Hero's 2017 FCS Playoffs as a 68-Team field

[The Cats]

Let's just go all out and make the FCS Playoffs a full 68-team bracket in honor of March Madness.

Here's Hero's Sports's 2017 68 team tournament bracket. What do you think?

https://herosports.com/fcs/football-2017-fcs-playoffs-68-team-ncaa-tournament-bracket-march-madness-byby?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Link&utm_campaign=FCS

https://cdn.herosports.com/upload/files/2018/03/fcs-bracket-e1520902325374.jpg

[TheKingpin28]

Let's just go all out and make the FCS Playoffs a full 68-team bracket in honor of March Madness.

Here's Hero's Sports's 2017 68 team tournament bracket. What do you think?

https://herosports.com/fcs/football-2017-fcs-playoffs-68-team-ncaa-tournament-bracket-march-madness-byby?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Link&utm_campaign=FCS

https://cdn.herosports.com/upload/files/2018/03/fcs-bracket-e1520902325374.jpg

SDSU as a #2 seed is laughable for starts.

We need to go back to 16 teams with the entire field seeded. Hell I'd even settle for 20 at this point.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[TennBison]

You left out Trump University.

[PAllen]

There's a lot of suckage in that bracket. And I don't mean the seedings. God almighty, the FCS playoffs should never get bigger than 32.

[katss07]

SDSU as a #2 seed is laughable for starts.

We need to go back to 16 teams with the entire field seeded. Hell I'd even settle for 20 at this point.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk
Yeah, SDSU as a 2 is a head scratcher. Maybe they are seeding this as if it were before the playoffs? Can’t think of any other reason JSU is ahead of Sam, SDSU or Wofford.

[BEAR]

Or why UCA is ahead of SDSU? Good grief...I know our coach screwed us but dang...swap the two...

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

There's a lot of suckage in that bracket. And I don't mean the seedings. God almighty, the FCS playoffs should never get bigger than 32.

Lehigh was so bad last year they're in the 16 seed play-in game!....lol

[F'N Hawks]

Is there an NIT bracket?

[JayJ79]

Interesting stat:
according to ncaa.com (using the RPI list and the SRS list),
there are 351 MBB teams in Div. I, with 68 teams that make the tournament, which is 19.4% of the total teams.
there are 124 FB teams in Div. I FCS, with 24 teams that make the playoffs, which is 19.4% of the total teams.

[TheKingpin28]

Yeah, SDSU as a 2 is a head scratcher. Maybe they are seeding this as if it were before the playoffs? Can’t think of any other reason JSU is ahead of Sam, SDSU or Wofford.If they increase it past 24, why even have the playoffs. JSU was about as tough as wet toilet paper this year.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[PaladinFan]

There's a lot of suckage in that bracket. And I don't mean the seedings. God almighty, the FCS playoffs should never get bigger than 32.

I'd love to go back to a smaller playoff field. 7 win teams really shouldn't even be in the discussion for the post season, I don't care what conference you play in.

[UNHWildcat18]

I'd love to go back to a smaller playoff field. 7 win teams really shouldn't even be in the discussion for the post season, I don't care what conference you play in.

errrr thats rather debatable.

[Professor Chaos]

SDSU as a #2 seed is laughable for starts.

We need to go back to 16 teams with the entire field seeded. Hell I'd even settle for 20 at this point.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk


Yeah, SDSU as a 2 is a head scratcher. Maybe they are seeding this as if it were before the playoffs? Can’t think of any other reason JSU is ahead of Sam, SDSU or Wofford.


Or why UCA is ahead of SDSU? Good grief...I know our coach screwed us but dang...swap the two...
The #1 and #2 seeds are the 8 seeded teams from the previous playoffs bracketed together like they were in the FCS bracket (#1 JMU and #8 SUU in the upper left region and #2 NDSU and #7 Wofford in the upper right region and so forth). Looks like the entire thing is based off of last year's regular season.

[Professor Chaos]

The 24 team field is no different from the 16 team field for the top 8. In fact it's better for the top 8 since they're all now seeded and all get a bye on Thanksgiving weekend whereas with the 16 team field only the top 4 were seeded and everyone played Thanksgiving weekend. The top 8 are the true title contenders anyway. Since the field expanded past 16 in 2010 Youngstown St in 2016 is the only team to even play in the title game after playing on Thankgiving weekend.

Personally, I'll take more playoff football over less playoff football. Regionalization has always been a thing in the FCS playoffs so it has just as good of a chance to go away with a 24 team field as it did with a 16 team field... which is slim to none.

[Sammy94]

Yeah, SDSU as a 2 is a head scratcher. Maybe they are seeding this as if it were before the playoffs? Can’t think of any other reason JSU is ahead of Sam, SDSU or Wofford.


It's Zero Sports, he hates the Kats. I am shocked he gave us a 2 seed.

[POD Knows]

SDSU as a #2 seed is laughable for starts.

We need to go back to 16 teams with the entire field seeded. Hell I'd even settle for 20 at this point.

Sent from my SM-J727V using TapatalkWhy is it laughable, they were a 5 seed in the FCS tourney last year, there were 4 teams ahead of them and those 4 teams got #1 seeds in this, they would have to be a #2 if they are basing this somewhat after last years pairings.

[PaladinFan]

errrr thats rather debatable.

Not in my view.

If you cannot get to 8 wins in an 11 game schedule, why do you think you should have a claim to play for the national title? Just because?

With the 16 team field, sometimes the power conferences would get 3 teams in. Sometimes they'd just get 1. You didn't get a playoff bid just because you were pretty good last year and won 7 games. This concept that 5 teams from a single conference should make the post season is just anathema to competition and good order.

Cut the field to 16. Make it hard to get in. Quit giving autobids to weak conferences. Finish the whole shooting match before Christmas.

[PaladinFan]

The 24 team field is no different from the 16 team field for the top 8. In fact it's better for the top 8 since they're all now seeded and all get a bye on Thanksgiving weekend whereas with the 16 team field only the top 4 were seeded and everyone played Thanksgiving weekend. The top 8 are the true title contenders anyway. Since the field expanded past 16 in 2010 Youngstown St in 2016 is the only team to even play in the title game after playing on Thankgiving weekend.

Personally, I'll take more playoff football over less playoff football. Regionalization has always been a thing in the FCS playoffs so it has just as good of a chance to go away with a 24 team field as it did with a 16 team field... which is slim to none.

So we have a field with a bunch of filler teams that have no business being there? Precisely correct.

In a 16 team field nearly every team is a title contender. Most teams in that field won at least 9 games.

Think about the increased competition as well. Instead of the #1 seed getting a bye week while their opponents play an extra game, they will have to see a 9 win team right out of the gate.

Contract the field, put the best teams in there, and slug it out. The seeding still matters as you get home games, but there are no cupcakes. There are plenty of teams in the 24 team field that have no reason to be there. I'll certainly throw Furman in that pile as well lest anyone thinks I'm a homer.

[POD Knows]

It's Zero Sports, he hates the Kats. I am shocked he gave us a 2 seed.You were a #6 seed in the FCS tourney, that makes you a 2 seed here, why are you guys have a problem with this concept, anybody seeded 5 to 8 gets a 2 seed in this bracket it looks like.

[Professor Chaos]

So we have a field with a bunch of filler teams that have no business being there? Precisely correct.

In a 16 team field nearly every team is a title contender. Most teams in that field won at least 9 games.

Think about the increased competition as well. Instead of the #1 seed getting a bye week while their opponents play an extra game, they will have to see a 9 win team right out of the gate.

