC and Ohio State and Georgia and Texas and then MAYBE they can think about talking smack about other DI-AA programs. What unmitigated gall!"

I guess what he meant to say is: "People in glass houses should not throw stones." ;)

[401ks]

And, what it's worth, I think Albany played a very commendable schedule last year. xnodx

...and promptly had their lunch eaten by Dayton, the non-scholarship school from the FCS Pioneer League that obviously can't be good enough to merit a shot at the FCS Championship. xrolleyesx


I just want to state for the record: I realize that Butler's recent schedule is one of those in the PFL that could be singled out as a comparatively weak non-league schedule. I will not defend it except to say that current game contracts were put in place largely by the old regime. Butler is turning their program around, but it cannot take place overnight. I suspect that by the time my son is a senior at Butler, this whole "weak schedule" issue will be moot.

[Syntax Error]

In the final GPI Dayton did finish #30, above playoff teams Fordham #35, E. Illinois #42..... but at the end of the regular season Dayton was #39 (still higher than Fordham). Not saying, just saying. Biggest point is the attitude of putting down non/limited scholly teams. It is really ridiculous. Beat them and then crow. They are eligible for the playoffs and will get a shot someday.

[bluehenbillk]

My worry with expanding the playoffs is teams that really don't belong in the playoffs being there. I don't think 4-loss teams belong in the playoffs. If you can't win 2/3 of your games why should your program be rewarded for mediocrity??

If it does expand they should really take a look at the non-competitiveness of some leagues. Look at the MEAC, aren't they 0-for the 21st century. The NEC isn't that great, yea it may be getting better, the Big South, please. I've never honestly seen a PFL game but I can't imagine it being any better than these other leagues or other playoff doormats like the OVC & the Patriot. If anything, the expansion of the playoffs & some of these games on TV is just going to perpetuate the general public's perception that 1-AA is a "significant" step down from the big boys of 1-A.

[UAalum72]

If it does expand they should really take a look at the non-competitiveness of some leagues. Look at the MEAC, aren't they 0-for the 21st century. The NEC isn't that great, yea it may be getting better, the Big South, please. I've never honestly seen a PFL game but I can't imagine it being any better than these other leagues or other playoff doormats like the OVC & the Patriot. If anything, the expansion of the playoffs & some of these games on TV is just going to perpetuate the general public's perception that 1-AA is a "significant" step down from the big boys of 1-A.
Well, if only teams from the CAA, SoCon, Gateway and Montana deserve to be in the playoffs, cut the field to four. Then maybe FCS will look 'significant' enough for you.xrolleyesx

[lc83]

...and promptly had their lunch eaten by Dayton, the non-scholarship school from the FCS Pioneer League that obviously can't be good enough to merit a shot at the FCS Championship. xrolleyesx


I just want to state for the record: I realize that Butler's recent schedule is one of those in the PFL that could be singled out as a comparatively weak non-league schedule. I will not defend it except to say that current game contracts were put in place largely by the old regime. Butler is turning their program around, but it cannot take place overnight. I suspect that by the time my son is a senior at Butler, this whole "weak schedule" issue will be moot.

BU at Northern Iowa in 2010. Some Ivy schools as well soon.

[DetroitFlyer]

[/B]

BU at Northern Iowa in 2010. Some Ivy schools as well soon.

Man, that would be great! Glad to see Butler stepping up again! With the strong recruiting classes last year and this year, Butler should be vastly improved by 2010!

And for the record, I am thrilled to have some PFL brethren here to help make this argument. For years, I have been a lone voice for the PFL relative to playoff access, it is great to sit back and see some other PFL fans chime in with excellent points! Just another sign of the overall improvement building in the PFL!

[lizrdgizrd]

I agree with you. The relative "prowess" is unknown.

However, I look at how the playoffs are handled here in California by the CIF (California Interscholastic Federation):

Each league has (for lack of a better term) "AQs". There are also a number of "at large" or "wild card" qualifiers. In the CIF Southern Division/Southern Section one league, the Empire League ended up with four teams in the quarterfinals. Is the Empire League (currently) the dominant league in the Southern Division? No doubt. Does the Orange Coast League, who's champion has never done better than one-and-done in the playoffs deserve a place in the playoffs? In my humble opinion, yes. The champion of the Orange Coast League deserves its shot. Maybe one day they'll win a CIF title. But unless they are given the chance, no one will ever know.

Dayton, for example, beat two FCS league champions (Fordham and Albany) in 2007. It seems to me that "the committee" has more than enough information from the past few years to conclude that an 11-1 PFL Champion now deserves to be in the playoffs in spite of the presence of a DII team or two on their schedule.

You have to realize that I'm coming at this entire issue primarily as an outsider. I had my own "elitist" ideas about "DI-AA" ball a few years ago. While my son turned down scholarship offers from FCS programs, and turned down numerous walk-on offers from full-scholarship FCS and FBS programs to attend a non-scholarship school in the PFL, that doesn't make him any less of a player. And I've discovered that the level of play in non-scholarship FCS football is FAR above anything I believed before we began the whole recruiting process.

There are a LOT of "old school" attitudes that could use changing. It just seems very odd to me that elitist FCS fans (who are looked down upon by elitist FBS fans) would go out of their way to denigrate other FCS programs because of some misplaced perception of athletic superiority. xconfusedx I would've thought that FCS fans knew better, and weren't ones to make the same mistake as their low self-esteem FBS brethren. xeyebrowx

To be clear, I'm an advocate for no AQs. Let the best 16 teams play for the title. Period.

[uni88]

There are a LOT of "old school" attitudes that could use changing. It just seems very odd to me that elitist FCS fans (who are looked down upon by elitist FBS fans) would go out of their way to denigrate other FCS programs because of some misplaced perception of athletic superiority. xconfusedx I would've thought that FCS fans knew better, and weren't ones to make the same mistake as their low self-esteem FBS brethren. xeyebrowx

I agree. It is hypocritial for FCS fans complain about how they are treated by FBS schools (denigrate, won't schedule, etc.) and then turn around and treat non/limited scholly schools in a similar manner.


I guess I'm unclear on the concept. Who's butt does Dayton have to kiss in order to be considered? Dayton went out and, 1.) Won their FCS League Championship; 2.) Beat the FCS Patriot League Champion (a league with an AQ); 3.) Beat the FCS Northeast Conference Champion (a league about to be awarded an AQ, from what I understand); and 4.) ended up with an 11-1 record.
...
Whether any of you dislike the fact that "non-scholarship" programs are playing in the same division as your mighty scholarship programs is immaterial. The "Division I (FCS) Football Championship" is NOT a "true" championship if certain members are summarily excluded. I have a bit of a beef with the leagues/conferences that "choose" not to take part, but that is completely different discussion.


The Pioneer League and the Northeast Conference are FCS leagues/conferences. To summarily exclude them from the FCS playoffs because some old-guard elitists feel that they are, somehow, not worthy is inexcusable and indefensible.

Here is where I disagree. Pioneer League and NEC teams are not excluded; they do not have an autobid but they are eligible for an at-large bid. Dayton was not competing against Fordham or Albany for a playoff spot they were competing against UNH, EIU & Villanova. While I question EIU's inclusion, I don't think Dayton would have been next in line. Dayton and other Pioneer League teams hurt their chances for an at-large bid because of their schedule; they can't do anything about their conference schedule (other than encourage their conference mates to schedule up) but they can do something about their OOC schedule. While Fordham and Albany were good OOC games if they want an at-large bid they should not schedule a DII team and play a couple of teams from either the Gateway, SoCon, Big Sky, and/or CAA. And I realize that a number of full scholly teams play DII teams (UNI included) but they are able to make up for that with the strength of their conference schedule which the Pioneer does not have yet. IMO If Drake would have won the Pioneer and beaten UNI and ISU they would have gotten a bid.

