Non-Questions about playoff criteria

[URMite]

In order to help out Ursus, I thought we should continue any debate about who got in, who should have gotten in, and what is the current criteria in this thread instead of his request for questions thread.

I think this was the SRS from last season.



RANK /TEA RECORD/NCAASRS


1 Eastern Ill. (11-1) 25.30


2 North Dakota St. (11-0) 23.17


3 Eastern Wash. (10-2) 19.05


4 Southeastern La. (10-2) 18.12


5 McNeese St. (10-2) 16.25


6 Fordham (11-1) 16.00


7 Coastal Caro. (10-2) 15.68


8 Montana (10-2) 15.64


9 Towson (10-2) 15.55


10 Maine (10-2) 15.54


11 Northern Ariz. (9-2) 14.54


12 Jacksonville St. (9-3) 13.50


13 Bethune-Cookman (10-2) 13.39


14 Harvard (9-1) 13.32


15 Tennessee St. (9-3) 13.09


16 Charleston So. (10-3) 11.81


17 South Dakota St. (8-4) 10.01


18 South Carolina St. (9-3) 9.38


19 Princeton (8-2) 9.37


20 Sacred Heart (10-2) 9.32


21 Southern Utah (8-4) 9.19


22 Tenn.-Martin (7-5) 9.03


23 Sam Houston St. (8-4) 8.69


24 Youngstown St. (8-4) 8.15


25 Samford (8-4) 7.85


26 Chattanooga (8-4) 7.70


27 Old Dominion (8-4) 7.20


28 Lehigh (8-3) 7.15


29 New Hampshire (7-4) 6.66


30 Central Ark. (7-5) 6.24

Now how they got to those numbers is anyone's guess. However 21 & 23 got an at-large 24 & >30 did not. I think the only one skipped was 22 (with 5 losses)

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

29 also got an at large

[ursus arctos horribilis]

hey that's cool URMite. I can move those other comments over there to this thread going forward. I'll put this link on that one as well.

[URMite]

Without looking it up myself, did SUU or SHSU win more road games than YSU? Did either of them have opponents with a greater cumulative winning percentage than YSU without regard to who the opponents played?

[centennial]

The point most people were making is SRS doesn't align with any other rating. It is an inherently bad system. On top of that teams were put in that were lower on it. Basically the selectors do what they want. Do you think something like this would fly if FBS had a playoffs. Could anyone imagine the Sun Belt getting an at large even in a 24 team playoff? Since the national media doesn't care about the FCS NCAA can get away with it.

[WestCoastAggie]

The point most people were making is SRS doesn't align with any other rating. It is an inherently bad system. On top of that teams were put in that were lower on it. Basically the selectors do what they want. Do you think something like this would fly if FBS had a playoffs. Could anyone imagine the Sun Belt getting an at large even in a 24 team playoff? Since the national media doesn't care about the FCS NCAA can get away with it.

Georgia Southern or La. Tech may "earn" an at-large bid in a 24-team type playoff.

But meh...

[URMite]

29 also got an at large

Umm...I wonder if that could have to do with their vague description of standardizing 11 vs 12 games?

I think if this methodology (to use the term loosely) was used 10-1 Lehigh would have had a better chance of getting in that year as well.

Not sure what would have helped our 8-3 team from 2012...

[centennial]

Umm...I wonder if that could have to do with their vague description of standardizing 11 vs 12 games?

I think if this methodology (to use the term loosely) was used 10-1 Lehigh would have had a better chance of getting in that year as well.

Not sure what would have helped our 8-3 team from 2012...
Those rankings are already standardized. Its a part of the formula.

[robsnotes4u]

Here is the main statement, everyone is forgetting.

"The NCAA SRS will not “force select” any teams into the championship; rather, it is one of several resources that theFootball Championship Committee will have at its disposal when debating the merits of teams under consideration forchampionship selection."

I know a lot hate computer ratings, and I would love to have something like SRS, or Massey Composite to be the only thing they look at. They tried that with the BCS and people complained, as everyone has their own perception.

[robsnotes4u]

Interesting article if you have never read it. I read this when it first came out and it peaked my interest in understanding SRS.

http://smartfootball.com/chase-stuart/the-simple-rating-system-bringing-order-kinda-to-chaos#sthash.Eft38W9T.dpbs

[MTfan4life]

The point most people were making is SRS doesn't align with any other rating. It is an inherently bad system. On top of that teams were put in that were lower on it. Basically the selectors do what they want. Do you think something like this would fly if FBS had a playoffs. Could anyone imagine the Sun Belt getting an at large even in a 24 team playoff? Since the national media doesn't care about the FCS NCAA can get away with it.

This is my favorite thing about people posting computer rankings. People only use the ones that benefit their argument or opinion. If the more common ones sandbagged NDSU or the Valley, you'd call them crappy at best.

[URMite]

Interesting article if you have never read it. I read this when it first came out and it peaked my interest in understanding SRS.

http://smartfootball.com/chase-stuart/the-simple-rating-system-bringing-order-kinda-to-chaos#sthash.Eft38W9T.dpbs

That definitely appears to be a different version since MOV is absent from last season's FCS SRS.

[robsnotes4u]

That definitely appears to be a different version since MOV is absent from last season's FCS SRS.

Correct, NCAA doesn't use MOV. Just a good article on SRS. I had an Excel version of Stuart Chase's SRS last year, but I must have deleted it.

[TypicalTribe]

At the end of the day, there are no perfect methods for picking teams. There just aren't enough data points.

[MTfan4life]

Is your point that YSU has been a bubble team 5 times since 2006 and has not gotten in every time? Is YSU the new Wofford?

