Expanded IAA playoff proposals

[aceinthehole]

What are the real roadblocks to expanding the playoffs? How can the schedule/season/playoffs be modified to allow for an expanded field?

My comments in another thread led me to this proposal and I'm looking for feedback on the challanges to expanding the playoffs.

CURRENT I-AA PLAYOFFS:
6 teams (8 auto bids/8 at-large); 1st round, quarterfinals, semi-finals, and finals.

Auto Bids: A-10/CAA, Big Sky, Gateway, MEAC, OVC, PL, So Con, Southland

Other conferences auto-bid status:
Big South - only 5 members, not eligible for auto-bid.
Great West - transitional IAA members, possible eligiblity in ??? years
MAAC - only 5 members, not eligible for auto-bid.
NEC - denied auto bid.
PFL - not requested access to playoffs
Ivy - chooses not to participate in playoffs
SWAC - due to "Classic" commitmments, not eligible for auto-bid

PROPOSAL:
1) Add 2 Play-in games (preliminary round) by expanding the playoff field by 4 teams for a total of 20 teams.

2) Add 1 auto-bid for the NEC and keep 3 new bids for at-large teams. Once the Great West meets its eligiblity requirements, then grant them an auto-bid for a final 10/10 split of auto bids and at-larges.

3) Seed all teams 1-20 based on record, SOS, etc. Seeding will ensure the 8 lowest ranked teams (auto bids or at large) play in the preliminary round for the right to meet the #1 - #4 seed respectively.

SUMMARY:
This just adds 1 week to the playoffs and ensures that only the 8 weakest teams are required to be in the PIG. This will add 3 at-large bids immediately, and it will not make the road to a NC any tougher for the top seeded teams.

Instead of #1 vs. #16; #2 vs. #15, etc. in the first round, under this proposal its would be:
(13/20) vs. #4
(14/19) vs. #3
(15/18) vs. #2
(16/17) vs. #1.

Why can't this work?

[DUPFLFan]

Did you forget about the PFL? Or are they not included.

[*****]

Where do you get the extra week? NCAA says no to playoffs during Bowl season. Why doesn't the PFL get an AQ? Only certain SWAC teams are not in the playoffs currently.

[DotCat]

I could work. However, if another week is added for these "play-in" (I hate that term) games, why not just expand the field by 16, then all team will have to play the same amount of games to get to the NC. Just a thought.

[DotCat]

NCAA says no to playoffs during Bowl season.

Gosh, I hate bowl games.

[Tod]

What are the real roadblocks to expanding the playoffs? How can the schedule/season/playoffs be modified to allow for an expanded field?

My comments in another thread led me to this proposal and I'm looking for feedback on the challanges to expanding the playoffs.

CURRENT I-AA PLAYOFFS:
6 teams (8 auto bids/8 at-large); 1st round, quarterfinals, semi-finals, and finals.

Auto Bids: A-10/CAA, Big Sky, Gateway, MEAC, OVC, PL, So Con, Southland

Other Conferences:
Big South - only 5 members, not eligible for auto-bid.
Great West - transitional IAA members, will be eligible in ??? years
MAAC - only 5 members, not eligible for auto-bid.
NEC - denied auto bid.
PFL - chooses not to participate
Ivy - chooses to not participate
SWAC -chooses not to participate

PROPOSAL:
1) Add 2 Play-in games (preliminary round) by expanding the playoff field by 4 teams for a total of 20 teams.

2) Add 1 auto-bid for the NEC and keep 3 new bids for at-large teams. Once the Great West meets its eligiblity requirements, then grant them an auto-bid for a final 10/10 split of auto bids and at-larges.

3) Seed all teams 1-20 based on record, SOS, etc. Seeding will ensure the 4 lowest ranked teams (auto bids or at large) play in the preliminary round for the right to meet the #1 and # 2 seed respectively.

SUMMARY:
This just adds 1 week to the playoffs and ensures that only the 4 weakest teams are required to be in the PIG. This will add 3 at-large bids immediately, and it will not make the road to a NC any tougher for the top seeded teams.

Instead of #1 vs. #16 and #2 vs. #15 in the first round, under this proposal its would be #1 vs. (winner #18/19) and #2 vs (winner #17/20).

Why can't this work?

Two things...

1. Does the Pioneer choose not to participate, or were they denied an auto-bid?

2. The Great West will have only five teams - ineligible for an auto-bid.

[aceinthehole]

Sorry, the PFL is in there, but becasue all media reports indicate they are not interested in participating they are not an auto-qualifier.

Ralph, that is what I know least about, where or how to add another week. Its a calender issues and I don't have a sugesstion yet. But you can't run a playoff with more than 16 teams, without adding a "round" in there somewhere. The $64K question is, how?

By expanding to just 20 teams and using PIG, it places the burden of additional rounds on the lowest seeded teams. If you say you double the field to 32 (a bad idea), then every team must play an extra game. I see the PIGs as a compromise between providing more access and not making top seeded teams play more games.

[GannonFan]

32 teams? Yuck, I don't like that option at all. Way too many teams will make the playoffs. Heck, right now, there are only 1 or 2 teams each year that feel like they were left out of the playoffs unfairly, so a jump from 18 teams feeling they should make it to 32 is a huge leap. Other divisions have byes for higher seeded teams so I don't see why that would be a problem. The playoffs will have to expand when the Great West comes on board fully (2008 I think? and assuming they get a 6th member) so I don't have a problem even extending auto bids to the NEC if they want. Expand to no more than 24 teams (really 20 is probably the best) and all is good. If the Big South can get a 6th they can get an auto-bid too. The seeding will always be contentious (it was very contentious back when all 16 were seeded) but any pairings or seedings will always be contentious. 20 sounds good to me, 24 as a last resort (although that will be too many).

There's room in the schedule now for 12 weeks of football, so I don't see how this will impact that - this just means that everybody needs to start that first week and there are no bye weeks during the season - a lot of teams don't have bye weeks in their schedules anyway so I don't see that being a big hurdle. And this way the playoffs can start and end like they do now with the week before Thanksgiving being the playin round (of 4 or 8 teams).

[Go...gate]

It would be great to give every conference champ a shot. Maybe we increase the field, start early (and stay limited to 11 games max) and end regular season by 2 weeks before Thanksgiving?

[FU97]

Math isn't a major at your school is it? If you expand by 4 to 20 teams for two play-in games you are left with 18 teams for the first round (original 16 plus the two play-in winners). If you want two play in games, you can only add two teams, not 4. Alternatively, you could make the 13-20 seeds play in a "first round".

[nmatsen]

The PFL should NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER recieve an auto-bid. NEVER NEVER NEVER!They struggle to even stay on the field with lower tier scholarship 1-AA's and get smoked by average and above average ones. Not to mention the fact that the consistently get beat by Division II and III schools! Show me a Division III school that belongs in the Gateway for example then I will show you, well, Indiana State, ok, that wasn't a good example. Lets say they do have an auto-bid and they would have gotten in last year, Drake or San Diego or Dayton or someone is in the play-offs, a top notch Illinois State or Youngstown is out? Does that make any sense whatsoever? No! If they want to get an auto bid then they need to go through the neccissary steps but not until then it should not even be speculation. If Pioneer league teams don't understand this then someone needs to set them done and help them understand reality and where they are in the food chain of college football, somewhere between NAIA Division II and Division III!

[aceinthehole]

Math isn't a major at your school is it? If you expand by 4 to 20 teams for two play-in games you are left with 18 teams for the first round (original 16 plus the two play-in winners). If you want two play in games, you can only add two teams, not 4. Alternatively, you could make the 13-20 seeds play in a "first round".


Funny, wise ass. In sketching this out in my free time at work, I did miss that. I had drafted propsals for 2 and 4 PIGs scenarios, so I used the wrong numbers.

So yes, to add 4 teams to the playoffs as I proposed, you would have 4 preliminary round (or Play-in) games with the winners set to face the top 4 seeds.

(13/20) vs. #4
(14/19) vs. #3
(15/18) vs. #2
(16/17) vs. #1

[Mr. Tiger]

Where do you get the extra week? NCAA says no to playoffs during Bowl season. Why doesn't the PFL get an AQ? Only certain SWAC teams are not in the playoffs currently.

Ralph is correct. In the SWAC, Southern, Grambling, Alabama State and the two teams headed to the SWAC championship game are ineligible for the playoffs. The only reason a SWAC school hasn't been considered for an at-large bid in recent years is because Southern, Grambling and Alabama State have been the best teams in the conference since 2000.

[FlyBoy8]

I have an idea. Why don't we expand the playoffs to 120 teams? That way everyone can get in.

:bang:

[aceinthehole]

Based on some comments and for extra clairfication, I've made some edits:

CURRENT I-AA PLAYOFF STRUCTURE:
16 teams (8 auto bids/8 at-large); 1st round, quarterfinals, semi-finals, and finals.

Auto Bids: A-10/CAA, Big Sky, Gateway, MEAC, OVC, PL, So Con, Southland

Other conferences auto-bid status:
Big South - only 5 members, not eligible for auto-bid.
Great West - transitional IAA members, possible eligiblity in ??? years
MAAC - only 5 members, not eligible for auto-bid.
NEC - denied auto bid.
PFL - has not requested access to playoffs
Ivy - chooses not to participate in playoffs
SWAC - due to "Classic" commitmments, not eligible for auto-bid

PROPOSAL:
1) Add 4 Play-in games (preliminary round) by expanding the playoff field by 4 teams for a total of 20 teams.

2) Add 1 auto-bid for the NEC and 3 new bids for at-large teams. Once the another conference meets eligiblity requirements, then grant them an auto-bid for a final 10/10 split of auto bids and at-larges.

3) Seed all teams 1-20 based on record, SOS, etc. Seeding will ensure the 8 lowest ranked teams (auto bids or at large) play in the preliminary round for the right to meet the #1 - #4 seed respectively.

SUMMARY:
This just adds 1 week to the playoffs and ensures that only the 8 weakest teams are required to be in the PIG. This will add 3 at-large bids immediately, and it will not make the road to a NC any tougher for the top seeded teams.

Instead of #1 vs. #16; #2 vs. #15, etc. in the first round, under this proposal its would be:
(13/20) vs. #4
(14/19) vs. #3
(15/18) vs. #2
(16/17) vs. #1.

[Bub]

Two things...

1. Does the Pioneer choose not to participate, or were they denied an auto-bid?

2. The Great West will have only five teams - ineligible for an auto-bid.


PFL hasn't requested an auto-bid, two reasons: 1) Our comiss. is the comiss. of the Gateway-can you say conflict and she doesn't ask, 2) why ask when you know you won't be allowed in.

I'm confident if an autobid was extended the PFL champ would show up ready to go.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I like the PIG concept. Eventually, like it or not, I-AA will need to expand the playoffs to allow other leagues to get autobids. That's the reality, and this is a way to do it.

Anyone who is moaning and groaning about math or mad about of having the NEC or PFL having an autobid really is wasting their time. If it's not the NEC, it WILL be something else - the Big South/GWFC getting 6 teams, an amicable split-up of the CAA... this WILL happen, and the 16-game model won't allow any more autobids.

If you add 1 autobid, you also have to add one more at-large team. That means you either have 18, 20, 22, or 24 teams, based on the amount of autobids you add - 1, 2, 3 or 4.

I would personally prefer to see certain leagues play 1 fewer game and play in a bowl game to qualify for the playoffs. This could include a TSN Cup featuring the NEC/PFL, an Eddie Robinson Cup featuring the MEAC/SWAC winners (hey I can dream, can't I?) If that's not possible, though, a PIG is the best option.

The one problem is that in the PFL/NEC, you need to ensure that schools have the minimum amount of games versus Division I competition. San Diego this year, for example, only played 6 D-I schools (not counting the PFL championship). If the PFL/NEC Bowl game will be for a playoff place, something needs to be done to ensure that ALL teams play a minimum of 9 D-I opponents. That acutally could be a dealbreaker.

[Bub]

The PFL should NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER recieve an auto-bid. NEVER NEVER NEVER!They struggle to even stay on the field with lower tier scholarship 1-AA's and get smoked by average and above average ones. Not to mention the fact that the consistently get beat by Division II and III schools! Show me a Division III school that belongs in the Gateway for example then I will show you, well, Indiana State, ok, that wasn't a good example. Lets say they do have an auto-bid and they would have gotten in last year, Drake or San Diego or Dayton or someone is in the play-offs, a top notch Illinois State or Youngstown is out? Does that make any sense whatsoever? No! If they want to get an auto bid then they need to go through the neccissary steps but not until then it should not even be speculation. If Pioneer league teams don't understand this then someone needs to set them done and help them understand reality and where they are in the food chain of college football, somewhere between NAIA Division II and Division III!


Nice to see you've you expanded your "love" beyond the Hawkeyes! xsmoochx

[colgate13]

I like the PIG concept. Eventually, like it or not, I-AA will need to expand the playoffs to allow other leagues to get autobids. That's the reality, and this is a way to do it.

Actually, there is the 'nuclear' option: no autobids.

Don't scoff. I think it would have the potential to happen if the situation with autobids became unmanagable and there was no desire to have another week of playoffs.

:twocents:

[DUPFLFan]

Thanks - I'll pass this on to the Drake players for their bulletin board.

[bluehenbillk]

2 things:

1- If the NCAA votes to expand the season to 12 regular season games I can't support anything more than a 16-team playoff.

2- What's up with the love for the NEC getting an auto-bid?

[henfan]

If I-AA adds the 12th game to the regular season, forget about expanding the playoff field. There would likely be little support for it among the AFCA and I-AA CEOs. The PIG option is not attractive because it would provide those schools drawing a bye an unfair competitive advantage in the form of an off week, not to mention lost revenue on first round home games from the top seeded teams!

At some point, sheer numbers may make it necessary to simply do away with all auto-bids and allow the NCAA's Playoff Selection Committee to open up the tournament to the 16 most qualified teams, regardless of conference affiliation. IMO, the tournament should be about awarding competitiveness throughout the regular season, not about doling out feel good bouquets because you happen to have the best record in a marginal conference.

[colgate13]

IMO, the tournament should be about awarding competitiveness throughout the regular season, not about doling out feel good bouquets because you happen to have the best record in a marginal conference.

But that is counter to how the rest of the NCAA tourneys work AND 'best' is often a subjective decision. Autobids ensure that schools from all walks of life are represented and there have been upsets to show that it was warranted. Fordham over Northeastern in 2002 comes to mind...

[henfan]

But that is counter to how the rest of the NCAA tourneys work AND 'best' is often a subjective decision. Autobids ensure that schools from all walks of life are represented and there have been upsets to show that it was warranted. Fordham over Northeastern in 2002 comes to mind...

The NCAA may award auto-bids for most of its tournaments, but D-I bylaws do not require that they do so. In fact, the bylaws are written to assure at-large bids are protected, not the other way around. That's an important point of distinction to note when implying that auto-bids hold any sort of sanctity. They simply don't.

To a degree, yes, of course 'best' may sometimes be subjective, but not that subjective. Short of having a 120 team round robin tournament, you'll never, ever find the perfect solution to selecting teams. Chances are, you'll always have a team or two feeling slighted.

And of course there will be upsets in a single elimination tournament when one team is granted- whether deserving or not- equal opportunity. I'd rather the NCAA reward teams for comparative performance during the regular season based on pre-determined criteria, rather than try to make every conference feel good. But, hey, I'm probably in the minority on this one.

[blur2005]

Let's just wait on this for a few more years, and when the CAA gets their all-sports members (if GM, ODU, and Georgia State were to ALL add football, or just a couple of them), the CAA will HAVE to split, creating the need for new northern conference that would likely or at least plausibly be the new America East football conference, thus creating a need for another autobid. Some of this was discussed in the George Mason thread recently.

[DTSpider]

In all honesty, how many teams really both deserve the chance and have the team to win it all? Maybe 6 or 8 in a given year. Why expand the playoffs from 16? When was the last time a legitimate national contender didn't make the playoffs (sorry JMU fans but 2005 doesn't count)?

Let's keep it at 16 and make teams really earn the right to the playoffs. Otherwise it's like bowl season in which every 6 win-team keeps playing. Playoffs are for the best of the best. Maybe some conferences lose their auto-bid in the future. Once again, just because you are eligible doesn't mean you are entitled.

In fact, if we could, I'd rather have one extra regular season game and one less week of the playoffs. That gives everyone an extra game and then you have to pick the 8 best teams for the playoffs. You have a much better picture after 12 regular season games than 10 (assuming to go to 32 team playoff you have only 10 regular season games). Then with travel costs and other playoff problems it's just not as interesting. Anyone ever figure out that part of the first round playoff attendance dip is often the two teams have nothing in come and no history. You can call it what you want, but JMU- Cal Poly isn't as exciting for either fan base compared to JMU - W&M.

[skinny_uncle]

I would like to point out that you could have more autobids without adding teams. It would just reduce the number of at-larges. We would just continue to seed the top 4 as we do now. An autobid is not the same as a seed.