Contract the field, put the best teams in there, and slug it out. The seeding still matters as you get home games, but there are no cupcakes. There are plenty of teams in the 24 team field that have no reason to be there. I'll certainly throw Furman in that pile as well lest anyone thinks I'm a homer.
I'd disagree that a 16 team field provided a harder path for the seeds. For instance, with a 16 team field last year you would've have one of those top 8 teams getting a 5-6 Lehigh in the round of 16. The opening round is a good way of weeding out the pretenders who were paper tigers hiding behind a good regular season record or a cupcake laden league title.

My contention is that if you really only want to include the "contenders" you might as well skip 16 and take it down to 8. There are not 16 national title contenders at the end of the regular season.... even 8 may be stretching it. Let the teams that had a good season (notice I said good not great) enjoy some postseason football. Who did it hurt to put Nicholls and South Dakota into the playoff field this past year? Both were bubble teams that probably wouldn't have made a 16 team field and they played a fantastic back and forth first round game.

You know what tournament is also full of a bunch of filler teams? The NCAA men's basketball tournament... and this weekend will be evidence that there's a lot more excitement to be gained from games that involve one or both teams that have no chance at taking down the title. College sports is entertainment.... why not enjoy being entertained by more playoff football? I think 24 teams is a superior model to 16 because, like I said earlier, it doesn't change the path for the top 8 and it also gives every FCS league an autobid that wants one.

[UNHWildcat18]

Not in my view.

If you cannot get to 8 wins in an 11 game schedule, why do you think you should have a claim to play for the national title? Just because?

With the 16 team field, sometimes the power conferences would get 3 teams in. Sometimes they'd just get 1. You didn't get a playoff bid just because you were pretty good last year and won 7 games. This concept that 5 teams from a single conference should make the post season is just anathema to competition and good order.

Cut the field to 16. Make it hard to get in. Quit giving autobids to weak conferences. Finish the whole shooting match before Christmas.

Because teams play significantly harder schedules than other teams. They also play in harder conferences, don't get me wrong there are definitely limits to this but UNH classic example, goes 7-4 everyone cries that they make it in over other teams. They go down and beat the southland champs UCA. Do you think 9-2 Mcneese who lost to UCA 47-17 deserved to get in over UNH due to W/L ratio? There are too many teams in weaker conferences that can get to 8/9 wins that have a smaller chance to win the NC over a 7-4 team from say the CAA/MVFC/Big Sky. If you take the auto bids way and kept it at 16 the PL NEC Pioneer don't even get their conference champs in last year. Honestly I wish the number of FCS schools would shrink, a lot have no business being in the FCS and would be a better fit for D2

[TheKingpin28]

The #1 and #2 seeds are the 8 seeded teams from the previous playoffs bracketed together like they were in the FCS bracket (#1 JMU and #8 SUU in the upper left region and #2 NDSU and #7 Wofford in the upper right region and so forth). Looks like the entire thing is based off of last year's regular season.


Why is it laughable, they were a 5 seed in the FCS tourney last year, there were 4 teams ahead of them and those 4 teams got #1 seeds in this, they would have to be a #2 if they are basing this somewhat after last years pairings.

I see how they did it, but I'd still put them in the Top 4 with WSU as well.

[PaladinFan]

I'd disagree that a 16 team field provided a harder path for the seeds. For instance, with a 16 team field last year you would've have one of those top 8 teams getting a 5-6 Lehigh in the round of 16. The opening round is a good way of weeding out the pretenders who were paper tigers hiding behind a good regular season record or a cupcake laden league title.

My contention is that if you really only want to include the "contenders" you might as well skip 16 and take it down to 8. There are not 16 national title contenders at the end of the regular season.... even 8 may be stretching it. Let the teams that had a good season (notice I said good not great) enjoy some postseason football. Who did it hurt to put Nicholls and South Dakota into the playoff field this past year? Both were bubble teams that probably wouldn't have made a 16 team field and they played a fantastic back and forth first round game.

You know what tournament is also full of a bunch of filler teams? The NCAA men's basketball tournament... and this weekend will be evidence that there's a lot more excitement to be gained from games that involve one or both teams that have no chance at taking down the title. College sports is entertainment.... why not enjoy being entertained by more playoff football? I think 24 teams is a superior model to 16 because, like I said earlier, it doesn't change the path for the top 8 and it also gives every FCS league an autobid that wants one.

As long as you have autobids, there is some risk that a bad team will sneak through. That's always going to be the case.

I disagree with your contention, though. Just as an example, consider 2005. That was a 16 team field. Only two teams in the field had fewer than 8 wins. Both of those teams (Eastern Washington and Nicholls State) were surprising autobids in their conference. In 2017 there were several playoff participants that were not even ranked or finished well back in their conference.

In 2005, there were perhaps only a small handful of teams in that field that were not legitimate threats to make the national title game. It would not have surprised anyone to see probably 12 of those team hoist the trophy that year.

One reason I like it is because it gets to the point. We don't waste time on these play in games and then watching powerful teams beat up on unranked opponents coming off their bye week. In a 16 team field virtually every team immediately is paired with an 8 or 9+ win opponent in round one. The favorites are still the favorites, but the high seeds aren't protected nearly as much from playing top teams early in the post season.

Besides, it concludes the playoffs without the big gap before the National Title game. I'm a big FCS fan, but even I lose interest on a national level waiting weeks for the finale. Let's get on with it.

[PaladinFan]

Because teams play significantly harder schedules than other teams. They also play in harder conferences, don't get me wrong there are definitely limits to this but UNH classic example, goes 7-4 everyone cries that they make it in over other teams. They go down and beat the southland champs UCA. Do you think 9-2 Mcneese who lost to UCA 47-17 deserved to get in over UNH due to W/L ratio? There are too many teams in weaker conferences that can get to 8/9 wins that have a smaller chance to win the NC over a 7-4 team from say the CAA/MVFC/Big Sky. If you take the auto bids way and kept it at 16 the PL NEC Pioneer don't even get their conference champs in last year. Honestly I wish the number of FCS schools would shrink, a lot have no business being in the FCS and would be a better fit for D2

Take the SoCon 10 or 15 years ago. Clearly the top FCS conference. Some years App, GSU, and Furman all made the field. Other years (2003) none of them did.

You think a 7 win Georgia Southern team coming off a national title, and two straight semi final appearances gets left home in 2017? Absolutely not. They did in 2003, though. They weren't good enough that year, forget nepotism.

You don't make the field just because you have a perceived tough conference and don't come anywhere close to winning it. You make 8 wins, you are on the bubble. 9 wins, you are in. That simple. Want to play for the title? Get better and win more games.

[Mattymc727]

This is my dream.

Although there would be some astonishing blowouts obviously.

[UNHWildcat18]

Take the SoCon 10 or 15 years ago. Clearly the top FCS conference. Some years App, GSU, and Furman all made the field. Other years (2003) none of them did.

You think a 7 win Georgia Southern team coming off a national title, and two straight semi final appearances gets left home in 2017? Absolutely not. They did in 2003, though. They weren't good enough that year, forget nepotism.

You don't make the field just because you have a perceived tough conference and don't come anywhere close to winning it. You make 8 wins, you are on the bubble. 9 wins, you are in. That simple. Want to play for the title? Get better and win more games.

That's utter rubbish, It's all about perception based off analysis and OOC scheduling. the CAA and MVFC crushed it this year and for the last few years. It's also constantly changing, conferences can rise and fall in terms of strength over time and their bids need to be evaluated accordingly. It's not perfect but people try their best to get it right. Win more games? you can go kick ****ing rocks if you think a 8/9 team deserves to be in over any other team with less wins regardless of current conference strength and OOC performance.