And like lizrdgizrd, many would prefer to get rid of the autobids and let the best 16 teams play for the title. This isn't the NCAA DI basketball tournament where you can have 6 rounds in 3 weeks and there is a ton of cash available to teams (and their conferences) that make the tournament. Expanding the playoffs either shortens the regular season or extends the playoff season and there is no hugh financial windfall for each of the participants and their conferences so many would prefer to limit the playoffs to the teams that have a shot at winning the championship.

[89Hen]

I don't care if Dayton played The Little Sisters of the Poor Teachers College in their pre-league schedule. They WON their league, and they beat two other FCS league/conference CHAMPIONS on their way to an 11-1 record.

What are some of the "elite" FCS programs afraid of? That they might actually get beat by some obviously-not-good-enough-to-get-a-scholarship guys from a non-scholarship program? It seems that way. I hope I'm wrong. That would be INCREDIBLY lame. :p
You are wrong and on the first one you've nailed the problem. You and other PFL fans DON'T care what your OOC schedule is, but the rest of I-AA fans (and obviously the Committee) DO. As for why I wouldn't want to see one of the autos go to another conference that would be one and done (I seriously question the OVC and MEAC's bids too), it would take away a bid from a more deserving team. Plenty of NC's have come from the at-large ranks, so more autos is not the answer to a better field.

[lizrdgizrd]

You are wrong and on the first one you've nailed the problem. You and other PFL fans DON'T care what your OOC schedule is, but the rest of I-AA fans (and obviously the Committee) DO. As for why I wouldn't want to see one of the autos go to another conference that would be one and done (I seriously question the OVC and MEAC's bids too), it would take away a bid from a more deserving team. Plenty of NC's have come from the at-large ranks, so more autos is not the answer to a better field.
I believe this year's did. :D

[89Hen]

Okay, let's see...

2007: Dayton beats Fordham the playoff-bound Patriot League Champion; beats Albany the Northeast Conference Champion; and beats a very strong league opponent in San Diego. Finishes 11-1

2006: San Diego beats the Ivy League Co-Champion Yale; and beats the Northeast Conference Champion Monmouth. Finishes 11-1

2007: BCS "National Champion" LSU lost TWO games to "unranked" opponents. Yet, somehow xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx they end up being "National Champions". Michigan lost to that "lower division" school, ASU and still ended up playing in a New Year's Day Bowl Game and beating Florida. Yet, San Diego losing one game to UC Davis in 2006 somehow totally invalidates their ENTIRE season? xrolleyesx
2007: Fordham is one of the weakest autos to make the field in a long time and Albany's only wins outside of the NEC were Fordham and former NEC mate Stony Brook. Not a very compelling case to include Dayton.... more compelling to exclude Fordham IMO.

2006: Wins over teams that are not playoff bound + loss to UC-D + games to Azusa and Dixie = not compelling.

Are you seriously comparing USD or any PFL team to an SEC or Big10 schedule? A two loss SunBelt or C-USA team would not be playing for the NC. Your analogy is completely off. Also, a bowl game for UM does not equal a spot in the national championship field.

[89Hen]

I believe this year's did. :D
xnodx

[McTailGator]

http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/?title=proposal-would-add-four-spots-to-fcs-pla-2010&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1



Once again.

THERE IS NO WAY THIS WILL HAPPEN.

IT IS BAD FOR THE PLAYERS, AND BAD FOR COLLEGE FOOTBALL.

[lizrdgizrd]

2007: Fordham is one of the weakest autos to make the field in a long time and Albany's only wins outside of the NEC were Fordham and former NEC mate Stony Brook. Not a very compelling case to include Dayton.... more compelling to exclude Fordham IMO.
This is a problem the last few years for the PL. 2006 saw a 6-5 Lafayette make the playoffs. 2005 saw both 8-3 Colgate and Lafayette exit in the first round. 2004 saw 8-3 Lafayette and 9-2 Lehigh exit in the first round. Of course Colgate did have a good post-season in 2003 until they went scoreless in the Championship game.

[89Hen]

This is a problem the last few years for the PFL. 2006 saw a 6-5 Lafayette make the playoffs. 2005 saw both 8-3 Colgate and Lafayette exit in the first round. 2004 saw 8-3 Lafayette and 9-2 Lehigh exit in the first round. Of course Colgate did have a good post-season in 2003 until they went scoreless in the Championship game.
I just don't know how many more losses the OVC and MEAC have to amass before they lose their spot if the field stays at 16. At least the PL has had some 'recent' wins. The OVC and MEAC are working on 10 years without a single win. xsmhx

The biggest problem with the way the C chooses the 8 autos each year is that I'm pretty sure they do it at the start of the year. So if a conference is having a good year but were miserable the previous, they'd be left out. My proposal would be to have the autos decided in mid October so the C can see how they did OOC. That info, combined with previous playoff performance would give a better chance for a NEC or PFL to steal a bid from one of the conferences that simply hasn't earned one. Remember that if at least 8 conferences apply, they HAVE to give out 8 autos. They can't just say, we think only 6 are deserving.

[401ks]

[/B]

BU at Northern Iowa in 2010. Some Ivy schools as well soon.

Great!!! xthumbsupx

This is the direction of Butler Football.

[UAalum72]

I just don't know how many more losses the OVC and MEAC have to amass before they lose their spot if the field stays at 16. At least the PL has had some 'recent' wins. The OVC and MEAC are working on 10 years without a single win. xsmhx
To illustrate (correct me if I missed somebody):
OVC
2007 Eastern Kentucky First Round Loss Richmond 14-31
Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Southern Illinois 11-30
2006 UT-Martin First Round Loss Southern Illinois 30-36
Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Illinois St. 13-24
2005 Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Southern Illinois (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000129.html) 6-21
2004 Jacksonville St. First Round Loss Furman (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000413.html) 7-49
2003 Jacksonville St. First Round Loss Western Kentucky (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000198.html) 7-45
2002 Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Western Illinois (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000197.html) 9-48
Murray St. First Round Loss Western Kentucky (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000198.html) 20-59
2001 Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Northern Iowa (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000113.html) 43-49
2000 Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Montana (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000090.html) 13-45
Western Kentucky Quarterfinal Loss Appalachian State 14-17
Western Kentucky First Round Win Florida A&M 27-0 (WKU no longer in OVC)
1999 Tennessee St First Round Loss North Carolina A&T (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000554.html) 10-24
1998 Tennessee St First Round Loss Appalachian State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000280.html) 31-45
1997 Eastern Kentucky First Round Loss Western Kentucky (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000198.html) 14-42
1996 Eastern Illinois First Round Loss Northern Iowa (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000113.html) 14-21
1996 Murray St. Quarterfinal Loss Troy (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000150.html) 3-31
Murray St. First Round Win Western Illinois (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000197.html) 34-6
1995 Eastern Kentucky First Round Loss Montana (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000090.html) 0-48
1995 Murray St. First Round Loss Northern Iowa (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000113.html) 34-35 1994
Eastern Kentucky Quarterfinal Loss Youngstown State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000141.html) 15-18
Eastern Kentucky First Round Win Boston University 30-23
1993 Eastern Kentucky First Round Loss Georgia Southern (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000419.html) 12-14
MEAC
2007 Delaware St. First Round Loss Delaware 7-44
2006 Hampton First Round Loss New Hampshire 38-41
2005 Hampton First Round Loss Richmond (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000600.html) 10-38
2004 Hampton First Round Loss William & Mary (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000743.html) 35-42
2003 Bethune-Cookman First Round Loss Florida Atlantic (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000758.html) 24-32
NCA&T First Round LossWofford (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000199.html) L 10-31
2002 Bethune-Cookman First Round Loss Georgia Southern (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000419.html) 0-34
2001 FAMU First Round Loss Georgia Southern (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000419.html) 35-60
2000 FAMU First Round Loss] Western Kentucky (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000198.html) 0-27
1999 FAMU Semi-final Loss Youngstown State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000141.html) L 24-27
Quarterfinal Win Troy (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000150.html) 17-10
First Round Win Appalachian State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000280.html) 44-29
1999 NCA&T Quarterfinal Loss Youngstown State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000141.html)3-41
First Round Win Tennessee State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000667.html) 24-10
1998 FAMU Quarterfinal Loss Western Illinois (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000197.html) 21-24
First Round Win Troy (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000150.html) 27-17
1998 Hampton First Round Loss Connecticut (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000363.html) 34-42
1997 FAMU First RoundLoss Georgia Southern (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000419.html) 37-52
1997 Hampton First Round Loss Youngstown State (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000141.html) 13-28
1996 FAMU First Round Loss Troy (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000150.html) 25-29
1993 Howard First Round Loss Marshall (http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/team000499.html) 14-28