Five times??? xlolx Exaggerate much? In 2007, they were 7-4 with a 16 team field. In 2012, they had an FBS win, but they had 4 FCS level losses, and the committee rarely has let in a team with 4 or more FCS or lower losses. Last season, they were probably snubbed, we'll give you that. 2013 is the only one of those three that was legitimate. Where are the other two? The two seasons they went 6-5 back when the rule was a clear "you need 7?"

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Five times??? xlolx Exaggerate much? In 2007, they were 7-4 with a 16 team field. In 2012, they had an FBS win, but they had 4 FCS level losses, and the committee rarely has let in a team with 4 or more FCS or lower losses. Last season, they were probably snubbed, we'll give you that. 2013 is the only one of those three that was legitimate. Where are the other two? The two seasons they went 6-5 back when the rule was a clear "you need 7?"

They bring up those 6-5 seasons all the time as proof of their snubbings. When you are mediocre just learn to stfu and quit making yourself look like a moron. It's a perception of themselves problem.

As I've said many times about SOME MVFC fans. It is best to buy them for what they are actually worth and sell them for what they think they are worth. Guy could make a good livin' that way.

The ridiculous MVFConspiracy conference marches to a beat we can not hear. Had this same argument you are going through right now with a Penguin fan a few years back. When I pointed that two of the 7 win seasons had a D2 victory the answer was "Yeay...but sitill!". xlolx

[penguinpower]

They bring up those 6-5 seasons all the time as proof of their snubbings. When you are mediocre just learn to stfu and quit making yourself look like a moron. It's a perception of themselves problem.

As I've said many times about SOME MVFC fans. It is best to buy them for what they are actually worth and sell them for what they think they are worth. Guy could make a good livin' that way.

The ridiculous MVFConspiracy conference marches to a beat we can not hear. Had this same argument you are going through right now with a Penguin fan a few years back. When I pointed that two of the 7 win seasons had a D2 victory the answer was "Yeay...but sitill!". xlolx


The real issue is that a share of the conference title is not needed for the Big Sky and CAA teams to get in the playoffs, but that standard is placed on MVFC teams. That is the bull**** I am talking about. And it is still no guarantee.

[semobison]

They bring up those 6-5 seasons all the time as proof of their snubbings. When you are mediocre just learn to stfu and quit making yourself look like a moron. It's a perception of themselves problem.

As I've said many times about SOME MVFC fans. It is best to buy them for what they are actually worth and sell them for what they think they are worth. Guy could make a good livin' that way.

The ridiculous MVFConspiracy conference marches to a beat we can not hear. Had this same argument you are going through right now with a Penguin fan a few years back. When I pointed that two of the 7 win seasons had a D2 victory the answer was "Yeay...but sitill!". xlolx

Youngstown would have probably made it last season if they would have had Uni early, ndsu mid season and SDSU late. In all three games they got beat by better teams but they really crapped in the bed in the last game of the season against the Jacks. That being said, they were still probably a better team than the three Big Sky teams who lost their first round game in the playoffs. Remember 2010 when a 4-4 Valley team curbstomped the BSC co champs in Bozeman? Any 5-3 team in the Valley this year should be in! How many first round losses for the Sky this year?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Youngstown would have probably made it last season if they would have had Uni early, ndsu mid season and SDSU late. In all three games they got beat by better teams but they really crapped in the bed in the last game of the season against the Jacks. That being said, they were still probably a better team than the three Big Sky teams who lost their first round game in the playoffs. Remember 2010 when a 4-4 Valley team curbstomped the BSC co champs in Bozeman? Any 5-3 team in the Valley this year should be in! How many first round losses for the Sky this year?
BFD. Do you remember the barely making the playoffs teams from the BSC curb stomping the MVFC teams a wile back...teams like NAU over SIU? That stuff happens. It sure as hell doesn't mean that team x or team y should have been selected.

Get this through your head. You show up at the table with your resume and based on that you get in or don't. It doesn't mkae a whole lot of difference if you are in a conference with the most overblown ego's I've personally ever seen or not.

You pick the MVFC team that went on to win 3 straight after that season as your proof? Good one dude...seriously you really make a great point there. The post you are answering doesn't have a damn thing to do with what you supplied. It was about teams without the criteria thinking they deserved a shot...when they didn't there slick. You know, the usual information bias/conspiracy crap that the MVFC is famous for.

Moving these over to the other thread cuz I have fallen back into this on the wrong thread.

[robsnotes4u]

BFD. You show up at the table with your resume and based on that you get in or don't.

As true a statement as I have read regarding selections for the playoffs. Congrats

[MR. CHICKEN]

In order to help out Ursus, I thought we should continue any debate about who got in, who should have gotten in, and what is the current criteria in this thread instead of his request for questions thread.

I think this was the SRS from last season.



RANK /TEA RECORD/NCAASRS


1 Eastern Ill. (11-1) 25.30


2 North Dakota St. (11-0) 23.17


3 Eastern Wash. (10-2) 19.05


4 Southeastern La. (10-2) 18.12


5 McNeese St. (10-2) 16.25


6 Fordham (11-1) 16.00


7 Coastal Caro. (10-2) 15.68


8 Montana (10-2) 15.64


9 Towson (10-2) 15.55


10 Maine (10-2) 15.54


11 Northern Ariz. (9-2) 14.54


12 Jacksonville St. (9-3) 13.50


13 Bethune-Cookman (10-2) 13.39


14 Harvard (9-1) 13.32


15 Tennessee St. (9-3) 13.09


16 Charleston So. (10-3) 11.81


17 South Dakota St. (8-4) 10.01


18 South Carolina St. (9-3) 9.38


19 Princeton (8-2) 9.37


20 Sacred Heart (10-2) 9.32


21 Southern Utah (8-4) 9.19


22 Tenn.-Martin (7-5) 9.03


23 Sam Houston St. (8-4) 8.69


24 Youngstown St. (8-4) 8.15


25 Samford (8-4) 7.85


26 Chattanooga (8-4) 7.70


27 Old Dominion (8-4) 7.20


28 Lehigh (8-3) 7.15


29 New Hampshire (7-4) 6.66


30 Central Ark. (7-5) 6.24

Now how they got to those numbers is anyone's guess. However 21 & 23 got an at-large 24 & >30 did not. I think the only one skipped was 22 (with 5 losses)