[blukeys]

In all honesty, how many teams really both deserve the chance and have the team to win it all? Maybe 6 or 8 in a given year. Why expand the playoffs from 16? When was the last time a legitimate national contender didn't make the playoffs (sorry JMU fans but 2005 doesn't count)?

Let's keep it at 16 and make teams really earn the right to the playoffs. Otherwise it's like bowl season in which every 6 win-team keeps playing. Playoffs are for the best of the best. Maybe some conferences lose their auto-bid in the future. Once again, just because you are eligible doesn't mean you are entitled.



It seems we revisit this issue about 3 times a year. The last time this came up was when the NEC Presidents said that the NEC deserved an auto bid. Of course, they ignored the Big South and Great West who on the basis of performance were much more deserving.

The purpose of a playoff system is to determine a national champion on the field. The selection committee picks the teams most likely to win the NC. I would really would like to see someone advance the argument that a Mid Major could beat:

1. ASU - 2005
2. JMU - 2004
3. Delaware - 2003
4. WKU - 2002
5. Montana -2001
6. GSU - 2000

Colgate 13 and 89 Hen totally demolished the Mid Major Myth 8 months ago in another thread. Their analysis stated that the only Mid Major worthy of consideration of a playoff slot was Duquesne 2002. Why do we :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse ??? every 5 months?

Albany is one program that is working hard to schedule tough competition and move up. But, in the end do they have the team that could win a NC with 30 equivalencies???

Why should Albany take the place of YSU or a half dozen other programs?


In the end the argument for expansion is just an attempt to mollify the loudest complainers who are not in the playoffs but for their own reasons believe they belong.

If we want to expand the playoffs why not increase the at-large slots?

Conference Champs in '05 only went 4-4 in the FIRST ROUND!!!! Shouldn't a conference Champ do better than .500 if they are the cream of the crop?

I see no reason for giving an auto bid to another one and done conference whether we expand the playoffs or not.

[Purple Knight]

Nix the twelth game, eliminate the bye weeks and go with the 20 team field. The 1 thru 12 seeds will get a week off while the 13rh thru 20th seeds are having 4 more great I-AA games on TV.

[Sly Fox]

Reading this thread I get the feeling you all love the BCS. The comparisons between the elitism by certain posters here is similar to the attitude of the BCS elite.

To take it a step further some of you that are always super-protective of letting "subpar" teams into your league want to turn around and punish these same schools for not playing against the calibre of the very league you excluded them from. That sounds like the same things I hear from the SEC/ACC/Big Ten honks.

Perhaps wearing Michigan headgear is starting to seap into certain posters' brains.

[Proud Griz Man]

I think the I-AA playoffs should include 16 teams, with only tweaks being seeding for top eight and move the chipper back to Saturday. :hurray:

[blukeys]

Reading this thread I get the feeling you all love the BCS. The comparisons between the elitism by certain posters here is similar to the attitude of the BCS elite.

To take it a step further some of you that are always super-protective of letting "subpar" teams into your league want to turn around and punich these schools for not playing against the calibre of the same league you excluded them from. That sounds like the same things I hear from the SEC/ACC/Big Ten honks.


Let's hear your proposal. The Percentage or I-AA teams vis a vis those in the playoffs is already better than d-2 or 3. By the Way there are many d-3 conferneces who get no auto bid.

As I have stated here I believe the Big South has a great argument for an auto bid. Their argument is every bit as good as the Meac's. Why doesn't the Big South work the system instead of whining?

[Purple Knight]

Reading this thread I get the feeling you all love the BCS. The comparisons between the elitism by certain posters here is similar to the attitude of the BCS elite.

To take it a step further some of you that are always super-protective of letting "subpar" teams into your league want to turn around and punish these same schools for not playing against the calibre of the very league you excluded them from. That sounds like the same things I hear from the SEC/ACC/Big Ten honks.

Perhaps wearing Michigan headgear is starting to seap into certain posters' brains.

Are you using 'honk' as a racial slur? Why am I really surprised,...NOT!

[aceinthehole]

It seems we revisit this issue about 3 times a year. The last time this came up was when the NEC Presidents said that the NEC deserved an auto bid. Of course, they ignored the Big South and Great West who on the basis of performance were much more deserving.

The purpose of a playoff system is to determine a national champion on the field. The selection committee picks the teams most likely to win the NC. I would really would like to see someone advance the argument that a Mid Major could beat:

1. ASU - 2005
2. JMU - 2004
3. Delaware - 2003
4. WKU - 2002
5. Montana -2001
6. GSU - 2000

Colgate 13 and 89 Hen totally demolished the Mid Major Myth 8 months ago in another thread. Their analysis stated that the only Mid Major worthy of consideration of a playoff slot was Duquesne 2002. Why do we :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse ??? every 5 months?

Albany is one program that is working hard to schedule tough competition and move up. But, in the end do they have the team that could win a NC with 30 equivalencies???

Why should Albany take the place of YSU or a half dozen other programs?


In the end the argument for expansion is just an attempt to mollify the loudest complainers who are not in the playoffs but for their own reasons believe they belong.

If we want to expand the playoffs why not increase the at-large slots?

Conference Champs in '05 only went 4-4 in the FIRST ROUND!!!! Shouldn't a conference Champ do better than .500 if they are the cream of the crop?

I see no reason for giving an auto bid to another one and done conference whether we expand the playoffs or not.

Once again, we are off the topic of fairness and equity for an NCAA post season tourney. The purpose of this and all NCAA tourneys is to provide equal accces to conference champs AND reward the performance of top programs to crown a national champion. You can do both! Don't be so eliteist.

If you applied your logic to basketball then March Madness would only include teams from the top 6 conferences. Even mid-majors such as the MVC who get multiple bids, know they have not shot at a NC. Should UNI be denied a at-large to the NCAA basketball tourney becasue they have no shot to win the National Championship? I mean why does Delaware even field a basketball team if they can't win the National Championship? What do the Blue Hens look forward to if it can't earn a bid to the "Big Dance?" Post season apperances should be a reward for regular season conference champs!

There was a lot of good points made for excluding the NEC from at at-large spots, but we need to open our minds a little and explore other options. And BTW - we all agree that the Big South and GWC are ineligable for an auto-bid becasue they have just 5 members, so the NEC doesn't care how "good" or "deserving" they are. That have not met the NCAA stated criteria and the NEC has!

[DTSpider]

A big difference is that in basketball you can play 2 games a week pretty easily. Not possible in football.

[Sly Fox]

Who is whining? I was just making an observation. I just find it peculiar that some of the same folks on here who rail on what a joke I-A football has become are suggesting using the same rationale at the I-AA level. Surely I am not alone in that perspective.

I am not sure what the ultimate answer is. I do believe that any system should allow for the possibility of every I-AA school to play their season with the possibility of being part of postseason play. That's part of what makes the basketball tourney so awesome. If there can be a way to make that happen in football it should be the ultimate goal.

As for my reference to conference honks somehow being a racial reference, say what? Its a reference to the blowhards that run the BCS landscape. How you can somehow infer I made any racial slur is beyond me. And what is that supposed to mean about not being surprised?

[blukeys]

Once again, we are off the topic of fairness and equity for an NCAA post season tourney. The purpose of this and all NCAA tourneys is to provide equal accces to conference champs AND reward the performance of top programs to crown a national champion. You can do both! Don't be so eliteist.

If you applied your logic to basketball then March Madness would only include teams from the top 6 conferences. Even mid-majors such as the MVC who get multiple bids, know they have not shot at a NC. Should UNI be denied a at-large to the NCAA basketball tourney becasue they have no shot to win the National Championship? I mean why does Delaware even field a basketball team if they can't win the National Championship? What do the Blue Hens look forward to if it can't earn a bid to the "Big Dance?" Post season apperances should be a reward for regular season conference champs!

There was a lot of good points made for excluding the NEC from at at-large spots, but we need to open our minds a little and explore other options. And BTW - we all agree that the Big South and GWC are ineligable for an auto-bid becasue they have just 5 members, so the NEC doesn't care how "good" or "deserving" they are. That have not met the NCAA stated criteria and the NEC has!


1. read my quote I said the Big South and GWC were better based on performance which I believe is the true measure of competitiveness not some arbitrary minimum that includes lame teams that can't beat decent d-2 teams.

2. If you want to sue based on equity (which no one ever defines unless they are some socialist wanting to spread the wealth) then put your case in the Delaware Court of Chancery the premier equity Court in the nation. Hire Ivy Talk I'm sure you will get a fair hearing. Other than that quit your whining.

3. While UNI has as legitimate a chance to win the NC in baskeball as Villanova did in 1985, Delaware has no chance because of a sucky coach. Delaware should not even be considered for a BBall slot. I would argue that Nova in '85 was one of the best 64 teams in the nation. PLEASE!!!!!! make your case that any mid major was one of the best 16 teams in the nation from 2000 to 2005. This is a question in my original post you have conveniently forgotten to mention. You can start with Duquesne of 2002. They have already been discredited but go ahead make your case since you neglected to do so already.

Personally I do care how good the GWFC and Big South champs are. I would rather see reps from those 2 conferences assuming they are deserving than a watered Down NEC rep who will be another MEAC or OVC team.

You appeal to the NCAA rules on one hand and then damn them with another. YOU can't have it both ways. Either live with the current NCAA rules or not condemn the GWFC and the Big South for not achieving them. Your approach is pure hypocrisy.

[UAalum72]

I would really would like to see someone advance the argument that a Mid Major could beat:

1. ASU - 2005
2. JMU - 2004
3. Delaware - 2003
4. WKU - 2002
5. Montana -2001
6. GSU - 2000
...

I see no reason for giving an auto bid to another one and done conference whether we expand the playoffs or not.
By a one and done conference are you referring to the MEAC and the OVC?

I believe the NEC has the same number of playoff wins against those six teams as the two automatic-bid conferences.

You should be screaming to drop those two leagues. That would open up two more at-large bids for the A-10.

And you'd eliminate another possible way that Delaware might be forced to play Delaware State.

[blukeys]

Who is whining? I was just making an observation. I just find it peculiar that some of the same folks on here who rail on what a joke I-A football has become are suggesting using the same rationale at the I-AA level. Surely I am not alone in that perspective.

I am not sure what the ultimate answer is. I do believe that any system should allow for the possibility of every I-AA school to play their season with the possibility of being part of postseason play. That's part of what makes the basketball tourney so awesome. If there can be a way to make that happen in football it should be the ultimate goal.

As for my reference to conference honks somehow being a racial reference, say what? Its a reference to the blowhards that run the BCS landscape. How you can somehow infer I made any racial slur is beyond me. And what is that supposed to mean about not being surprised?

One thing I have learned is that not everyone is aware of certain racial putdowns and stereotypes that have been well known over the years by old timers.

The term "honky" is a well known put down of whites by blacks going back 70+ years. I am assuming you are unaware of this as I assumed another poster was unaware of the Mad Dog 40, and pork chop references were racial putdowns aimed at blacks.

We can go on from here with the non-auto bid conferences attacking the auto bid conferences for conspiracy, elitism, sexism, homophobia, the fall of Rome, and the corruption in building the TransContinental Railroad (Hell on wheels!!!).

[blukeys]

By a one and done conference are you referring to the MEAC and the OVC?

I believe the NEC has the same number of playoff wins against those six teams as the two automatic-bid conferences.

You should be screaming to drop those two leagues. That would open up two more at-large bids for the A-10.
And you'd eliminate another possible way that Delaware might be forced to play Delaware State.


DUUHHHHH! Yes I am saying that the NEC has a good case for getting an auto bid over the the MEAC and the OVC and that is the avenue they can pursue. I have stated this In 2 threads in the last few days and have said so about a half dozen times in the last year. I am not that difficult to read as I have already said this repeatedly for the last 8 months. I know for some this must have been cleverly hidden in my posts but, trust me this is what I think!!!! Based on CCSU's win over Colgate they can also make the case over the PL this year. Go for it.

As for opening another 2 slots for the A-10 you really need to read the NCAA rules. The Current rules call for 8 conference champions and 8 at large teams. Eliminating the MEAC and OVC would not get additional at large's for the A-10 or anyone else under current rules. Please read the rules first before advancing A-10 conspiracy theories.

As for UD - DelState, We thought Albany in 2006 was a more worthy and competitive opponent. Do you disagree?????

[aceinthehole]

1. read my quote I said the Big South and GWC were better based on performance which I believe is the true measure of competitiveness not some arbitrary minimum that includes lame teams that can't beat decent d-2 teams.

2. If you want to sue based on equity (which no one ever defines unless they are some socialist wanting to spread the wealth) then put your case in the Delaware Court of Chancery the premier equity Court in the nation. Hire Ivy Talk I'm sure you will get a fair hearing. Other than that quit your whining.

3. While UNI has as legitimate a chance to win the NC in baskeball as Villanova did in 1985, Delaware has no chance because of a sucky coach. Delaware should not even be considered for a BBall slot. I would argue that Nova in '85 was one of the best 64 teams in the nation. PLEASE!!!!!! make your case that any mid major was one of the best 16 teams in the nation from 2000 to 2005. This is a question in my original post you have conveniently forgotten to mention. You can start with Duquesne of 2002. They have already been discredited but go ahead make your case since you neglected to do so already.

Personally I do care how good the GWFC and Big South champs are. I would rather see reps from those 2 conferences assuming they are deserving than a watered Down NEC rep who will be another MEAC or OVC team.

You appeal to the NCAA rules on one hand and then damn them with another. YOU can't have it both ways. Either live with the current NCAA rules or not condemn the GWFC and the Big South for not achieving them. Your approach is pure hypocrisy.


1. Please cite where in the NCAA manual, regulation, statues, or other docs they state "competativeness" is a criteria for an auto bid. That factor only relates at at-large selction, where I agree the NEC teams have not qualified.

2. I do not suggest or support legal means of redress, but rather a cooperative approach to revise the current structure for the benefit and equity of all participants.

3. We all know UNI can win some games, but realisticly they have no shot at winning the actual NC. Villanova is a member of the big 6 conferences - your argument doesn't apply. Furthermore, the point is any auto-bid entry outside of the big 6 have almost no chance of winning the NC. Even if UNI were capable of winning the NC, they would make the tourney as an at-large. I am arguing for auto-bid access, not at-large qualifications.

4. Good for you and good for the GWC and Big South. When they add a member and meet the stated NCAA criteria I too would support an auto-bid for them both.

5. Where is my contridiction with the NCAA rules? The NEC (and its members) has done what is asked by the NCAA and the GWC and BS have not. I am simply suggesting the NCAA live up to its own word. Please state where the NCAA has its case against the NEC?

I'm glad at least a few others see the hyporicy of some posters on this board. Many here simply apply the I-A BCS attitude to the I-AA playoffs. Its a shame.

[aceinthehole]

DUUHHHHH! Yes I am saying that the NEC has a good case for getting an auto bid over the the MEAC and the OVC and that is the avenue they can pursue.

I think UA was being sarcastic, but if not, I disagree with you both.

The NEC deserves an auto-bid in addition to the MEAC and OVC, not in place of another conference.

If we took their bid, don't they have the same argument for inclusion? Its a catch 22. We need to expand the tourney and the popularity of IAA football, not hold on to "old guard" ways.

Let's face it the NEC isn't getting someone else's established spot in the playoffs. No one would support that and 1 win over Colgate doesn't carry that much weight.

[nmatsen]

Thanks - I'll pass this on to the Drake players for their bulletin board.

Yeah, i'm sure it will really jack them up for the game, maybe they could try to keep us under 50 this year in the first 3 quarters? Just accept the fact that this is a I-AA football board, not a board for schools who can't beat division III teams. Can anyone remember losing to a division III team on this board? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Oh, just teams from the PFL? Thats right!

[blukeys]

1. Please cite where in the NCAA manual, regulation, statues, or other docs they state "competativeness" is a criteria for an auto bid. That factor only relates at at-large selction, where I agree the NEC teams have not qualified.
4. Good for you and good for the GWC and Big South. When they add a member and meet the stated NCAA criteria I too would support an auto-bid for them both.

5. Where is my contridiction with the NCAA rules? The NEC (and its members) has done what is asked by the NCAA and the GWC and BS have not. I am simply suggesting the NCAA live up to its own word. Please state where the NCAA has its case against the NEC?

I'm glad at least a few others see the hyporicy of some posters on this board. Many here simply apply the I-A BCS attitude to the I-AA playoffs. Its a shame.


1. This is hilarious we are supposed to assume that the NCAA is not running a playoff for the purpose of determining the best team in I-AA and yet you insist on "Please cite where in the NCAA manual, regulation, statues, or other docs they state "competativeness" is a criteria for an auto bid. That factor only relates at at-large selction, where I agree the NEC teams have not qualified. (Your own misspelling on "competativeness" )

YOU DON'T BELIEVE THE COMPETIVENESS OF A CONFERENCE SHOULD BE A FACTOR FOR AN AUTO BID?