[PaladinFan]

That's utter rubbish, It's all about perception based off analysis and OOC scheduling. the CAA and MVFC crushed it this year and for the last few years. It's also constantly changing, conferences can rise and fall in terms of strength over time and their bids need to be evaluated accordingly. It's not perfect but people try their best to get it right. Win more games? you can go kick ****ing rocks if you think a 8/9 team deserves to be in over any other team with less wins regardless of current conference strength and OOC performance.

What I am saying is that these 4th and 5th best teams in a conference and hangers on just stay home. In fact, that format reinforces strength of schedule and puts a premium on winning your conference. If a team can't finish daggum better than 5th in their conference, what makes you think they should play for a title?

Go back to 16 teams. Go back to 8 autobids (drop the bids for the NEC and Pioneer). Then you find the next 8 best at large teams. Those 8 teams are going to probably be really good.

Just to use 2017 as an example. Here is a potential field:

1. JMU (CAA)
2. NDSU (MVFC)
3. JSU (OVC)
4. Wofford (SoCon)
5. Kennesaw State (Big South)
6. UCA (Southland)
7. Southern Utah (Big Sky)
8. Lehigh (Patriot)
9. Weber State (9-2)
10. Stony Brook (9-2)
11. SDSU (9-2)
12. Samford (8-3)
13. Sam Houston State (10-1)
14. Western Illinois (8-3)
15. San Diego (9-2)
16. Elon (8-3)

Of course, you will have the last few in/out based on strength of schedule. Seed the first 4 and pair everyone else up. You have less saturation with one or two conferences, and more compelling matchups early on.

Just my opinion.

[PAllen]

16 is plenty if you do away with the as many at-large than auto bid rule. Every conference should get an auto bid. Then the few remaining at larges can accommodate the 10-1 team that lost it's autobid in surprising fashion as well as a number of the 2nd or even 3rd place teams from the conferences that appear to be the toughest. Seed them 1-16 so that a team like last year's Lehigh team heads on the road to the #1 seed.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

I like the 24 team system right now. Top 8 get a bye weekend and I enjoy the 3 week break to the title game. It gives fans a chance to make plans. Plus more playoff games is a good thing.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

A&T is in NDSU's bracket. That would be a fun matchup but I don't think they would get by Ill State to meet the Bison.

[katss07]

I like the 24 team system right now. Top 8 get a bye weekend and I enjoy the 3 week break to the title game. It gives fans a chance to make plans. Plus more playoff games is a good thing.
I totally agree with this. 24 teams is enough, but just enough. I feel like 16 is too small of a number. 24 allows for the best teams in small conferences to get in and potentially make some noise (the San Diegos of the world) but still gives power conference teams with good records to get in (8-3, 7,4 teams from strong leagues). Obviously, regionalization sucks. But having a 24 team bracket gives variety and the right amount of fluff. The playoffs are fun! And having 24 teams compete for the title is great. The playoffs last long enough as is. Adding more would be overkill. Fortunately, I think that the NCAA is happy with how the 24 team playoff has worked.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

I totally agree with this. 24 teams is enough, but just enough. I feel like 16 is too small of a number. 24 allows for the best teams in small conferences to get in and potentially make some noise (the San Diegos of the world) but still gives power conference teams with good records to get in (8-3, 7,4 teams from strong leagues). Obviously, regionalization sucks. But having a 24 team bracket gives variety and the right amount of fluff. The playoffs are fun! And having 24 teams compete for the title is great. The playoffs last long enough as is. Adding more would be overkill. Fortunately, I think that the NCAA is happy with how the 24 team playoff has worked.


Agree.

The argument that a 7-4 shouldn't be in the playoffs is total nonsense. Many teams challenge themselves by playing tough OOC schedules and that is a benefit and shouldn't be a negative. 24 is a good number. Gives teams in good conferences that played a tough schedule credit and rewards them.

[Professor Chaos]

As long as you have autobids, there is some risk that a bad team will sneak through. That's always going to be the case.

I disagree with your contention, though. Just as an example, consider 2005. That was a 16 team field. Only two teams in the field had fewer than 8 wins. Both of those teams (Eastern Washington and Nicholls State) were surprising autobids in their conference. In 2017 there were several playoff participants that were not even ranked or finished well back in their conference.

In 2005, there were perhaps only a small handful of teams in that field that were not legitimate threats to make the national title game. It would not have surprised anyone to see probably 12 of those team hoist the trophy that year.

One reason I like it is because it gets to the point. We don't waste time on these play in games and then watching powerful teams beat up on unranked opponents coming off their bye week. In a 16 team field virtually every team immediately is paired with an 8 or 9+ win opponent in round one. The favorites are still the favorites, but the high seeds aren't protected nearly as much from playing top teams early in the post season.

Besides, it concludes the playoffs without the big gap before the National Title game. I'm a big FCS fan, but even I lose interest on a national level waiting weeks for the finale. Let's get on with it.
I love the break between the semis and the natty.... I never had to prep to travel for the game when there was a week (or 6 days) between the semi and the natty but my guess is it would be a nightmare considering all that goes into taking care of it with the 3 week break. From the perspective of the fan of a competing institution in the title game I see no benefit to going back to the format where everything is done by Christmas.

I do think 3 weeks between the semis and the natty does cause it to drag on too long. I'd be fine with it always being a two week break even if that meant that the natty was on or very close to New Year's Eve and New Year's Day.

But regardless all those good teams with 8 or 9 wins that you're referring to have to do in a 24 team field is win that opening round game against the "fluff". I really don't see your point of claiming that it's somehow tougher for everyone in the top 8 if we don't let teams 9-24 sort themselves out on the field and just have the committee do it for them. Generally the better teams will win so, if anything, the 24 team format allows those week autobids to be knocked out before the round of 16. Doesn't that make the round of 16 better in a 24 team than it would be in a 16 team format.

You're argument of "I don't like the extra games" is a valid argument, I just don't agree with it but to each their own in that respect. I like watching playoff football. But that's about the only argument I can understand for wanting to go back to a 16 team field.


What I am saying is that these 4th and 5th best teams in a conference and hangers on just stay home. In fact, that format reinforces strength of schedule and puts a premium on winning your conference. If a team can't finish daggum better than 5th in their conference, what makes you think they should play for a title?

Go back to 16 teams. Go back to 8 autobids (drop the bids for the NEC and Pioneer). Then you find the next 8 best at large teams. Those 8 teams are going to probably be really good.

Just to use 2017 as an example. Here is a potential field:

1. JMU (CAA)
2. NDSU (MVFC)
3. JSU (OVC)
4. Wofford (SoCon)
5. Kennesaw State (Big South)
6. UCA (Southland)
7. Southern Utah (Big Sky)
8. Lehigh (Patriot)
9. Weber State (9-2)
10. Stony Brook (9-2)
11. SDSU (9-2)
12. Samford (8-3)
13. Sam Houston State (10-1)
14. Western Illinois (8-3)
15. San Diego (9-2)
16. Elon (8-3)

Of course, you will have the last few in/out based on strength of schedule. Seed the first 4 and pair everyone else up. You have less saturation with one or two conferences, and more compelling matchups early on.

Just my opinion.
You still get those matchups in the round of 16 (if those teams are really good enough to justify being in the top 16). You just have to wait a week. Not really a big deal IMO. Besides, as attendance shows, a lot of people have other things going on Thanksgiving weekend so why not have those more compelling matchups on a "normal" weekend the first weekend in December.

[LU808]

Why is it laughable, they were a 5 seed in the FCS tourney last year, there were 4 teams ahead of them and those 4 teams got #1 seeds in this, they would have to be a #2 if they are basing this somewhat after last years pairings.