19994.....PRIOR PERFORMANCE IN PLAYOFFS = CONSIDERATION BAH COMMITTEE..........xshhhx...BROCK!

[Sycamore62]

BFD. Do you remember the barely making the playoffs teams from the BSC curb stomping the MVFC teams a wile back...teams like NAU over SIU? That stuff happens. It sure as hell doesn't mean that team x or team y should have been selected.

Get this through your head. You show up at the table with your resume and based on that you get in or don't. It doesn't mkae a whole lot of difference if you are in a conference with the most overblown ego's I've personally ever seen or not.

You pick the MVFC team that went on to win 3 straight after that season as your proof? Good one dude...seriously you really make a great point there. The post you are answering doesn't have a damn thing to do with what you supplied. It was about teams without the criteria thinking they deserved a shot...when they didn't there slick. You know, the usual information bias/conspiracy crap that the MVFC is famous for.

Moving these over to the other thread cuz I have fallen back into this on the wrong thread.

Are you counting the BigTen or just FCS?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Are you counting the BigTen or just FCS?

Ahh, I have no dealings with them but if you tell me it is that way with them then I will trust you on it. I guess maybe it's a cultural thing in that neck of the woods.

[robsnotes4u]

Here is a SRS, not the NCAA as it includes Margin of Victory, through 9 weeks.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6l9uy8q3sqankr5/SRS%20through%20oct.%2026.png?dl=0

[robsnotes4u]

That definitely appears to be a different version since MOV is absent from last season's FCS SRS.

If you would like to create an Excel Worksheet, there might be enough information in this screencast to do it. You would need to change formulas, or place a zero in for MOV to be close to what the NCAA does.
http://www.screencast.com/users/Sports-Reference/folders/PFR/media/cea8d1e3-ed91-431f-a0df-1336c03b1268

The only issue is you would probably need to do other divisions that are included in SRS computations.

[BisonTru]

Get this through your head. You show up at the table with your resume and based on that you get in or don't. It doesn't mkae a whole lot of difference if you are in a conference with the most overblown ego's I've personally ever seen or not.



Just trying to figure this out. From what I gather, you can justify strength of conference to place an 8-4 Big Sky team in the field over a team with a better record in a weaker conference. However, you cannot use strength of conference to argue an 8-4 MVFC team over an 8-4 Big Sky team.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Just trying to figure this out. From what I gather, you can justify strength of conference to place an 8-4 Big Sky team in the field over a team with a better record in a weaker conference. However, you cannot use strength of conference to argue an 8-4 MVFC team over an 8-4 Big Sky team.

Where, oh where did I ever do that? I am one of the people that for ages now has been trying to tell conference jock sniffers to get off that mindset because these teams are selected on a conference quota.

So no, you absolutely DO NOT have it straight.

[semobison]

Where, oh where did I ever do that? I am one of the people that for ages now has been trying to tell conference jock sniffers to get off that mindset because these teams are selected on a conference quota.

So no, you absolutely DO NOT have it straight.

So its regionalization then. If you have a good team and want to make the playoffs you are better off in an average conference? And hey, if I am wrong, don't be a smart ass, just simplify wtf your saying.

[centennial]

We are going in a backwards manner. If your team is the next best 13 after the autobids they should be in. End of conversation, it doesn't matter to me if they got to the finals last year or they come from the BigSky or CAA or have been in the playoffs ten years in a row. These ADs are manipulating the system to essentially cheat. Even if MVFC only deserves the autobid and has a completely **** year, I would still maintain this stance. We are almost to the end of the season again and it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Big Sky or the CAA got more at larges than the MVFC. And there will be no explaination for it. No one will be able to justify it outside of excuses.

[URMite]

Let's take a look at losses...

Has a team with 5 losses of any type ever received an at-large bid?

Does anybody have a list of teams from the SoCon, CAA, MVFC, & Big Sky (not because they are in those conferences, but because they are the ones assumed to have a reasonable SOS) with only 3 losses of any type that were not part of the playoff field starting in 1989?

[URMite]

Where, oh where did I ever do that? I am one of the people that for ages now has been trying to tell conference jock sniffers to get off that mindset because these teams are selected on a conference quota.

So no, you absolutely DO NOT have it straight.
Don't you mean are not? Otherwise it seems to undermine your own argument.

[centennial]

Let's take a look at losses...

Has a team with 5 losses of any type ever received an at-large bid?

Does anybody have a list of teams from the SoCon, CAA, MVFC, & Big Sky (not because they are in those conferences, but because they are the ones assumed to have a reasonable SOS) with only 3 losses of any type that were not part of the playoff field starting in 1989?

This is a selective look at the data. You are probably right. A 3-4 loss MVFC, CAA team would win multiple other conferences. The real question is the point of the playoffs to get the best teams or not? If the big dance, NFL, NBA can do it right, why not us?

[URMite]

From what I have seen, at-large bid have been on this basis.