GET A LIFE!!!

Let's let in any old conference. Hey what is to stop the Pa. Conference from moving up from D-2. Those teams can support scollies in BBall and baseball.


Competiveness is what it is all about. So far You have not answered a single question from me. So I will pose just one more. Name for me the Mid-Major team that should replace a 2005 playoff team and what would their chances be to win a NC. Please make your case.

Of course the NCAA looks at competitiveness (this is the correct way to spell the word) that is why they evaluate which conferences get the auto bid every year. If the NEC looks more competitive and in my view they look that way every year, then they can make their case. Your approach is to say, I am excluded but that is unfair. waa waa waa waa waa waa waa waa
Grow up!


5. Your Contradiction (the correct way to spell the word) with rules is that you cite them on one hand to include your conference and then ignore the application of the very same rules by the Playoff Selection Committee so as to claim victim status.

Make up your mind. If the NCAA is a bunch of jerks aimed at denying you your time in the playoffs then you should be willing to compete with the Big South and GWFC unless you are AFRAID they are actually better than you

The very same NCAA rules that excludes your conference from auto bid status (the decision of the playoff comittee) also has a rule that excludes the Big South. You are all to happy to use a NCAA rule against the Big South yet you whine like stuck pigs when the NCAA rules against you. What Hypocrisy!! I suggest the NCAA lower their conference limit to 5 teams so that the Big South can compete against the NEC. How do you think you would to then???? Do you really think you guys could beat Coastal Carolina???? or Charleston Southern???

Get over yourself. So far in the last year the biggest whiners in this argument has been the NEC. After that there are some Coastal fans who deserve 2nd place. Coastal however really stepped it up with scheduling and their whiners have pretty much left the board.

[Mr. Tiger]

No current automatic bid should be taken away from any conference. People forget the OVC and MEAC have had past success in the playoffs. Eastern Kentucky and Florida A&M are past Division I-AA champions. I believe the 16-team playoffs is fine. All conferences with at least seven members eligible for the playoffs should receive an automatic bid. Just take away an at-large. Simply as that. But I can't support the Big South who had one of their best teams lose to Presbyterian 42-0 getting an automatic bid over the OVC or MEAC. That just doesn't make sense to me.

[Sly Fox]

The term "honky" is a well known put down of whites by blacks going back 70+ years. I am assuming you are unaware of this as I assumed another poster was unaware of the Mad Dog 40, and pork chop references were racial putdowns aimed at blacks.

I am not a kid. I grew up hearing the expression honky. But that is quite a stretch from the present day expression 'honks' which has a completely different meaning. Frankly, as caucasian dude I have never had a problem with honky or gringo ... they're actually pretty funny.


We can go on from here with the non-auto bid conferences attacking the auto bid conferences for conspiracy, elitism, sexism, homophobia, the fall of Rome, and the corruption in building the TransContinental Railroad (Hell on wheels!!!).

Actually my premise was not autobid vs. non-autobid ... it was about more at-larges for the power conferences as opposed to invites for non-autos under an expanded playoff system being proposed. I feel the I-AAAs should get a shot before we let in 3rd or 4th place schools (even if they are better than the Pioneer Champion or whoever). But that's JMHO.

[blukeys]

I think UA was being sarcastic, but if not, I disagree with you both.

The NEC deserves an auto-bid in addition to the MEAC and OVC, not in place of another conference.

If we took their bid, don't they have the same argument for inclusion? Its a catch 22. We need to expand the tourney and the popularity of IAA football, not hold on to "old guard" ways.

Let's face it the NEC isn't getting someone else's established spot in the playoffs. No one would support that and 1 win over Colgate doesn't carry that much weight.


Where in the NCAA rules did any conference get perpetual rights to an auto bid? Your thinking suggests that things never change. If a new conference proves in the regular season and the playoffs that they are more deserving of a playoff slot do we deny them the opportunity until the NCAA decides it is time to expand???

Neither the OVC nor the MEAC have won a playoff game in the 21st century. Your argument is totally ridiculous. Of course a more deserving conference should get an auto bid over an undeserving one. You simply want to change the subject because all of the NEC people refuse to make the case that the NEC deserves an auto bid more than the OVC and MEAC. Why else do you refuse to state your case after challenges I have made in 4 different posts to state why the NEC deserves an auto bid over the winless OVC and MEAC?

One can only assume that your case is so weak you can't make it!!

[FlyBoy8]

While we're talking autobids, I think Savannah State should get one. Hey, if "access" to the playoffs really means "has an autobid," well SSU doesn't have access to the playoffs either.

xcoffeex

[blukeys]

I am not a kid. I grew up hearing the expression honky. But that is quite a stretch from the present day expression 'honks' which has a completely different meaning. Frankly, as caucasian dude I have never had a problem with honky or gringo ... they're actually pretty funny.



Actually my premise was not autobid vs. non-autobid ... it was about more at-larges for the power conferences as opposed to invites for non-autos under an expanded playoff system being proposed. I feel the I-AAAs should get a shot before we let in 3rd or 4th place schools (even if they are better than the Pioneer Champion or whoever). But that's JMHO.


Just checking Foxy, I had an African American Female ask me today if it was a bad thing to call a white person a red neck. She had heard the term and seen a guy with an upper body sunburn and had used the term. She got a negative response and did not know why. I explained the historic use of the term including the assumption that the individual was prejudiced. She replied "He's not like that!!!" and went over and apologised. A real group hug moment.

I assume nothing nowdays. So much of what I grew up with is Ancient History.

[UAalum72]

Where in the NCAA rules did any conference get perpetual rights to an auto bid? Your thinking suggests that things never change.
No, the events of the last half-dozen years suggests that. Really, how much LESS could the MEAC and OVC do in the playoffs that would rate them 'not competitive'?


Neither the OVC nor the MEAC have won a playoff game in the 21st century.
Weren't there fewer than eight auto-bids before the Patriot League got the last one? or was the field smaller then?

I don't insist the NEC get a bid over the OVC and MEAC, but they could rotate all leagues that haven't won a playoff game for five years until one of them won a game.

I'd actually prefer no autobids to bids for just some of the leagues. That at least would put all of I-AA on the same footing for playoff selection

[UAalum72]

While we're talking autobids, I think Savannah State should get one. Hey, if "access" to the playoffs really means "has an autobid," well SSU doesn't have access to the playoffs either.

xcoffeex
I thought SSU was joining the MEAC with Winston-Salem and NC Central this year. Therefore they have access. We'll see what that does to the MEAC's GPI this year.

[Mr. Tiger]

I thought SSU was joining the MEAC with Winston-Salem and NC Central this year. Therefore they have access. We'll see what that does to the MEAC's GPI this year.

SSU is not joining the MEAC this year. The MEAC isn't too excited about taking in a team that is not competitive.

[aceinthehole]

1. This is hilarious we are supposed to assume that the NCAA is not running a playoff for the purpose of determining the best team in I-AA and yet you insist on "Please cite where in the NCAA manual, regulation, statues, or other docs they state "competativeness" is a criteria for an auto bid. That factor only relates at at-large selction, where I agree the NEC teams have not qualified. (Your own misspelling on "competativeness" )

YOU DON'T BELIEVE THE COMPETIVENESS OF A CONFERENCE SHOULD BE A FACTOR FOR AN AUTO BID?

GET A LIFE!!!

Let's let in any old conference. Hey what is to stop the Pa. Conference from moving up from D-2. Those teams can support scollies in BBall and baseball.


Competiveness is what it is all about. So far You have not answered a single question from me. So I will pose just one more. Name for me the Mid-Major team that should replace a 2005 playoff team and what would their chances be to win a NC. Please make your case.

Of course the NCAA looks at competitiveness (this is the correct way to spell the word) that is why they evaluate which conferences get the auto bid every year. If the NEC looks more competitive and in my view they look that way every year, then they can make their case. Your approach is to say, I am excluded but that is unfair. waa waa waa waa waa waa waa waa
Grow up!


5. Your Contradiction (the correct way to spell the word) with rules is that you cite them on one hand to include your conference and then ignore the application of the very same rules by the Playoff Selection Committee so as to claim victim status.

Make up your mind. If the NCAA is a bunch of jerks aimed at denying you your time in the playoffs then you should be willing to compete with the Big South and GWFC unless you are AFRAID they are actually better than you

The very same NCAA rules that excludes your conference from auto bid status (the decision of the playoff comittee) also has a rule that excludes the Big South. You are all to happy to use a NCAA rule against the Big South yet you whine like stuck pigs when the NCAA rules against you. What Hypocrisy!! I suggest the NCAA lower their conference limit to 5 teams so that the Big South can compete against the NEC. How do you think you would to then???? Do you really think you guys could beat Coastal Carolina???? or Charleston Southern???

Get over yourself. So far in the last year the biggest whiners in this argument has been the NEC. After that there are some Coastal fans who deserve 2nd place. Coastal however really stepped it up with scheduling and their whiners have pretty much left the board.

I'll answer any question you have, but all I ask is for you to clarify your statements and questions - your logic isn't clear to me. Also, I'm sorry if a few typos upset you, but let's not loose sight of the discussion at hand.

My basic understanding of your point is:
1) You have some self-defined measure of how an I-AA football team (and conference) should operate.
2) You have some unclear level of minimum "investment" you require of an I-AA football program.
3) You have a fairly certain, yet indescribable measure of success that teams and conferences must achieve to be worthy of an auto bid.
4) You refuse to follow the concept of NCAA policy for conference standards and instead, support some other logic like the “OVC hasn’t won a playoff game so they should lose their spot.”
5) You support NEC inclusion, but someone else has got to go.

Yes, I think:

A) The NCAA guidelines for post-season tourneys in other sports should apply in principle to I-AA football. Of course the NCAA is having a tourney to crown a national champion, but it is ALSO rewarding post season play to smaller conference champs. If you do not agree with this point, it is useless to go forward – we can just agree to disagree. Auto-bid access to I-AA football should have same basic standards as all other team sports.

B) Yes, basketball is generally comparable regardless of the length of the game, season, or schedule. Bottom line, if the NCAA thinks its fair that the SWAC champ earns a ticket to the "Big Dance," then yes, the NEC should have an auto-bid to the I-AA playoffs. What is the purpose of auto-bids in any sport if only a few “elite” teams have a shot a participating?

C) NEC teams are improving and have proved they can compete and win against many teams outside of the “mid-major” classification. I have no doubt the NEC would win some games vs. Big South, OVC, MEAC, and other opponents. However, the NEC is years away from winning against the “elite” and NC contenders in I-AA football.

D) Yes I do think things should change! I do not think we must be stuck with the current 16-team format. Yes, I do think the OVC and MEAC do have rights to a perpetual spot under the current NCAA conference qualifications.

E) This argument is not about a replacing any existing teams in the tourney, but ADDING teams to expand the field. I can’t and won’t make a case that a NEC was more deserving over another team based on their performance. For the 100 time, the basis for the NEC’s inclusion is simply because that are a qualified conference. The NCAA set the standards to be recognized as a conference, and the NEC has met it.

F) I have no problem with the GWC and BS if they added teams to get a bid. They would be merely complying with the requirements set forth by the NCAA. By applying the existing standards to leave out these 2 conferences is following the rules, however there is no basis that has been stated to deny an auto-bid to the NEC. What are the NCAA standards that the NEC is not in compliance with?

This is an intersting topic, and I can slowly see some people comming around to exploring options to expand the tourney. But for all those who still haven't been convinced , what must the NEC do earn an auto-bid, not an at-large?

[kardplayer]

By the Way there are many d-3 conferneces who get no auto bid.

I don't know that this is accurate. In the 2005 playoffs, 25 of the 27 conference champs were amongst the 32 playoff teams.

One conference that didn't make the playoffs was the UAA conference, which only has 4 teams.

The other is the New England Small College Athletic Conference. Based on the academic caliber of the schools, the conference's mission statement, and the fact that the champ hasn't played in the playoffs in the past few years, I'm guessing may be pulling an Ivy and keeping their teams out.

Nonetheless, assuming the NESCAC school was excluded, they get 25 of 27 conferences represented, while we had 9 of 13 (NEC, PFL, MAAC, and Big South as the 4 with no bids).

I think bringing up the D3 situation only weakens your argument.

[*****]

...they get 25 of 27 conferences represented, while we had 9 of 13 (NEC, PFL, MAAC, and Big South as the 4 with no bids)...Since MAAC, GWFC and Big South aren't technically I-AA conferences only the NEC and Ivy didn't play postseason in 2005. SWAC and PFL had their own champ games and we know about the Ivy declining postseason. Now that the PFL and NEC will have their own champ game all bases are covered.

[DUPFLFan]

By the way - didn't UNI "graduate" many of those imports from other programs that you had?

How many more are you importing this year?

[DUPFLFan]

Ralph - I am not sure that the NEC/PFL Game is set - many issues remain (what site - travel and expenses)...

Besides - I hope having this game doesn't mean that further post season opportunities are not available...

[OL FU]

This is an intersting topic, and I can slowly see some people comming around to exploring options to expand the tourney. But for all those who still haven't been convinced , what must the NEC do earn an auto-bid, not an at-large?

Convince God to slow down the sun (whoops I need an astronomy lesson :nod: ) and add three more weeks to the autumn season. :nod: :D

Sorry, I know that was not necesary :rolleyes:

[*****]

Ralph - I am not sure that the NEC/PFL Game is set - many issues remain (what site - travel and expenses)...

Besides - I hope having this game doesn't mean that further post season opportunities are not available...I read this to mean it was pretty much a done deal:
===
"I'm confident the game will take place and give our student athletes a meaningful postseason opportunity," said Ron Ratner, interim commissioner of the NEC.

"I don't think anything we talked about represented anything that would be a deal breaker," Viverito [commissioner of the Pioneer Football League] said.
===

I would hope that both conferences would agree to replace any team in the game if they get selected by the playoff committee.

[DUPFLFan]

I would hope that both conferences would agree to replace any team in the game if they get selected by the playoff committee.

I would hope that the NCAA would use this as a play in game for a bid...

[henfan]

I do believe that any system should allow for the possibility of every I-AA school to play their season with the possibility of being part of postseason play.

Seems we agree on this.

I suppose, then, you'd have no issue with my plan that would ensure equal access to the championship series for every team classified as I-AA. My plan involves no shortening of the regular season, no lengthening of the post season, no changes to how teams currently determine their conference champions, no disruption of student-athletes academic schedules, no change in holiday plans of the players, coaches, bands, cheerleaders, support staff, administrators, boosters, etc. My plan would also reward the teams based on comparative regular season performance.

Anyone who is looking out for the best interests of the student-athletes, adheres to the principles of equal access and fairness, and believes that the point of the post-season should be to reward regular season success could not possibly be against my plan to eliminate all automatic playoff bids. Automatic bids are not guaranteed by NCAA D-I Bylaws anyway. 16 at-large teams would still be selected by an independent committee based on comparative regular season performance, using metrics like record in and out of conference, strength of schedule, power rating, etc. Teams with the best records and strongest schedules would prevail come selection time.

Still sound good to the equal access advocates? :eyebrow:

[Dane96]

Seems we agree on this.

I suppose, then, you'd have no issue with my plan that would ensure equal access to the championship series for every team classified as I-AA. My plan involves no shortening of the regular season, no lengthening of the post season, no changes to how teams currently determine their conference champions, no disruption of student-athletes academic schedules, no change in holiday plans of the players, coaches, bands, cheerleaders, support staff, administrators, boosters, etc. My plan would also reward the teams based on comparative regular season performance.

Anyone who is looking out for the best interests of the student-athletes, adheres to the principles of equal access and fairness, and believes that the point of the post-season should be to reward regular season success could not possibly be against my plan to eliminate all automatic playoff bids. Automatic bids are not guaranteed by NCAA D-I Bylaws anyway. 16 at-large teams would still be selected by an independent committee based on comparative regular season performance, using metrics like record in and out of conference, strength of schedule, power rating, etc. Teams with the best records and strongest schedules would prevail come selection time.

Still sound good to the equal access advocates? :eyebrow:

Sure, great plan, sounds like the seeding of the BCS. :nono:
We have a great system (the playoffs) however it needs to be tweaked because the amount of leagues and teams at the IAA level have changed the landscape. This isnt about who is deserving, this is about adding a week to the playoffs. And cry me a river about disturbing schedules with athletes: These guys miss more time, more tests, etc in all sports (including hoops).