Your Trump display banner is laughable....don't tell me you're a Bernie Bro' or a Hillary Ho'

[Professor Chaos]

16 is plenty if you do away with the as many at-large than auto bid rule. Every conference should get an auto bid. Then the few remaining at larges can accommodate the 10-1 team that lost it's autobid in surprising fashion as well as a number of the 2nd or even 3rd place teams from the conferences that appear to be the toughest. Seed them 1-16 so that a team like last year's Lehigh team heads on the road to the #1 seed.
That all sounds well and good but whether the field is 16 or 24 teams I doubt you'll ever see 16 seeded teams. If you want the entire field seeded I think the best you could hope for is an 8 team field.

I've always contended that you could pod teams in seed lines and still maintain the regionalization while making a better and more fair bracket for everyone.

For example last year you'd still have your 8 seeds:
1) JMU
2) NDSU
3) JSU
4) UCA
5) SDSU
6) SHSU
7) Wofford
8) SUU

Those teams would essentially act as the 1 and 2 seeds but they'd be bracketed the same way so 1 would play 8 in the quarters if each wins and so on. Then you'd have groups of 4 teams on seeds lines 3 through 6. Last year it could've been:
3 seeds: SBU, Weber St, WIU, Samford
4 seeds: UNI, Elon, South Dakota, Kennesaw St
5 seeds: Furman, NAU, UNH, Monmouth
6 seeds: Nicholls, San Diego, Central Connecticut St, Lehigh

Then you can matchup the 3 seeds with the 6 seeds geographically and feed them into the overall 5-8 seeds based on geography and matchup the 4 seeds with the 5 seeds geographically and feed them into the overall 1-4 seeds based on geography. They can still maintain their regionalization to a certain extent but put together a fair and balanced bracket. In my 2017 example it could be something like this:

Elon vs Furman to #1 JMU
Weber St vs San Diego to #8 SUU
UNI vs Monmouth to #4 UCA
WIU vs CCSU to #5 SDSU
South Dakota vs NAU to #2 NDSU
SBU vs Lehigh to #7 Wofford
Kennesaw St vs UNH to #3 JSU
Samford vs Nicholls to #6 SHSU

Some of it looks very similar to the bracket they put out but it evens things out in that two of the strongest unseeded teams like WIU and Weber don't get matched up with each other in the 1st round and one of the strongest unseeded teams like SBU doesn't get fed right into #1 JMU.

[Go...gate]

You left out Trump University.

Not to mention my perennial favorites, Oxford, Cambridge, the Sorbonne and the University of Havana!

[PaladinFan]

Agree.

The argument that a 7-4 shouldn't be in the playoffs is total nonsense. Many teams challenge themselves by playing tough OOC schedules and that is a benefit and shouldn't be a negative. 24 is a good number. Gives teams in good conferences that played a tough schedule credit and rewards them.

NDSU fans have only ever known a 20+ team field at this level (it expanded to 20 in 2010 and 24 in 2013). A 7-4 playoff team is common under that framework, but was an absolute rarity under the prior set up. Most teams were allowed a loss to an FBS program and one or two losses in conference play.

Again, I am making that argument as a fan of a team that went 7-4 and was rewarded by making the playoffs this season. There’s no way this year’s Furman team makes the field in the mid-2000s. We played a tough schedule, won some games, and beat some good teams, but that alone isn’t a ticket to the post season.

Frankly, we had a shot at the autobid and managed to lose it late in the season. We shouldn’t get rewarded with an atta boy you tried hard.

Where I think I am not communicating is that the 16 team field doesn’t hurt those teams with strong strengths of schedule. You have 8 autobids, and the 8 at large teams are most likely going to be the best teams from the best conferences that didn’t get the autobids. Maybe a 10-1 Pioneer League team slips in, but most likely the “bubble” will be the 2nd and 3rd best teams from the power conferences.

[PAllen]

That all sounds well and good but whether the field is 16 or 24 teams I doubt you'll ever see 16 seeded teams. If you want the entire field seeded I think the best you could hope for is an 8 team field.

I've always contended that you could pod teams in seed lines and still maintain the regionalization while making a better and more fair bracket for everyone.

For example last year you'd still have your 8 seeds:
1) JMU
2) NDSU
3) JSU
4) UCA
5) SDSU
6) SHSU
7) Wofford
8) SUU

Those teams would essentially act as the 1 and 2 seeds but they'd be bracketed the same way so 1 would play 8 in the quarters if each wins and so on. Then you'd have groups of 4 teams on seeds lines 3 through 6. Last year it could've been:
3 seeds: SBU, Weber St, WIU, Samford
4 seeds: UNI, Elon, South Dakota, Kennesaw St
5 seeds: Furman, NAU, UNH, Monmouth
6 seeds: Nicholls, San Diego, Central Connecticut St, Lehigh

Then you can matchup the 3 seeds with the 6 seeds geographically and feed them into the overall 5-8 seeds based on geography and matchup the 4 seeds with the 5 seeds geographically and feed them into the overall 1-4 seeds based on geography. They can still maintain their regionalization to a certain extent but put together a fair and balanced bracket. In my 2017 example it could be something like this:

Elon vs Furman to #1 JMU
Weber St vs San Diego to #8 SUU
UNI vs Monmouth to #4 UCA
WIU vs CCSU to #5 SDSU
South Dakota vs NAU to #2 NDSU
SBU vs Lehigh to #7 Wofford
Kennesaw St vs UNH to #3 JSU
Samford vs Nicholls to #6 SHSU

Some of it looks very similar to the bracket they put out but it evens things out in that two of the strongest unseeded teams like WIU and Weber don't get matched up with each other in the 1st round and one of the strongest unseeded teams like SBU doesn't get fed right into #1 JMU.

Long long ago, in the dark ages before NDSU played D-I football, we had a tournament in which all 16 teams were seeded.

Full disclosure: It was Lehigh's AD who spearheaded the push to fewer seeds, rationalization, and bidding for home playoff games.

[PaladinFan]

Before expanding the field, they seeded four teams. I thought that worked well.

Using my example above, a 16 team field would look similar to this:

1. James Madison
Lehigh

Stony Brook
Wofford

4. Central Arkansas
Wofford

Southern Utah
South Dakota State

2. NDSU
Sam Houston State

Weber State
Western Illinois

3. Jacksonville State
Samford

Kennesaw State
Elon

To me, that's a more compelling playoff. The seeds are protected with home games, but they don't get a bye and they have to play some legitimate title contenders right out of the gate.

[Professor Chaos]

Long long ago, in the dark ages before NDSU played D-I football, we had a tournament in which all 16 teams were seeded.

Full disclosure: It was Lehigh's AD who spearheaded the push to fewer seeds, rationalization, and bidding for home playoff games.
Yeah, and I'm pretty sure that's because the tournament was hemorrhaging money in ways we don't even see today with the 24 team field. My guess would be the NCAA told D1AA ADs they either need to restructure the format to maximize revenue/minimize cost or shrink the field. Regardless, I don't blame Lehigh's AD.

Hell l'd be happy if they left everything the way it was and just changed one little word on the handbook from "Regular season intra-conference rematches will be avoided if is both teams first game of the tournament" to "Regular season intra-conference rematches will be avoided if it is either teams first game of the tournament".

Baby steps. :)

[UNHWildcat18]

Before expanding the field, they seeded four teams. I thought that worked well.

Using my example above, a 16 team field would look similar to this:

1. James Madison
Lehigh

Stony Brook
Wofford

4. Central Arkansas
Wofford

Southern Utah
South Dakota State

2. NDSU
Sam Houston State

Weber State
Western Illinois

3. Jacksonville State
Samford

Kennesaw State
Elon

To me, that's a more compelling playoff. The seeds are protected with home games, but they don't get a bye and they have to play some legitimate title contenders right out of the gate.