Anyone with 3 or less losses and a minimum SOS are the first group in. (Good luck determining what that minimum SOS is)

Anyone with 5 or more losses is out.

Everyone left get scrutinized and subjected to endless debate on whether they should be in or out.

If you played 8 >.500 FBS teams and finished 3-8, you might be one of the 13 best teams but you are not getting an at-large bid.

[centennial]

From what I have seen, at-large bid have been on this basis.

Anyone with 3 or less losses and a minimum SOS are the first group in. (Good luck determining what that minimum SOS is)

Anyone with 5 or more losses is out.

Everyone left get scrutinized and subjected to endless debate on whether they should be in or out.

If you played 8 >.500 FBS teams and finished 3-8, you might be one of the 13 best teams but you are not getting an at-large bid.
The rules state only 6 wins are necessary. A 4 loss team from a good conference needs to kick out the 9 win at large from MEAC or PL.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

So its regionalization then. If you have a good team and want to make the playoffs you are better off in an average conference? And hey, if I am wrong, don't be a smart ass, just simplify wtf your saying.

I'll be a smart ass if I feel like it's getting pretty f'n dumb the amount of whining that gets done by MVFC posters. Seriously, I've said a ton of times that I sure could not have argued if another team from the MVFC made it. You know why? Because it is ARGUABLE. That's the problem sometimes. If your team is on the bubble and arguments can be made one way or the other then you are at risk...which is risky.

But you know what I have not seen ONCE. I've not seen one guy from the MVFC admit that maybe another team had a case to get in as much as they did. So you think listening to someone and arguing with a fanbase like this is good discussion and one shouldn't start making fun of them over it...sorry I disagree with you on that.

On top of that all I hear is how f'n tough your conference from each and every team...no time off...gotta work all the time...yeah we all get it you all are under the impression that the MVFC is god's f'n gift to everything. That's the comedic part. Your conference is no tougher a grind than any other top conference out there so get over yourselves...you look ridiculous. It is a grind in the MVFC, it is also a grind in the CAA, BSC, SLC, etc. etc. I went off roading a bit there but felt I'd explain the reason some of ya are gonna get a less than amicable response from some of us that have grown tired of the tear fest.

Not saying you are doing that personally semo. You want to argue about which mediocre team didn't make the final couple slots? Why? If your weren't ****ty you made it pretty easily with your resume. It's called the bubble for a reason, it ain't called the sure footin'.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Don't you mean are not? Otherwise it seems to undermine your own argument.

oops, yes. xlolx

[ursus arctos horribilis]

We are going in a backwards manner. If your team is the next best 13 after the autobids they should be in. End of conversation, it doesn't matter to me if they got to the finals last year or they come from the BigSky or CAA or have been in the playoffs ten years in a row. These ADs are manipulating the system to essentially cheat. Even if MVFC only deserves the autobid and has a completely **** year, I would still maintain this stance. We are almost to the end of the season again and it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Big Sky or the CAA got more at larges than the MVFC. And there will be no explaination for it. No one will be able to justify it outside of excuses.

The CAA teams on an individual basis may or may not have a better case than an MVFC team. We just have to wait and see but this silly misnomer that the BSC has been getting more bids that the NVFC is the type of bull**** that you really need to bone up on. I challenged clenz on this claim last year to go back and sort it out...guess what...he hasn't been making that claim since. It happened last year, that's it. It's been pretty damn even the rest of the history.

[MTfan4life]

The rules state only 6 wins are necessary. A 4 loss team from a good conference needs to kick out the 9 win at large from MEAC or PL.

Those are not rules. They're bull**** guidelines that they only have because I'm sure some sort of guidelines are required. They've set a precedent that having too many losses is going to greatly affect your playoff status, regardless if you've played Pop Warner teams or NFL teams. Every team has a chance at being the one champion in any given season. Some teams just lose their chances during the regular season.

[MTfan4life]

Does anybody have a list of teams from the SoCon, CAA, MVFC, & Big Sky (not because they are in those conferences, but because they are the ones assumed to have a reasonable SOS) with only 3 losses of any type that were not part of the playoff field starting in 1989?

Here are the teams falling under that criteria.
Big Sky
Northern Arizona 2012 8-3
Idaho State 2002 8-3 (were Co-Champions of the conference)
Portland State 1999 8-3
Eastern Washington 1993 7-3

Southern Conference
Wofford 2004 8-3
Wofford 2002 9-3 (had a win over 10-2 Georgia Southern)

Colonial
Richmond 2012 8-3
Villanova 2001 8-3 (Co-champions with 4 other teams)
Rhode Island 2001 8-3
Northeastern 1997 8-3
New Hampshire 1996 8-3 (I didn't think I'd ever see them on a snubbed list)
Connecticut 1995 8-3
Richmond 1995 7-3-1
William & Mary 1994 8-3
Massachusetts 1993 8-3
Massachusetts 1992 7-3
New Hampshire 1990 7-3-1

Valley
Youngstown State 2005 8-3
Youngstown State 2001 8-3 (6 D1 wins during era where that was a rule)
Northern Iowa 1999 8-3 (FBS win, but 2 D2 wins)
Western Illinois 1994 8-3 (The bubble must have been stacked this year)

I don't see this clear outrageous bias that they supposedly have against a certain one of these conferences.

[semobison]

I'll be a smart ass if I feel like it's getting pretty f'n dumb the amount of whining that gets done by MVFC posters. Seriously, I've said a ton of times that I sure could not have argued if another team from the MVFC made it. You know why? Because it is ARGUABLE. That's the problem sometimes. If your team is on the bubble and arguments can be made one way or the other then you are at risk...which is risky.