[nmatsen]

This is so crazy, listen to yourselves talk. If your team didn't make the play-offs or was not eligible, the play-offs need changed. I don't see anone on here bitc*ing from App State, UNI, N.H., you get my point. If you don't like sitting at home, win! Plain and simple. Youngstown State thinks the play-off format needs changed, Illinois State probably does too (sorry for the Gateway bias, its what I know most about), maybe Youngstown should have just won at UNI or at SIU, but they didn't, there fore they bit&h. Win, you are in, lose you are out. It is as simple as that. If Drake goes 11-0 last year and beats UNI and Illinois State people will talk about them being in the play-offs, but they didn't, they got slaughtered by both of us, therefore people (like me) laugh at them when the say their conference should get an autobid! Those of you who keep "not making the play-offs" keep bitc*ing, in the mean time I am going to sit over here and count the number of times we have made the play-offs in the end zone of the Dome. Some day one of you will get what you want, some slap dick will come to the dome for the play-offs, get smoked by 50 because their crappy non-scholly league got an autobid and one of our best players will trip over one of them going into the end zone and kill our chances for the National Title! Will that make you happy, thats justice isn't it.

[Bub]

Holy crap Nmatsen, you better take a couple more of those blood pressure pills or you're goin explode!

You're right Drake or any other PFL team has no chance to win the NC. In part because we recruit student/athletes, rather than import rejects from I-A for one year(one fall season to be exact) so we can try and win the NC. Do those guys you sign up for one year even have to go to class? If you have to bring in this type of player to have a legitimate shot to get into the playoffs and that's what it takes to have a shot at winning the NC, then I guess we won't get in the playoffs. I can live with that. You guys are like a pro team signing free agents to a one year deal. It's all about winning. :(

[GannonFan]

Holy crap Nmatsen, you better take a couple more of those blood pressure pills or you're goin explode!

You're right Drake or any other PFL team has no chance to win the NC. In part because we recruit student/athletes, rather than import rejects from I-A for one year(one fall season to be exact) so we can try and win the NC. Do those guys you sign up for one year even have to go to class? If you have to bring in this type of player to have a legitimate shot to get into the playoffs and that's what it takes to have a shot at winning the NC, then I guess we won't get in the playoffs. I can live with that. You guys are like a pro team signing free agents to a one year deal. It's all about winning. :(

Come on, don't let one guy's rant all of sudden turn you into diminishing the players on teams that give scholarships. That's a pretty wide swath you just cut there and the vast majority of student athletes on the scholarship teams are just as interested in their education as those that go to non-scholarship schools. Just because a school plays in the playoffs does not mean they have sold their academic integrity down the river. Heck, there are plenty of schools with more academic prestige than Drake that play in the playoffs. Like I said, don't let one guy goad you into such erroneous hyperbole.

[aceinthehole]

If you don't like sitting at home, win! Plain and simple.

CCSU/Stony Brook did win their conference title, so why are they staying home?

Maybe if UNI and the MVC gave up its auto-bid in all sports like baseball, etc. then you'd have a point. But I know some people can't seem to follow logic.

And yes, henfan has a great point. If you wanted to be fair you must either allow every eligible conference an auto-bid, or none at all. You can't pick and chose auto-bids without some clear criteria from the NCAA.

Clearly, I want to see all eligible conferences get an auto-bid, but 16 at large bids would be more transparent than current process of unexplained exclusion of auto-bids for certain conferences. This is just too inconsistent with other NCAA-run post season tourneys.

[henfan]

Sure, great plan, sounds like the seeding of the BCS.

Huh? It's nothing like the BCS at all. We're talking about a selection committee choosing 16 teams for a tournament based on performance, not selecting two teams to play one game. The 16 teams with the best win-loss records and the strongest comparative schedules would have little to worry about.

Sounds like some folks are against rewarding wins and strong schedules. It's a odd twist on equity and fairness. : smh :

[nmatsen]

You are right Bub, or Bob or what ever the hell your name is, we take players to win football games, i'm sure that you guys don't do anything like that over at Drake do ya. As far as the MVC giving up auto bids in sports like baseball or basketball, where in the hell does that come from? Should Wichita State not participate in the College World Series? They are not nessecarily a bunch of slap dicks, should UNI not get an auto-bid to the NCAA basketball tournament. Probably not, your point is senseless. Northern Iowa and teams from the MVC that win conference tournaments and recieve auto-bids deserve the auto bid as they can hold their own, un-like Stonybrook. Your point was stupid. This is NCAA Division I athletics we are talking about here, not the 2nd period gym class from Middle School where everyone gets a freaking chance.

From now on Montana, GA Southern, Deleware, are going to have to play a 10 game schedule, get rid of your money game and have to play 5 games to make it to Chattanooga, i'm sure that those schools would be willing to do that just to give teams like Stonybrook or Drake a slot in the field of 48!

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Let's get something straight. Getting rid of autobids will never, never, never, happen. Otherwise, you may as well just dump conference play altogether - why have conferences? They just serve to ruin your GPI. The CAA people won't realize this until ODU, Georgia State, and Geroge Mason all go 1-10 in the CAA South and threaten someone's chances at getting a home game. Then I'm sure we'll hear all about how unfair the GPI is from these same jokers who are saying that we should get rid of autobids.

Let's also get something else straight. Not only WILL the playoffs expand, they SHOULD expand. The NEC isn't at the point yet where they can demand a playoff spot right now, but even a moron can sense that in 2005 they took a major step in the right direction - with some good wins and a renewed commitment to ramping up scholarships.

But don't just talk about the NEC. Talk about the Big South and/or the GWFC getting enough schools to become a major conference. You're trying to tell me if tomorrow Humboldt State and Azusa Pacific decide to join the GWFC that they should be denied an autobid? There is talk of the CAA losing northern schools so they can form some new conference. Think that won't happen without some sort of autobid for the new conference? The NEC isn't the only way another autobid can happen.

Stop this crazy tinfoil hatted talk. Autobids aren't going anywhere. The playoffs will eventually expand. The only question is, how.

[Bub]

Come on, don't let one guy's rant all of sudden turn you into diminishing the players on teams that give scholarships. That's a pretty wide swath you just cut there and the vast majority of student athletes on the scholarship teams are just as interested in their education as those that go to non-scholarship schools. Just because a school plays in the playoffs does not mean they have sold their academic integrity down the river. Heck, there are plenty of schools with more academic prestige than Drake that play in the playoffs. Like I said, don't let one guy goad you into such erroneous hyperbole.


Yea, I jumped over board, there. The rant shouldn't have, but did get me mad. My bad. :o

[coop]

How has the NEC done Against the A-10? Enough said with Auto-Bid Talk!!!
2005 CCSU 56-10 Loss To 4-7 URI. Teams would be fighting to play an Auto-Bid NEC if they ever got in. BTW I can List other scores if you like.

[aceinthehole]

Let's get something straight. Getting rid of autobids will never, never, never, happen. Otherwise, you may as well just dump conference play altogether - why have conferences? They just serve to ruin your GPI. The CAA people won't realize this until ODU, Georgia State, and Geroge Mason all go 1-10 in the CAA South and threaten someone's chances at getting a home game. Then I'm sure we'll hear all about how unfair the GPI is from these same jokers who are saying that we should get rid of autobids.

Let's also get something else straight. Not only WILL the playoffs expand, they SHOULD expand. The NEC isn't at the point yet where they can demand a playoff spot right now, but even a moron can sense that in 2005 they took a major step in the right direction - with some good wins and a renewed commitment to ramping up scholarships.

But don't just talk about the NEC. Talk about the Big South and/or the GWFC getting enough schools to become a major conference. You're trying to tell me if tomorrow Humboldt State and Azusa Pacific decide to join the GWFC that they should be denied an autobid? There is talk of the CAA losing northern schools so they can form some new conference. Think that won't happen without some sort of autobid for the new conference? The NEC isn't the only way another autobid can happen.

Stop this crazy tinfoil hatted talk. Autobids aren't going anywhere. The playoffs will eventually expand. The only question is, how.

Lehigh, I'm with you 100% and agree with almost everything you said. I was only responding to a valid counterpoint by henfan and a few others. But we all know there is no way they will eliminate all auto-bids - it just won't happen.

My only other point is that the NEC has standing right now! At what point do you think they could "demand" a playoff spot? What NCAA standards have they not yet met? What is this "test" the NEC must pass to be "granted" an auto-bid? Isn't the auto-bid a right for each and every duly approved conference?

I am only trying to argue that I-AA football needs to follow the precedent set by the NCAA that grants auto-bid access to all eligible conference champs. Right now the NEC is the only one that has standing. If (and when) the conferences add members or the CAA splits, what argument will those conferences have that doesn't exist right now?

I'm sorry if I sound repetative, but I've yet to see where anyone here (including the NCAA) has stated or documented a valid case or reason for the rejection of the NEC application for an auto bid.

I'm sorry, I'll promise to get off this topic soon :)

[nlwwln]

the current playoff system is just fine, id like to see them add maybe 2 more schools to the mix because one or two schools did get left out this year but otherwise it just makes for better competetion, mid majors do not deserve an auto bid bottom line. but there should be a mid major bowl between the best two mid majors but if a mid major goes undefeated and has a few quality teams on its schedule then i think they do deserve a spot. cmon who doesnt wanna see a cinderella story?

[aceinthehole]

How has the NEC done Against the A-10? Enough said with Auto-Bid Talk!!!
2005 CCSU 56-10 Loss To 4-7 URI. Teams would be fighting to play an Auto-Bid NEC if they ever got in. BTW I can List other scores if you like.


OK, so are you saying the required standard for an auto-bid is a conference's regular season record vs. A-10/CAA teams? Boy I love how so many A-10 fans keep bringing up their conference record as the NCAA benchmark for all other schools/conferences.

If you really think so, I'd love to see how all the conferences stack up to your "standards."

[*****]

OK, so are you saying the required standard for an auto-bid...Maybe a couple at-large selections would help the NEC towards an AQ? The Big South almost had one last year and the GWFC did get one. All the current AQ conferences have had multiple selections recently so before we go expanding the playoffs by increasing the AQs there might be a little more needed.

[DUPFLFan]

To me - do away with the mid major designation. It just serves as more a derogatory term from other 1-aa schools (sort of like second class citizens - the same way 1-a schools talk about 1-aa)

Either we are Division 1 or we are not - and according to the NCAA, we are.

[nmatsen]

Ah, horse *****! It is because of teams like Drake in Des Moines passing themselves off as a I-AA school that gives real I-AA school like UNI a bad rap! Look at the facts, top to bottom, any I-AA non-schollie team would finish at the bottom third of any AQ conference! The same as most quality I-AA schools would struggle at best to stay in the bottom third of any BCS conference but we don't go getting pis$ed at the BCS system because they don't give us an auto-bid to a BCS bowl. At least I know where UNI stands in the realm of College Football. To the average football fan they see Drake play, hear that they are I-AA and then automatically dis-credit I-AA. I was at Scheels in Des Moines last year and a guy at the counter saw that I was buying a Drake sweatshirt for my wife, (she is in grad school there) he said to me that "Drake should go un-defeated this year with all the players they have coming back, especially looking at their schedule". I told him that Drake would lose their first 3 games and he laughed at me. If I am not mistaken they did, it is because this I-AA classification that a non-schollie school has that quality I-AA teams can't get a fair shake. You are right, the NCAA does consider I-AA non-schollie's still D-I so maybe my beef should be with them!

[*****]

maybe everyone should cool down a little bit and stop the smackin'? :beerchug:

[nlwwln]

To me - do away with the mid major designation. It just serves as more a derogatory term from other 1-aa schools (sort of like second class citizens - the same way 1-a schools talk about 1-aa)

Either we are Division 1 or we are not - and according to the NCAA, we are.

this would solve everything

[DUPFLFan]

I told him that Drake would lose their first 3 games and he laughed at me. If I am not mistaken they did..

You are mistaken potty mouth. Drake won their third, fourth and fifth game.

Look - am I saying that Drake should be spoke of in the same breath as UNI and Appalachian State - no.. No more than Illinois and Northwestern in the same breath as Texas.

But at least if Illinois and Northwestern have a very good season, they have a chance for post season...

There is no need to trash anyone's program...It wasn't so long ago that UNI didn't do so well (2002)

[nmatsen]

maybe everyone should cool down a little bit and stop the smackin'? :beerchug:


Come on Ralph, I am backing up everything with fact, its not like I am calling Bub a stinker poo poo head. :smiley_wi

[*****]

... But at least if Illinois and Northwestern have a very good season, they have a chance for post season...Here we go again. Drake has a chance at a playoff spot if they play good competition and have a very good season.

[*****]

Come on Ralph, I am backing up everything with fact, its not like I am calling Bub a stinker poo poo head. :smiley_wiThere has been a ton of smack in this thread, not just you. I just hate to read one I-AA putting down another here on the discussion board.

[Bub]

Come on Ralph, I am backing up everything with fact, its not like I am calling Bub a stinker poo poo head. :smiley_wi


Wahhhhh he called me names waa waa :rotateh:

[aceinthehole]

Here we go again. Drake has a chance at a playoff spot if they play good competition and have a very good season.

WRONG! Drake does not have the same chance at the playoffs as Samford or Howard. That is the point. If either one of those schools won their conference, there in, and there are no questions asked. However, Drake, San Diego, Albany and CCSU don't have that identical opportunity to earn a berth through conference play.

Now the PFL hasn't asked for this chance, but the NEC has and was denied. What is so hard to understand? Why can't we support all I-AA programs?

Ralph, the only smack is coming from the few posters who can't post a rebuttle without swearing and name calling. Almost everyone else has been able to make opposing views heard in a thoughtful manner. This is what message boards are for, right?

[Bub]

Come on, don't let one guy's rant all of sudden turn you into diminishing the players on teams that give scholarships. That's a pretty wide swath you just cut there and the vast majority of student athletes on the scholarship teams are just as interested in their education as those that go to non-scholarship schools. Just because a school plays in the playoffs does not mean they have sold their academic integrity down the river. Heck, there are plenty of schools with more academic prestige than Drake that play in the playoffs. Like I said, don't let one guy goad you into such erroneous hyperbole.


It wasn't meant as a slam at scholarship players, it was a real question, though presented in a smart a** method. When a I-A player transfers in to a I-AA school with one year of eligibility, what requirements are there that they maintain satisfactory academic progress and do most of them enroll in the following spring term? I think that is a legitimate question, related to the student part of student/athlete. An issue that most of the PFL and PL do not have to worry about as well as the obvious Ivy's. Playoffs weren't meant as the issue, nor scholarships per se.

[*****]

WRONG! Drake does not have the same chance at the playoffs as Samford or Howard... Almost everyone else has been able to make opposing views heard in a thoughtful manner. This is what message boards are for, right? :nod:

Drake has a chance, same as Cal Poly et al. Just not a chance for an AQ.

[Bub]

There has been a ton of smack in this thread, not just you. I just hate to read one I-AA putting down another here on the discussion board.


It's okay we're use to it. PFL, NEC and MAAC--- the red headed step children of I-AA :bawling:

[Lehigh Football Nation]

One thing that gets glossed over here - and this definitely hurts the PFL in regards to any sort of bid - is the fact that certain teams schedule multiple sub-D-I opponents.

San Diego didn't have 7 D-I wins in their regular-season schedule. If you want to start thinking about autobids, you have to have your top teams scheduling at the very least 9 D-I opponents. Drake in 2004 had the same problem.

[Bub]

One thing that gets glossed over here - and this definitely hurts the PFL in regards to any sort of bid - is the fact that certain teams schedule multiple sub-D-I opponents.

San Diego didn't have 7 D-I wins in their regular-season schedule. If you want to start thinking about autobids, you have to have your top teams scheduling at the very least 9 D-I opponents. Drake in 2004 had the same problem.


That is true. One thing from a cost stand point. The PFL is a wide conference, Florida to California. Our travel costs are high, e.g. last year Drake flew to San Diego and Davidson. This season they will fly to Jacksonville Florida. Many of our schools therefore need to play some closer games and home games. Most schollie teams won't play us home & home, (UNI is and it will be sweet) and in the west/midwest, we don't have as many I-AA opportunities as you do in the east. Not an excuse, just the facts.

[DUPFLFan]

Here we go again. Drake has a chance at a playoff spot if they play good competition and have a very good season.

Ralph - in the 13 years that the Pioneer league has been in existance, not once has any team been offered an at large bid. So you are saying that not once since 1993 has there been a team good enough to participate...

Here is another hint for you.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Pioneer Football League is a college athletic conference which operates literally from coast to coast in the United States It has member schools that range from North Carolina and Florida in the east to California in the west. The conference participates in the NCAA's Division I-AA as a football-only conference. Unlike most other Division I-AA conferences, the Pioneer League consists of institutions which choose not to award athletic scholarships ("grants-in-aid") to football players; these institutions are sometimes (unofficially) referred to as "I-AAA" schools. The Pioneer Football League, like its non-scholarship bretheran The Ivy League, do not participate in the 1-AA playoffs.

[blukeys]

Ralph - in the 13 years that the Pioneer league has been in existance, not once has any team been offered an at large bid. So you are saying that not once since 1993 has there been a team good enough to participate...