Too bad all the bold teams got exposed by teams that "shouldn't be in the playoffs. Lehigh wasn't making any playoff game compelling last year. We will never go back to 16 or 20. I agree with most people that 24 is the best, still wish we didn't even let the pioneer league compete though. Hilarious that a conference with no scholarships and little care about football gets to have an auto bid.

[PaladinFan]

Too bad all the bold teams got exposed by teams that "shouldn't be in the playoffs. Lehigh wasn't making any playoff game compelling last year. We will never go back to 16 or 20. I agree with most people that 24 is the best, still wish we didn't even let the pioneer league compete though. Hilarious that a conference with no scholarships and little care about football gets to have an auto bid.

No, but that is the risk of having the autobid. Some teams are always going to make the field that probably should not. That isn't changing regardless of the number of teams.

But you are asking a different question. A team's performance in the post season is not the same as whether the team should be there in the first place. Elon earned the right to be there this year as did Jacksonville State. If Furman wanted another crack at Elon, they should have handled their business and converted the one or two more plays necessary to beat Samford or Wofford.

2004 may actually be a better example than 2005. 16 teams in that field. 4 teams finished 8-3. The remaining 12 teams were either 9 or 10 win teams.

Those playoff fields got to the point. There was no waiting around for three weeks waiting on the best teams to finally start playing one another.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

NDSU fans have only ever known a 20+ team field at this level (it expanded to 20 in 2010 and 24 in 2013). A 7-4 playoff team is common under that framework, but was an absolute rarity under the prior set up. Most teams were allowed a loss to an FBS program and one or two losses in conference play.

Again, I am making that argument as a fan of a team that went 7-4 and was rewarded by making the playoffs this season. There’s no way this year’s Furman team makes the field in the mid-2000s. We played a tough schedule, won some games, and beat some good teams, but that alone isn’t a ticket to the post season.

Frankly, we had a shot at the autobid and managed to lose it late in the season. We shouldn’t get rewarded with an atta boy you tried hard.

Where I think I am not communicating is that the 16 team field doesn’t hurt those teams with strong strengths of schedule. You have 8 autobids, and the 8 at large teams are most likely going to be the best teams from the best conferences that didn’t get the autobids. Maybe a 10-1 Pioneer League team slips in, but most likely the “bubble” will be the 2nd and 3rd best teams from the power conferences.


D2 and D3 have 32 teams so the FCS having 24 is just right IMO.

Having 24 rewards teams in tough conferences that played tough schedules but would not make the field in a 16 team playoff. I'm fine with that.

[PaladinFan]

D2 and D3 have 32 teams so the FCS having 24 is just right IMO.

Having 24 rewards teams in tough conferences that played tough schedules but would not make the field in a 16 team playoff. I'm fine with that.

Again, the 16 team playoff format still rewards good teams that play tough schedules. It just puts more of a premium on winning those games instead of just playing them.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Again, the 16 team playoff format still rewards good teams that play tough schedules. It just puts more of a premium on winning those games instead of just playing them.


NDSU in '10 would not have been in a 16 team field but proved they were a top team with their play.

If the FCS went back to 16 teams I would be fine with that if they cut out the autobids. Put the 16 best teams in and if 5 come from one conference then that is fine.

[PaladinFan]

NDSU in '10 would not have been in a 16 team field but proved they were a top team with their play.

If the FCS went back to 16 teams I would be fine with that if they cut out the autobids. Put the 16 best teams in and if 5 come from one conference then that is fine.

2010 was the first season with an expanded field, and no, NDSU probably would not have gotten a bid. Of course, they could have looked to losing four conference games as the reason why.

That's my point, you reach a place where the conference games aren't really that important because well, hey, if we just finish top four then we can get really serious about playing football again.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

2010 was the first season with an expanded field, and no, NDSU probably would not have gotten a bid. Of course, they could have looked to losing four conference games as the reason why.

That's my point, you reach a place where the conference games aren't really that important because well, hey, if we just finish top four then we can get really serious about playing football again.

Disagree.

It makes conference games more important. If a team has the philosophy of really challenging themselves in their OOC games and they take a couple of losses, then conferences are even more important.

Last year NDSU played 2 top ten FCS teams and #11 Iowa in the OOC. If they would have lost 2 of those or all 3, then running the table or having only one more slip up made conference games huge.

[PAllen]

NDSU in '10 would not have been in a 16 team field but proved they were a top team with their play.

If the FCS went back to 16 teams I would be fine with that if they cut out the autobids. Put the 16 best teams in and if 5 come from one conference then that is fine.

The problem is that there aren't enough games between common opponents to determine who the best 16 teams are. My opinion on the matter stems from my belief that the playoffs should be about determining the single best team in the country, not as an ataboy for the top x number of teams. If you're not the best team in your conference, you have a tough argument to make that you're the best in the country. If you're not even top 3 in your conference, then you're definitely not the best team in the country. The only place where there are enough games to determine who's better than who is within conferences with round robin play. So just declaring a given conference as the toughest and therefore claiming that half that conference should go on to be considered candidates for the best in the country doesn't make sense to me. Auto bids ensure that it is a national championship (assuming all conferences participate) and not just crowning a winner of an interconference challenge.

[katss07]

The 24 team playoff is much better than the old 16 team playoff. The FCS is much more competitive nowadays than it was when I started following it, which really wasn’t too long ago (2007 maybe). It used to be the same teams. App St, Georgia Southern, ODU came around at the end of their run in the FCS, EWU, obviously Montana and UD. Yes, NDSU is a powerhouse, but there are always different challengers coming along.

First of all the 24 team field allows the best teams from the best conferences to get in. ALL the teams that made it from the MVFC were playoff teams. Maybe 3 of them would have made it in the 16 team field. All of the Southland teams that made it were strong, even Nicholls! They wouldn’t have even been a bubble team with a 16 team playoff. And McNeese at 9-2 didn’t even make it! IMO taking 24 teams in the field is the right amount because it allows the best teams in, and that is the entire reason I like the field as is (minus regionalization crap). And there is still a true premium on playoff spots.

Looking back at the playoff field since it expanded...
2013: How about Jacksonville. They probably would not have made it had this been the old format. But instead they got in thanks to the 24 team field. Yes, they got all the way to the quarterfinals, but this was really a major springboard for the program. They are always the OVC rep and they don’t seem to be slowing down.

2014: Sam Houston St. Kats aren’t in if this is a 16 team field. But they avenged their previous playoff loss to SELA, then proceeded to take down two ranked opponents on their home turf. The Kats were great, just didn’t show it in the regular season. Same thing happened in ‘15. Sneaks into playoffs and next thing you know its semis again.

2016: Youngstown! Maybe a bubble team if this were a 16 team playoff. But they beat a good Samford team and then went on the road and JSU with ease. Then they beat Wofford in OT at home and took down EWU on the red. A potential bubble team now in the title game.

2017: Kennesaw. They went 3-1 over there final 4 games against a very tough lineup. Gave Sam all they could handle at Bowers. They aren’t in with a 16 team playoff.

[PaladinFan]

Yeah, but last season there was a 6 win team that made the field. 6!

If I want to watch barely .500 teams play post season football I can just tune into the widely availble 100 bowl games played by FBS teams.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

The problem is that there aren't enough games between common opponents to determine who the best 16 teams are. My opinion on the matter stems from my belief that the playoffs should be about determining the single best team in the country, not as an ataboy for the top x number of teams. If you're not the best team in your conference, you have a tough argument to make that you're the best in the country. If you're not even top 3 in your conference, then you're definitely not the best team in the country. The only place where there are enough games to determine who's better than who is within conferences with round robin play. So just declaring a given conference as the toughest and therefore claiming that half that conference should go on to be considered candidates for the best in the country doesn't make sense to me. Auto bids ensure that it is a national championship (assuming all conferences participate) and not just crowning a winner of an interconference challenge.