But you know what I have not seen ONCE. I've not seen one guy from the MVFC admit that maybe another team had a case to get in as much as they did. So you think listening to someone and arguing with a fanbase like this is good discussion and one shouldn't start making fun of them over it...sorry I disagree with you on that.

On top of that all I hear is how f'n tough your conference from each and every team...no time off...gotta work all the time...yeah we all get it you all are under the impression that the MVFC is god's f'n gift to everything. That's the comedic part. Your conference is no tougher a grind than any other top conference out there so get over yourselves...you look ridiculous. It is a grind in the MVFC, it is also a grind in the CAA, BSC, SLC, etc. etc. I went off roading a bit there but felt I'd explain the reason some of ya are gonna get a less than amicable response from some of us that have grown tired of the tear fest.

Not saying you are doing that personally semo. You want to argue about which mediocre team didn't make the final couple slots? Why? If your weren't ****ty you made it pretty easily with your resume. It's called the bubble for a reason, it ain't called the sure footin'.

Hey, I know there are other teams from other conferences that have been deserving and left out. Yes, it is called the bubble for a reason. I asked you about regionalization since you came up with the conference quota remark???
About the Valley, we had two teams in last season, both won first round games. This season we go 23-1 in OOC FCS games, a few of our fans complain about the recent lack of playoff selections, hoping for more teams this year and that has you all ticked off. Come on, this is a fan message board, that you have input in. If you think Valley fans are going to admit that other conferences are just as good as we are, THIS YEAR, I just don't know what to say!! I stand by what I said earlier. Any team that goes 5-3 in the Valley this season IMO deserves a playoff spot. My guess is that could be anywhere from 3 to 5 teams.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Hey, I know there are other teams from other conferences that have been deserving and left out. Yes, it is called the bubble for a reason. I asked you about regionalization since you came up with the conference quota remark???
About the Valley, we had two teams in last season, both won first round games. This season we go 23-1 in OOC FCS games, a few of our fans complain about the recent lack of playoff selections, hoping for more teams this year and that has you all ticked off. Come on, this is a fan message board, that you have input in. If you think Valley fans are going to admit that other conferences are just as good as we are, THIS YEAR, I just don't know what to say!! I stand by what I said earlier. Any team that goes 5-3 in the Valley this season IMO deserves a playoff spot. My guess is that could be anywhere from 3 to 5 teams.

First off nothing has me ticked off. The remark I made on conference quota's was a mistake that URMIte asked about and corrected for me which I agreed with his correction.

Your standing on a 23-1 record as if it's something that everyone should marvel at? Sorry man, it's good but there are only a few quality wins in that mess so let's not overstretch the Johnson over that one.

The MVFC as a whole IS NOT dramatically better than the other conferences. I don't care what you all think. NDSU is better, the conference is similar to the other top conferences so when you measure the rest of the at large teams against each other without regard to what conference they are in then MAYBE the MVFC get in 3, or 4, or whatever. Maybe they don't. The statement that any 5-3 is just more ridiculous talk as if you were in a vacuum on this thing. The answer is "no" on that one. It depends on who theose teams are matched up against and what their record is OOC (not the MVFC's) and so forth.

[semobison]

First off nothing has me ticked off. The remark I made on conference quota's was a mistake that URMIte asked about and corrected for me which I agreed with his correction.

Your standing on a 23-1 record as if it's something that everyone should marvel at? Sorry man, it's good but there are only a few quality wins in that mess so let's not overstretch the Johnson over that one.

The MVFC as a whole IS NOT dramatically better than the other conferences. I don't care what you all think. NDSU is better, the conference is similar to the other top conferences so when you measure the rest of the at large teams against each other without regard to what conference they are in then MAYBE the MVFC get in 3, or 4, or whatever. Maybe they don't. The statement that any 5-3 is just more ridiculous talk as if you were in a vacuum on this thing. The answer is "no" on that one. It depends on who theose teams are matched up against and what their record is OOC (not the MVFC's) and so forth.

That is your opinion and I can respect that. Do I agree? Hell no! 5-3, 8-4 in the Valley or UNI 5-3 7-5 with 2 FBS losses is not ridiculous, IMO! Do you want the best teams or regionalization? I can tell you this though, even though I THINK 7-5 UNI is good enough, I doubt that the committee will. Also, I don't care what you say 23-1 and 7-1 is pretty good anywhere! Thinking that it is not is, well...ridiculous!

[ursus arctos horribilis]

That is your opinion and I can respect that. Do I agree? Hell no! 5-3, 8-4 in the Valley or UNI 5-3 7-5 with 2 FBS losses is not ridiculous, IMO! Do you want the best teams or regionalization? I can tell you this though, even though I THINK 7-5 UNI is good enough, I doubt that the committee will. Also, I don't care what you say 23-1 and 7-1 is pretty good anywhere! Thinking that it is not is, well...ridiculous!

Stop putting words in my mouth. I said it was good. I said there wasn't a ton of quality so stop with the overdone self congratulations.

5 losses will very likely keep them out I don't care if 2 are FBS. That is a well known playoff killer is having too many D2 or FBS games mixed or separate. We agree on this because I also have my doubts with a 5 loss UNI. Thing is we'll hear all about it for ages anyway if it happens.

The individual teams will be compared with each other. The 13 that the committee thinks is the best will be selected. On top of that this regionalization talk is pure crap anyway. The AGS Poll has missed one team each of the last 5 years or something like that. If the AGS Poll does a good job ranking the teams and the Poll Committee selects those same teams we've EXCEPT ONE then I'd say a fairly good job is being done.