Here is another hint for you.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Pioneer Football League is a college athletic conference which operates literally from coast to coast in the United States It has member schools that range from North Carolina and Florida in the east to California in the west. The conference participates in the NCAA's Division I-AA as a football-only conference. Unlike most other Division I-AA conferences, the Pioneer League consists of institutions which choose not to award athletic scholarships ("grants-in-aid") to football players; these institutions are sometimes (unofficially) referred to as "I-AAA" schools. The Pioneer Football League, like its non-scholarship bretheran The Ivy League, do not participate in the 1-AA playoffs.


Which Pioneer League team do you think warranted an at large bid in the last 13 years?

[DUPFLFan]

That was my question to Ralph... Seems to me that Dayton had some really good years there...

[*****]

That was my question to Ralph... Seems to me that Dayton had some really good years there...Oh. I missed the question I guess. I don't think the PFL has had a squad that warranted playoff selection. Dayton was probably the closest that one year.

BTW, that "Wacko"pedia thing is wrong. I-AAA is already an NCAA classification for non-football D-I schools not to mention the playoff mistake. The Ivy League is the only league that bars playoffs for all it's members.

[blukeys]

That was my question to Ralph... Seems to me that Dayton had some really good years there...


Make your case which Dayton team and what year and what playoff team would you throw out.

[UAalum72]

OK, so are you saying the required standard for an auto-bid is a conference's regular season record vs. A-10/CAA teams? Boy I love how so many A-10 fans keep bringing up their conference record as the NCAA benchmark for all other schools/conferences.

If you really think so, I'd love to see how all the conferences stack up to your "standards."
Here's the MEAC last year, versus:
I-A 0-2
A-10 0-3
Ind. 5-0 (all vs. 0-11 Savannah st.)
D-II 4-3
OVC 2-0 (both vs. 2-9Tennessee St.)
SWAC 3-0
Big South 3-3

[*****]

That's 13-8 OOC vs. D-I scholarship programs.

[UAalum72]

That's 13-8 OOC vs. D-I scholarship programs.
Or 2-3 (with wins vs. the 2-9 team) vs. automatic-bid conferences. And 7 games vs. D-II. And 5 wins vs. Savannah State - they might as well join the conference.

[kardplayer]

That's 13-8 OOC vs. D-I scholarship programs.

Ralph -

You did not really just write that. C'mon - have some integrity and don't spin data - you're better than that.

The 13 wins are:

5 vs. 0-11 Savannah State
2 vs. 2-9 Tennessee State (who's wins are 2-9 Murray State and 2-9 Jackson State - and somebody had to lose those games)
1 vs. 2-9 Jackson State
1 vs. 3-8 Arkansas Pine Bluff
1 vs. 1-10 Liberty
1 vs. 7-4 Charleston Southern (note: CS' wins include 1 point over Liberty, 2 vs. Sub D-I's, and a squeaker over Jacksonville, a PFL school)
1 vs. 5-6 Gardner-Webb
1 vs. 6-5 Alabama State (6-4 vs. Div. I-AA, and a loss to a DII)

That gives them 2 wins over teams with records over .500, and neither of those teams garners any respect from 99% of the folks here.

[*****]

... have some integrity and don't spin data...I'm not saying, I'm just saying.

[eaglesrthe1]

Once the GWC as a whole becomes playoff eligible, there will be some changes to the landscape. Even though I would be against it, it will probably involve an expansion of playoff teams at that point.

As it stands, no conference is guaranteed an auto-bid. The auto-bid conferences are voted on each year. They are limited to eight by NCAA rule.

Since it is the same eight conferences that have an auto-bid that also have representation on the playoff committee, they currently have a monopoly on who gets in as a league champ. It is convenient that these same eight conferences are also considered to be the eight strongest conferences that participate. The GWC will change all of that, since they will be considered to be stronger than several of the current conferences.

The committee will finally be forced to deal with this issue. Will they absorb the criticism for not allowing a stronger conference to have an auto-bid? Will they change the rules to allow more than 50% of the playoff teams to be selected by auto-bid? Or will they expand the number of participants to keep the rule intact?

My guess would be the latter. This will be the best chance for the mid-majors to be included in the playoff field. Either through more teams being eligible for auto-bids, or just from more teams being eligible and then having a team that may merit being in the top 20-32 teams.

[DUPFLFan]

Ralph - perception is reality. In addition, some have said in this and other threads that if you don't have scholarships you don't belong in the playoffs.

[*****]

Ralph - perception is reality. In addition, some have said in this and other threads that if you don't have scholarships you don't belong in the playoffs.I'm not sure what you mean. Perception is reality only when the reality is not known.

[DUPFLFan]

My point exactly - the perception is that they are not really 1-aa teams - they are d-3 teams that are forced into a category. So why ever invite them to the playoffs or give them an autobid. They don't belong!

Since they have never been invited - no one really knows how they would do. Could they do as well as a 16 seed? Maybe but who knows?

[*****]

My point exactly - the perception is that they are not really 1-aa teams - they are d-3 teams that are forced into a category. So why ever invite them to the playoffs or give them an autobid. They don't belong!

Since they have never been invited - no one really knows how they would do. Could they do as well as a 16 seed? Maybe but who knows?Hopefully everyone here knows the reality, they are D-I and I-AA in football.

[DUPFLFan]

Quotes from other threads...

"Getting every conference (except mid-majors of course) to participate in the playoffs would go a long way. Maybe some creativity would be required to pull it off, but it would be good for I-AA." - from MEAC thread...

The PFL should NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER recieve an auto-bid. NEVER NEVER NEVER! from this thread...

Just accept the fact that this is a I-AA football board, not a board for schools who can't beat division III teams. - from this thread...

Now that the PFL and NEC will have their own champ game all bases are covered - Ralph..

Some day one of you will get what you want, some slap dick will come to the dome for the play-offs, get smoked by 50 because their crappy non-scholly league got an autobid and one of our best players will trip over one of them going into the end zone and kill our chances for the National Title! Will that make you happy, thats justice isn't it. - from this thread...

From now on Montana, GA Southern, Deleware, are going to have to play a 10 game schedule, get rid of your money game and have to play 5 games to make it to Chattanooga, i'm sure that those schools would be willing to do that just to give teams like Stonybrook or Drake a slot in the field of 48! from this thread..

"The Gateway is I-AA as a vehicle for local, regional and national prominence. Pioneer Football is much more local. It is much more about creating situations where their students can become athletes as well. Patty V.

Still think perception isn' t reality?

[*****]

Quotes from other threads... ...Still think perception isn' t reality?They all know that the PFL is I-AA, that's reality. All of them know that.

What's the problem, that some don't think the PFL should get an autobid? That is their perception.

[UAalum72]

What's the problem, that some don't think the PFL should get an autobid? That is their perception.
No, ralph, that is their opinion.

Their perception (how they interpret what they 'see' as fact) is that the PFL isn't the same as other I-AA leagues (Division III in disguise, etc.).

[GannonFan]

All this perception/reality stuff - maybe the NCAA sees this too - how else to explain that they do not change the playoffs to make the mid-majors that are eligible to have an auto-bid actually get one? The NCAA is fully aware of what their mandates have wrought and maybe they themselves think they have forced some (not all) of these teams from mid-major conferences to artificially pose as DIAA schools? For all the ranting and raving at fans of other schools, the only one who have any power to sway things here is the NCAA and they seem happy with the status quo.

[Dane96]

Which, has been exactly the point of the fans of mid-major teams (at least the NEC schools who are giving rides.)

I just read through the Colgate/PL scholarship issue. I laughed when I heard a fan discuss the possibility of Colgate leaving and/or restructuring of the PL by adding 'Nova and Richmond to....drum roll.....KEEP THE AUTO-BID THE PL has.

Hmmmm....it has been the party line there is no such thing as a pre-determined autobid.

Seems perception is MORE LIKE REALITY!

[89Hen]

What are the real roadblocks to expanding the playoffs?
The desire to do so.

[*****]

Good to see 89Hen back and to the point.

[Dane96]

Good to see 89Hen back and to the point.

Ralph, are you that set in your ways? Back to what point?! The point what Ace, myself, and others have been, with reverence, promoting? The point that there is no such thing as a mid-major EVER being considered for an auto-bid. The fact that the process is subjective? The fact that the whole process is a guise for an old-boys network?

What exactly is the point? It would seem, through these eyes, that the only point 89Hen fan had, and you confirmed, is the point we were trying to make days ago, yet others, and yourself, filled this board up with hogwash about objectivity, fair processes, grey areas, mysterious selection qualifications, etc.

The point is....without an auto-bid or an expanded playoff, no mid-major WILL EVER be considered for the playoffs. :bang:

[*****]

Ralph, are you that set in your ways? Back to what point?! The point what Ace, myself, and others have been, with reverence, promoting? The point that there is no such thing as a mid-major EVER being considered for an auto-bid. The fact that the process is subjective? The fact that the whole process is a guise for an old-boys network?

What exactly is the point? It would seem, through these eyes, that the only point 89Hen fan had, and you confirmed, is the point we were trying to make days ago, yet others, and yourself, filled this board up with hogwash about objectivity, fair processes, grey areas, mysterious selection qualifications, etc.

The point is....without an auto-bid or an expanded playoff, no mid-major WILL EVER be considered for the playoffs. :bang:Geez, D96... his opinion point. In case you haven't noticed 89Hen (the second most frequent poster on AGS) has been on hiatus for a bit. The fact that he is back and cut to the quick with his opinion is why I posted that. I think I have made my opinion clear. I don't think it is the same as his or your's. I don't think the NEC/PFL/MAAC are ready for an autobid to a 16 team playoff. I don't think the "mid-majors" are BANNED from the playoffs. I think if Albany plays a schedule like CCU did last year and finishes 10-1 then they have a legit shot at a playoff berth.

[Dane96]

Geez, D96... his opinion point. In case you haven't noticed 89Hen (the second most frequent poster on AGS) has been on hiatus for a bit. The fact that he is back and cut to the quick with his opinion is why I posted that. I think I have made my opinion clear. I don't think it is the same as his or your's. I don't think the NEC/PFL/MAAC are ready for an autobid to a 16 team playoff. I don't think the "mid-majors" are BANNED from the playoffs. I think if Albany plays a schedule like CCU did last year and finishes 10-1 then they have a legit shot at a playoff berth.

Yeah, Ralph, I think I am intuitive enough to realize what you meant (regarding his infrequent posting of late). And again, you have admitted our point: AS IS NO MID-MAJOR WILL GET AN AUTO BID.

Don't skew this to an at-large question, because frankly, UA goes 10-1, with last season's (or this season's schedule) and DOESN'T GET IN...that would be a travesty.

[OL FU]

Yeah, Ralph, I think I am intuitive enough to realize what you meant (regarding his infrequent posting of late). And again, you have admitted our point: AS IS NO MID-MAJOR WILL GET AN AUTO BID.

Don't skew this to an at-large question, because frankly, UA goes 10-1, with last season's (or this season's schedule) and DOESN'T GET IN...that would be a travesty.

I agree.
NO MID-MAJOR WILL GET AN AUTO BID. and they shouldn't.

I also agree if Albany had been 10-1 with this schedule they should have been in the play offs.



10 Sat. #24 Hofstra (TWC)
36-7, L
17 Sat. at #25 Massachusetts 40-0, L
24 Sat. at Central Conn. State* 14-13, L
OCTOBER

1 Sat. at Maine+ 31-7, L
8 Sat. Stony Brook* (HC / TWC)
7-3, L
15 Sat. Sacred Heart* 21-7, W
22 Sat. at St. Francis, Pa.*
25-16, W
29 Sat. at Wagner*
38-10, W
NOVEMBER

5 Sat. Robert Morris* 20-17, W
12 Sat. at Monmouth*
16-13, L
19
Sat.
at Fordham
41-0, W

[henfan]

There's a good reason why the playoffs have not expanded since 1986 beyond 16 teams. Despite the opinions offered by some here, there's little evidence to suggest widespread support among I-AA members for expanding the number of playoff slots, especially if it means adding another week to the post-season. That's not to say that there won't be opportunites to tweak the format slightly at some point in the future...

In the meantime, the NCAA and I-AA PSC should provide more clarification on the auto-bid selection criteria. It should publicly state eligible auto-bid criteria so that the NEC, GWC, BSC and any other conference interested in going after an auto-bid in the future knows exactly what they'll have to do to land one. The criteria is already in place for at-large bids.

One thing seems clear to me, if a D-I conference didn't restrict the number of equivalancies offered to the point of requiring one more scholarship than the D-II FB maximums and if its member schools consistently played and defeated teams from other auto-bid conferences, the NCAA would have a hard case arguing against awarding them an auto-bid. IMO, they'd probably have much more widespread support among I-AA conferences and fans.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

There's a good reason why the playoffs have not expanded since 1986 beyond 16 teams. Despite the opinions offered by some here, there's little evidence to suggest widespread support among I-AA members for expanding the number of playoff slots, especially if it means adding another week to the post-season. That's not to say that there won't be opportunites to tweak the format slightly at some point in the future...

In the meantime, the NCAA and I-AA PSC should provide more clarification on the auto-bid selection criteria. It should publicly state eligible auto-bid criteria so that the NEC, GWC, BSC and any other conference interested in going after an auto-bid in the future knows exactly what they'll have to do to land one. The criteria is already in place for at-large bids.

One thing seems clear to me, if a D-I conference didn't restrict the number of equivalancies offered to the point of requiring one more scholarship than the D-II FB maximums and if its member schools consistently played and defeated teams from other auto-bid conferences, the NCAA would have a hard case arguing against awarding them an auto-bid. IMO, they'd probably have much more widespread support among I-AA conferences and fans.

Fair points all, but what you're not mentioning is the fact that there are:

* 2 conferences that would be difficult to deny if they get 6+ members (GWFC, BSC)
* 1 conference that is rumored to possibly split apart (CAA)

That's a lot of pressure at adding an autobid that wasn't there even a few years ago. And that's not even including the NEC. Face it, the landscape has changed. There's a lot of pressure to add another autobid that wasn't there before.

If you add autobids, you have to expand the playoffs, period.

[danefan]

That is a great point. What happens if the CAA does split into...lets say a new America East conference...does the committee not give both the Amerca East an autobid? I can't imagine that a conference with UNH, UMASS, Maine, Northeastern, Hofstra and others would not get an autobid.

That is, of course, assuming that a new conference will be formed...which, as I already know, no one here believes will happen.

[*****]

That is a great point. What happens if the CAA does split into...lets say a new America East conference...does the committee not give both the Amerca East an autobid? I can't imagine that a conference with UNH, UMASS, Maine, Northeastern, Hofstra and others would not get an autobid.
That is, of course, assuming that a new conference will be formed...which, as I already know, no one here believes will happen.I think a bunch of members think a new conference will be formed and possibly an existing conference will depart.

[henfan]

That is a great point. What happens if the CAA does split into...lets say a new America East conference...does the committee not give both the Amerca East an autobid? I can't imagine that a conference with UNH, UMASS, Maine, Northeastern, Hofstra and others would not get an autobid.

That is, of course, assuming that a new conference will be formed...which, as I already know, no one here believes will happen.

Danefan, Northeastern and Hofstra are full CAA members, or at least they, Delaware, TU, JMU and W&M will be as of 9/2007, when the CAA assumes control of the A-10 FB league. The CAA will assume the A-10's auto-bid beginning in 2007. NU or HU have expressed no interest in returning to the AEC and likely wouldn't even if they added football. That ship has long since sailed, but I think I understand you point.

Aside from idle message board chatter, there's no indication the AEC is putting together a FB league any time soon. However, IF the America East ever begins sponsoring its own FB league, the conference would be eligible to apply for an auto-bid once they have at least 6 I-AA teams in the conference that have been playing together for at least 2 consecutive years. The very soonest we'd see an AEC auto-bid would be the 2013 season. (UA & SBU are locked into the NEC until 2010.) There may be events that impact I-AA selection between now and then.

[Dane96]

Danefan, Northeastern and Hofstra are full CAA members, or at least they, Delaware, TU, JMU and W&M will be as of 9/2007, when the CAA assumes control of the A-10 FB league. The CAA will assume the A-10's auto-bid beginning in 2007. NU or HU have expressed no interest in returning to the AEC and likely wouldn't even if they added football. That ship has long since sailed, but I think I understand you point.

Aside from idle message board chatter, there's no indication the AEC is putting together a FB league any time soon. However, IF the America East ever begins sponsoring its own FB league, the conference would be eligible to apply for an auto-bid once they have at least 6 I-AA teams in the conference that have been playing together for at least 2 consecutive years. The very soonest we'd see an AEC auto-bid would be the 2013 season. (UA & SBU are locked into the NEC until 2010.) There may be events that impact I-AA selection between now and then.

Check your PM!