Of course non scholly conferences and traditionally weak/poor conferences want that autobid, they wouldn't get in otherwise.

If 4-5 teams from one tough conference get in then that is the way it is, that year.

How did Lehigh and Monmouth do this in their playoff games?

[Bisonator]

Yeah, but last season there was a 6 win team that made the field. 6!

If I want to watch barely .500 teams play post season football I can just tune into the widely availble 100 bowl games played by FBS teams.
Need to get rid of auto-bids and pick the top 16-24 teams.

[PaladinFan]

Of course non scholly conferences and traditionally weak/poor conferences want that autobid, they wouldn't get in otherwise.

If 4-5 teams from one tough conference get in then that is the way it is, that year.

How did Lehigh and Monmouth do this in their playoff games?

Again, not true.

Teams from traditionally weak non-autobid conferences did make the post season in a 16 team format. Coastal Carolina, for instance, made the 16 team field as a Big South team in 2006, just three years after starting the program. That team was 9-2 that season with several signature wins.

This is the same argument you see at the FBS level. Sure, we can put an undefeated Notre Dame team in the Sugar Bowl against Alabama in 2013 with the predictable result that the Tide beat the brakes off the Irish. Does that take away from the fact that ND earned the right to at least prove they were worthy of consideration?

Under your theory, the FBS bowls would essentially evlolve into a round robin tournament with the top half of the SEC playing one another. Best conference. Best teams. Why even bother with the rest of the country? Why delay the inevitable?

Again, I am making this argument as a fan of a team that was in the power conference for 20 years at this level.

Your wins matter. Your strength of schedule matters. But if you want to make the playoff field, you can't just lose a bunch of conference games and expect to be there.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Again, not true.

Teams from traditionally weak non-autobid conferences did make the post season in a 16 team format. Coastal Carolina, for instance, made the 16 team field as a Big South team in 2006, just three years after starting the program. That team was 9-2 that season with several signature wins.

This is the same argument you see at the FBS level. Sure, we can put an undefeated Notre Dame team in the Sugar Bowl against Alabama in 2013 with the predictable result that the Tide beat the brakes off the Irish. Does that take away from the fact that ND earned the right to at least prove they were worthy of consideration?

Under your theory, the FBS bowls would essentially evlolve into a round robin tournament with the top half of the SEC playing one another. Best conference. Best teams. Why even bother with the rest of the country? Why delay the inevitable?

Again, I am making this argument as a fan of a team that was in the power conference for 20 years at this level.

Your wins matter. Your strength of schedule matters. But if you want to make the playoff field, you can't just lose a bunch of conference games and expect to be there.



What the freak are you arguing about?

Yes, it is true. THIS LAST PLAYOFF YEAR, Lehigh and Monmouth made the field. No, they wouldnt have made it with a 16 team field. That wasn't my point.

You want a 16 team field. Good for you.

24 teams is here to stay. I like it you don't.

Move on.

[PaladinFan]

What the freak are you arguing about?

Yes, it is true. THIS LAST PLAYOFF YEAR, Lehigh and Monmouth made the field. No, they wouldnt have made it with a 16 team field. That wasn't my point.

You want a 16 team field. Good for you.

24 teams is here to stay. I like it you don't.

Move on.

Read what you wrote. You didn't say "THIS LAST PLAYOFF YEAR," you said:

1. "non scholly conferences and traditionally weak/poor conferences want that autobid, they wouldn't get in otherwise." [not true.]

2. "How did Lehigh and Monmouth do this in their playoff games?" [so what?]

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Read what you wrote. You didn't say "THIS LAST PLAYOFF YEAR," you said:

1. "non scholly conferences and traditionally weak/poor conferences want that autobid, they wouldn't get in otherwise." [not true.]

2. "How did Lehigh and Monmouth do this in their playoff games?" [so what?]



Ya, w/o it they wouldn't.

Ya, nothing is 100% certain so ya maybe they could. Teams can have a great year. But more times than not they will not make a playoff field w/o an autobid. Cherry pick a few cases where it happens, big deal but most times they wont.

You think conference games don't matter. Fine. I think they do. They were/are huge.

Another reason they are huge. Playoff seeding. Teams want home games for the playoffs, better chance of winning. Good example: USD probably beats Sammy at home . If they would have done better in CONFERENCE games, they could have possible played that game at home.

Like I said, I enjoy the 24 team field now and I highly doubt it will ever go back to 16.

[katss07]

USD doesn’t beat Sam in the DakotaDome. But that is beside the point. Ask WIU if conference games matter. Constantly Western is a good team. 8-3 or so. Third/fourth in the MVFC most years. Yet because they lose one conference game they don’t seem to ever get a seed despite being a great team. Then they lose in round two. Sam-UCA in 2016 was the difference between a bye or not. The point is conference games matter, just in different ways on different levels. Colgate or Lehigh has to go in and seemingly win the conference to get the PL autobid, as a PL team won’t get an at large. But South Dakota St can go in and just win some tough games and get it. Still important. The 24 team field doesn’t take away from the importance of conference games. It adds to it.

[PaladinFan]

USD doesn’t beat Sam in the DakotaDome. But that is beside the point. Ask WIU if conference games matter. Constantly Western is a good team. 8-3 or so. Third/fourth in the MVFC most years. Yet because they lose one conference game they don’t seem to ever get a seed despite being a great team. Then they lose in round two. Sam-UCA in 2016 was the difference between a bye or not. The point is conference games matter, just in different ways on different levels. Colgate or Lehigh has to go in and seemingly win the conference to get the PL autobid, as a PL team won’t get an at large. But South Dakota St can go in and just win some tough games and get it. Still important. The 24 team field doesn’t take away from the importance of conference games. It adds to it.

Western Illinois was 8-3 last year and bounced in the first round.

Prior to that, the last time they won 8 games was 2010, where they finished 7-4, made the post season (20 teams!) and was throttled by App State in the second round.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Western Illinois was 8-3 last year and bounced in the first round.

Prior to that, the last time they won 8 games was 2010, where they finished 7-4, made the post season (20 teams!) and was throttled by App State in the second round.

On the road at Weber and it went to the wire. They proved they belonged in the playoffs and could/would have beaten many of the other playoff teams, including Furman. JMU struggled against Weber also.

Should Wofford have been in? San Diego was a better team watching both of them in person this year. Non scholly proved to be a better team compared to a conference champ.

[IBleedYellow]

I think smaller schools just want a smaller playoff so that when they actually get there they feel they have a better chance @ winning it all.

[PaladinFan]

On the road at Weber and it went to the wire. They proved they belonged in the playoffs and could/would have beaten many of the other playoff teams, including Furman. JMU struggled against Weber also.

Should Wofford have been in? San Diego was a better team watching both of them in person this year. Non scholly proved to be a better team compared to a conference champ.

You are arguing in circles. What happens in the playoffs is not relevant to the question of whether the team earned the right to be there.

Of course Wofford should have been in. They finished 9-2 and won the SoCon and was the autobid. In no world, 16 teams are not, are they left home. One bad day in Fargo does not mean they didn't deserve to be there.

Oddly enough, you mention Wofford. The Terriers have unequivocally the best case for being upset at the system after being left out of the field in 2002 despite winning 9 games. Still, they were the fourth best SoCon team and had an inexcusable loss to VMI early in the season. That cost them their spot.

It is perhaps unfair that a less deserving team from another conference made the field over Wofford that season, but they had their shot and didn't win when they had to.

- - - Updated - - -


I think smaller schools just want a smaller playoff so that when they actually get there they feel they have a better chance @ winning it all.

Do I need to point you to the three times Furman played for a national title over massive state schools?

[IBleedYellow]

You are arguing in circles. What happens in the playoffs is not relevant to the question of whether the team earned the right to be there.