I agreed with the AGS Poll last year and thought YSU should have been chosen but hey it was debatable so I don't take it as hard as some do.

[URMite]

I still think the biggest problem is SOS.

There are people who look only at divisions and think any 1-11 FBS teams is better than any 11-1 FCS team. And any 1-11 FCS team is better than any 11-1 division II team.

There are people who think a win is a win and that any 8-3 division II is equal to any 8-3 FCS team.

And all kinds of people in between...

[MTfan4life]

Your standing on a 23-1 record as if it's something that everyone should marvel at?

The FCS non-con wins are sorted by order of record:

#15 Montana
#18 Cal Poly
#19 Liberty
Northern Arizona
Drake
Duquesne
Central Arkansas
Butler
St. Francis PA
Eastern Illinois
Eastern Illinois
Southeast Missouri State
Northwestern Louisiana
North Dakota
Northern Colorado
Tennessee Tech
Tennessee Tech
Southern Utah
Incarnate Word
Valparaiso
Mississippi Valley State
Austin Peay
Weber State

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I still think the biggest problem is SOS.

There are people who look only at divisions and think any 1-11 FBS teams is better than any 11-1 FCS team. And any 1-11 FCS team is better than any 11-1 division II team.

There are people who think a win is a win and that any 8-3 division II is equal to any 8-3 FCS team.

And all kinds of people in between...

Agreed.

[kalm]

After watching SDSU in person last year in the playoffs, I'd say the committee got it about right.

[semobison]

After watching SDSU in person last year in the playoffs, I'd say the committee got it about right.

You mean after they beat NAU, in Flagstaff! How bout the Griz losing in Missoula to Coastal? What happened to SUU? 3 BSC teams lost their first game in the playoffs last year. Last time a Valley team lost their playoff opener was 2010!

[robsnotes4u]

You mean after they beat NAU, in Flagstaff! How bout the Griz losing in Missoula to Coastal? What happened to SUU? 3 BSC teams lost their first game in the playoffs last year. Last time a Valley team lost their playoff opener was 2010!

What does the results of last years games have to do with this year? Does every team that is playing in the FCS this year have the exact same players, the exact same injuries, the exact same schedule, etc...

The perception should be, who are the the best 13 teams that remain after the autobid. Conferences should have nothing to do with it.

Maybe your argument should be the autobid isn't fair. They should do away with it, because the winner of X conference isn't as good as the 7-5 team in the MVFC.

Funny thing I have found out from message boards. When a team has improved, becoming the big dog, the fans of that team also think they have improved. They think they know more about football, selection committees, etc. Is there a class for this? Is it done by osmosis? I wonder, since I live in Fargo, and I am around Bison fans always, have I gotten smarter?

Rant over. Another nice taping last night of the Bison pre-game show at Fargo Billiards. I love when they are there during our pool league night. Running around filming us shooting pool for filler in the show.

[semobison]

What does the results of last years games have to do with this year? Does every team that is playing in the FCS this year have the exact same players, the exact same injuries, the exact same schedule, etc...

The perception should be, who are the the best 13 teams that remain after the autobid. Conferences should have nothing to do with it.

Maybe your argument should be the autobid isn't fair. They should do away with it, because the winner of X conference isn't as good as the 7-5 team in the MVFC.

Funny thing I have found out from message boards. When a team has improved, becoming the big dog, the fans of that team also think they have improved. They think they know more about football, selection committees, etc. Is there a class for this? Is it done by osmosis? I wonder, since I live in Fargo, and I am around Bison fans always, have I gotten smarter?

Rant over. Another nice taping last night of the Bison pre-game show at Fargo Billiards. I love when they are there during our pool league night. Running around filming us shooting pool for filler in the show.

Um...you do realize I was responding to Kalm who brought up last years SDSU game at EWU. And, I have not gotten any smarter watching Bison football since the early 80's when I was a student because we were good then too!....I have not lived in Fargo for a long time but used to play pool league for Ricks Bar. One of the pool tables was right in front of the stage and the band's started at 9 so the last league games were played while drunk women danced around the pool table!... Lighten up!

[kalm]

You mean after they beat NAU, in Flagstaff! How bout the Griz losing in Missoula to Coastal? What happened to SUU? 3 BSC teams lost their first game in the playoffs last year. Last time a Valley team lost their playoff opener was 2010!

Yep, the BSC had a poor showing last year. Just saying i expected a better game out of the Valley #2.

Same thing for the UM-UNI game in 2011.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

The thing some people have trouble wrapping their head around is that what is being said backs up what most non MVFC fans have said. There isn't some great separation between leagues. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. You expect that over a period of time between fairly evenly matched participants.

So in any given year one conferences teams could have resumes that stack up better in their eyes against the others. As I said earlier you can try and predict the future but the only thing the committee has to go on is what each team brings to the table as far as resume. You don't get to go down the rabbit hole with 23-1, what some teams have done over the history of the playoffs and so forth.

You get to narrow your focus down to what team x did this year and then you compare it to team y, etc.

[semobison]

Yep, the BSC had a poor showing last year. Just saying i expected a better game out of the Valley #2.

Same thing for the UM-UNI game in 2011.
And I expected you guys to get to the finals!

[Sycamore62]

Does anyone have actual knowledge about the cost to bus a team as opposed to flying a team?

I'd like to know the cost of 1 away game and how much more a couple hundred miles costs

[semobison]

The thing some people have trouble wrapping their head around is that what is being said backs up what most non MVFC fans have said. There isn't some great separation between leagues. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. You expect that over a period of time between fairly evenly matched participants.