[henfan]

Fair points all, but what you're not mentioning is the fact that there are:

* 2 conferences that would be difficult to deny if they get 6+ members (GWFC, BSC)
* 1 conference that is rumored to possibly split apart (CAA)

That's a lot of pressure at adding an autobid that wasn't there even a few years ago. And that's not even including the NEC. Face it, the landscape has changed. There's a lot of pressure to add another autobid that wasn't there before.

If you add autobids, you have to expand the playoffs, period.

I didn't mention it because it hasn't happened yet and there's no indication that it's going to happen anytime soon. All of those scenarios are way too speculative to seriously consider.

I wholeheartedly agree that the NCAA will have decisions to make if the GWC or BSC ever get enough schools to become eligible, if the NEC ever meets the unknown criteria for auto-bid eligibility, if other conferences enter I-AA, etc. I'm not convinced the result will be automatically increasing the size or length of the playoffs, though it will undoubtedly be one of several options. :twocents:

[Husky Alum]

It's no secret that the "rumors" abot America East football are coming from SOMEWHERE - gee I wonder where.

Who's the new commissioner of the AE? Former Maine AD Patrick Nero.

If the CAA keeps adding football schools (ODU, etc), there's not going to be a need for affiliate members other then Villanova - or the CAA can cherry pick its affiliates.

What school is an affiliate member? MAINE.

Which affiliate is the biggest PITA to get to if you're a southern school? MAINE

Connect the dots.

[89Hen]

The point is....without an auto-bid or an expanded playoff, no mid-major WILL EVER be considered for the playoffs. :bang:
You couldn't be any more wrong. Mid-majors will ALWAYS be considered for the playoffs. However, that consideration ends quickly when you look at the record of MM's against playoff caliber teams. In most cases it's 0-0. In others it's 0-1 or 0-2. There are a couple of MM's who's schedule would warrant more consideration than others (Albany and CCSU come to mind) but until those teams actually win some of those games, the consideration is over quickly. There have been a couple of MM's who have had the record, others who have had the schedule, but none have put together both, which is needed to get that at-large bid.

[blukeys]

It's no secret that the "rumors" abot America East football are coming from SOMEWHERE - gee I wonder where.

Who's the new commissioner of the AE? Former Maine AD Patrick Nero.

If the CAA keeps adding football schools (ODU, etc), there's not going to be a need for affiliate members other then Villanova - or the CAA can cherry pick its affiliates.

What school is an affiliate member? MAINE.

Which affiliate is the biggest PITA to get to if you're a southern school? MAINE

Connect the dots.


Yes no press releases, no rumors of discussions amongst schools and this underlying totally thorough dissatisfaction with a conference administration (CAA) that has yet to log a single year at the helm.

Personally I think the affiliate schools are in a wait and see mode about the new administration and hope that the CAA does a better job than the A-10. (Well they really can't do worse)

Realistically any move by anyone is WAAAAAY down the road and will be made based on the performance of the CAA administration. All other comments are just speculation on a message board waiting for Spring Practices and September football.

[aceinthehole]

In the meantime, the NCAA and I-AA PSC should provide more clarification on the auto-bid selection criteria. It should publicly state eligible auto-bid criteria so that the NEC, GWC, BSC and any other conference interested in going after an auto-bid in the future knows exactly what they'll have to do to land one. The criteria is already in place for at-large bids.

One thing seems clear to me, if a D-I conference didn't restrict the number of equivalancies offered to the point of requiring one more scholarship than the D-II FB maximums and if its member schools consistently played and defeated teams from other auto-bid conferences, the NCAA would have a hard case arguing against awarding them an auto-bid. IMO, they'd probably have much more widespread support among I-AA conferences and fans.

Thanks. I agree 100%.

State the criteria for the NEC to meet! And yes, the NEC may have to eliminate any limitations for FB schollys to gain auto-bid access, however that type of specific language would casue problems with the current PL model.

The rest of this is speculation and planning on what the future conference arraingments hold. I am much more concered with the current sistuation, compared to the very likely, but still uncertain conference realignments down the road.

[GannonFan]

Come on, I think you know the auto-bid criteria right now - have NCAA approval. They are the last barrier to the approval and they have to say yes. They aren't passive observers that just set the rules out and then see how things fall. They are active participants and right now, they don't want to add another bid. Gnash your teeth all you want and cry foul, but that's the way it is - it's subjective based on maybe nothing but their whims and right now they say no.

[UAalum72]

Come on, I think you know the auto-bid criteria right now - have NCAA approval. They are the last barrier to the approval and they have to say yes. They aren't passive observers that just set the rules out and then see how things fall. They are active participants and right now, they don't want to add another bid. Gnash your teeth all you want and cry foul, but that's the way it is - it's subjective based on maybe nothing but their whims and right now they say no.
Then they should say it's based on whim and tell the NEC don't waste three more years on 30 scholarships, and three more with 45 or so because it won't make any difference, just wait until you can fund 63 at once, then MAYBE we'll let you in, and hope the Great West and Big South don't find sixth members at the same time and all get stuck out in the cold.

If they can't show objective standards to be met, then it's just the old boys' club we've been saying it is.

[GannonFan]

Then they should say it's based on whim and tell the NEC don't waste three more years on 30 scholarships, and three more with 45 or so because it won't make any difference, just wait until you can fund 63 at once, then MAYBE we'll let you in, and hope the Great West and Big South don't find sixth members at the same time and all get stuck out in the cold.

If they can't show objective standards to be met, then it's just the old boys' club we've been saying it is.

Of course it is, who ever said it wasn't? Welcome to the NCAA. But it's unlikely that these whims are just based on antipathy towards NEC or other mid major schools and is very likely based on a perceived inability of these teams to compete, buttressed by results on the field that show, generally, that these schools are not at the same competitive level as the rest of IAA. That, coupled again with the perceived notion that many of these schools are only in IAA by means of an ill-advised NCAA mandate, is probably the source of these whims. If you want to get around these, start being more competitive on the field (schedule against the old boy's club of teams in IAA and win these games) and start funding the programs to at least bring them to a level comparable to the other funded IAA programs. You can argue that it's all still subjective even then but you'll have a lot more people (me included for what that's worth) on your side. Albany already had a decent schedule last year - if they won enough of those games they would've been in the playoffs. The means to make the playoffs are there, even without the auto-bid. I'd argue that if the NEC got an at-large in (and as I said if Albany wins more of those OOC games against the A10 teams) then the auto-bid campaign would be a lot easier. I say win it on the field and the backroom deals are easier to make.

[Kid Dakota]

Two things...

1. Does the Pioneer choose not to participate, or were they denied an auto-bid?

2. The Great West will have only five teams - ineligible for an auto-bid.

Cal Poly is eligible, made playoffs last year or do you need all schools eligible. Naturally if the Mustangs didn't win the confrence championship we would have a problem but if they did would they get the auto-bid?

[*****]

... 1. Does the Pioneer choose not to participate, or were they denied an auto-bid?...The PFL has never requested an AQ.

[Bub]

The PFL has never requested an AQ.


This is true. As mentioned our commish is against our participation, with the common belief being that her dual role as the Gateway helps her to be against it. However, I don't really know what the view of the PFL coaches or AD's is on this subject. That opinion has not been made known to the public at large.

Regardless of whether on thinks an AQ should be proveded to the PFL, the coaches do know that a request, if made, would not be granted, based upon current SOS issues.

[JohnStOnge]

NCAA says no to playoffs during Bowl season.

Hadn't heard of that. What nonsense. Sometimes I really wonder about the NCAA.

[walliver]

* 2 conferences that would be difficult to deny if they get 6+ members (GWFC, BSC)
* 1 conference that is rumored to possibly split apart (CAA)

It might be difficult to deny the Big South, but IF the Big South had an auto-bid in 2005, Charleston Southern, a team with FOUR wins* against scholarship level I-AA teams, would have gone to the playoffs.

When the GWFC and BSC become auto-bid eligible, "The Committee" should pick the top 8 conferences based on historical performance and current conference strength (the GPI should be a part of this, but not the exclusive measure). Obviously, this might put the OVC and MEAC at risk of losing their spots, but the selection committee would be at liberty to award at-large spots to conference champions of non-auto-bid conferences.


* Charleston Southern finished 7-4 with 2 Division II and 1 mid-major wins (as well as a Division II loss).

[UAalum72]

It might be difficult to deny the Big South, but IF the Big South had an auto-bid in 2005, Charleston Southern, a team with FOUR wins* against scholarship level I-AA teams, would have gone to the playoffs.

When the GWFC and BSC become auto-bid eligible, "The Committee" should pick the top 8 conferences based on historical performance and current conference strength (the GPI should be a part of this, but not the exclusive measure).

The heck with 'historical performance'. Who gives a rat's ass what a conference did when today's players were in diapers? Look at the last four years, that's enough.



* Charleston Southern finished 7-4 with 2 Division II and 1 mid-major wins (as well as a Division II loss).

A so-called "mid-major" win is a Division I win, by every rule in the book. You're talking about an auto-bid, not an at-large; that's why there's a minimum of six teams in a league required (gives you five D-I league games).

[DUPFLFan]

This is true. As mentioned our commish is against our participation, with the common belief being that her dual role as the Gateway helps her to be against it. However, I don't really know what the view of the PFL coaches or AD's is on this subject. That opinion has not been made known to the public at large.

Regardless of whether on thinks an AQ should be proveded to the PFL, the coaches do know that a request, if made, would not be granted, based upon current SOS issues.

Amen. Bub - That is why Drake started upgrading its schedule beginning last year..

[SoCon48]

32 teams? Yuck, I don't like that option at all. Way too many teams will make the playoffs. Heck, right now, there are only 1 or 2 teams each year that feel like they were left out of the playoffs unfairly, so a jump from 18 teams feeling they should make it to 32 is a huge leap. Other divisions have byes for higher seeded teams so I don't see why that would be a problem. The playoffs will have to expand when the Great West comes on board fully (2008 I think? and assuming they get a 6th member) so I don't have a problem even extending auto bids to the NEC if they want. Expand to no more than 24 teams (really 20 is probably the best) and all is good. If the Big South can get a 6th they can get an auto-bid too. The seeding will always be contentious (it was very contentious back when all 16 were seeded) but any pairings or seedings will always be contentious. 20 sounds good to me, 24 as a last resort (although that will be too many).

There's room in the schedule now for 12 weeks of football, so I don't see how this will impact that - this just means that everybody needs to start that first week and there are no bye weeks during the season - a lot of teams don't have bye weeks in their schedules anyway so I don't see that being a big hurdle. And this way the playoffs can start and end like they do now with the week before Thanksgiving being the playin round (of 4 or 8 teams).

I agree, Gannon. H, it would be be 64 next.:D

[*****]

... our commish is against our participation ... I don't really know what the view of the PFL coaches or AD's is on this subject. That opinion has not been made known to the public at large...I've never heard her say she's against it. I have heard her say the school's are against it and her opinion doesn't count. It has absolutely nothing to do with the GFC.

[DUPFLFan]

Ralph - I know you have said this before but frankly I have a hard time believing that any coach wouldn't want the possibility of post season play in the 1-AA playoffs. Especially when your conference gets no exposure or television. You would think the schools/coaches would want it for recruiting...

But if what you say is true, then why would the PFL explore a postseason game with the NEC?

Sorry - I find it hard to believe.

What I find much more plausible is that the PFL has never asked because either they see that the NEC has asked and has been denied or that Patty V won't ask because it might impact a second Gateway school's chances. Besides, since when does a commissioner's opinion not count...

Sorry but it quacks like a duck....

[Bub]

I've never heard her say she's against it. I have heard her say the school's are against it and her opinion doesn't count. It has absolutely nothing to do with the GFC.

Ralph, I'm not saying, I'm just saying!:)

While Patty V. may not have said the exact words, "I'm against an auto-bid for the PFL" she has definitely expressed her view that the PFL is not qualified to play with the schollie teams, e.g.


"The Gateway is I-AA as a vehicle for local, regional and national prominence. Pioneer Football is much more local. It is much more about creating situations where their students can become athletes as well. " Patty V.


There is more, but frankly I'm too lazy to look for it. The point is the commish of a league should be pushing for their league, not selling it short. For her to make the comment she made shows a complete lack of understanding of the quality of players present in the PFL, "their students can become athletes as well". What in the world does that mean, does she not look at the bios of players? Drake has a roster with many all-state players, some in multiple sports. My son was all-state in football and track and he is one of many. I'm pretty sure these boys were athletes when they signed to play at Drake and were being recruited by other schools, including schollies. They didn't lose their athleticism when they decided to go the non-schollie route. I can understand guys from other conf. having some of these views, they've never seen us play, but our commish? She should have our back and she doesn't. That makes me believe she doesn't support our participation in the playoffs. That's my take on Patty V.

[*****]

... While Patty V. may not have said the exact words, "I'm against an auto-bid for the PFL" she has definitely expressed her view that the PFL is not qualified to play with the schollie teams, e.g.
"The Gateway is I-AA as a vehicle for local, regional and national prominence. Pioneer Football is much more local. It is much more about creating situations where their students can become athletes as well. " Patty V.... shows a complete lack of understanding of the quality of players present in the PFL, "their students can become athletes as well". What in the world does that mean...That quote is exactly what the schools say. I wish other non-schollie schools would say that, "creating situations where their students can become athletes." Siena doesn't, Fairfield doesn't, St. Mary's doesn't, Canisius doesn't... all of them (and others) recently took away the situation where their students could become a collegiate athlete in football. She is talking about the PFL schools dedicated to a way for them to keep football. That's my take.

[Bub]

That quote is exactly what the schools say. I wish other non-schollie schools would say that, "creating situations where their students can become athletes." Siena doesn't, Fairfield doesn't, St. Mary's doesn't, Canisius doesn't... all of them (and others) recently took away the situation where their students could become a collegiate athlete in football. She is talking about the PFL schools dedicated to a way for them to keep football. That's my take.


That context and reading, if that is what Patty V. means, implies that but for the PFL providing non-scholarship football these students couldn't become college football players. And my point is that is wrong, at least for the quality players. If Drake didn't have football most of the football players wouldn't have gone there. They would be playing football some where else and most likely on schollie or as a walk-on.

Regardless, I wish those schools had found a way to keep football too.

[*****]

That context and reading, if that is what Patty V. means, implies that but for the PFL providing non-scholarship football these students couldn't become college football players. And my point is that is wrong, at least for the quality players. If Drake didn't have football most of the football players wouldn't have gone there. They would be playing football some where else and most likely on schollie or as a walk-on...Again, that is not my take. She isn't talking about player quality, she is talking about the schools they attend and the ability to offer their students a chance to play intercollegiate football. You're right, if Drake wasn't "creating situations where their students can become athletes" some of them wouldn't go to Drake.

[DUPFLFan]

"The Gateway is I-AA as a vehicle for local, regional and national prominence. Pioneer Football is much more local. It is much more about creating situations where their students can become athletes as well. " Patty V.

Ralph - my read is the same as Bub... It sounds like she thinks that the Pioneer league is a club sport league.

Since I can only speak for my knowledge of Drake here, the failure in her logic is that many if not all of the players were all state caliber players in football and other sports. They chose Drake for the combination of education and athletics. They weren't dragged in from the general population. I am sure that this is the case for many other Pioneer league teams.

Personally, until the PFL gets a full time commissioner that has the league's best interests at heart - things will never change.

[nmatsen]

What, you think that the baseball players at Iowa State that play club baseball or the hockey players that play club hockey weren't all state caliber selections in High School? They very much were. I was a first team all-state selection my senior year and still had to walk on at UNI eventually earning a scholarship. I don't think you guys understand here, most of your players would not be playing for a scholarship institution, that is not meant to be a slam, you just have to accept it, just like most of our players would not be playing at Penn State or USC, you would be surprised how similar the numbers might actually be, 1 or 2 from each school probably. I would be that out of the 17 or 18 kids that Drake brings in to every class maybe 1 or 2 of them had legitimate (real, not just books) scholarship offers to a D-II school or NAIA. Much like the students that go to IA State gets "baseball players" that chose the school for Baseball and Acedemics. Your analogy to football being a club sport at Drake was probably more right on than you think. Not perfectly, but it does line up that way. No scholarships, very low profile athletes, very low profile programs (news, media, facilities).

[Bub]

What, you think that the baseball players at Iowa State that play club baseball or the hockey players that play club hockey weren't all state caliber selections in High School? They very much were. I was a first team all-state selection my senior year and still had to walk on at UNI eventually earning a scholarship. I don't think you guys understand here, most of your players would not be playing for a scholarship institution, that is not meant to be a slam, you just have to accept it, just like most of our players would not be playing at Penn State or USC, you would be surprised how similar the numbers might actually be, 1 or 2 from each school probably. I would be that out of the 17 or 18 kids that Drake brings in to every class maybe 1 or 2 of them had legitimate (real, not just books) scholarship offers to a D-II school or NAIA. Much like the students that go to IA State gets "baseball players" that chose the school for Baseball and Acedemics. Your analogy to football being a club sport at Drake was probably more right on than you think. Not perfectly, but it does line up that way. No scholarships, very low profile athletes, very low profile programs (news, media, facilities).