[bluehenbillk]

I just don't know how many more losses the OVC and MEAC have to amass before they lose their spot if the field stays at 16. At least the PL has had some 'recent' wins. The OVC and MEAC are working on 10 years without a single win. xsmhx

The biggest problem with the way the C chooses the 8 autos each year is that I'm pretty sure they do it at the start of the year. So if a conference is having a good year but were miserable the previous, they'd be left out. My proposal would be to have the autos decided in mid October so the C can see how they did OOC. That info, combined with previous playoff performance would give a better chance for a NEC or PFL to steal a bid from one of the conferences that simply hasn't earned one. Remember that if at least 8 conferences apply, they HAVE to give out 8 autos. They can't just say, we think only 6 are deserving.


89 I know exactly where you're coming from & appreciate the suggestion for change, which I agree we need - change.

However, the only thing I'm afraid that your suggestion would encourage teams to do is schedule cupcakes OOC to drive up your records. DelState for example ran their 1-AA NC schedule this year, but they still proved to be a far inferior team come playoff time.

[DetroitFlyer]

Is this a case most of the time of the OVC team or the MEAC team always coming in as a low seed and having to play on the road against a top seeded team? If so, I would expect there to be many more losses than wins....

And here is a lesson for those of you that are not willing to grasp reality.... The MEAC and OVC have paid their money, ( as in scholarships ), so they will continue to receive AQ's, end of story. It has NOTHING to do with being competitive, it has to do with coin! The sooner you grasp that reality, the sooner these arguments end the the sooner the hyprocisy of the current system is exposed for what it truly is, a complete joke that one might call FBS lite.

[89Hen]

However, the only thing I'm afraid that your suggestion would encourage teams to do is schedule cupcakes OOC to drive up your records. DelState for example ran their 1-AA NC schedule this year, but they still proved to be a far inferior team come playoff time.
Surely the Committee would look at quality of opponents... they do now when determining at-larges, so there's no reason to think they'd ignore OOC SOS when ranking the conferences.

[lizrdgizrd]

Is this a case most of the time of the OVC team or the MEAC team always coming in as a low seed and having to play on the road against a top seeded team? If so, I would expect there to be many more losses than wins....

And here is a lesson for those of you that are not willing to grasp reality.... The MEAC and OVC have paid their money, ( as in scholarships ), so they will continue to receive AQ's, end of story. It has NOTHING to do with being competitive, it has to do with coin! The sooner you grasp that reality, the sooner these arguments end the the sooner the hyprocisy of the current system is exposed for what it truly is, a complete joke that one might call FBS lite.
When you uncover those secret documents that show how the OVC and MEAC have paid for their AQs then I'll join you in your call to end the oppression of the PFL. Until then, accept the fact that many of us don't think the OVC or the MEAC should be guaranteed an AQ and the PRIMARY reason the PFL has no AQ is that it's never asked for one. xpeacex

[bluehenbillk]

Surely the Committee would look at quality of opponents... they do now when determining at-larges, so there's no reason to think they'd ignore OOC SOS when ranking the conferences.

I still don't get how you'd award AQ's in October.

[401ks]

I can certainly understand why some people may feel the way they do about this subject. There are always two sides to every debate.

However, as the the "worthiness" of any team or league or conference to be in the playoffs, I have to once again look at how the playoffs are handled by the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF). xcoffeex

All CIF leagues have AQs. Some leagues are weaker. Some are stronger. Some teams that finish further down in the standings in a very strong league have whined, "But we're a MUCH better team than that league champion Fruits & Nuts High because we play in a much stronger league and have a stronger non-league schedule! Fruits & Nuts High just plays cream puffs and we deserve to be in the playoffs more than them!" xbawlingx

Gee, that sounds familiar. xrolleyesx

To these folks the CIF says, "Tough cookies. If you want to be sure that you're in the playoffs, WIN YOUR LEAGUE! Championships are won ON THE FIELD, not in a selection committee meeting room."

Do "weaker" CIF teams make the playoffs? Yes. Does this system cheapen the playoff/championship process? Only in the tear-moist eyes of the supporters of the teams that were "left out", I would guess.

I'm reading the exact same arguments here. "This team or that team is more deserving than Dayton or Fordham or Albany or San Diego or Lafayette because they play in a tougher conference and play a tougher non-conference schedule." I believe that you can guess my response to that. ;)

And for the record: I have felt this way about playoffs for years. I am not just a "PFL fan". I am a sports fan, and more specifically, a football fan. It just so happens that my son will be attending a PFL school next year. (by his choice, by the way)

[89Hen]

Is this a case most of the time of the OVC team or the MEAC team always coming in as a low seed and having to play on the road against a top seeded team? If so, I would expect there to be many more losses than wins....

And here is a lesson for those of you that are not willing to grasp reality.... The MEAC and OVC have paid their money, ( as in scholarships ), so they will continue to receive AQ's, end of story. It has NOTHING to do with being competitive, it has to do with coin! The sooner you grasp that reality, the sooner these arguments end the the sooner the hyprocisy of the current system is exposed for what it truly is, a complete joke that one might call FBS lite.
No. Good teams win at home or on the road. JMU went 3-0 on the road on the way to the NC in 2004. Delaware won twice on the road last year. UMass won on the road to the 1998 NC and 2006 game. BSC teams have won at #1 seeds recently. There are plenty of other examples.

Also, I know that during this streak the OVC had home games and had a #1 seed and a #4 seed and lost. The MEAC have hosted and lost.

As for your last comment, that's ridiculous. The Committee has to give out 8 autos if at least 8 apply. I can think of only one instance where more than 8 applied. If your conference doesn't apply for one, you won't get one. Simply saying you don't want to apply because you know you'd be turned down doesn't work. That's like me claiming I can fly, but I just don't feel like it, so you can't prove I can't fly. xcoffeex

[89Hen]

I still don't get how you'd award AQ's in October.
You are awarding the conferences that will receive them. Not the teams.

[DetroitFlyer]

When you uncover those secret documents that show how the OVC and MEAC have paid for their AQs then I'll join you in your call to end the oppression of the PFL. Until then, accept the fact that many of us don't think the OVC or the MEAC should be guaranteed an AQ and the PRIMARY reason the PFL has no AQ is that it's never asked for one. xpeacex


I did not say that the MEAC or OVC paid for an AQ. I said that they are scholarship conferences and as such, they have "paid their money" by playing scholarship football. The "money paid" is what results in the AQ. The argument has been put forth that Coastal Carolina "earned" an at large bid to the playoffs. Why doesn't the PFL do the same? Of course the Big South does not have a bid, ( yet ), so the only way to make the playoffs is via the at large.... Well, guess what, CCU is a scholarship school, ( as is their conference ). They also paid their way into the opportunity for an at large. Mark my words, in the future, any scholarship conference that is eligible will have an at large bid.

All that is going on here is the enforcement of the "OVC Rule", even though it failed once again this year! It does not need to pass, it is enforced now.