So in any given year one conferences teams could have resumes that stack up better in their eyes against the others. As I said earlier you can try and predict the future but the only thing the committee has to go on is what each team brings to the table as far as resume. You don't get to go down the rabbit hole with 23-1, what some teams have done over the history of the playoffs and so forth.

You get to narrow your focus down to what team x did this year and then you compare it to team y, etc.

I agree with you completely on this post. Year to year things change. You stated previously that the AGS poll has been fairly accurate on who has made the playoffs. The AGS poll on Sept 22, the week before Valley started conference play had 8 of our 10 teams ranked in the top 24. Now, I am not stupid enough to think we have a chance to get 6 teams in, 5 would be a huge stretch. Now, I have looked at the records and upcoming schedules and what I see is 4 Valley teams at best at 5-3 or better in conference play. these teams would be 8-4 overall except UNI who would be 7-5 with their two close FBS losses, most likely on the bubble looking in. I hope you can see why IMO, THIS YEAR if you go 5-3, in the Valley you have a very strong case for being a playoff team. I don't believe the MVFC has 3 teams in the top 10 but I do think we have 5 or 6 ranked between 8 and 24 this year!

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I agree with you completely on this post. Year to year things change. You stated previously that the AGS poll has been fairly accurate on who has made the playoffs. The AGS poll on Sept 22, the week before Valley started conference play had 8 of our 10 teams ranked in the top 24. Now, I am not stupid enough to think we have a chance to get 6 teams in, 5 would be a huge stretch. Now, I have looked at the records and upcoming schedules and what I see is 4 Valley teams at best at 5-3 or better in conference play. these teams would be 8-4 overall except UNI who would be 7-5 with their two close FBS losses, most likely on the bubble looking in. I hope you can see why IMO, THIS YEAR if you go 5-3, in the Valley you have a very strong case for being a playoff team. I don't believe the MVFC has 3 teams in the top 10 but I do think we have 5 or 6 ranked between 8 and 24 this year!

I never once mentioned the early polls as I didn't think I would need to but just so you know I'm talking about the final AGS Poll. So if we are clear on that now...if the poll committee grabs all but one team that we have on our poll then they must have totally f'd it up right?

Please for the love of god stop trying to sell me on one mediocre team being more deserving than another cuz I tell you I won't buy into it.

You see I don't care that MVFC teams have to play other MVFC's during the season. The fact that you use an early season poll as some stance of why a conference deserves more at the end of the year is seriously silly. You do realize that conference play, wins & losses, is part of the whittling down process correct?

This same thing has happened with the CAA before. Did that mean at the end all of those teams that had some certain record in conference pulled out of thin air should have made it in?

Now all that said. I could easily see 4 MVFC teams getting in and I would not argue against it. It's a very strong league this year and if individual resumes match up better with other candidates then by all means they should get in at that point.

It has nothing to do with your 5-3 rationale however.

[semobison]

I never once mentioned the early polls as I didn't think I would need to but just so you know I'm talking about the final AGS Poll. So if we are clear on that now...if the poll committee grabs all but one team that we have on our poll then they must have totally f'd it up right?

Please for the love of god stop trying to sell me on one mediocre team being more deserving than another cuz I tell you I won't buy into it.

You see I don't care that MVFC teams have to play other MVFC's during the season. The fact that you use an early season poll as some stance of why a conference deserves more at the end of the year is seriously silly. You do realize that conference play, wins & losses, is part of the whittling down process correct?

This same thing has happened with the CAA before. Did that mean at the end all of those teams that had some certain record in conference pulled out of thin air should have made it in?

Now all that said. I could easily see 4 MVFC teams getting in and I would not argue against it. It's a very strong league this year and if individual resumes match up better with other candidates then by all means they should get in at that point.

It has nothing to do with your 5-3 rationale however.

Ok, 8-4 in the Valley should get you in, forget what your conference record is! Wow!

[kalm]

Ok, 8-4 in the Valley should get you in, forget what your conference record is! Wow!

Depends on who your resume is up against.

[robsnotes4u]

Depends on who your resume is up against.

Bingo!!!

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Depends on who your resume is up against.

xlolx

I actually typed up that exact thing about a 1/2 hr. ago and adding "this is what I meant by things not being considered in a vacuum" but then just erased it and left it alone.

I figure he's acting like I'm being hard headed when I'm simply laying out how and why these things go the way they do sometimes so no sense going farther into than I already was. Glad to see that it's sort of well known though, thanks kalm.

[semobison]

Depends on who your resume is up against.

Well, the resume for Valley teams should be pretty good. The only non conference losses for any teams in the Valley who can make 8-4 would be FBS losses.

[clawman]

We are going in a backwards manner. If your team is the next best 13 after the autobids they should be in. End of conversation, it doesn't matter to me if they got to the finals last year or they come from the BigSky or CAA or have been in the playoffs ten years in a row. These ADs are manipulating the system to essentially cheat. Even if MVFC only deserves the autobid and has a completely **** year, I would still maintain this stance. We are almost to the end of the season again and it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Big Sky or the CAA got more at larges than the MVFC. And there will be no explaination for it. No one will be able to justify it outside of excuses.
"best" as measured by what?

[MTfan4life]

We are going in a backwards manner. If your team is the next best 13 after the autobids they should be in. End of conversation, it doesn't matter to me if they got to the finals last year or they come from the BigSky or CAA or have been in the playoffs ten years in a row. These ADs are manipulating the system to essentially cheat. Even if MVFC only deserves the autobid and has a completely **** year, I would still maintain this stance. We are almost to the end of the season again and it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Big Sky or the CAA got more at larges than the MVFC. And there will be no explaination for it. No one will be able to justify it outside of excuses.