You hate Drake(and all non schollies)so much you can't see the forest for the trees. I personally know 6 players from last years class who turned down schollies to attend Drake. And 2 others who decided to accept the schollies rather than Drake. This year I personally know of at leat one kid who decided to accept the schollie rather than Drake. Rather than guessing what I think I know from back in the day, I'm talking about real kids and what I really know of those kids. It doesn't demean your accomplishments if Drake has good players. We clearly don't have as many quality players as UNI, nor do we have any I-A transfers, but to say only 1 or 2 of our players per class were even offered D-II or NAIA scholarships or were deserving of such an offer is so wrong it is clearly guided by hate and not reaason.

Facilities? I'll put the renovated Drake Stadium up against the UNI Dome anytime as far as a football venues go.

If you had ever toured a D-II or NAIA school you would understand why a kid would choose non schollie Drake over them. Drake's facilities are so much better it is like night and day. Most D-II and NAIA schools have facilities that don't measure up to our local high schools facilities.

You need to get facts and not let your dislike/hate guide your opinions.

[colgate13]

Ralph - I know you have said this before but frankly I have a hard time believing that any coach wouldn't want the possibility of post season play in the 1-AA playoffs.

Not 100% sure about how things work at PFL schools, but the coach can want it all they want, but that doesn't necessarily translate into 'the school' wanting it. The school would be the president and BOT. If they don't want it, the school doesn't want it, even if all coaches and every player want it.

Case in point, the Patriot League used to not participate in the post season. It wasn't because the coach didn't want to... so the statement might be true.

[Go...gate]

With all the hoo-hah about the MEAC and SWAC blowing off the play-offs, and with the Ivy still resistant to the post-season, I say give an auto-bid to the NEC and the PFL (if Duquesne joins up to make it an eight-team league). Why not give everybody a chance? It's like Day 1 and 2 at the Masters or the first week of the NCAA BB tournament.

[nmatsen]

That renovated Drake Stadium for Track and Field?

[OL FU]

With all the hoo-hah about the MEAC and SWAC blowing off the play-offs, and with the Ivy still resistant to the post-season, I say give an auto-bid to the NEC and the PFL (if Duquesne joins up to make it an eight-team league). Why not give everybody a chance? It's like Day 1 and 2 at the Masters or the first week of the NCAA BB tournament.

I say speed up the transition period and give it to the GWFC. :nod:

[Bub]

That renovated Drake Stadium for Track and Field?

As opposed to the UNI Dome for track & field, basketball, wrestling, concerts & football?

[nmatsen]

As opposed to the UNI Dome for track & field, basketball, wrestling, concerts & football?

The difference here is that the UNI Dome was built with football number 1 priority and the renovation was made with the Drake Relays in priority. Don't you get it Bub? I don't hate Drake, I just have a problem with Drake considering themselves I-AA because it brings down the reputation of the quality of the I-AA division. Not the way that the MAC conference brings down I-A but the in the way that it is just not the same, it would be like a fully funded division III school still claiming that it is still a division III school. It would not be, it would be moved to a NAIA school or D-II school the way that William Penn did a couple of years ago. They just moved divisions, they didn't classify themselves as D-III-Scholly, they moved divisions as to not be pretenders, why can't you get that this is what I am asking you to do, stop mascarading around as a Division I-AA program and accept that you are the equivalent of a very average Division III program. Hell, now you think you should get a fair shake at the playoffs?

Here's an idea, why don't we eliminate all classification from NAIA to NCAA I-III, every conference gets 1 auto bid to the "Post Season Tournament". Well lets see, Ohio State tied for first in the Big-Ten but lost the tie breaker so they are out, but Wartburg won the Iowa Conference Championship so they are in, they play USC in the first round. Is that fair? NO! If the I-AA playoffs get expanded it should be to allow teams like Youngstown or Montana State in, not to give the winner of the PFL an auto-bid.

Please don't get me wrong, I have respect for the players that Drake has regardless of level of play. I know first hand how much time and comitment it takes to play college football, but that doesn't give them the right to come to the party and say "we're here" let us in.

[Bub]

The difference here is that the UNI Dome was built with football number 1 priority and the renovation was made with the Drake Relays in priority. Don't you get it Bub? I don't hate Drake, I just have a problem with Drake considering themselves I-AA because it brings down the reputation of the quality of the I-AA division. Not the way that the MAC conference brings down I-A but the in the way that it is just not the same, it would be like a fully funded division III school still claiming that it is still a division III school. It would not be, it would be moved to a NAIA school or D-II school the way that William Penn did a couple of years ago. They just moved divisions, they didn't classify themselves as D-III-Scholly, they moved divisions as to not be pretenders, why can't you get that this is what I am asking you to do, stop mascarading around as a Division I-AA program and accept that you are the equivalent of a very average Division III program. Hell, now you think you should get a fair shake at the playoffs?

Here's an idea, why don't we eliminate all classification from NAIA to NCAA I-III, every conference gets 1 auto bid to the "Post Season Tournament". Well lets see, Ohio State tied for first in the Big-Ten but lost the tie breaker so they are out, but Wartburg won the Iowa Conference Championship so they are in, they play USC in the first round. Is that fair? NO! If the I-AA playoffs get expanded it should be to allow teams like Youngstown or Montana State in, not to give the winner of the PFL an auto-bid.

Please don't get me wrong, I have respect for the players that Drake has regardless of level of play. I know first hand how much time and comitment it takes to play college football, but that doesn't give them the right to come to the party and say "we're here" let us in.


We aren't mascarading as anything other than what the NCAA tells us we are. Your problem is with them not us. Your team kicked our azz last year, well you were the #2 team in the nation and should have been #1. ILS kicked your azz, as well as ours and should have beaten ISU. Both UNI and ILSU, on a given day were quite caple of kicking the crap out of a lot of I-AA teams. However, there are a lot of I-AA schollie teams we could hang with and yes beat, including some mid-level teams. Can we hang with and beat the best I-AA schollie teams-NO. However that can be said about a lot of teams that make it to the playoffs-look at the first round scores through the years. The PFL, as well as the NEC are NCAA I-AA conferences that play football. As such they should qualify for the playoffs. I don't think the NCAA or selection committee will change any of this, but it's a nice debate.

As to what brings down the reputation of I-AA, do you really think it is the PFL and NEC? How about this from the Pantherntion board, I'm paraphrasing,"the point of I-AA is to give players who wash out of I-A a second chance". The view that I-AA is I-A lite does more to bring down the reputation of I-AA in the mind of the casual fan than the PFL or NEC does, IMHO.

[nmatsen]

Well, if someone from Lehigh would show up to debate whether or not they should be in the playoffs I would debate with them too. Remember what I said about not saying that you are like the "MAC" of 1-A but more like a I-AA to a I-A. We have beaten a lot of I-A schools over the years and could hang with a lot of them, that does not mean that we are I-A. I understand that my beef should be with the University but it is stuff like this that will make it so nice when we bury the hatchet together at Zimms on Ingersoll before the game next year in August!

[blukeys]

Can we hang with and beat the best I-AA schollie teams-NO.



If this is the case why should you be given an autobid? The purpose of the playoffs is to crown a national champion, not have people feel good because they made it into the playoffs. The teams most likely to win a chmpionship should be in the playoffs. To include a team for feel good reason exculdes a team that genuinely has a chance to win.

The argument that some other conference autobids are currently undeserving is hardly a good reason to add another undeserving team that has no chance of winning. The Ncaa has the ability to change the autobid conferences and should do so when a conference is consistently non - competitive.



Well, if someone from Lehigh would show up to debate whether or not they should be in the playoffs I would debate with them too.

Last I saw Lehigh was not in the playoffs last year. They have been sucessful against Gateway teams in the past.






If the I-AA playoffs get expanded it should be to allow teams like Youngstown or Montana State in, not to give the winner of the PFL an auto-bid.


I agree get the best teams in there.

[DUPFLFan]

and Football ...

Nmadsen - you do not know what you are talking about.

I know personally of at least 15 players that had d-II offers and some had d-1aa scholly offers to gateway conference schools that chose Drake instead.

My son is one of them...

Besides there are some d-1a programs that couldn't beat some d-iii programs - do you consider them a d-iii program - are they an embarassment to you too?

[nmatsen]

and Football ...

Nmadsen - you do not know what you are talking about.

I know personally of at least 15 players that had d-II offers and some had d-1aa scholly offers to gateway conference schools that chose Drake instead.

My son is one of them...

Besides there are some d-1a programs that couldn't beat some d-iii programs - do you consider them a d-iii program - are they an embarassment to you too?


Just for the record it is Matsen, there has never been nor will there ever be a Division III program defeat a I-A program (shouldn't say never but in the last 50 years). Please don't forget that I also made mention of the Mac to I-A, I still consider them I-A because the landscape is the same. Also, I know more about college football sitting on the *****ter in the morning than you will ever know. I will promise you (please remember what I said earlier about 1-2 a year) that if you take out the kids that "had an offer from Central Missouri" (but lost it is what they forget to tell you), and the kids that were offered "book money" from NW Missouri State that you have less than 1-2 kids in every class that have recieved scholarship offers, your son may have very possibly been one of them. I am not embarrassed by the Drake or the Pioneer Football league, they should just not be classified I-AA. Like Bub said, my beef should be with the NCAA. I know where my school and my team land in the overall scheme of College Football, you should too! Not in I-AA.

Maybe some people should chip in here and rate the divisions of football from I-A to D-III and also throw in NAIA. Tell me were they all land in a ranking system. Heres mine.

I-A
I-AA
DII
NAIA Division I
I-AA Non Scholarship
NAIA Division II
D-III

Why do they not call I-AA Non Scholarship something else. They don't call us "I-A non-23 scholarships" they have a seperate classification for us, their needs to be one for teams in the "non-scholarship" category. Go up and be I-AA or go down and be D-III. I don't care. I respect Drake athletes just as much as I do Iowa or Central College, just find a spot. There is enough confusion in I-AA football as it is, we don't need sub-classifications inside of what is already a sub-classification.

[DUPFLFan]

Sorry - thought you were just MAD. SO why does UNI want to play us? obviously we don't offer any competition...

[nmatsen]

Sorry - thought you were just MAD. SO why does UNI want to play us? obviously we don't offer any competition...

We want to play you because you are a "sub par team" (par being I-AA)such as a D-II team or a D-III. You are a team that allows us an easy and sure victory at the begining of the year without too big of a risk of injury to our key players. You are someone who normally would be a home series but due to the fact that you guys are in located in Des Moines we will do a one time home and home becasue it allows us time to reach out to our alumni base in the Des Moines area! Thanks to the NCAA classifying you I-AA we don't have to count you as a D-II win. That is the NCAA's problem but I can deal with it. It is very similar to our money game with IA State with the exeption of the fact that we do have 55 scholarships and they have 85 so we have a little more of a realistic shot of winning but it is still more than likely a sure loss. Hey, if you guys were going out to Indiana State for a football game, trust me, all of my money would be on you guys, but also on many D-II teams or D-III teams. But to just get on track here I still don't think that an expanded playoff system should include an auto-bid from the PFL.

[Bub]

Just for the record it is Matsen, there has never been nor will there ever be a Division III program defeat a I-A program (shouldn't say never but in the last 50 years). Please don't forget that I also made mention of the Mac to I-A, I still consider them I-A because the landscape is the same. Also, I know more about college football sitting on the *****ter in the morning than you will ever know. I will promise you (please remember what I said earlier about 1-2 a year) that if you take out the kids that "had an offer from Central Missouri" (but lost it is what they forget to tell you), and the kids that were offered "book money" from NW Missouri State that you have less than 1-2 kids in every class that have recieved scholarship offers, your son may have very possibly been one of them. I am not embarrassed by the Drake or the Pioneer Football league, they should just not be classified I-AA. Like Bub said, my beef should be with the NCAA. I know where my school and my team land in the overall scheme of College Football, you should too! Not in I-AA.

Maybe some people should chip in here and rate the divisions of football from I-A to D-III and also throw in NAIA. Tell me were they all land in a ranking system. Heres mine.

I-A
I-AA
DII
NAIA Division I
I-AA Non Scholarship
NAIA Division II
D-III

Why do they not call I-AA Non Scholarship something else. They don't call us "I-A non-23 scholarships" they have a seperate classification for us, their needs to be one for teams in the "non-scholarship" category. Go up and be I-AA or go down and be D-III. I don't care. I respect Drake athletes just as much as I do Iowa or Central College, just find a spot. There is enough confusion in I-AA football as it is, we don't need sub-classifications inside of what is already a sub-classification.



You should know in NAIA football there is no Division I&II, it is all one Division. Drake has regularly thumped all the NAIA teams around here and will continue to do so, when they play them. I happen to think NAIA football is very good. My son was debating between NAIA, D-II (with scholarship offers in hand)and Drake . Drake won, dispite no football scholarships, because it was a better school and football program IHHO.

As hard as it is to accept, for some kids, scholarship money doesn't mean everything. Promise all you want, but when it comes to the football players at Drake and what scholarships they did or didn't have, I'll have to go with mine and DUPFLFAN's personal knowledge.

[nmatsen]

Well then, if you would please take a look at the NAIA home page
http://naia.collegesports.com/
I can promise you that there is most surely a D-I and II of NAIA and if there is not such a classification in football it has been changed very recently. I am not saying you can't beat a NAIA school, a very good one at that, I am telling you that just because you beat them does not make you "great" or a traditional I-AA. We have beaten many I-A teams in the past but that does not make us I-A or even on their level. If your son did not have the offers he was looking for from DII and NAIA then he probably would select an excellent I-AA non scholly program such as Drake, the same way that someone who did not recieve the offer they were looking for from a I-A school they might take one from a I-AA. It is all in order to what I have posted above as my "pecking order" if you will of College football. You and DUPFL Fan can have all the views you want and me and the rest of I-AA will continue to put you in the "pecking order" that we do.

[Bub]

Well then, if you would please take a look at the NAIA home page
http://naia.collegesports.com/
I can promise you that there is most surely a D-I and II of NAIA and if there is not such a classification in football it has been changed very recently. I am not saying you can't beat a NAIA school, a very good one at that, I am telling you that just because you beat them does not make you "great" or a traditional I-AA. We have beaten many I-A teams in the past but that does not make us I-A or even on their level. If your son did not have the offers he was looking for from DII and NAIA then he probably would select an excellent I-AA non scholly program such as Drake, the same way that someone who did not recieve the offer they were looking for from a I-A school they might take one from a I-AA. It is all in order to what I have posted above as my "pecking order" if you will of College football. You and DUPFL Fan can have all the views you want and me and the rest of I-AA will continue to put you in the "pecking order" that we do.

I don't need to look at the NAIA home page. As I said, my son was recruited by and looked at some NAIA schools. I know about them. Division I & II exist, but not for football and haven't for some time. Football is all one division.


My son had the offers he wanted from D-II and NAIA schools, he didn't think they measured up to Drake as football programs or academically, and therefore he chose to reject those offers and go to Drake, just as I understand DUPFLFAN's son did. Our sons didn't settle for Drake, they chose Drake. There is a huge difference.

[nmatsen]

Bub, I am not saying that either of your sons "settled" to play at Drake, not my intention at all. I am just saying that when all options were measured, Drake was the best choice. Correct? If your son was offered a full ride at Colgate (a reputable, scholarship I-AA program and an outstanding acedemic institution) he might have chosen to be wearing a "Gate" on the side of his helmet right now. If one of the D-II schools offered him a full ride instead of half he might have been there right now instead of Drake, I don't know the situation and I don't need to know, I am just saying that if the "offer" wasn't right from a NAIA school or a D-II school or possibly there not been an offer from the school he wanted to attend he CHOSE to go to Drake, not settled. I didn't settle to go to UNI becaue I wouldn't play at Iowa, I CHOSE UNI because they could offer me something Iowa couldn't, much like your son probably chose Drake over wherever he was going to go. Nothing wrong with that, this is getting too personal, I don't like bringing up players like this. Once again, as a WHOLE, Pioneer Football League Members do not stack up to schools that are WINNING Auto-Bid conference Championships. Therefore until they do "in my opinion" they should not be given auto-bids. If the NCAA needs to change their classification to accomodate that then the NCAA needs to do that.

[Bub]

Bub, I am not saying that either of your sons "settled" to play at Drake, not my intention at all. I am just saying that when all options were measured, Drake was the best choice. Correct? If your son was offered a full ride at Colgate (a reputable, scholarship I-AA program and an outstanding acedemic institution) he might have chosen to be wearing a "Gate" on the side of his helmet right now. If one of the D-II schools offered him a full ride instead of half he might have been there right now instead of Drake, I don't know the situation and I don't need to know, I am just saying that if the "offer" wasn't right from a NAIA school or a D-II school or possibly there not been an offer from the school he wanted to attend he CHOSE to go to Drake, not settled. I didn't settle to go to UNI becaue I wouldn't play at Iowa, I CHOSE UNI because they could offer me something Iowa couldn't, much like your son probably chose Drake over wherever he was going to go. Nothing wrong with that, this is getting too personal, I don't like bringing up players like this. Once again, as a WHOLE, Pioneer Football League Members do not stack up to schools that are WINNING Auto-Bid conference Championships. Therefore until they do "in my opinion" they should not be given auto-bids. If the NCAA needs to change their classification to accomodate that then the NCAA needs to do that.