The NEC makes it a bit more interesting by working to beat the Old Guard at its own game. The NEC does not meet the "OVC Rule" criteria, but they have pushed the envelope just far enough that they cannot be dismissed as easily as the PFL. Frankly, my hat is off to the NEC for not only further exposing the AQ process for the joke that it is, all the while actually getting one for themselves in the bargin. SWEET!

Why do you think the PFL has never requested an AQ? Well, I know you are clueless, so I'll fill you in.... The PFL is 100% committed to the non-scholarship model. If the league asks for an AQ, there is a fear that momentum could build to actually put the "OVC Rule" on the books. If that happened, many of the PFL schools would probably choose to give up football, rather than meet the minimum scholarship or funding requirements as established by the Old Guard.

This is not rocket science, it is simply opening your eyes to way things work in FCS.

[401ks]

To be clear, I'm an advocate for no AQs. Let the best 16 teams play for the title. Period.

Uh, okay....

Who's "opinion" picks the "best" 16 teams?

(Should we just borrow the BCS computers?) xrolleyesx

[89Hen]

To these folks the CIF says, "Tough cookies. If you want to be sure that you're in the playoffs, WIN YOUR LEAGUE! Championships are won ON THE FIELD, not in a selection committee meeting room."
To imply that a champion of a 6 team conference that also happens to be one of the lowest ranked confernces in a subdivision is automatically more worthy than a second place team from larger, more highly ranked conference is ridiculous IMO.

Dayton > Albany > Appalachian State xcoffeex

[89Hen]

Why do you think the PFL has never requested an AQ? Well, I know you are clueless, so I'll fill you in.... The PFL is 100% committed to the non-scholarship model. If the league asks for an AQ, there is a fear that momentum could build to actually put the "OVC Rule" on the books. If that happened, many of the PFL schools would probably choose to give up football, rather than meet the minimum scholarship or funding requirements as established by the Old Guard.

This is not rocket science, it is simply opening your eyes to way things work in FCS.
Gotcha. Even though the PFL won't request an auto, they should be granted one. xnutsx

You are right that it's not rocket science. PLENTY of teams have figured out how to get in the playoffs without an auto. Only the really stubborn ones refuse to acknowledge this.... you know, like people that have ignored it for years here. xcoffeex

[bench]

I hear the bitching, but I still don't see anyone doing anything about it. All the PFL has to do is play respected out-of-conference opponents and win. That's it. If Dayton runs the table with a win over a mid-level and up CAA or SoCon team and a top Patriot League team, they're in. It's that simple - play quality teams and win. I don't see what's hard about this.

I pull for underdogs. I appreciate the scrappy challenger. I just don't like it when underdogs want the reward without the work.

[401ks]

You are awarding the conferences that will receive them. Not the teams.

Oh, that's a MUCH better system! xeekx

Giving the bids to conferences and COMPLETELY overlooking the individual teams! :p

I have just wandered down the Rabbit Hole.

Oh dear, there's the Queen of Hearts and the Mad Hatter!

[89Hen]

I hear the bitching, but I still don't see anyone doing anything about it. All the PFL has to do is play respected out-of-conference opponents and win. That's it.
Get used to it bench, it's been going on for years here. A new team each year champions the cause, but it ends up with the same tired old arguement and the refusal to answer the questions of how others have broken through. It's funny to hear people call CalPoly and Coastal "Old Guard", but that's basically what they're doing. Anyone who makes the playoffs is a part of the conspiracy to keep the lower ranked teams down. xcoffeex

[GannonFan]

I can certainly understand why some people may feel the way they do about this subject. There are always two sides to every debate.

However, as the the "worthiness" of any team or league or conference to be in the playoffs, I have to once again look at how the playoffs are handled by the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF). xcoffeex

All CIF leagues have AQs. Some leagues are weaker. Some are stronger. Some teams that finish further down in the standings in a very strong league have whined, "But we're a MUCH better team than that league champion Fruits & Nuts High because we play in a much stronger league and have a stronger non-league schedule! Fruits & Nuts High just plays cream puffs and we deserve to be in the playoffs more than them!" xbawlingx

Gee, that sounds familiar. xrolleyesx

To these folks the CIF says, "Tough cookies. If you want to be sure that you're in the playoffs, WIN YOUR LEAGUE! Championships are won ON THE FIELD, not in a selection committee meeting room."

Do "weaker" CIF teams make the playoffs? Yes. Does this system cheapen the playoff/championship process? Only in the tear-moist eyes of the supporters of the teams that were "left out", I would guess.

I'm reading the exact same arguments here. "This team or that team is more deserving than Dayton or Fordham or Albany or San Diego or Lafayette because they play in a tougher conference and play a tougher non-conference schedule." I believe that you can guess my response to that. ;)

And for the record: I have felt this way about playoffs for years. I am not just a "PFL fan". I am a sports fan, and more specifically, a football fan. It just so happens that my son will be attending a PFL school next year. (by his choice, by the way)

Hey, if this was high school, then your argument would be great. However, this is college and the need to be "inclusive" to everyone is just not there. These sports aren't being played just to give people an athletic outlet. Inclusion of everyone, regardless of merit, normally stops at the high school level.

In that regard, the issue is that not all conferences are created equal. Under your argument, any collection of 6 teams (the minimum for consideration of an AQ) would merit inclusion in the playoffs. Even if that conference was made up of the bottom teams in 6 conferences who just happened to band together to take advantage of your "ignorance is blind" concept of playoff selection. The CIF's response of "win it on the field" is ignorance run amock - when the field's are significantly different, that statement is just a cop out from having to explain an indefensible position.

I'm with others, let's just ditch the AQ's altogether and pick the best 16 teams. Scheduling does matter. The PFL fans on here have moaned and groaned for years, but they can't ever escape the fact that a large majority of their conference plays multiple sub-division teams, even down to the DIII level, and they don't even always fare well in these mismatches. Show me one current AQ conference where more than one team plays a DIII school and you might have something. However, that does not exist.

Not only that, but the PFL has been quite clear that they don't want to be in the playoffs. No griping on here changes that fact - the commissioner of the PFL, under the direction (since she works for them as their mouthpiece) of the Presidents of the Universities who make up that conference, has said the PFL is not interested in the playoffs. Why are we even trying to find a way to fit conferences into the playoffs that don't want to be in the playoffs?

And if a single team wanted to be in the playoffs, the path for that is very easy - the number of independent (i.e. no AQ's) teams who have made the playoffs over the years is impressive, and include such schools as Georgia Southern, Youngstown St, Delaware, Hofstra, Coastal Carolina, William and Mary, Cal Poly, and many others. No one is denied access to the playoffs by not having an AQ. History refutes that notion time and time again.

Like I said, I'm on the page of ditching the AQ's and just picking the best teams as determined by the committee. It's already a 16 team field, and I don't think with all of the whining that a team that was tested on the field against a quality schedule has ever been left out of the playoffs unless they had several things against them (i.e. too many losses). It doesn't matter how much you spend on football, whether you have schollies or not, the only thing that would matter would be how good of a team you are. Should be pretty easy. xthumbsupx

[89Hen]

Oh, that's a MUCH better system! xeekx

Giving the bids to conferences and COMPLETELY overlooking the individual teams! :p

I have just wandered down the Rabbit Hole.