When will you understand that the number of playoff bids a conference gets doesn't equal strength of that conference? You have this 2013 playoff selection stick up your *** and you can't let it go because you think it will happen again. Why does it matter how many teams from your conference make the playoffs anyways? Only one team gets to be the champion.


And there will be no explaination for it.

So if the 4th place team from the Valley is a 7-5 Youngstown State with Pioneer and NEC non-con wins and the 4th place team from the CAA is a 9-3 Richmond with a non-con win over Liberty and a conference win over Villanova, you'd still say there's no excuse that the 4th CAA team got in? Your conference humping love affair is getting a little too wild.

[melloware13]

One thing to look at is not who's in the top 24 of the poll (using AGS as most accurate recently, but I let people choose their own adventure), but top 20. Remember that there will be some AQ's that aren't ranked in the top 24 that have to be in the field because of the auto bid.

[tingly]

The problem with taking the top 13 at larges is that it's impossible to know who the last few are. They have to use things like conference standings, schedule strength, big wins, bad losses, injuries, and good/bad November performance cuz they don't have any other options. It's along the lines of, "so how do we break this 8-way tie for the last 4 spots without flipping coins?"

[centennial]

When will you understand that the number of playoff bids a conference gets doesn't equal strength of that conference? You have this 2013 playoff selection stick up your *** and you can't let it go because you think it will happen again. Why does it matter how many teams from your conference make the playoffs anyways? Only one team gets to be the champion.



So if the 4th place team from the Valley is a 7-5 Youngstown State with Pioneer and NEC non-con wins and the 4th place team from the CAA is a 9-3 Richmond with a non-con win over Liberty and a conference win over Villanova, you'd still say there's no excuse that the 4th CAA team got in? Your conference humping love affair is getting a little too wild.
Is a 7-5, or 8-4 team from MVFC equal to one a 10-2 from MEAC? That's your answer. Having parity in a league does not make in worst especially when it dominates OOC.
Richmond is 2nd in the CAA, the 4th team in the CAA is Delaware, I absolutely believe 4-5 teams from MVFC deserve the at large more. Tell me why someone should select SC State over YSU as an at large?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Is a 7-5, or 8-4 team from MVFC equal to one a 10-2 from MEAC? That's your answer. Having parity in a league does not make in worst especially when it dominates OOC.
Richmond is 2nd in the CAA, the 4th team in the CAA is Delaware, I absolutely believe 4-5 teams from MVFC deserve the at large more. Tell me why someone should select SC State over YSU as an at large?

This is sort of the problem with a lot of you MVFC guys. You overvalue yourselves so enormously it's comical. Until recently I had taken stuff you post fairly seriously but I realize now you are simply a comedian making ridiculous comments so I'll take it as such. If you have a losing record in your own conference you have almost no chance of making the playoffs so pay attention.

Your conference ain't that god damn tough in comparison to the others so stop lying to yourself tiger.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

The problem with taking the top 13 at larges is that it's impossible to know who the last few are. They have to use things like conference standings, schedule strength, big wins, bad losses, injuries, and good/bad November performance cuz they don't have any other options. It's along the lines of, "so how do we break this 8-way tie for the last 4 spots without flipping coins?"

One of the sharper dudes on the board recently it would appear. Nice work there.

[centennial]

This is sort of the problem with a lot of you MVFC guys. You overvalue yourselves so enormously it's comical. Until recently I had taken stuff you post fairly seriously but I realize now you are simply a comedian making ridiculous comments so I'll take it as such. If you have a losing record in your own conference you have almost no chance of making the playoffs so pay attention.

Your conference ain't that god damn tough in comparison to the others so stop lying to yourself tiger.
How is this ridiculous? There are 4 teams with winning conference records, another 2 with .500. You have clearly become vindictive for no reason. Fine, I get it the whining is getting old, and I agree that it is. It is my opinion that MVFC this year is better than any other FCS conference, if you have any reasons to refute what I said list your reasons instead of personally attacking me.

[Bisonator]

Your conference ain't that god damn tough in comparison to the others so stop lying to yourself tiger.

What's your proof that this is true?

Wouldn't 23-1 kind of refute that statement?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

What's your proof that this is true?

Wouldn't 23-1 kind of refute that statement?

If it were 23-1 against playoff teams I'd go with ya on that but it ain't. So yeah I got as much proof as you do.

[Bisonator]

If it were 23-1 against playoff teams I'd go with ya on that but it ain't. So yeah I got as much proof as you do.

Haha! The fact is it's all we do have so far this season and all we have to go on as far as "best" conference.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

How is this ridiculous? There are 4 teams with winning conference records, another 2 with .500. You have clearly become vindictive for no reason. Fine, I get it the whining is getting old, and I agree that it is. It is my opinion that MVFC this year is better than any other FCS conference, if you have any reasons to refute what I said list your reasons instead of personally attacking me.

You know what. I may have misread your post previously. I read it as you saying teams with even a 4-5 record in your conference as opposed to maybe 4 or 5 teams. So yes, you would have 4 or 5 teams ELIGIBLE to be considered in the mix of all the other teams. It does not mean all 4 or 5 are locks to get in.

But yes to another point the whining from your crowd is sickening to watch constantly over the last few years. I can see that you all are pre-emptively developing your arguments in case you don't get everything you feel you are entitled to this year.

Aplogies on my mistaken reading of the last post though.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Haha! The fact is it's all we do have so far this season and all we have to go on as far as "best" conference.

Oh, I've said many times it is the best conference. It ain't by the freaking landslide that some of your contemporary's want to make it out to be. The difference between the MVFC, CAA, BSC, etc. ain't a wide gap even if I give the nod to the MVFC this year.