Of course Wofford should have been in. They finished 9-2 and won the SoCon and was the autobid. In no world, 16 teams are not, are they left home. One bad day in Fargo does not mean they didn't deserve to be there.

Oddly enough, you mention Wofford. The Terriers have unequivocally the best case for being upset at the system after being left out of the field in 2002 despite winning 9 games. Still, they were the fourth best SoCon team and had an inexcusable loss to VMI early in the season. That cost them their spot.

It is perhaps unfair that a less deserving team from another conference made the field over Wofford that season, but they had their shot and didn't win when they had to.

- - - Updated - - -



Do I need to point you to the three times Furman played for a national title over massive state schools?


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/096/044/trollface.jpg?1296494117

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

You are arguing in circles. What happens in the playoffs is not relevant to the question of whether the team earned the right to be there.

Of course Wofford should have been in. They finished 9-2 and won the SoCon and was the autobid. In no world, 16 teams are not, are they left home. One bad day in Fargo does not mean they didn't deserve to be there.

Oddly enough, you mention Wofford. The Terriers have unequivocally the best case for being upset at the system after being left out of the field in 2002 despite winning 9 games. Still, they were the fourth best SoCon team and had an inexcusable loss to VMI early in the season. That cost them their spot.

It is perhaps unfair that a less deserving team from another conference made the field over Wofford that season, but they had their shot and didn't win when they had to.

- - - Updated - - -



Do I need to point you to the three times Furman played for a national title over massive state schools?


You keep going on and on and on....

Guess what? The playoff field is staying at 24. Weak ass conferences like this because they get an auto. Good teams from tough conferences get in at 7-4....good.


Move on.

[NDSUtk]

I would like to see a 20 team playoff field. I believe there are 10 autobids right now, and per NCAA rules, you need an equal or greater number of at-large teams so 20 works.

Rank the top 12 teams and get Thanksgiving week off. Bottom 8 play that first weekend. Cuts down from 8 to 4 games on a weekend with crap attendance anyway.

Top 4 ranked teams get winners of the first 4 games, allowing a little flexibility to regionalize if possible but still maintaining the integrity of the top seed positions per quadrant of the bracket.

The middle 8 teams could be regionalized with the rules they can't play someone they played in the regular season. And you'd have 2 weeks lead time for travel arrangements which may help fans as these 8 are defined right away. You could also consider that teams 5-8 are home and teams 9-12 are visitors, or do the bidding I guess. Let the NCAA figure that out.

So it cuts out 4 bubble teams, lessens expenses by getting rid of the half the Thanksgiving games that are poorly attended anyway, and gives top 12 a week off for rest which, in a way, allows for more competitive games yet gives top 4 a slight advantage week 1 because their opponents just played.

Seems like a reasonable middle ground to me.

[POD Knows]

I would like to see a 20 team playoff field. I believe there are 10 autobids right now, and per NCAA rules, you need an equal or greater number of at-large teams so 20 works.

Rank the top 12 teams and get Thanksgiving week off. Bottom 8 play that first weekend. Cuts down from 8 to 4 games on a weekend with crap attendance anyway.

Top 4 ranked teams get winners of the first 4 games, allowing a little flexibility to regionalize if possible but still maintaining the integrity of the top seed positions per quadrant of the bracket.

The middle 8 teams could be regionalized with the rules they can't play someone they played in the regular season. And you'd have 2 weeks lead time for travel arrangements which may help fans as these 8 are defined right away. You could also consider that teams 5-8 are home and teams 9-12 are visitors, or do the bidding I guess. Let the NCAA figure that out.

So it cuts out 4 bubble teams, lessens expenses by getting rid of the half the Thanksgiving games that are poorly attended anyway, and gives top 12 a week off for rest which, in a way, allows for more competitive games yet gives top 4 a slight advantage week 1 because their opponents just played.

Seems like a reasonable middle ground to me.xthumbsupx

[TheKingpin28]

I would like to see a 20 team playoff field. I believe there are 10 autobids right now, and per NCAA rules, you need an equal or greater number of at-large teams so 20 works.

Rank the top 12 teams and get Thanksgiving week off. Bottom 8 play that first weekend. Cuts down from 8 to 4 games on a weekend with crap attendance anyway.

Top 4 ranked teams get winners of the first 4 games, allowing a little flexibility to regionalize if possible but still maintaining the integrity of the top seed positions per quadrant of the bracket.

The middle 8 teams could be regionalized with the rules they can't play someone they played in the regular season. And you'd have 2 weeks lead time for travel arrangements which may help fans as these 8 are defined right away. You could also consider that teams 5-8 are home and teams 9-12 are visitors, or do the bidding I guess. Let the NCAA figure that out.

So it cuts out 4 bubble teams, lessens expenses by getting rid of the half the Thanksgiving games that are poorly attended anyway, and gives top 12 a week off for rest which, in a way, allows for more competitive games yet gives top 4 a slight advantage week 1 because their opponents just played.

Seems like a reasonable middle ground to me.

This would actually be something I could get behind. I have been a huge proponent of going back to 16 or 20, but with this setup, I would be fine.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

This would actually be something I could get behind. I have been a huge proponent of going back to 16 or 20, but with this setup, I would be fine.



Doesn't matter this year. Barring a slew of injuries, I don't see anyone on the schedule beating the Bison this year.

[katss07]

I would like to see a 20 team playoff field. I believe there are 10 autobids right now, and per NCAA rules, you need an equal or greater number of at-large teams so 20 works.

Rank the top 12 teams and get Thanksgiving week off. Bottom 8 play that first weekend. Cuts down from 8 to 4 games on a weekend with crap attendance anyway.

Top 4 ranked teams get winners of the first 4 games, allowing a little flexibility to regionalize if possible but still maintaining the integrity of the top seed positions per quadrant of the bracket.

The middle 8 teams could be regionalized with the rules they can't play someone they played in the regular season. And you'd have 2 weeks lead time for travel arrangements which may help fans as these 8 are defined right away. You could also consider that teams 5-8 are home and teams 9-12 are visitors, or do the bidding I guess. Let the NCAA figure that out.

So it cuts out 4 bubble teams, lessens expenses by getting rid of the half the Thanksgiving games that are poorly attended anyway, and gives top 12 a week off for rest which, in a way, allows for more competitive games yet gives top 4 a slight advantage week 1 because their opponents just played.

Seems like a reasonable middle ground to me.

Interesting idea. Here is what the playoffs might have looked like this year under the format.

With 20 teams Nicholls, USouthDakota, Monmouth and New Hampshire get left out. So here is what the bracket could have looked like.

Samford/NAU at 1. JMU
9. Stony Brook at 8. SUU

Elon/Lehigh at 4. UCA
12. Weber St at 5. SDSU

Furman/CCStU at 3. JSU
11. Kennesaw St at 6. SHSU

San Diego/UNI at 2. NDSU
10. Western Ill at 7. Wofford

I dont see this or something like this ever happening, although it is cool to think about. I like the 24 team playoff and it is here to stay. But this isn’t a terrible idea.

[TheKingpin28]

Doesn't matter this year. Barring a slew of injuries, I don't see anyone on the schedule beating the Bison this year.

I looked at the schedule and they only play 1 "cold weather" game this year.

(09-01) Home: Cal Poly
(09-15) Home: UNA
(09-22) Home: Delaware
(09-29) Home: SDSU
(10-06) Away: UNI
(10-13) Away: WIU
(10-20) Home ISUr
(10-27) Away: USeD
(11-03) Home: YSU
(11-10) Away: MoSU "Cold-Weather 35-60F"
(11-17) Home: SIU

The only thing I am worried about is the 3 game stretch of SDSU followed by going to UNI and WIU. That is just a brutal stretch.

[Milktruck74]

We are 70 comments in on some mythical 68 team basketball bracket for FCS.....DEAR JESUS, CAN WE JUST SKIP THE NEXT 4 MONTHS, and get to August already?

[PAllen]

Of course non scholly conferences and traditionally weak/poor conferences want that autobid, they wouldn't get in otherwise.

If 4-5 teams from one tough conference get in then that is the way it is, that year.

How did Lehigh and Monmouth do this in their playoff games?

Lehigh had a crap year and had no business in the playoffs without the autobid. The problem is, the same was said by many of the 1998 Lehigh squad until the playoff games were played. It comes down to the difference in opinion as to what the playoffs should be. Are you trying to have a tournament or are you trying to determine the best team in the country on the field. Traditionally weak/poor conferences produce great teams from time to time. Without the PL autobid, Lehigh 98-00 ends in defeating Lafayette in the regular season, and Colgate isn't in the final a few years later. Dayton and/or San Diego had a few really good ( potentially great) teams that were shut out of the tournament because of opinion of their conference. I don't care how you or your conference did last year. That was a different team against a different set of teams. The great thing about FCS is that we have the ability to determine the champion on the field. If you want to claim to be the best team in the country, then be one of the best (not 5th place) in your conference.

[PAllen]

USD doesn’t beat Sam in the DakotaDome. But that is beside the point. Ask WIU if conference games matter. Constantly Western is a good team. 8-3 or so. Third/fourth in the MVFC most years. Yet because they lose one conference game they don’t seem to ever get a seed despite being a great team. Then they lose in round two. Sam-UCA in 2016 was the difference between a bye or not. The point is conference games matter, just in different ways on different levels. Colgate or Lehigh has to go in and seemingly win the conference to get the PL autobid, as a PL team won’t get an at large. But South Dakota St can go in and just win some tough games and get it. Still important. The 24 team field doesn’t take away from the importance of conference games. It adds to it.

Leaving that 10-1 Lehigh team at home was rediculous, but I can't really complain. If you don't win the conference, there is credible doubt as to whether or not you are the best team. At that point, it's an opinion game. You take the best team from every conference. Fill in the rest with those that just missed out on the conference title. Any spots left can go to other "honorable mention" schools. When you start routinely seeing at large teams that lost half of their games, you have too many playoff spots.

[PaladinFan]

Lehigh had a crap year and had no business in the playoffs without the autobid. The problem is, the same was said by many of the 1998 Lehigh squad until the playoff games were played. It comes down to the difference in opinion as to what the playoffs should be. Are you trying to have a tournament or are you trying to determine the best team in the country on the field. Traditionally weak/poor conferences produce great teams from time to time. Without the PL autobid, Lehigh 98-00 ends in defeating Lafayette in the regular season, and Colgate isn't in the final a few years later. Dayton and/or San Diego had a few really good ( potentially great) teams that were shut out of the tournament because of opinion of their conference. I don't care how you or your conference did last year. That was a different team against a different set of teams. The great thing about FCS is that we have the ability to determine the champion on the field. If you want to claim to be the best team in the country, then be one of the best (not 5th place) in your conference.

I think that boils it down. Are you trying to find the strongest programs to play for a title or you just want a tournament where everyone gets a shot because they play in a perceived "power" conference.

[Serpentor]

Wossamotta U. gets hosed again...

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Lehigh had a crap year and had no business in the playoffs without the autobid. The problem is, the same was said by many of the 1998 Lehigh squad until the playoff games were played. It comes down to the difference in opinion as to what the playoffs should be. Are you trying to have a tournament or are you trying to determine the best team in the country on the field. Traditionally weak/poor conferences produce great teams from time to time. Without the PL autobid, Lehigh 98-00 ends in defeating Lafayette in the regular season, and Colgate isn't in the final a few years later. Dayton and/or San Diego had a few really good ( potentially great) teams that were shut out of the tournament because of opinion of their conference. I don't care how you or your conference did last year. That was a different team against a different set of teams. The great thing about FCS is that we have the ability to determine the champion on the field. If you want to claim to be the best team in the country, then be one of the best (not 5th place) in your conference.


Difference of opinion.

You could still be one of the best by not winning your conference title. During NDSU's run they have won the outright Valley title twice. Last year YSU made the title game and they placed 3rd in the conference. In '10 NDSU proved they were one of the best teams by losing in OT to the eventual champ and they were the last team in. I like the 24 team setup right now.

Like I said, if a tough conference gets 4-5 teams into the playoffs I have no problem with that and never will.

[NY Crusader 2010]

I think smaller schools just want a smaller playoff so that when they actually get there they feel they have a better chance @ winning it all.

Expanded field definitely makes it harder for auto-bids from weaker conferences to have deep tournament runs. In 2003, Colgate had to win three games to get to the national championship. Most years, a PL team would now have to win four games just to get there (and probably all on the road).

These days, a PL team just getting to the Round of 16 is a major accomplishment.

[PAllen]

Difference of opinion.

You could still be one of the best by not winning your conference title. During NDSU's run they have won the outright Valley title twice. Last year YSU made the title game and they placed 3rd in the conference. In '10 NDSU proved they were one of the best teams by losing in OT to the eventual champ and they were the last team in. I like the 24 team setup right now.

Like I said, if a tough conference gets 4-5 teams into the playoffs I have no problem with that and never will.

You could definitely be "one of the best" and finish 4th in your conference. My issue is with you laying claim to being THE best. Without autobids, undefeated teams will get left out in favor of teams that have proven during the season that they are not even the best team in their conference. Perhaps that undefeated team from a "lesser conference" is not as good, but you'll never know if you don't give them a shot. I also don't have a problem with sending an undefeated 2018 Valpo team on the road to play a higher seed.

[NY Crusader 2010]

I would like to see a 20 team playoff field. I believe there are 10 autobids right now, and per NCAA rules, you need an equal or greater number of at-large teams so 20 works.

Seems like a reasonable middle ground to me.

I prefer 20 to 24. Save the opening round for the real fringe teams.

Right now there are 10 FCS conferences actively participating in the playoffs and thus 10 auto-bids. You are correct about the NCAA rule. Interestingly, the minimum field could expand to 26 with this scenario: The HBCU's decided to scrap the Celebration Bowl and SWAC Championship Game while also moving Grambling-Southern to the Saturday ahead of Thanksgiving. Ivy Presidents make history by eliminating the postseason bans. You'd suddenly have 13 auto-bids which would require a minimum of 13 at-large bids.

[cx500d]

You could definitely be "one of the best" and finish 4th in your conference. My issue is with you laying claim to being THE best. Without autobids, undefeated teams will get left out in favor of teams that have proven during the season that they are not even the best team in their conference. Perhaps that undefeated team from a "lesser conference" is not as good, but you'll never know if you don't give them a shot. I also don't have a problem with sending an undefeated 2018 Valpo team on the road to play a higher seed.

If they are undefeated they deserve to get in. If they were in a weak conference or had a weak schedule, they will get exposed soon enough, but undefeated deserves a shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PAllen]

If they are undefeated they deserve to get in. If they were in a weak conference or had a weak schedule, they will get exposed soon enough, but undefeated deserves a shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Admittedly a smaller field, but there have been undefeated teams from non autobid conferences left out.

[PaladinFan]

Admittedly a smaller field, but there have been undefeated teams from non autobid conferences left out.

Of course, there needs to be some sort of formula.

Teams like San Diego, for instance, need to recognize that they are a good team from a weak conference and schedule their out of conference games accordingly. Essentially, do what Boise State was forced to do for a number of years at the FBS level. If you want to be in the conversation for the big games, you have to do more than just beat a bunch of weak teams.