Oh dear, there's the Queen of Hearts and the Mad Hatter!
xconfusedx xsmhx You completely missed the point. Autos are not given to teams, they are given to conferences. The Committee currently awards the 8 autos every year. My proposal was instead of awarding them at the beginning of the year when we know nothing about the current strength of the conferences, award them in October when a great amount of the OOC games have been played. That way, if an NEC is having a great year OOC and the OVC is not, they'd have a legit shot at one of the 8 (assuming they apply for one). xconfusedx

[bench]

Get used to it bench, it's been going on for years here. A new team each year champions the cause, but it ends up with the same tired old arguement and the refusal to answer the questions of how others have broken through. It's funny to hear people call CalPoly and Coastal "Old Guard", but that's basically what they're doing. Anyone who makes the playoffs is a part of the conspiracy to keep the lower ranked teams down. xcoffeex

This is exciting. I don't think I've ever been a part of a conspiracy before. How much are the membership dues

[401ks]

xconfusedx xsmhx You completely missed the point. Autos are not given to teams, they are given to conferences. The Committee currently awards the 8 autos every year. My proposal was instead of awarding them at the beginning of the year when we know nothing about the current strength of the conferences, award them in October when a great amount of the OOC games have been played. That way, if an NEC is having a great year OOC and the OVC is not, they'd have a legit shot at one of the 8 (assuming they apply for one). xconfusedx

Okay, I did misunderstand you... slightly. Mea culpa. :o

I still disagree with you, largely because of my view that OOC games should not carry so much weight in the process. We are discussing the Division I (FCS) Football Championship. I believe that conference/league games should be the MAJOR criteria for selection, with OOC games only used in a VERY limited fashion to "break ties".

[bluehenbillk]

xconfusedx xsmhx You completely missed the point. Autos are not given to teams, they are given to conferences. The Committee currently awards the 8 autos every year. My proposal was instead of awarding them at the beginning of the year when we know nothing about the current strength of the conferences, award them in October when a great amount of the OOC games have been played. That way, if an NEC is having a great year OOC and the OVC is not, they'd have a legit shot at one of the 8 (assuming they apply for one). xconfusedx

Again 89, how is the committee supposed to do that mid-year? I'd be more in favor of dumping the AQ's altogether & have them pick the best 16 teams regardless of conference affiliation.

[lizrdgizrd]

xconfusedx xsmhx You completely missed the point. Autos are not given to teams, they are given to conferences. The Committee currently awards the 8 autos every year. My proposal was instead of awarding them at the beginning of the year when we know nothing about the current strength of the conferences, award them in October when a great amount of the OOC games have been played. That way, if an NEC is having a great year OOC and the OVC is not, they'd have a legit shot at one of the 8 (assuming they apply for one). xconfusedx
I kinda like that idea. I think it'd be more fair for the NEC etc.

[Mountaineer]

I believe that conference/league games should be the MAJOR criteria for selection, with OOC games only used in a VERY limited fashion to "break ties".

Conference games are a major criteria, hence the reason no PFL has received an invite. To balance that out a more competitive OOC is needed and quite simply - the PFL haven't been stepping up to the plate. xpeacex

[401ks]

Hey, if this was high school, then your argument would be great. However, this is college and the need to be "inclusive" to everyone is just not there. These sports aren't being played just to give people an athletic outlet. Inclusion of everyone, regardless of merit, normally stops at the high school level.

In that regard, the issue is that not all conferences are created equal. Under your argument, any collection of 6 teams (the minimum for consideration of an AQ) would merit inclusion in the playoffs. Even if that conference was made up of the bottom teams in 6 conferences who just happened to band together to take advantage of your "ignorance is blind" concept of playoff selection. The CIF's response of "win it on the field" is ignorance run amock - when the field's are significantly different, that statement is just a cop out from having to explain an indefensible position.

I'm with others, let's just ditch the AQ's altogether and pick the best 16 teams. Scheduling does matter. The PFL fans on here have moaned and groaned for years, but they can't ever escape the fact that a large majority of their conference plays multiple sub-division teams, even down to the DIII level, and they don't even always fare well in these mismatches. Show me one current AQ conference where more than one team plays a DIII school and you might have something. However, that does not exist.

Not only that, but the PFL has been quite clear that they don't want to be in the playoffs. No griping on here changes that fact - the commissioner of the PFL, under the direction (since she works for them as their mouthpiece) of the Presidents of the Universities who make up that conference, has said the PFL is not interested in the playoffs. Why are we even trying to find a way to fit conferences into the playoffs that don't want to be in the playoffs?

And if a single team wanted to be in the playoffs, the path for that is very easy - the number of independent (i.e. no AQ's) teams who have made the playoffs over the years is impressive, and include such schools as Georgia Southern, Youngstown St, Delaware, Hofstra, Coastal Carolina, William and Mary, Cal Poly, and many others. No one is denied access to the playoffs by not having an AQ. History refutes that notion time and time again.

Like I said, I'm on the page of ditching the AQ's and just picking the best teams as determined by the committee. It's already a 16 team field, and I don't think with all of the whining that a team that was tested on the field against a quality schedule has ever been left out of the playoffs unless they had several things against them (i.e. too many losses). It doesn't matter how much you spend on football, whether you have schollies or not, the only thing that would matter would be how good of a team you are. Should be pretty easy. xthumbsupx

I won't claim to know the whole silly history of the PFL asking or not asking for an AQ. I'll simply say that you are correct that (for whatever the reason may be) the PFL has not asked for an AQ.

A few comments...

The CIF's stance is NOT an "inclusiveness" issue. In fact, those that are left out would argue otherwise!

Maybe you could explain to me the purpose of college (particularly FCS) sports in general, and football specifically. xconfusedx The FCS certainly is not the "minor league" of the NFL. The vast majority of FCS football programs do not make money. (Is there a single FCS football program that is profitable?) I don't recall seeing one single school that has "Football" as a degree program.

I love this "6 loser team conference" argument. xrolleyesx First of all, you are using the current AQ minimum qualifier. That could (and should?) be changed. And yeah, I can just see a bunch of "loser" schools just happening to band together for the sole purpose of getting one of its football teams into the playoffs! xlolx Yeah, like that would happen. NOT.

"Win it on the field" is "ignorance run amok"??? I can't even believe that you wrote that. xeekx

Selection committees are anathema to sports, IMHO. If we are talking "cop outs" here, I would opine that the "cop out" is allowing a bunch of coffee-and-donut-fueled administrators sitting around a conference table and looking at computer print outs decide who makes the playoffs. Let's just go to a scoring system like Synchronized Swimming or Rhythmic Gymnastics. ("I give them an extra point for degree of difficulty, but subtract .5 because of their ugly uniforms!") ;)

[401ks]

Conference games are a major criteria, hence the reason no PFL has received an invite. To balance that out a more competitive OOC is needed and quite simply - the PFL haven't been stepping up to the plate. xpeacex

You'll get no argument from me about the weakness of much of the PFL's OOC schedules. All I can say is that change is coming, slowly but surely.

My point is that the PFL is an FCS conference/league. The playoffs determine the FCS champion. The playoffs do not determine the OOC champion.

If someone thinks that the PFL champion sucks, fine... beat the snot out of them when you meet them in the playoffs. Otherwise...

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

I see these realities:


NCAA Tournaments will always have AQ's
No NCAA Tournament is about the best 8, 16, 32, 64 or 65 teams. There are always teams from "power" conferences that are better than AQ League Champions.
The NCAA will take the path of least resistance. In other sports they've proven that they'll expand a tournament rather than develop criteria to rank leagues to earn AQ's or include a "weaker" conference champion by excluding a "quality" at large team . Ice Hockey is the most recent example. The men's tournament was expanded to 16 teams despite not having the number of schools playing the sport required for a 16 team tournament. Two new leagues were given an AQ berth and two more at large berths were created.


So, my humble opinion is that the NCAA will expand the FCS Tournament so that they provide the same opportunity to conferences that they do in all other NCAA sports -- a game in the national championship tournament. That is the NCAA way and the FCS Playoffs are still a NCAA sanctioned event.

Having said that, the expansion will probably be driven by the number of conferences that request an AQ. Twenty is being discussed so that the NEC and Big South get bids. If the GWFC becomes eligible, I assume they will request an AQ so that means 22 teams. If the Pioneer or someone else requests an AQ, then we'll see 24 and so on.

I'll finish with one other reality that I foresee. If the Pioneer Football League doesn't take advantage of this expansion to obtain an AQ, then their only chance for an at large bid is winning with a schedule that demonstrates to the Committee that they are worthy of an at large bid. With playoff expansion why in the world wouldn't the PFL request an AQ?

BTW, The NCAA Basketball Tournament always has the equivalent of a 7-4 football team. Using the ratio and proportion math I learned in HS and rounding up, based on a 28 game schedule that would be an 18-10 hoop team. And it's the same deal, a team from a "power" conference. Shoot, this year, I wouldn't bet on my America East Champion if they played the last place team in the SEC or a few of the other "power" leagues.

[UAalum72]

the refusal to answer the questions of how others have broken through. It's funny to hear people call CalPoly and Coastal "Old Guard", but that's basically what they're doing.
It's been answered, you're not listening. Cal Poly and Coastal only play four league games, so they have seven or eight chances to get the 'big' wins needed for the playoffs. If you've got seven league games, you can get a couple of OOC wins and be told those 'power' teams sucked this year anyway, so try again next year. You're penalizing teams for playing in a league with enough members to meet the AQ criteria. Should they drop out of a football league in which they may be an all-sport member to jump thru the hoops of life as an independent, just for an outside shot at the playoffs?

[DetroitFlyer]

This is exciting. I don't think I've ever been a part of a conspiracy before. How much are the membership dues

Please pay attention as I am really growing tired of repeating the obvious. You play scholarship football in FCS, you have paid your money and are welcome to the playoffs. If you do not play scholarship football in FCS, you are not welcome.

If you really do not understand, go back and research the "OVC Rule".

[bench]

You'll get no argument from me about the weakness of much of the PFL's OOC schedules. All I can say is that change is coming, slowly but surely.

My point is that the PFL is an FCS conference/league. The playoffs determine the FCS champion. The playoffs do not determine the OOC champion.

If someone thinks that the PFL champion sucks, fine... beat the snot out of them when you meet them in the playoffs. Otherwise...

You should know better than anyone how a mid-major school gets noticed. Butler's basketball team played and beat Michigan, Virginia Tech, Texas Tech, Ohio State, and Florida State before conference play began. If they don't win the Horizon tournament championship they're still going Dancing as an at-large because of their record combined with their strength of schedule. They made sure they couldn't be left out by doing it on the floor. They have proven they belong.

You seem to think PFL teams should make it into the playoffs if they have a gaudy record regardless of who they played in the process. The system, flawed though it may be, is based on merit. If inclusion and participation without earning it is what you want, go play intramurals, brother. If you and your brethren are really serious about playing for a championship, step up. You have the perfect example to follow on your very own campus.

[uni88]

I can certainly understand why some people may feel the way they do about this subject. There are always two sides to every debate.

However, as the the "worthiness" of any team or league or conference to be in the playoffs, I have to once again look at how the playoffs are handled by the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF). xcoffeex

All CIF leagues have AQs. Some leagues are weaker. Some are stronger. Some teams that finish further down in the standings in a very strong league have whined, "But we're a MUCH better team than that league champion Fruits & Nuts High because we play in a much stronger league and have a stronger non-league schedule! Fruits & Nuts High just plays cream puffs and we deserve to be in the playoffs more than them!" xbawlingx

Gee, that sounds familiar. xrolleyesx

To these folks the CIF says, "Tough cookies. If you want to be sure that you're in the playoffs, WIN YOUR LEAGUE! Championships are won ON THE FIELD, not in a selection committee meeting room."

Do "weaker" CIF teams make the playoffs? Yes. Does this system cheapen the playoff/championship process? Only in the tear-moist eyes of the supporters of the teams that were "left out", I would guess.

I'm reading the exact same arguments here. "This team or that team is more deserving than Dayton or Fordham or Albany or San Diego or Lafayette because they play in a tougher conference and play a tougher non-conference schedule." I believe that you can guess my response to that. ;)

And for the record: I have felt this way about playoffs for years. I am not just a "PFL fan". I am a sports fan, and more specifically, a football fan. It just so happens that my son will be attending a PFL school next year. (by his choice, by the way)


First, do you realize that your argument can be turned around and used against you? To paraphrase:
"Do weaker conference champions miss the playoffs? Yes. Does this system cheapen the playoff/championship process? Only in the tear-moist eyes of the supporters of the teams that were "left out", I would guess."

Second, IMO you're presenting this as a black & white issue when really it's more of a 6 of one 1/2 dozen of the other.


You argue that conference champions have earned an AQ into the playoffs based by winning their conference.
Others argue that the best 16 teams should be invited into the playoffs.

Both positions can be supported with valid reasoning so which solution is the best is subjective.

[bench]

Please pay attention as I am really growing tired of repeating the obvious. You play scholarship football in FCS, you have paid your money and are welcome to the playoffs. If you do not play scholarship football in FCS, you are not welcome.

If you really do not understand, go back and research the "OVC Rule".

Please pay attention as I am really growing tired of repeating the obvious. You don't play anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, worth a damn, you haven't earned your spot and are not welcome to the playoffs. If you played anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, who was worth a damn and beat them, you would be welcome.

[downbythebeach]

In that regard, the issue is that not all conferences are created equal. Under your argument, any collection of 6 teams (the minimum for consideration of an AQ) would merit inclusion in the playoffs. Even if that conference was made up of the bottom teams in 6 conferences who just happened to band together to take advantage of your "ignorance is blind" concept of playoff selection.



Yes, exactly, according to NCAA bylaws

in fact the school that we all are fans of pretty much play basketball in these conferences.......except g-town and a few other

[401ks]

Please pay attention as I am really growing tired of repeating the obvious. You don't play anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, worth a damn, you haven't earned your spot and are not welcome to the playoffs. If you played anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, who was worth a damn and beat them, you would be welcome.

The BCS supporters say:

"All of you I-AA wannabes, please pay attention as I am really growing tired of repeating the obvious. You don't play anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, worth a damn, you haven't earned your spot and are not welcome in the BCS. If you played anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, who was worth a damn and beat them, you would be welcome."

:D

[bench]

The BCS supporters say:

"All of you I-AA wannabes, please pay attention as I am really growing tired of repeating the obvious. You don't play anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, worth a damn, you haven't earned your spot and are not welcome in the BCS. If you played anyone, fully scholarshipped or not, who was worth a damn and beat them, you would be welcome."

:D

Great analogy, only one problem: that doesn't make any sense

[401ks]

You should know better than anyone how a mid-major school gets noticed. Butler's basketball team played and beat Michigan, Virginia Tech, Texas Tech, Ohio State, and Florida State before conference play began. If they don't win the Horizon tournament championship they're still going Dancing as an at-large because of their record combined with their strength of schedule. They made sure they couldn't be left out by doing it on the floor. They have proven they belong.

You seem to think PFL teams should make it into the playoffs if they have a gaudy record regardless of who they played in the process. The system, flawed though it may be, is based on merit. If inclusion and participation without earning it is what you want, go play intramurals, brother. If you and your brethren are really serious about playing for a championship, step up. You have the perfect example to follow on your very own campus.

I cannot defend Butler's past OOC schedule. It is what it is, and it was what it was. It is not what it will be. I'm not saying that Butler has even come close to deserving a playoff spot in many, many years.

The Horizon champ goes to the NCAAs, correct? Theoretically, that champion could have a cream puff OOC schedule and be under .500, but they still go to the Dance because they are the conference champions. They will have EARNED IT as conference champions. There is my perfect example.

"The system, flawed though it may be, is based on merit." No, it is based on subjective OPINION, and NOT on head-to-head competition on the field. Just about EVERYONE'S opinion before this past season was that ASU was going to be slaughtered by Michigan. Why even play the game? ASU is a "I-AA" team! They play a bunch of nobodies. Wofford? What the hell is that, a Junior College?

Same story. Different page. Go back to my first post on this subject. Everyone is looking down their noses at the folks "beneath" them. Sad. xsmhx I expected more from this crowd.

[401ks]

Great analogy, only one problem: that doesn't make any sense

That's exactly what I thought about your original statement! ;)

We'll just have to agree to disagree. xpeacex

[GannonFan]

I won't claim to know the whole silly history of the PFL asking or not asking for an AQ. I'll simply say that you are correct that (for whatever the reason may be) the PFL has not asked for an AQ.


Seeing how that's pretty much critical to this whole discussion it's an interesting point to just brush off. The PFL does not want to be in the playoffs - hence why they schedule like they do and hence why they never complain about not being in the playoffs. The only ones who do are the people on boards like these or the occassional coach in the PFL who isn't in line with the thinking of the people who hired him.




A few comments...

The CIF's stance is NOT an "inclusiveness" issue. In fact, those that are left out would argue otherwise!

Maybe you could explain to me the purpose of college (particularly FCS) sports in general, and football specifically. xconfusedx The FCS certainly is not the "minor league" of the NFL. The vast majority of FCS football programs do not make money. (Is there a single FCS football program that is profitable?) I don't recall seeing one single school that has "Football" as a degree program.



First of all, yes, CIF's stance is an inclusiveness issue. They wouldn't have that system if they didn't want every conference to be "included" and have a chance. If it went by merit, the outcome would be different. Make it "inclusive" and give anybody a shot, and they have what they have.

Second, college football, even at this level, is about entertainment and prestige. It feels good to have a football program and to allow the alumni, community, and students an outlet to cheer and more importantly support ($$$) their university. It is not about providing athletic outlets for students. If that was the case, there would be a lot more sports offered, or schools would have strictly intramurals and no intercollegiate sports.

Also, there are several FCS schools that make a profit. Delaware pulls in about $2M a year on football. I'm sure Montana, when they get their house in order, makes money. Appy St has to be making money by now.




I love this "6 loser team conference" argument. xrolleyesx First of all, you are using the current AQ minimum qualifier. That could (and should?) be changed. And yeah, I can just see a bunch of "loser" schools just happening to band together for the sole purpose of getting one of its football teams into the playoffs! xlolx Yeah, like that would happen. NOT.

Since you profess to not know details, tell me again why VMI left the SoCon where it played for almost 80 years (and never made the playoffs) and happened to join a 6 team conference filled with teams with similar histories or nascent programs???? [/quote]



"Win it on the field" is "ignorance run amok"??? I can't even believe that you wrote that. xeekx

Again, you just miss the important part - it depends what fields you play on. If you hide in a weak conference and behind a weak OOC schedule, the fields you are playing on are significantly different than what most others play on. Hence the "ignorance".



Selection committees are anathema to sports, IMHO. If we are talking "cop outs" here, I would opine that the "cop out" is allowing a bunch of coffee-and-donut-fueled administrators sitting around a conference table and looking at computer print outs decide who makes the playoffs. Let's just go to a scoring system like Synchronized Swimming or Rhythmic Gymnastics. ("I give them an extra point for degree of difficulty, but subtract .5 because of their ugly uniforms!") ;)

Well, until we manage to get football teams to play schedules 5x bigger than what they play, we will always be faced with the problem that we don't have hard evidence on which to judge teams and select them for the playoffs. That's why OOC games matter - it, to the best degree possible, shows how your conference and teams match up against other conferences and teams. A strong conference isn't one that goes belly-up in OOC play, just like a weak one isn't one that dominates OOC play against similar conferences. It is relevant and it does indicate something. But when teams abandon the idea of playing a quality OOC, and a whole conference follows suit, knowing that's how the system is played and judged, then complaining about it afterwards is the equivalent of whining. xpeacex

[downbythebeach]

What is the big deal about being inclusive

Sports are inclusive other than FBS football and I guess FCS

Thats just the way it is.......back in the early 1990's even though you knew the cowboy or the 49ers were gonna win every year they didn't make the NFC champ game the Superbowl

You do this in sports

[bench]

That's exactly what I thought about your original statement! ;)

We'll just have to agree to disagree. xpeacex

I was parodying DetroitFlyer's post and got a little testy. I don't have a lot of patience when people would rather curse the darkness than light a match. The simple solution is being ignored in favor of having something to bitch about.

Trust me, nothing would make me happier than the PFL earning a bid. A couple of posters, with nothing to gripe about any longer, would simply disintegrate into ash and never be heard from again

[401ks]

Well, until we manage to get football teams to play schedules 5x bigger than what they play, we will always be faced with the problem that we don't have hard evidence on which to judge teams and select them for the playoffs. That's why OOC games matter - it, to the best degree possible, shows how your conference and teams match up against other conferences and teams. A strong conference isn't one that goes belly-up in OOC play, just like a weak one isn't one that dominates OOC play against similar conferences. It is relevant and it does indicate something. But when teams abandon the idea of playing a quality OOC, and a whole conference follows suit, knowing that's how the system is played and judged, then complaining about it afterwards is the equivalent of whining. xpeacex

All of your points are well-taken and intelligently presented. I certainly appreciate that.

While we could go back and forth about this, I wish to end my participation in this discussion. We'll have to agree to disagree for now. The solution for a process that stinks for some would end up stinking for someone else.

This is not the type of discussion that I planned on when I joined this forum. I have responded more to this forum in the past couple of days than I have in all the forums to which I belong in the past couple of years!

While issues like the PFL "not wanting" to be in the playoffs is, indeed, critical to the whole discussion, I still see a STRONG underlying issue of elitism. Certainly not everyone... since there ARE decent arguments in favor of the present (admittedly flawed) system, but as a newcomer looking in on all of this, it sure does seem like a lot of "We-may-not-be-SEC-or-Big Ten-but-at-least-we're-better-than-THOSE-guys" running through the FCS.

That is my biggest disappointment in all of this. xsmhx Dayton or Albany or Monmouth or San Diego fans will survive just fine without a playoff spot. In the end, it simply doesn't matter. Some of the attitudes are disappointing. :(

xpeacex

[401ks]

I was parodying DetroitFlyer's post and got a little testy. I don't have a lot of patience when people would rather curse the darkness than light a match. The simple solution is being ignored in favor of having something to bitch about.

Trust me, nothing would make me happier than the PFL earning a bid. A couple of posters, with nothing to gripe about any longer, would simply disintegrate into ash and never be heard from again

As I mentioned earlier, I truly believe that the PFL in general, and Butler specifically, are working to upgrade their programs and schedules over the next few years. This entire discussion will soon be moot. xcoolx

xpeacex

[Saint3333]

If this happens I predict 24 and eventually 32 teams, welcome to the little leagues of college football.

16 if enought to crown a true champion.

[Syntax Error]

... This is not the type of discussion that I planned on when I joined this forum. I have responded more to this forum in the past couple of days than I have in all the forums to which I belong in the past couple of years!...That's the way it is at AGS, welcome!

[downbythebeach]

If this happens I predict 24 and eventually 32 teams, welcome to the little leagues of college football.

16 if enought to crown a true champion.

I predict 128

no no 256

[BDKJMU]

12 game seasons aren't necessarily a 7 year pattern- following this year both 2012 and 2013 are 12 game seasons. It all boils down to whether there are 12 or 13 Saturdays from the season start date and end date as determined by the NCAA.

Bottom line is if you move the opening round of the playoffs a week back to what will be between about Nov 17-22 (which is the date the last regular season Saturday has fallen on 03'-08') then every season the 1st Sat games would have to be played between Aug 25-30 (whichever day the Saturday fell on) in order to play 12 straight games AND have the playoffs start a week earlier.

Again, I don't see the playoff being moved back a week, and if they are, I certainly don't see the option for a 12th game being kept except for MAYBE once every 1/2 doz years (I should have said once every 6 years, not 7) like this season when they are playing the 1st games on Sat, Aug 30th.

How many years has it been since the bulk of teams played their 1st game in Aug? At least a 1/2 doz years.

[BDKJMU]

Wow!

Boy, I should've expected this, I guess. :o Well, I'll have to answer each one of these posts individually to give them each the answer they deserve (but may not want to hear).

"They have absolutely no chance of winning a national championship as long as they refuse to do what they have to in order to be considered."

I guess I'm unclear on the concept. Who's butt does Dayton have to kiss in order to be considered? Dayton went out and, 1.) Won their FCS League Championship; 2.) Beat the FCS Patriot League Champion (a league with an AQ); 3.) Beat the FCS Northeast Conference Champion (a league about to be awarded an AQ, from what I understand); and 4.) ended up with an 11-1 record.

The last time I looked, the Championship is the Division I (FCS) Football Championship. It is not the "Who's Played the Most Impressive Non-Conference Schedule in Division I (FCS) Championship". Or the "Who Won the Toughest Conference in Division I (FCS) Championship". Even AQs are awarded purely on league/conference play. To say that one FCS league or conference is not worthy of a chance is pure elitism.

I don't care if Dayton played The Little Sisters of the Poor Teachers College in their pre-league schedule. They WON their league, and they beat two other FCS league/conference CHAMPIONS on their way to an 11-1 record.

"Lurking Dog", a poster on the Pioneer Football League forum posted the following humorous, but true observation about our "National Champion":

Dayton beat...
Fordham who beat...
Colgate who beat...
Towson who beat...
Richmond who beat...
Wofford who beat...
Appalachian St who beat...
Michigan who beat...
Florida who beat...
Kentucky who beat...
LSU

Dayton for "National Champion"?? :D

I cannot and will not defend some of the weak schedules that are out there. Teams DO need to step up the level of competition in their schedules. I absolutely agree. However...

Whether any of you dislike the fact that "non-scholarship" programs are playing in the same division as your mighty scholarship programs is immaterial. The "Division I (FCS) Football Championship" is NOT a "true" championship if certain members are summarily excluded. I have a bit of a beef with the leagues/conferences that "choose" not to take part, but that is completely different discussion.

This is NOT the FBS. The FCS should NOT rely on "polls" and computers and "opinions" to choose its champion. The championship should be won ON THE FIELD. If you summarily exclude certain FCS programs from their opportunity to prove themselves ON THE FIELD, the FCS Championship is no better than the joke that some call the BCS "National Championship".

What are some of the "elite" FCS programs afraid of? That they might actually get beat by some obviously-not-good-enough-to-get-a-scholarship guys from a non-scholarship program? It seems that way. I hope I'm wrong. That would be INCREDIBLY lame. :p

Its true that Dayton beat the Patriot League Champ, from another non scholly (I know, "equivalencies") league that has an AQ that would rank right now in terms of playoff record 6th or 7th of the 8 AQ leagues, and Albany, the NEC champ from a partial scholly league that is NOT YET an AQ league.

Bottom line, since the Patriot got an AQ in I believe it was 97', in the 11 playoff seasons by my count, they have gone 7-15, with 3 of those wins coming in one season (Colgate 03') and have gone 0-6 in the playoffs since 04'. The following includes the playoff fields up to 05'
http://www.i-aa.org/article.asp?articleid=75056

The point is, beating the Patriot and NEC champs doesn't mean the PFL champ is deserving of a playoff bid. When no one in the PFL is still scheduleing Div IIIs and the top PFL teams start scheduling tough non conference schedules against top tier teams from the Big 4 traditional multi bid conferences (CAA, So-Con, Gateway, Big Sky) and winning some of those games that would be a different story and would prove the PFL champ deserves consideration. Until then they don't.

[BDKJMU]

I hear the bitching, but I still don't see anyone doing anything about it. All the PFL has to do is play respected out-of-conference opponents and win. That's it. If Dayton runs the table with a win over a mid-level and up CAA or SoCon team and a top Patriot League team, they're in. It's that simple - play quality teams and win. I don't see what's hard about this.

I pull for underdogs. I appreciate the scrappy challenger. I just don't like it when underdogs want the reward without the work.

Ditto....

[Fresno St. Alum]

when the FCS goes to 20 what will happen if/when the GWFC gets a 6th member and could be eligible for an auto bid? take away an at-large or add 2 more spots?

[JohnStOnge]

I'm for expanding the playoff field with the purpose being to give more automatic bids to teams that win their conferences. The idea is to create a situation where as many teams in FCS as possible control their own destinty (win your conference and you're in). However, I don't see the big deal about just extending the FCS season. The College football season isn't over until February. If it overlaps the Bowl season, so what?

[Syntax Error]

The following includes the playoff fields up to 05'
http://www.i-aa.org/article.asp?articleid=75056That was when CSN did all the I-AA stuff at I-AA.org. It merged into CSN when the name change came. The updated all-time brackets are here:
http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=82976
I don't see the big deal about just extending the FCS season. The College football season isn't over until February. If it overlaps the Bowl season, so what?ESPN holds the television contract and they say no. It really blows. If they move the playoffs to a week earlier, there goes rivalry week because they all have to move back. The opening round of the playoffs against all the other big college football rivalries (probably Harvard/Yale too, etc.).

[89Hen]

Again 89, how is the committee supposed to do that mid-year? I'd be more in favor of dumping the AQ's altogether & have them pick the best 16 teams regardless of conference affiliation.
The same way they do before the season. I'm not really following your issue with this. The Committee picks the 8 every year, why would picking them mid-year be more difficult than pre-season?

[89Hen]

Okay, I did misunderstand you... slightly. Mea culpa. :o

I still disagree with you, largely because of my view that OOC games should not carry so much weight in the process. We are discussing the Division I (FCS) Football Championship. I believe that conference/league games should be the MAJOR criteria for selection, with OOC games only used in a VERY limited fashion to "break ties".
The conference games are the ones that determine the team. I'm talking conference. Once conference play begins, all the conferences will .500 against themselves. The conference games don't tell us anything about the strength of the conferences, just the strength of the teams within the conferences.

[89Hen]

It's been answered, you're not listening. Cal Poly and Coastal only play four league games, so they have seven or eight chances to get the 'big' wins needed for the playoffs. If you've got seven league games, you can get a couple of OOC wins and be told those 'power' teams sucked this year anyway, so try again next year.
So the same people that make the arguement that it's so hard to find good competition, now are saying teams like CalPoly and Coastal can find even more. xcoffeex

USD's refusal to play CalPoly doesn't sit to well with this whole arguement.

[Grabholdofyosef]

I was parodying DetroitFlyer's post and got a little testy. I don't have a lot of patience when people would rather curse the darkness than light a match. The simple solution is being ignored in favor of having something to bitch about.

Trust me, nothing would make me happier than the PFL earning a bid. A couple of posters, with nothing to gripe about any longer, would simply disintegrate into ash and never be heard from again
This got me thinking. If Dayton had beaten Morehead state would they have gotten in.

[TheValleyRaider]

This got me thinking. If Dayton had beaten Morehead state would they have gotten in.

That certainly seems plausible xnodx

[UAalum72]

So the same people that make the arguement that it's so hard to find good competition, now are saying teams like CalPoly and Coastal can find even more.
YES, because those teams have seven games to fill with good OOC opponents. You don't have control over the teams you HAVE to play in your conference


USD's refusal to play CalPoly doesn't sit to well with this whole arguement.
USD has nothing to do with an autobid for the NEC

[89Hen]

YES, because those teams have seven games to fill with good OOC opponents. You don't have control over the teams you HAVE to play in your conference
You missed the point. How can a team fill seven good spots OOC but others with only three spots can't get any.

If you want to talk NEC specifically, that's another discussion. I was talking about adding more autos in general. Several of the NEC teams HAVE done what is necessary for them to get an at-large, including Albany.