We all have opinions, I accept, appreciate and applaud that. I think we can agree conf. are not as strong at the bottom as they are at the top, whether it's the Gateway(Indiana State) or the Pioneer(Butler). We can agree to disagree on whether the I-AA football playoffs should expand to include the NEC & PFL, or whether they should be included in lieu of the MEAC if they bail.

[*****]

... We can agree to disagree on whether the I-AA football playoffs should expand to include the NEC & PFL, or whether they should be included in lieu of the MEAC if they bail.Maybe I'm wrong but I think the MEAC is talking about sending their champ (someday) to the Heritage Bowl instead of the playoffs. Like the SWAC, all the remaining teams without a conflicting game would be playoff eligible just like all the teams from the NEC, PFL, MAAC, Big South and Great West (not provisionals) are now.

[UAalum72]

Maybe I'm wrong but I think the MEAC is talking about sending their champ (someday) to the Heritage Bowl instead of the playoffs. Like the SWAC, all the remaining teams without a conflicting game would be playoff eligible just like all the teams from the NEC, PFL, MAAC, Big South and Great West (not provisionals) are now.
But wouldn't it have to go as an at-large? At least in basketball, a conference whose champion is ineligible for the NCAA tournament essentially forfeits its automatic bid for that season -that's why ineligible teams don't participate in their conference tournaments.

[henfan]

I say speed up the transition period and give it to the GWFC. :nod:

Most I-AA programs have millions of dollars invested in their FB programs. If your school wants feelgood rewards, they've come to the wrong place. This isn't pee-wee soccer, for Pete's sake.

I say eliminate all auto-bids and have the NCAA's designated committee award the 16 slots to the teams they think are the most deserving of a shot at the national championship, regardless of I-AA conference affiliation. If six teams from the SoCon deserve to go to the playoffs, fine. If none from the A-10 deserve to go, fine. Just reward the 16 best the opportunity based on regular season performance. If a team plays a challenging schedule and wins its games, there will be little need for fretting.

[GannonFan]

But wouldn't it have to go as an at-large? At least in basketball, a conference whose champion is ineligible for the NCAA tournament essentially forfeits its automatic bid for that season -that's why ineligible teams don't participate in their conference tournaments.

I believe the NCAA, at least in IAA football, leaves it up to the individual conferences to determine who gets the auto-bid. As long as they have a procedure for it when the season starts, then they can give it to whomever comes out of that process.

[*****]

I believe the NCAA, at least in IAA football, leaves it up to the individual conferences to determine who gets the auto-bid. As long as they have a procedure for it when the season starts, then they can give it to whomever comes out of that process.I don't think the selection committee would give a conference an AQ if the conference was not going to give it to the conf champ.

[blukeys]

Most I-AA programs have millions of dollars invested in their FB programs. If your school wants feelgood rewards, they've come to the wrong place. This isn't pee-wee soccer, for Pete's sake.

I say eliminate all auto-bids and have the NCAA's designated committee award the 16 slots to the teams they think are the most deserving of a shot at the national championship, regardless of I-AA conference affiliation. If six teams from the SoCon deserve to go to the playoffs, fine. If none from the A-10 deserve to go, fine. Just reward the 16 best the opportunity based on regular season performance. If a team plays a challenging schedule and wins its games, there will be little need for fretting.

Agree with you Henfan. The whole NEC argument is predicated on the Little League T-Ball rule that everyone should play. I have challenged these guys to provide the name of one team from a mid major conference that could have won a I-AA championship and the silence has been deafening. They just want an auto bid to make their kids feel good not because they have ONE team that could win an NC.

Of course if their autobid leaves out more deserving teams and their athletes then too bad.

[UAalum72]

There's also been deafening silence when we ask how long the MEAC KEEPS an autobid without winning a single playoff game for a decade. What's THEIR chance of winning a NC?

No auto-bids? Fine, it'll end this 'mid-major' crap and at least put the NEC on a level with the MEAC and SWAC - a terrible league, but at least not segregated from equal automatic access to the I-AA playoffs.

[Go...gate]

I think the answer is to slot the NEC into the autobid to be vacated by the MEAC, with the GWFC being added once they get a sixth team (San Diego any possibility here?). Cal me a purist, but everybody should get a chance, including the PFL in the long term.

[UAalum72]

Most I-AA programs have millions of dollars invested in their FB programs.

Oh yeah. The NEC has four new stadiums in the last four years, three more less than 15 years old, and Albany has one on the drawing board. You don't finance those with bake sales.

I've seen Parsons Field, I wasn't impressed. How much has Delaware put into their stadium in the last 20 years? (except for the artificial turf they just got embarassed into installing). Has UMass restored the concrete in the last 40 years? they don't even have permanent lights. New Hampshire?

[aceinthehole]

There's also been deafening silence when we ask how long the MEAC KEEPS an autobid without winning a single playoff game for a decade. What's THEIR chance of winning a NC?

No auto-bids? Fine, it'll end this 'mid-major' crap and at least put the NEC on a level with the MEAC and SWAC - a terrible league, but at least not segregated from equal automatic access to the I-AA playoffs.

:) Exactly, we won't be "mid-majors" anymore, but just a weak I-AA conference like the MEAC, SWAC, Big South, and OVC.

[*****]

There's also been deafening silence when we ask how long the MEAC KEEPS an autobid without winning a single playoff game for a decade. What's THEIR chance of winning a NC?

No auto-bids? Fine, it'll end this 'mid-major' crap and at least put the NEC on a level with the MEAC and SWAC - a terrible league, but at least not segregated from equal automatic access to the I-AA playoffs.The MEAC has too won a playoff game in the last decade. No need to smack on the discussion board. BTW, the SWAC has never had an AQ.

[UAalum72]

The MEAC has too won a playoff game in the last decade. No need to smack on the discussion board. BTW, the SWAC has never had an AQ.
Not smack, just a mistake. It's actually six years, right? and how many years before that? Or was it the OVC that hasn't won in how many years?

You're the I-AA guru, is there a central listing of playoff records by conference somewhere?

And the REAL point is, what ARE their chances of winning the national championship, if that's the criterion Delaware posters want to use?

As far as smack goes, you'd have more credibility if you also warned off all the 'mid-majors = D-III' crap from the UNI and UD posters you get around here.

[*****]

Not smack, just a mistake. It's actually six years, right? and how many years before that? Or was it the OVC that hasn't won in how many years?
You're the I-AA guru, is there a central listing of playoff records by conference somewhere?
And the REAL point is, what ARE their chances of winning the national championship, if that's the criterion Delaware posters want to use?
As far as smack goes, you'd have more credibility if you also warned off all the 'mid-majors = D-III' crap from the UNI and UD posters you get around here.1. The MEAC last won a playoff game in 1999 (and they won three that year) and the OVC last won in 2000.
2. I'll try to get the Conference playoff records for you.
3. Every AQ Conference has a current member that has won an NCAA I-AA national championship except for the Southland and the Patriot.
4. I have warned off members from smacking, even on this thread!! I also alerted moderators by reporting posts. You have got to help these Mods out by reporting posts that have smack.

[colgate13]

fyi - www.diaafootball.com has playoff info by team, conference, etc. Great site! (run by an AGS'er I believe...)

[blukeys]

There's also been deafening silence when we ask how long the MEAC KEEPS an autobid without winning a single playoff game for a decade. What's THEIR chance of winning a NC?

No auto-bids? Fine, it'll end this 'mid-major' crap and at least put the NEC on a level with the MEAC and SWAC - a terrible league, but at least not segregated from equal automatic access to the I-AA playoffs.


No deafening silence from me. I have already stated on this board that the NCAA should reevaluate the autobids when it becomes obvious the conference is not competitive in the playoffs. If you want a standard I would say going 5 + years without winning a game. The NCAA could also look at the OVC.

Your argument here for a NEC autobid appears to be that there are weak teams with autobids now so lets add more. I find that logic unappealing when competitive teams such as Youngstown are left out every year.

[UAalum72]

3. Every AQ Conference has a current member that has won an NCAA I-AA national championship except for the Southland and the Patriot.
Right. The MEAC won in 1978, and the OVC won in 1979 and 1982. What is this, the British Open, they get a lifetime exemption?

So HALF of the current autobid conferences have not won a championship in the LIFETIME of current players.

[*****]

fyi - www.diaafootball.com has playoff info by team, conference, etc. Great site! (run by an AGS'er I believe...)That's a nice setup (run by amsterbison I think) but it has some caveats like the conference playoff records. They are for current teams only not for the conference. Example the Gateway.

That site has:
Playoff Appearances 48
Playoff Win-Loss 59-42
National Runner-ups 3
National Championships 6

Actually the Gateway has:
Playoff Appearances 37
Playoff Win-Loss 38-35
National Runner-ups 2
National Championships 2

So it is tricky.

[UAalum72]

Your argument here for a NEC autobid appears to be that there are weak teams with autobids now so lets add more. I find that logic unappealing when competitive teams such as Youngstown are left out every year.
No, just that IF you're going to have eight autos, somebody else should have a chance to prove it on the field, if a current participant hasn't in a specified period of time.

[*****]

Right. The MEAC won in 1978, and the OVC won in 1979 and 1982. What is this, the British Open, they get a lifetime exemption?
So HALF of the current autobid conferences have not won a championship in the LIFETIME of current players.My answer was for current members like I said. FAMU was not in the MEAC when it won for example.

[colgate13]

That's a nice setup (run by amsterbison I think) but it has some caveats like the conference playoff records.

There's also a little Lafayette College, UL-L mix up in the records...

But it's a quick handy tool that I find myself going back to time and again. I haven't found a better one.

[aceinthehole]

What is this, the British Open, they get a lifetime exemption?

too funny :)

[Dane96]

Ace, check your pm

[aceinthehole]

There's also a little Lafayette College, UL-L mix up in the records...

But it's a quick handy tool that I find myself going back to time and again. I haven't found a better one.

Its a great site, but you have to do some follow up work with the stats, especially when looking at historic records, classifications, and conference memberships.

For example the site says CCSU is 2-4 all-time vs. I-A conferences, but we all know that isn't true. CCSU is 0-3 vs. UConn when they were still Yankee/A-10 members (I-AA) and the Blue Devils are 2-1 vs. Buffalo, but again that was before the Bulls joined the I-A and the MAC.

[blukeys]

No, just that IF you're going to have eight autos, somebody else should have a chance to prove it on the field, if a current participant hasn't in a specified period of time.


I agree 100% and this option should be exercised before we start expanding the playoffs with more autobids.

[henfan]

Oh yeah. The NEC has four new stadiums in the last four years, three more less than 15 years old, and Albany has one on the drawing board. You don't finance those with bake sales.

I've seen Parsons Field, I wasn't impressed. How much has Delaware put into their stadium in the last 20 years? (except for the artificial turf they just got embarassed into installing). Has UMass restored the concrete in the last 40 years? they don't even have permanent lights. New Hampshire?

As I'm sure you realized after typing, investments in capital projects like facility maintenance and construction- especially for multi-purpose facilities- tend to be a less frequent and smaller part of the equation when considering year-to-year institutional committment to football. NEC schools, as well as NAIA, D-III, D-II and the rest of D-I also regularly invest in facility upkeep and construction. Even Delaware, who's done very little, has invested several million over the last 20 years in maintenence & enhancements to DE Stadium (new end zone grandstands, two total field replacements, ADA additions, lights, lockrooms, weight/training rooms, coaches offices, etc.) (FTR, UD's new field will not be artificial.) In short, every school has facility expenses.

It's just a fact that 'mid-major' programs have not had the same sort of expenses related to FB as have the rest of I-AA. People tend to discount the costs related to offering 60-ish FB equivalancies. They forget about the other 60-ish Title IX equivalancies that must be offered to offset the FB costs, as well as the additional expenses it takes to support those sports. I'm glad to see NEC schools stepping up and becoming increasingly more like the rest of the sub-division. It's the equitable thing to do to the benefit of the rest of I-AA and will help those programs become more competitive nationally. I think it's great.

Don't forget, I'm the guy in favor of doing away with auto-bids to give all schools in the I-AA classification equal access to the post-season- that includes the NEC, MAAC, PFL, Big South, GWFC, etc. I prefer the NCAA incent schools for regular season performance, not necessarily because they belong to a particular conference.

[nmatsen]

The only problem with not having auto-bids is it would make a lot of schools not able to take their money game because they would be afraid that if they don't have a certain record they won't get into the playoffs. If UNI for example plays two money games (supposed to be two losses) and drops a non-conference game to SDSU or something (just a scenario) They could go 6-1 in the conference and not get in because they were 7 and 4. This would cause schools to stop scheduling money games impacting finances of I-AA institutions and athletics.

[henfan]

The only problem with not having auto-bids is it would make a lot of schools not able to take their money game because they would be afraid that if they don't have a certain record they won't get into the playoffs.

I don't buy that explanation at all. At the end of the day, teams still have to win games. At large bids now are predicated on elements like strength of schedule and that still doesn't stop schools from scheduling money games.

Business is business and that isn't likely to change no matter the system for selecting playoff teams.

[GannonFan]

I don't buy that explanation at all. At the end of the day, teams still have to win games. At large bids now are predicated on elements like strength of schedule and that still doesn't stop schools from scheduling money games.

Business is business and that isn't likely to change no matter the system for selecting playoff teams.

I agree, I don't buy it either. Fact is, outside of maybe the OVC, most of the teams getting autobids generally are teams that would make the playoffs anyway. Sure, the SLC has had a few teams here and there that wouldn't have made it (the conference being the bare minimum in terms of numbers makes this more likely) and the Big Sky had Montana St a few years ago, but the vast majority of teams in the playoffs got there without the help of an autobid. These teams are playing some money games right now - what losing the autobids would do is make a team think twice about scheduling more than 1 money game - scheduling 3 money games could very well keep them out of the playoffs. But, play your one and you'll still be fine even without autobids, and the playoffs won't look any different than they do now.

[blukeys]

One area the NCAA really needs to clarify is their criteria for making an autobid determination. In their defense they have not needed to do so since they expanded to 16 teams but that is hardly a reasonable excuse for ignoring this area past the first 5 years of expansion.

The NEC is on solid footing when they complain that they have no target to shoot at to gain an auto bid. The only written guideline gives only a 6 member conference (too small in my opinion, 89 Hen's solution looks better and better) as a criteria.

The NCAA should:

1. Establish past performance criteria where a conference loses an auto-bid if they are awarded an auto bid and do not perform. This is currently in the rules but there are no established criteria.

2. Provide guidelines that they will use to determine what conferences should get auto-bids no later than Jan 1 of any year with bid determinations decided by June 1.

This should give conferences adequate time to tweak their auto bid proposals with the NCAA guidelines in mind.

I have been and remain opposed to a NEC auto bid or expansion past 16 teams. But I am also aware of the changes in the NEC and the attempts of certain teams in this conference to step up to the scolly teams. In my view this should not be discouraged. If the NEC wants to make the leap to the highest level they should at least be given a target to shoot at that is objective and measurable. At that stage individual institutions can make decisions with a decisive dollars and cents, cost vs. benefits criteria.

3. The NCAA needs seriously to look at the Minimum number of teams needed to qualify a conference for an auto bid. As I look at the conferences and the number of teams 8 is much more appropriate than 6. To win the Auto bid in the A-10 is twice as difficult as the Southland, yet both get an auto bid. Raising the conference requirement to 8 as opposed to 6 teams makes sense to me.

Regarding No. 3, I believe this in no way negates the responsibility for establishing criteria for Nos. 1 and 2.

The NCAA has failed in establishing objective criteria for deciding what conferences should receive an auto bid. This hurts not only the NEC but also the Big South and Great Western who are currently only 1 team away from auto bid status. None of these conferences should have to guess what the NCAA criteria should be. Nor should the existing auto bid conferences.

Everyone should enter the year with a clean slate, knowing the rules, and with the ability to make their best case.

Expansion is not the answer. Clarity is.:nod: :nod:

[GannonFan]

Expansion is not the answer. Clarity is.:nod: :nod:

You think that vagueness may be exactly what the NCAA wants? By being vague - they list the criteria that would be necessary but they leave the final say up to themselves - then they maintain a lot of control over the structure of the playoffs. By putting out a strict set of guidelines they cede all control over what the playoffs look like. I'm thinking the NCAA is perfectly fine with the subjective vagueness they have now.

[*****]

:nod: