What is your preferred playoff format?

[Professor Chaos]

A lot of chatter about this in various threads recently so I thought it would be interesting to gauge what the community sentiment is. I've seen suggestions all the way from 8 to 32 teams as being the best format so I'm curious what the consensus is (if there is one).

Disclaimer on the poll options: I know we'd all love to see all teams seeded in any format but that's just not realistic so I'm assuming that the 16, 20, and 24 team fields all have the same amount of seeds as they did in their last iteration of that format. Similarly I'm assuming that a theoretical 32 team field wouldn't add seeds from the 24 team field and that a theoretical 8 team field wouldn't take away seeds from a 16 team field.

Disclaimer #2: Also be aware that taking away autobids altogether is incredibly unlikely so I wouldn't assume the NCAA will ever do that. However, it is an NCAA rule that at least half the field has to be at-large selections so with a 16 team field the NEC and Pioneer would likely lose their autobids and with an 8 team field a whole bunch of conferences would lose their autobid.

Feel free to throw out your theories in the thread replies or pitch your preferred format.

[Professor Chaos]

I prefer the format we have now over any of the others. I like the break between the semis and the title game and I like the fact that it is a true tournament at least amongst the top 8 seeds (who are the true national title contenders anyway). But I also like the fact that every FCS conference that wants one gets an autobid which is why I'm opposed to anything less than a 20 team field.

It would be ideal if we could skip Thanksgiving weekend altogether (which a 16 team field finishing in January or an 8 team field would allow) but that would shrink the field too much for my liking. A 20 team field would be my second choice since it cuts those Thanksgiving weekend games in half and still allows for each conference to have an autobid but I don't like that it would likely cut the seeds down to 5.

I feel like 32 teams would be too much especially since it forces everyone to play on Thanksgiving weekend which would be bad for attendance. I also prefer to give the true title contenders a bye week to rest up (and I think it does help ticket sales for that first playoff game for teams on bye to have 2 weeks to sell tickets instead of 1).

[CHIP72]

The current format is fine and IMO the field size is the appropriate size, but all DI-AA/FCS conferences should participate in the playoffs. (I'm looking at you in particular Ivy League.)

I've said this for a while, but IMO 24 teams is the right number of playoff teams for DI-AA/FCS, 32 teams would be the appropriate number of playoff teams for D2, and 48 teams would be the ideal number of playoff teams for D3, based on the number of total teams in each classification. (Don't even get me started on DI-A/FBS football, which at the very least should have a playoff field that includes all conference champions, but it is very, very unlikely that will ever happen.)

[Sycamore62]

I'd like to see 32, seeded 1-32 with no byes. I dont like the possibility of a team getting a week to rest injuries because their critical 1-2 week injury happened at the right time.

[WestCoastAggie]

I'm in favor of ANY format that puts at least $800,000 directly into the coffers of NCAT. Since 2015, the Celebration Bowl has done just that. Regardless of the format, the NCAA needs to abolish the bid format and foot all of the expenses of the playoff games. In fact, they need to get a muliyear TV deal to pay for the FCS Playoffs.

[100%GRIZ]

I like the current format but only wish the Championship game was played 4pm est instead!

[UNHWildcat18]

I think the current format is what we should just stick with, but yes I think the 20 or 16 would be better and more competitive. With all of the conferences and auto-bids ect... It would be a mess going back. Stick at 24, and like westcoastaggie said, foot the expenses, work on a multi year tv deal.

[Professor Chaos]

I'm in favor of ANY format that puts at least $800,000 directly into the coffers of NCAT. Since 2015, the Celebration Bowl has done just that. Regardless of the format, the NCAA needs to abolish the bid format and foot all of the expenses of the playoff games. In fact, they need to get a muliyear TV deal to pay for the FCS Playoffs.
I'd also like to see the FCS playoffs TV rights bid out separately from the other NCAA championships (which the NCAA gets $40M+ annually from ESPN). I think it is one of the more lucrative in terms of TV ratings of the 24 NCAA championships that are tied to the $500M contract between ESPN and the NCAA that runs from 2012-2024. That's the only way the NCAA will ever justify dropping more cash than they already do on the FCS playoffs. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that though.

[SUPharmacist]

24 seems right to me. I think every conference deserves a path via auto-but, and 24 ensures the deserving at-larges will get in as well (debates about the flawed bubble teams aside). Also, since we are not going to seed the whole tourney 24 gives your 8 seeds a true benefit that they have earned.

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

I voted for 16 with 4 seeds. But I'd also be in favor of eliminating the auto-bids. Not sure if that's even legal per NCAA rules.

[PaladinFan]

24 seems right to me. I think every conference deserves a path via auto-but, and 24 ensures the deserving at-larges will get in as well (debates about the flawed bubble teams aside). Also, since we are not going to seed the whole tourney 24 gives your 8 seeds a true benefit that they have earned.

In my view, going back to 16 actually gets rid of a lot of the noise.

The fact that we have lengthy debates over which 7-5 team deserves to be in the tournament is, to me, ludicrous. Look, if you can't finish better than 5th in your own conference, why on earth should you have a shot to play for a national title?

With 16 teams, you narrow the field down to the better teams immediately. Someone will always get left out no matter the number. It puts more pressure on the regular season where losses can cripple your postseason shot. Everything just means more.

To me, the 24 team field is essentially a participation trophy for a bunch of teams that didn't earn the right to play for a title. I'm including Furman.

[Bisonator]

16 teams and seed the field

[ST_Lawson]

I like the current setup in terms of the bracket and schedule. Unfortunately, because of how home games are awarded (bid process), we are highly unlikely to ever host a playoff game unless we are lucky enough to earn a top 8 seed. Then again, it's no different than in the past...even in the 16-team era, we'd only get to host if we were a top 8 seed...we just haven't been a top 8 seed since 2002.

Like others have mentioned, I'd prefer to see the Ivy League send their teams to the postseason in football, and an adjustment to how the committee determines at-large and seeds. If they do in fact use the Coaches Poll as a metric...use literally any other ranking please. Even the STATS Top 25 is better...Massey Composite...that soccer game-predicting octopus...anything.

[Bisonator]

16 teams and seed the field
To add to this I'd also eliminate Thanksgiving weekend games and have the championship 2 weeks after the semi's.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Current format is perfect for FCS landscape ... 24 teams of 120 or so teams, with 16 teams playing into top 8 seeds. I would tweak 2 things though.

Just not a fan of autobids. Someone else suggested this a few weeks ago ... there ought to be minimum requirements for autobids .. 4-8 Lafayette nearly won their league this year before falling to Colgate in week 11. But Lafayette had beaten Holy Cross and would have won conference tie breaker if they would have beaten Colgate. So we would have had a 5-7 team in playoffs if that one game flipped.

The other change is more about selection process ... I think the committee should pick a computer system/Index or avg of systems (Massey Composite of 40+ polls is a good place to start that debate) to determine SOS of playoff prospective teams, and incorporate that into their process for determining all teams, but especially the top 8 seeds and bubble teams where most of the debate happens. It would not only make their jobs easier, but more defensible. Again, this is only to assist them in comparing strength of schedule between teams with nearly similar records, and explaining why certain teams fell off bubble.

That said, the committee did a very fair job this year. Only a couple debatable decisions, and even those were reasonably debatable IMO. 7-5 SIU deserved a bid IMO, but that was debatable.

So kudos to committee this year.

[JayJ79]

the only way to eliminate auto-bids would be to cut ties with the NCAA (i.e. have it no longer be an NCAA tournament).
If you want it to be an NCAA tournament, then all qualifying conferences must be offered an AQ bid. (if conferences choose to decline to send their champion as the AQ, then so be it).

They could MAYBE set minimum scholarship levels as a qualification factor to trim off the PFL AQ (and the Ivy, not that it matters) and maybe a couple others, but I'm not even sure that would jive with the NCAA bylaws.

[PaladinFan]

Here's my 16 team bracket for 2019. Take away auto bids for Pioneer and NEC. You can't convince me this isn't more interesting.

(1) NDSU (MVFC Auto)
Montana (At large)

Holy Cross (Patriot Auto)
Monmouth (Big South Auto)


Villanova (at large)
Illinois State (at large)

(4) Sacramento State (At large)
Northern Iowa (At large)

____

(3) Weber State (Big Sky Auto)
Nicolls (Southalnd Auto)

South Dakota State (At large)
Austin Peay (OVC Auto)

Central Arkansas (At large)
Montana State (at large)

Wofford (SoCon Auto)
(2) James Madison (CAA Auto)


I'm sure I missed someone. 8 autos. 8 at larges. No conference matchups in round 1. It can be done.

[Bisonator]

the only way to eliminate auto-bids would be to cut ties with the NCAA (i.e. have it no longer be an NCAA tournament).
If you want it to be an NCAA tournament, then all qualifying conferences must be offered an AQ bid. (if conferences choose to decline to send their champion as the AQ, then so be it).

They could MAYBE set minimum scholarship levels as a qualification factor to trim off the PFL AQ (and the Ivy, not that it matters) and maybe a couple others, but I'm not even sure that would jive with the NCAA bylaws.
When was this made a requirement? As far as I know the only requirement is there has to be at least the same amount of At-larges as Auto's.

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

the only way to eliminate auto-bids would be to cut ties with the NCAA (i.e. have it no longer be an NCAA tournament).
If you want it to be an NCAA tournament, then all qualifying conferences must be offered an AQ bid. (if conferences choose to decline to send their champion as the AQ, then so be it).

They could MAYBE set minimum scholarship levels as a qualification factor to trim off the PFL AQ (and the Ivy, not that it matters) and maybe a couple others, but I'm not even sure that would jive with the NCAA bylaws.

Can there be a minimum threshold that's established for auto-bid schools to meet? Winning record? Top 40/50 in computer rankings? 6 D1 wins?

[Sader87]

I voted 16 teams, final after NYD.

Include all the existing AQ....rationale being if you can't win your league, you probably aren't national title contenders save for a few exceptions.

Start a week later...Turkey Day weekend is a desert for fan interest. Three weekends before XMas, title game after NYD.

Even that is still somewhat unwieldy for the players and fans imo...but it's better than the current system.

[Sycamore62]

I also think that with regionalization they should still seed each game and give the higher seed an option to host.

[Gil Dobie]

I like the current setup. 8 seeds get a bye, championship after the holiday season. Perfect.

[ElCid]

I prefer the format we have now over any of the others. I like the break between the semis and the title game and I like the fact that it is a true tournament at least amongst the top 8 seeds (who are the true national title contenders anyway). But I also like the fact that every FCS conference that wants one gets an autobid which is why I'm opposed to anything less than a 20 team field.




Yup, this about sums it up. I also like the autobids. It is truly the only objective part of the selection process. Everything else is arguable and therefore subject to opinion and politics. As a concept, it is a beautiful compromise, kind of like the Senate and HOR, to offer a slight analogy. Every conf gets a minimum, and the best of any given year get more with no conf getting a monopoly forever. Because that is what would happen if autobids are eliminated. I can see it now for some top hotshot FCS recruit, oh, so and so team, they are in Conf X and they never get a shot at the playoffs, why would would I go there to play? The rich would get richer and the poor would get poorer. The playoffs are not the only reason people choose to play at any given school obviously, at least in the FCS, but it would impact some and that would be enough to turn the wheel.

[Professor Chaos]

In my view, going back to 16 actually gets rid of a lot of the noise.

The fact that we have lengthy debates over which 7-5 team deserves to be in the tournament is, to me, ludicrous. Look, if you can't finish better than 5th in your own conference, why on earth should you have a shot to play for a national title?

With 16 teams, you narrow the field down to the better teams immediately. Someone will always get left out no matter the number. It puts more pressure on the regular season where losses can cripple your postseason shot. Everything just means more.

To me, the 24 team field is essentially a participation trophy for a bunch of teams that didn't earn the right to play for a title. I'm including Furman.
The round of 16 in a 24 team format will have better teams (and presumably better football) than the round of 16 would have in a 16 team format. The fat is trimmed on Thanksgiving weekend with the 24 team format.

[ElCid]

Current format is perfect for FCS landscape ... 24 teams of 120 or so teams, with 16 teams playing into top 8 seeds. I would tweak 2 things though.

Just not a fan of autobids. Someone else suggested this a few weeks ago ... there ought to be minimum requirements for autobids .. 4-8 Lafayette nearly won their league this year before falling to Colgate in week 11. But Lafayette had beaten Holy Cross and would have won conference tie breaker if they would have beaten Colgate. So we would have had a 5-7 team in playoffs if that one game flipped.

The other change is more about selection process ... I think the committee should pick a computer system/Index or avg of systems (Massey Composite of 40+ polls is a good place to start that debate) to determine SOS of playoff prospective teams, and incorporate that into their process for determining all teams, but especially the top 8 seeds and bubble teams where most of the debate happens. It would not only make their jobs easier, but more defensible. Again, this is only to assist them in comparing strength of schedule between teams with nearly similar records, and explaining why certain teams fell off bubble.

That said, the committee did a very fair job this year. Only a couple debatable decisions, and even those were reasonably debatable IMO. 7-5 SIU deserved a bid IMO, but that was debatable.

So kudos to committee this year.

No. Any computer system can be manipulated, especially with so much at stake. It is garbage in garbage out with these computer polls. It really is not that hard to do. A slight percentage here and there, a rounding up or down and bingo, you have a different outcome. And as I said before, so many in the composite are fly by night outfits. Yes, people can be manipulated as well, but at least that has more chance of transparency than a hidden algorithm.

[cats2506]

The current format isn't gonna change, the NCAA runs something like 80 championship tournaments, all use the same format.
20% of the division field in the tournament
50% of the tournament field are conference autobids
1/3 of the tournament field is seeded
teams are matched by region when possible

[JayJ79]

When was this made a requirement? As far as I know the only requirement is there has to be at least the same amount of At-larges as Auto's.

Can there be a minimum threshold that's established for auto-bid schools to meet? Winning record? Top 40/50 in computer rankings? 6 D1 wins?

Name one NCAA tournament that doesn't have AQs, or that has a minimum threshold for those AQs beyond winning their conference

[JayJ79]

No. Any computer system can be manipulated, especially with so much at stake. It is garbage in garbage out with these computer polls. It really is not that hard to do. A slight percentage here and there, a rounding up or down and bingo, you have a different outcome. And as I said before, so many in the composite are fly by night outfits. Yes, people can be manipulated as well, but at least that has more chance of transparency than a hidden algorithm.
don't make the algorithm hidden. then everything would be perfectly transparent.

[JayJ79]

The current format isn't gonna change, the NCAA runs something like 80 championship tournaments, all use the same format.
20% of the division field in the tournament
50% of the tournament field are conference autobids
1/3 of the tournament field is seeded
teams are matched by region when possible
usually it is only 1/4 of the field that gets seeded. But that doesn't really make sense in a 24-team field

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

Name one NCAA tournament that doesn't have AQs, or that has a minimum threshold for those AQs beyond winning their conference

I honestly don't know how each sport is setup but my guess is there isn't?

I would say the only thing comparable is the First 4 in the NCAA Tournament. It's suppose to be the two weakest auto-bid teams and the last two at-larges. Is that how it always work out? That's debatable. While it is still technically part of the tournament it still has a second rate feel. The March Madness vibe truly kicks in at 12:30 on Thursday with 64 teams. If there must have auto-bids then 20 teams with 2 true play-in games would be better than the current format.

[ElCid]

don't make the algorithm hidden. then everything would be perfectly transparent.

Good luck trying to get those who runs these rankings to open them up to public scrutiny. And they can still be tweaked in a manner that is hidden in plain sight. The someone would have to prove it is biased. In the world of statistics, that is pretty hard and expensive to prove. Yes, I am looking at it from the worst case. You have to with something like this.

[Outsider1]

In my view, going back to 16 actually gets rid of a lot of the noise.

The fact that we have lengthy debates over which 7-5 team deserves to be in the tournament is, to me, ludicrous. Look, if you can't finish better than 5th in your own conference, why on earth should you have a shot to play for a national title?

With 16 teams, you narrow the field down to the better teams immediately. Someone will always get left out no matter the number. It puts more pressure on the regular season where losses can cripple your postseason shot. Everything just means more.

To me, the 24 team field is essentially a participation trophy for a bunch of teams that didn't earn the right to play for a title. I'm including Furman.


I understand that, but what about conferences that have multiple ties? The SLC this year ended up with a 2 way tie for 1st, a 2 way tie for 2nd and a 2 way tie for 4th with McNeese finally squeeking out the lone 3rd place slot, but the 5th team down the totem pole. Yes, you have the if/then rules to help sort those out but that only goes so far. I was on the line about suggesting dropping it to 20, but decided to leave it for now. LAst year the SLC didn't have much to back up the ones we got in. This year we have a better case at least.

**Deeper conference = more bids**

[ST_Lawson]

I like the current setup in terms of the bracket and schedule...

And then I went and clicked the wrong option in the poll (is there a way to change your answer?)

Disregard one vote for "16 teams (4 seeds) - finish after NYD"
Add one vote for "24 teams (8 seeds)"

[PAllen]

16 seed them all. Auto bids for every conference champ with a winning record against D-I opposition. The other's can be used for limited at large covering co-champs with superior resumes who lost a tie break with any remaining going to 2nd and 3rd place teams from the top conferences.

[WestCoastAggie]

I'd also like to see the FCS playoffs TV rights bid out separately from the other NCAA championships (which the NCAA gets $40M+ annually from ESPN). I think it is one of the more lucrative in terms of TV ratings of the 24 NCAA championships that are tied to the $500M contract between ESPN and the NCAA that runs from 2012-2024. That's the only way the NCAA will ever justify dropping more cash than they already do on the FCS playoffs. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that though.

The FCS Playoffs should be bid on separately, along with Outdoor T&F (especially during olympic years). But I do agree that this is a pipe-dream for now.

[WestCoastAggie]

Current format is perfect for FCS landscape ... 24 teams of 120 or so teams, with 16 teams playing into top 8 seeds. I would tweak 2 things though.

Just not a fan of autobids. Someone else suggested this a few weeks ago ... there ought to be minimum requirements for autobids .. 4-8 Lafayette nearly won their league this year before falling to Colgate in week 11. But Lafayette had beaten Holy Cross and would have won conference tie breaker if they would have beaten Colgate. So we would have had a 5-7 team in playoffs if that one game flipped.

The other change is more about selection process ... I think the committee should pick a computer system/Index or avg of systems (Massey Composite of 40+ polls is a good place to start that debate) to determine SOS of playoff prospective teams, and incorporate that into their process for determining all teams, but especially the top 8 seeds and bubble teams where most of the debate happens. It would not only make their jobs easier, but more defensible. Again, this is only to assist them in comparing strength of schedule between teams with nearly similar records, and explaining why certain teams fell off bubble.

That said, the committee did a very fair job this year. Only a couple debatable decisions, and even those were reasonably debatable IMO. 7-5 SIU deserved a bid IMO, but that was debatable.

So kudos to committee this year.

I'm starting to think an "Earned Access" format could be the way to go where your conference champion gets in automatically if they meet certain criteria. However, this could hurt lower ranked conferences. I think splitting the conferences into "regions" and then ranking the teams in this region could be the way to go, like they do in D-2 and D-3.

[CHIP72]

Name one NCAA tournament that doesn't have AQs, or that has a minimum threshold for those AQs beyond winning their conference

The D2 football tournament does not automatically include conference champions. If a conference champion is not a top 9 team in its region, it does not make the 28 team playoff (four regions with 7 teams each).

This season the NE-10 conference, one of the four conferences in D2 Super Region 1, did not have its conference champion participate in the D2 playoffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wapiti]

The only gripe I have about the current format is the 3 weeks between the semi's and the final. It should not be more then 2 weeks.

[Professor Chaos]

I'm starting to think an "Earned Access" format could be the way to go where your conference champion gets in automatically if they meet certain criteria. However, this could hurt lower ranked conferences. I think splitting the conferences into "regions" and then ranking the teams in this region could be the way to go, like they do in D-2 and D-3.
You're just replacing conferences with regions then. Why is it more fair to reward/punish teams based on region rather than based on conference affiliation?

They way they have it right now is adequate IMO. Every conference that wants to send their champion to the playoffs gets an AQ and that still leaves 14 spots for non-AQ teams which is plenty to ensure you give everyone with a legitimate argument a shot. There's no format that will eliminate the bitching and moaning (trust me, there's plenty to bitch about when it comes to the D2 playoff structure) short of putting every team in the playoffs. You have to find the happy medium between giving enough teams access and not watering the tournament down and to me the 24 team format is that happy medium.

[Bisonoline]

16 teams all seeded. Or 24 all seeded. No regionalization.

[JayJ79]

Or 24 all seeded. No regionalization.
That would definitely be a preferable way of doing things.

I'd also prefer a million dollar yearly salary and weekly [redacted due to inappropriate content]

i'd say both scenarios are equally likely to become reality.

[Sycamore62]

124 team round robin

[BisonTru]

That would definitely be a preferable way of doing things.

I'd also prefer a million dollar yearly salary and weekly [redacted due to inappropriate content]

i'd say both scenarios are equally likely to become reality.

Since were in imaginary land let’s go with daily.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

The only gripe I have about the current format is the 3 weeks between the semi's and the final. It should not be more then 2 weeks.
agreed .. 3 weeks is overkill, though I assume they are trying to avoid holiday break ??

[Redbird 4th & short]

16 teams all seeded. Or 24 all seeded. No regionalization.
I would agree .. but the budgetary limitations are what they are .. an probably not going away any time soon. So given the budget limits, I accept some regionalization. I don't like it, and I sure don't want 100% regionalization .. but otherwise accept it. This is why I like the top 8 seeds .. it helps limit the regionalization among the best teams.

[cats2506]

usually it is only 1/4 of the field that gets seeded. But that doesn't really make sense in a 24-team field
You're probably right, its been awhile since I read what their methodology was and am going from memory, it used to be posted on their site somewhere.

[Professor Chaos]

agreed .. 3 weeks is overkill, though I assume they are trying to avoid holiday break ??
Certain years 3 weeks would be necessary I think if two weeks from the semis would fall on New Year's Day or January 2nd. Years like this year I think they could play the title game on 1/4 instead of 1/11 and only have the two week break but the NCAA does organize a lot of events for the participating teams down in Frisco the week of the game. I think the teams usually arrive the Wednesday before the game so that week kinda gets hijacked in terms of prep.

[Bisonoline]

I would agree .. but the budgetary limitations are what they are .. an probably not going away any time soon. So given the budget limits, I accept some regionalization. I don't like it, and I sure don't want 100% regionalization .. but otherwise accept it. This is why I like the top 8 seeds .. it helps limit the regionalization among the best teams.

I think we all realize that. But the question was----what do you prefer. Not what is feasible. :)

[MTfan4life]

16 teams all seeded. Or 24 all seeded. No regionalization.

I like the current format of 24 teams, but 16 should be seeded. That way 9 is going to 8 and not playing a team better than #17. There was a year I thought Western Illinois and Weber State were the 9th and 10th best teams, but they were stuck playing each other in the first round. (That's quite a lengthy bus trip.) Seed the teams to 16 and that scenario never happens. Also this way you don't have years like where the 23rd and 24th best teams get to play each other in the first round.

[WeAreThePride]

16 teams, fully seeded.

[WeAreThePride]

I'm in favor of ANY format that puts at least $800,000 directly into the coffers of NCAT. Since 2015, the Celebration Bowl has done just that. Regardless of the format, the NCAA needs to abolish the bid format and foot all of the expenses of the playoff games. In fact, they need to get a muliyear TV deal to pay for the FCS Playoffs.
Wow.

[kalm]

I voted 16 teams, final after NYD.

Include all the existing AQ....rationale being if you can't win your league, you probably aren't national title contenders save for a few exceptions.

Start a week later...Turkey Day weekend is a desert for fan interest. Three weekends before XMas, title game after NYD.

Even that is still somewhat unwieldy for the players and fans imo...but it's better than the current system.

Depends on how you define “national title contenders. Off the top of my head in recent memory, JMU, SHSU, EWU, UNH, ISUr, Nova, Richmond, and SDSU have all reached the semi’s without winning the AQ with Richmond and EWU winning it all.

I like 32. More football.

[Ivytalk]

Am I allowed to vote?

[Professor Chaos]

Am I allowed to vote?
Absolutely... you should also get the Ivy Presidents to vote. ;)

[Professor Chaos]

Pretty interesting results so far. Nearly two thirds of voters prefer the current format. The 16 team format is a distant 2nd with roughly 22% support but voters are split whether to use the old schedule and finish by Christmas or give everyone a Thanksgiving weekend bye (or allow everyone to play regular season games that weekend if they want) and finish in January.

Reading the comments I think it's clear why the 24 team format is the most preferred. The two most common complaints are that the field is watered down and that there isn't enough seeding done. A 24 team allows them to seed more teams than any format with fewer teams making the quarterfinals and beyond a true tournament. Furthermore the only teams affected by the expanded field are outside those top 8 which are the teams that are long shots to make a title (or even just a deep playoff) run.

[kalm]

Am I allowed to vote?

King, eh?

[Sycamore62]

I would like to see the championship played wherever the FBS national championship is the saturday before. that would be cool

[ElCid]

Pretty interesting results so far. Nearly two thirds of voters prefer the current format. The 16 team format is a distant 2nd with roughly 22% support but voters are split whether to use the old schedule and finish by Christmas or give everyone a Thanksgiving weekend bye (or allow everyone to play regular season games that weekend if they want) and finish in January.

Reading the comments I think it's clear why the 24 team format is the most preferred. The two most common complaints are that the field is watered down and that there isn't enough seeding done. A 24 team allows them to seed more teams than any format with fewer teams making the quarterfinals and beyond a true tournament. Furthermore the only teams affected by the expanded field are outside those top 8 which are the teams that are long shots to make a title (or even just a deep playoff) run.

Seeding just the 8 is tough enough. Seeding more would be an exercise is futility. If 24 makes for a watered down field, something I don't agree with, then how on Earth could you possibly seed shades of mediocrity? I am pretty pleased with what it has evolved into. I think we are at a good point currently and any more tinkering is unnecessary. Not sure how to fix the timing any better. Lots of good ideas. They could experiment over a couple years and see what works better.

[Professor Chaos]

Seeding just the 8 is tough enough. Seeding more would be an exercise is futility. If 24 makes for a watered down field, something I don't agree with, then how on Earth could you possibly seed shades of mediocrity? I am pretty pleased with what it has evolved into. I think we are at a good point currently and any more tinkering is unnecessary. Not sure how to fix the timing any better. Lots of good ideas. They could experiment over a couple years and see what works better.
I agree that seeding all the way to 24 might get pretty questionable... unless the committee just used their internal poll to do it that would get pretty exhausting too I would think (although the MBB selection committee does it with their #1-#68 true seeds that they put out).

I've proposed a 24 team format for several years now that would pool those bottom 16 into groups of 4 in order to balance the bracket but that would also give the committee some margin for error. I'm sure it would lead to more disagreement about what pool those teams are in but I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I kind of enjoy those arguments. ;)

Anyway, this year they could've done that and only had to add one more first round flight. Most years it wouldn't add more than a flight or two either. This was how I laid it out theoretically this year:


I'll pitch my preferred playoff format like I do yearly. Keep it at 24 teams (10 autos and 14 at-larges), seed the top 8 like they do now, but then pool the bottom 16 into seed lines a la the NCAA basketball tournament. So the top 8 would be the #1 and #2 seeds and after that it could've been the following this year.

3 seeds
UNI
Villanova
Wofford
SEMO

4 seeds
Illinois St
Austin Peay
CCSU
Monmouth

5 seeds
Furman
UND
Nicholls
Albany

6 seeds
SLU
Kennesaw St
San Diego
Holy Cross

Then you start regionalizing by pairing together each 3 seed with a 6 seed and bracket each 3/6 matchup regionally to the #5-#8 seeds. Similarly you regionally pair each 4 seed with a 5 seed and then bracket each 4/5 matchup regionally to the #1-#4 seeds.

This year's bracket could've looked something like this:

(5)UND/(4)Illinois St to #1 NDSU
(6)SLU/(3)SEMO to #8 UCA
(6)Kennesaw St/(3)Wofford to #5 Montana St
(5)Furman/(4)Austin Peay to #4 Sac St
(5)Albany/(4)CCSU to #3 Weber St
(6)Holy Cross/(3)Villanova to #6 Montana
(6)San Diego/(3)UNI to #7 SDSU
(5)Nicholls/(4)Monmouth to #2 JMU


First round bus trips
My format: 4
Current format: 5

Potential second round bus trips
My format: 4 (none guaranteed)
Current format: 4 (none guaranteed)


If they really wanted to bid out the home team for the first round games they could but it would be better if the 3 and 4 seeds all hosted. So this year you'd be adding one flight to build a more balanced bracket that's more fair to the seeded teams in terms of the likely strength of their 2nd round opponent and more fair for the unseeded teams who are rewarded for being a "good" unseeded team. One more flight to operate it more like a true tournament rather than an 8 team tournament with 8 regional pods.

[BisonTru]

For all the folks that want 16, what two conferences do you want to pull the auto from? Having as many at larges as autos is a NCAA requirement for tourneys.

I would assume pioneer and probably the NEC. This year that would mean sending CCSU home after their damn near perfect season as Holy Cross still gets in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anthony215]

I voted for 32 teams and 8 seeds. Give the Auto bids to conference champions and then if the conference champion opts not to play in the playoffs (SWAC, Ivy, MEAC) then make those 3 bids open up as at large bids. I still think it's unbelievable that the Ivy League has not changed their no playoff rule for football when all other sports are able to play in the post season. Harvard a few years ago had some real good teams that could have made some noise in the playoffs but had to settle for 10-0 undefeated seasons.

[Professor Chaos]

For all the folks that want 16, what two conferences do you want to pull the auto from? Having as many at larges as autos is a NCAA requirement for tourneys.

I would assume pioneer and probably the NEC. This year that would mean sending CCSU home after their damn near perfect season as Holy Cross still gets in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think CCSU would've still had a shot at an at-large if it was a 16 team field this year. San Diego would not have. That would've been a vicious debate though I bet. Going by the AGS Poll the 8 teams left out of a 16 team field (with no NEC or Pioneer autobid) would've been:

13. Illinois St
15. Central Connecticut St
17. Furman
18. UND
20. Albany
22. Southeastern Louisiana
23. Kennesaw St
27. San Diego

Last few teams in would be UNI, Villanova, and SEMO (the only unseeded at-large teams in this year's field not in the above list). I don't know about you but those 8 teams likely left out don't look too watered down to me. 4 of them won games in this year's first round (3 over teams that likely would've made a 16 team field).

EDIT: On top of that with a 16 team field some team would've only had to beat Holy Cross to make the quarterfinals .

[Derby City Duke]

Thought I'd throw something a bit unorthodox out there.

I propose 20 teams with 8 seeds.

The 4 lowest rated conference champs are bracketed to play into the #1 and 2 seeds
The last four at-larges are bracketed to play the #7 and #8 seeds.
The four remaining teams are matched up with seeds 3-6

Rack and stack the 4 conference champs and assign them values of 9-12
Rack and stack the last 4 in and assign them values 17-20

Winner of 10/11 plays the #1 seed
Winner of 9/12 plays the #2 seed
Winner of 18/19 plays the #7 seed
Winner on 17/20 plays the #8 seed

This is modeled after the NCAA basketball play-in model. I don't have the solution on the metric used to determine the 4 lowest-rated conferences, but the committee does always reveal the 'last 4 in' on the selection show.

[Outsider1]

I'm in favor of ANY format that puts at least $800,000 directly into the coffers of NCAT. Since 2015, the Celebration Bowl has done just that. Regardless of the format, the NCAA needs to abolish the bid format and foot all of the expenses of the playoff games. In fact, they need to get a muliyear TV deal to pay for the FCS Playoffs.


Does FCS make the NCAA enough money to do this? I like the idea.

[ElCid]

Thought I'd throw something a bit unorthodox out there.

I propose 20 teams with 8 seeds.

The 4 lowest rated conference champs are bracketed to play into the #1 and 2 seeds
The last four at-larges are bracketed to play the #7 and #8 seeds.
The four remaining teams are matched up with seeds 3-6

Rack and stack the 4 conference champs and assign them values of 9-12
Rack and stack the last 4 in and assign them values 17-20

Winner of 10/11 plays the #1 seed
Winner of 9/12 plays the #2 seed
Winner of 18/19 plays the #7 seed
Winner on 17/20 plays the #8 seed

This is modeled after the NCAA basketball play-in model. I don't have the solution on the metric used to determine the 4 lowest-rated conferences, but the committee does always reveal the 'last 4 in' on the selection show.

Any plan that needs a slide rule to figure out is probably a non starter🤪

[uni88]

Any plan that needs a slide ruler to figure out is probably a non starter浪

I used an abacas. ;)

[Derby City Duke]

Any plan that needs a slide ruler to figure out is probably a non starter浪

I thought all you Citadel guys were smart...:D

[ElCid]

I thought all you Citadel guys were smart...:D

I was thinking of the ESPN talking heads. Don't want them to blow a gasket.

[FargoBison]

20 teams....Seed the top 12 teams. Don't really care about the play-in round.

More teams get seeded, the field is less bloated and the NCAA can still have some budget travel games early if it works.

[Professor Chaos]

Does FCS make the NCAA enough money to do this? I like the idea.
It's been reported in the past that the NCAA has lost money on the current format since they pay for travel and accommodations for visiting teams and both teams in Frisco. However, the only revenue figures in that equation are ticket sales and championship host site bid I believe. The great unknown is how much of the $40M+ annually the NCAA gets from ESPN for the NCAA Championships TV contract can be attributed to the FCS Playoffs since that contract includes 23 other NCAA Championships. I'd tend to think the FCS Playoffs are one of the 5 most lucrative in terms of TV ratings along with the College World Series, womens basketball tournament, and then maybe softball and volleyball.

[Derby City Duke]

I was thinking of the ESPN talking heads. Don't want them to blow a gasket.

2nd that sentiment. I just figured the committee would assign values to the play-in teams and all we'd get was the final bracket with the 8 seeds.

In theory the committee guys are supposed to be educated men and women -- they should be able to do this shouldn't they?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

It's been reported in the past that the NCAA has lost money on the current format since they pay for travel and accommodations for visiting teams and both teams in Frisco. However, the only revenue figures in that equation are ticket sales and championship host site bid I believe. The great unknown is how much of the $40M+ annually the NCAA gets from ESPN for the NCAA Championships TV contract can be attributed to the FCS Playoffs since that contract includes 23 other NCAA Championships. I'd tend to think the FCS Playoffs are one of the 5 most lucrative in terms of TV ratings along with the College World Series, womens basketball tournament, and then maybe softball and volleyball.

I'd agree. The FCS Playoffs are definitely one of the most lucrative properties of that package deal that ESPN got back in 2011 (mostly thanks to the fan power of JMU and NDSU). ESPN made out like bandits with that, which I think also includes the Frozen Four and Lacrosse championships as well. They basically got a platter of different NCAA championships for a song.

I've often wondered why Google, Fox, Facebook or someone like that hasn't tried to approach the NCAA and bid against the ESPN deal, which I'm pretty sure is peanuts. If they did, Google could critically harm ESPN and ESPN+ tomorrow if they so chose. All it would take is a bid doubling what the NCAA reaps for those championships (or even just one of them). If, say, Google won the contract for the FCS championship, you'd have to think the MVC would follow.

[Professor Chaos]

2nd that sentiment. I just figured the committee would assign values to the play-in teams and all we'd get was the final bracket with the 8 seeds.

In theory the committee guys are supposed to be educated men and women -- they should be able to do this shouldn't they?
It really shouldn't be all that tough. Once the field is set they do a poll vote to make a top 24 ranking, talk about it, and then poll vote again to come up with the 8 seeds. Shouldn't be too tough for them to work their way down those rankings to pool teams together in a similar way to how they set the top 8.

[Sader87]

For all the folks that want 16, what two conferences do you want to pull the auto from? Having as many at larges as autos is a NCAA requirement for tourneys.

I would assume pioneer and probably the NEC. This year that would mean sending CCSU home after their damn near perfect season as Holy Cross still gets in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Holy Cross may have had a damn, near perfect season playing CCSU's schedule this year...

[Outsider1]

It's been reported in the past that the NCAA has lost money on the current format since they pay for travel and accommodations for visiting teams and both teams in Frisco. However, the only revenue figures in that equation are ticket sales and championship host site bid I believe. The great unknown is how much of the $40M+ annually the NCAA gets from ESPN for the NCAA Championships TV contract can be attributed to the FCS Playoffs since that contract includes 23 other NCAA Championships. I'd tend to think the FCS Playoffs are one of the 5 most lucrative in terms of TV ratings along with the College World Series, womens basketball tournament, and then maybe softball and volleyball.

Not only FCS playoffs and Championship, but also regular season with the expansion of all the ESPN channels.I don't think advertising revenue would as big yet with streaming the games (based off of not seeing as high a volume vs TV), but the revenues still have to be growing. IF FCS is making money for the NCAA, is it being shared as well as FBS? Is that a real issue?

[Professor Chaos]

Not only FCS playoffs and Championship, but also regular season with the expansion of all the ESPN channels.I don't think advertising revenue would as big yet with streaming the games (based off of not seeing as high a volume vs TV), but the revenues still have to be growing. IF FCS is making money for the NCAA, is it being shared as well as FBS? Is that a real issue?
Conferences, FCS or FBS, work out their own agreements with ESPN and the other networks for broadcast rights. That money isn't shared with anyone other than the conference's member schools. The only contracts the NCAA negotiates is for their sanctioned championships (which the CFP is not). In the case of the men's basketball tournament the money from that monster contract is partially diviied out to the conferences of the participating schools. The more games your conference's teams play in the tourney the more "shares" the conference gets. I believe for the rest of the NCAA Championships the NCAA keeps that entire hunk o' change from the TV contract and uses it to fund the championships they sponsor (which in the vast majority of cases like the FCS Playoffs cost more to operate than they bring in with ticket sale revenue).

[Outsider1]

Thanks Prof, good info.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Conferences, FCS or FBS, work out their own agreements with ESPN and the other networks for broadcast rights. That money isn't shared with anyone other than the conference's member schools. The only contracts the NCAA negotiates is for their sanctioned championships (which the CFP is not). In the case of the men's basketball tournament the money from that monster contract is partially diviied out to the conferences of the participating schools. The more games your conference's teams play in the tourney the more "shares" the conference get. I believe for the rest of the NCAA Championships the NCAA keeps that entire hunk o change and uses it to fund the championships (which in the vast majority of cases like the FCS Playoffs cost more to operate than they bring in with ticket sale revenue).

Note too that almost all the FBS bowls have individual deals with ESPN, the Celebration Bowl as well. Those are outside the NCAA as well.

The way the financing for the FCS national Championship is NOT a huge pile of money from the NCAA. I believe they will subsidize travel to a certain degree and pay for the game in Frisco. But they do NOT foot the entire bill. The host institutions pay money to host the games, and that is only partially subsidized by the NCAA. In fact, if a host institution isn't careful, they can pay through the nose for an exciting playoff run. This isn't an issue for NDSU, where they've done it so many times it's become second nature, and in the Big Sky, where teams like Montana and Montana State have proven time and again they can host and make a modest profit. But that isn't always the case.

This is where a different media entity bidding on the championship would be so good for the subdivision. Rather than being an ESPN afterthought along with every other championship, that opens up the possibility of having the whole thing funded by, say, Google and making it a better experience for everyone. You could expand the playoffs to have the semi's at rotating neutral sites, for example.

[Outsider1]

So basically, how good is the AD (alongside the conference board/chair) at negotiating ESPN contracts? For now anyway...

[mvfcfan]

I voted other. Keep it at 24 but seed it 1-24 and get rid of the bidding nonsense. With as much money as the NCAA gets from basketball they should be able to help out with the highest level playoff system they sanction.

[JayJ79]

This is where a different media entity bidding on the championship would be so good for the subdivision.

if other media entities really wanted to bid, I highly doubt there is anything stopping them from bidding. My guess is that none of them really care.

[Professor Chaos]

if other media entities really wanted to bid, I highly doubt there is anything stopping them from bidding. My guess is that none of them really care.
When the NCAA is offering up broadcast rights for 24 different championships all in one package I think that significantly limits the potential media partners. Then again if they split out things like the College World Series/baseball tourney, women's basketball tourney, and FCS playoffs into separate contracts maybe the media partners are even less interested in the other 21 championships to put in a serious bid. It's kind of like the cable package vs a la carte. Nobody cares that Freeform (swimming & diving) is included in their packages, they're getting it because they need AMC (College World Series) and will pay for the 20 extra channels/championships as well to get it.

[Chalupa Batman]

Any plan that needs a slide rule to figure out is probably a non starter浪

https://media1.tenor.com/images/be5461967878f9229ae8656d62025a1e/tenor.gif?itemid=6219070 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftenor.com%2Fsearch%2Fa-beautiful-mind-gifs&psig=AOvVaw0RckopreqteifstVbmBqV8&ust=1575491593391000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCNig29ipmuYCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAO)

[kdinva]

I voted other. Keep it at 24 but seed it 1-24 and get rid of the bidding nonsense. With as much money as the NCAA gets from basketball they should be able to help out with the highest level playoff system they sanction.

agree with this, and don't have Conf. foes play each other until the round of 8..

if the seeding says in the first round Sac. State at Villanova, then the NCAA needs to open their checkbook for the travel.

[uni88]

agree with this, and don't have Conf. foes play each other until the round of 8..

if the seeding says in the first round Sac. State at Villanova, then the NCAA needs to open their checkbook for the travel.

Why should basketball subsidize football?

[LetsGoPeay]

As I said in the other thread about attendance, the future will see the playoff expand to 32 team.

- 4 Regional Quadrants
- 8 Seeds
- Start playoffs the weekend after Thanksgiving

The format works great for Baseball and the 64 team tournament they play. With more teams involved, and moving the 1st round off of Thanksgiving, everyone will benefit . . except you elite programs who are used to having the 1st round off.

[JayJ79]

I really don't see it expanding. There is already enough room in the current format for an additional 2 AQs, but I don't even know if those will ever be used, since the MEAC and SWAC seem fine sending their champs to their bowl game, and I highly doubt the Ivies will ever change their tune because they know they wouldn't like the reality of their team being crushed in the playoffs (yeah, they'd probably get an easy east coast opponent for the first round or two, but beyond that....)

are you expecting more FCS conferences to be formed?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I really don't see it expanding. There is already enough room in the current format for an additional 2 AQs, but I don't even know if those will ever be used, since the MEAC and SWAC seem fine sending their champs to their bowl game, and I highly doubt the Ivies will ever change their tune because they know they wouldn't like the reality of their team being crushed in the playoffs (yeah, they'd probably get an easy east coast opponent for the first round or two, but beyond that....)

are you expecting more FCS conferences to be formed?

I agree that the way things are right now, the MEAC, SWAC and Ivy are unlikely to participate. What I could see, however, is the construction of one or more football-only conference constructs, each with their own autobid. For example, the Big Sky is 13 members, which is ridiculous. They should just add Colorado School of Mines from D-II and form two different 7 team conferences, each with their own autobid. That would add one AQ.

This makes even more sense when you look at the Big Sky and CAA and see so many associate members that play in different hoops conferences.

[bulldog10jw]

Am I allowed to vote?

You could say that your preferred playoff format is the one in which Ivy League teams decide to participate.

[Ivytalk]

You could say that your preferred playoff format is the one in which Ivy League teams decide to participate.
Well put. And good enough for me!

[TheValleyRaider]

I don't mind the 24, but would prefer to see autobids from all conferences (including the Ivy/SWAC/MEAC). If that's the case, and the NCAA needs a certain number of at-larges, I guess I'm in favor of 32.

[NDSU1980]

I voted 16 teams and finish after New Years Day. This past Saturday proved that a few teams didn't deserve to be in the playoffs. We are scraping the bottom of the barrel to find 24 teams. Time to cut back and eliminate the garbage that basically competes as an "Also Ran".

[CHIP72]

I agree that the way things are right now, the MEAC, SWAC and Ivy are unlikely to participate. What I could see, however, is the construction of one or more football-only conference constructs, each with their own autobid. For example, the Big Sky is 13 members, which is ridiculous. They should just add Colorado School of Mines from D-II and form two different 7 team conferences, each with their own autobid. That would add one AQ.

I strongly disagree with this idea, mainly because it is more likely that conferences with a smaller number of teams will produce a weak champion. That's true at every level of sports and in every sport. Part of the reason why the Patriot League has had some very weak champions in recent years, including two that entered the playoffs with losing records, is because it only has 7 members. If that league had more teams, it would be less likely it would produce a champion that is undeserving of the playoffs in absolute terms.

[LetsGoPeay]

I really don't see it expanding. There is already enough room in the current format for an additional 2 AQs, but I don't even know if those will ever be used, since the MEAC and SWAC seem fine sending their champs to their bowl game, and I highly doubt the Ivies will ever change their tune because they know they wouldn't like the reality of their team being crushed in the playoffs (yeah, they'd probably get an easy east coast opponent for the first round or two, but beyond that....)

are you expecting more FCS conferences to be formed?

There are currently 126 teams in FCS, with about 113 teams that make themselves eligible for the playoffs. A 32 team playoff means that 28% of the teams make the playoffs. It would essentially reward most teams with winning records ( both overall and conference records ) of a playoff berth. Of course, a weak conference like the Pioneer League may still be a 1 bid team. But most other conferences will get multiple teams in the mix.

Regional play is a staple in all college sports, mainly because of costs in travel. FCS is no different. Region play should be embraced, not shunned. Then when you get to the playoffs, that's when you'll see how you match up nationally. But even that point ( because of costs ), it should happen in the later rounds of the playoffs, not early rounds.

With the Big Sky being the national outlier in a very eastern heavy sport, it only makes sense to keep most of those teams out West as long as possible in a playoff scenario. And it makes more sense for the Texas teams in the Southland Conference and in the western fringe of the MVFC, to be grouped with Big Sky playoff teams in a 32 team scenario.

You will have outliers with any playoff format. And someone may have to travel a long way. But it makes no sense to send a team like San Diego back east in a playoff, just to be one and done. At least the committee was gracious, and only made them travel to Iowa, and not back to the eastern states.

[Herder]

I vote for . . .

16 teams
8 seeded
Field Includes:
10 conf champs
6 at large teams
eliminate Thanksgiving games, a big disadvantage in Rd 2
championship after new year

[Professor Chaos]

I voted 16 teams and finish after New Years Day. This past Saturday proved that a few teams didn't deserve to be in the playoffs. We are scraping the bottom of the barrel to find 24 teams. Time to cut back and eliminate the garbage that basically competes as an "Also Ran".
See this is why I don't see the logic to your position. Teams 9-16 in a 16 team field are also-rans as well and the 8 teams added in a 24 team field are sometimes better. I pointed out earlier that 3 of the teams in that extra 8 this year beat 3 teams that would've made a 16 team field. Therefore making those "also rans" play each other to trim the fat on Thanksgiving weekend makes the round of 16 better because you don't have a team like Holy Cross being the only thing between another team and the quarterfinals.

A 16 team field that finishes after New Year's Day is no different from the current 24 team field for the top 8 except with a 24 team field those top 8 are all seeded whereas with a 16 team field only 4 of them are seeded. Those top 8 are the true title contenders almost every year. So rather than having a true tournament in the quarters and semis with a 24 team field you'd only have a true tournament in the semis with a 16 team field due to less seeded teams.


I vote for . . .

16 teams
8 seeded
Field Includes:
10 conf champs
6 at large teams
eliminate Thanksgiving games, a big disadvantage in Rd 2
championship after new year
It's an NCAA rule for all championships that at least half of the field has to be at-large selections. So if you drop to a 16 team field at least 2 conferences would have to be relieved of their AQs.

[LetsGoPeay]

I vote for . . .

16 teams
8 seeded
Field Includes:
10 conf champs
6 at large teams
eliminate Thanksgiving games, a big disadvantage in Rd 2
championship after new year

So this is what your 16 team bracket would look like, using the current seeds and auto qualifiers.

Using the top 8 seeds, maybe the bracket looks like this in a 16 team field.

#1 NDSU vs #16 Holy Cross
#8 Central Ark vs #9 UNI

#4 Sac St vs #13 CCSU
#5 Montana St vs #12 Nicholls

#3 Weber St vs #14 Albany
#6 Montana vs #11 Austin Peay

#2 JMU vs #15 San Diego
#7 SDSU vs #10 Wofford

Is this better than what we have right now, with 24 teams?

[LetsGoPeay]

Looking at that 16 team bracket for this season, there's no way they'll go back to that. It'll either stay at 24 . . or expand to 32.

[PaladinFan]

See this is why I don't see the logic to your position. Teams 9-16 in a 16 team field are also-rans as well and the 8 teams added in a 24 team field are sometimes better. I pointed out earlier that 3 of the teams in that extra 8 this year beat 3 teams that would've made a 16 team field. Therefore making those "also rans" play each other to trim the fat on Thanksgiving weekend makes the round of 16 better because you don't have a team like Holy Cross being the only thing between another team and the quarterfinals.

A 16 team field that finishes after New Year's Day is no different from the current 24 team field for the top 8 except with a 24 team field those top 8 are all seeded whereas with a 16 team field only 4 of them are seeded. Those top 8 are the true title contenders almost every year. So rather than having a true tournament in the quarters and semis with a 24 team field you'd only have a true tournament in the semis with a 16 team field due to less seeded teams.


It's an NCAA rule for all championships that at least half of the field has to be at-large selections. So if you drop to a 16 team field at least 2 conferences would have to be relieved of their AQs.

The NEC and Pioneer didn't get an AQ bid until very recently.

Seed 4, 8 AQs, 8 at large.

I understand this was how the playoffs existed really before NDSU showed up, but believe me, it was a more entertaining product than letting every Tom Dick and Harry with a 7 win resume play for a national title.

[PaladinFan]

So this is what your 16 team bracket would look like, using the current seeds and auto qualifiers.

Using the top 8 seeds, maybe the bracket looks like this in a 16 team field.

#1 NDSU vs #16 Holy Cross
#8 Central Ark vs #9 UNI

#4 Sac St vs #13 CCSU
#5 Montana St vs #12 Nicholls

#3 Weber St vs #14 Albany
#6 Montana vs #11 Austin Peay

#2 JMU vs #15 San Diego
#7 SDSU vs #10 Wofford

Is this better than what we have right now, with 24 teams?

I had a bracket earlier in the thread that I thought looked pretty good.

I don't think they'll ever go back to seeding every team. Seed the top 4. Everyone else is paired regionally.

[Professor Chaos]

The NEC and Pioneer didn't get an AQ bid until very recently.

Seed 4, 8 AQs, 8 at large.

I understand this was how the playoffs existed really before NDSU showed up, but believe me, it was a more entertaining product than letting every Tom Dick and Harry with a 7 win resume play for a national title.
Why was it more entertaining? Would you rather have Wofford, Villanova, and Holy Cross playing this weekend than Kennesaw St, Southeastern Louisiana, and Illinois St?

[mvfcfan]

Is there actually talk of expanding it besides on here? If it went to 32 it might actually be good for FCS football. It might get more fans from other schools at least interested in the postseason.

If it went to 32 they could seed it 1-8 in 4 different quadrants.

[JayJ79]

they're never going to increase the seeding. They'd have the same top 8 with 32 teams (its just those top 8 would no longer get byes). They'd still seek to maximize the number of "bus trips" (400 miles or less), so you'd have the same tough matchups in the west and the same cupcake battles in the east. You'd just be adding more questionable teams, and there would be the same squabbling for the last few spots, just as their always is.

[JacksFan40]

I think it's good the way it is. At least it's not the FBS playoffs were only 4 teams make it, should at least be 8 there but whatever.

[WileECoyote06]

Is there actually talk of expanding it besides on here? If it went to 32 it might actually be good for FCS football. It might get more fans from other schools at least interested in the postseason.

If it went to 32 they could seed it 1-8 in 4 different quadrants.

Or 1-4 in 8 different regionals.

I also really like Professor Chaos' proposal.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

To those that say a 24 team bracket allows garbage to participate, do you say the same thing about the basketball tournament with their 68 team bracket? There are many conferences with little no chance to win the national championship. My Alma Mater's conference is one of them. Guess what, UMBC is a member of America East and they knocked off #1 Virginia in the first #16 over #1 victory.

With current NCAA rules and ten conferences that want to participate, the reality is going to be a minimum of 20 teams. So, unless those of you that favor 16 teams have a method to get outside funding so the FCS Playoffs aren't a NCAA event, you're basically howling at the moon. When you compare the two only possible scenarios in the current NCAA sponsored event, I've found the 24 team option significantly better than a 20 team format. Seeding 8 teams being the most significant advantage.

History has show there will always be blowouts no matter what the size of the field is and attendance will be poor on Thanksgiving Saturday and actually down from the regular season for many reasons (bad weather, short time to plan travel, long distances to travel, schools charging high prices for games in butt ugly cold conditions, holiday responsibilities taking precedence, under reporting, etc.).

One last thing, seeding the entire field isn't the improvement many on here seem to think. As someone above stated, it is very difficult to seed the bottom teams. That is very accurate and it's why the rankings got manipulated when all teams were seeded. Miraculously, the NCAA still got their bus games!! Moving a team up or down in the seeding was very easy to do with the relative ranking of teams at many levels of the field. This tactic would be used to get bus games, don't kid yourself.

[Sycamore62]

how often do any of the last 4 in make it to the round of 16?

[NY Crusader 2010]

So here's my preferred playoff format:

All 13 conferences (to include the Ivy League, SWAC and MEAC) send their conference champ to the playoffs. As a result, a minimum of 13 at-large teams would be required to fill out the field. So I would propose a 28 team field (13 auto, 15 at-large). This number would put a premium on the first round bye as only the top 4 seeds would receive one. The remaining 24 teams would play opening weekend and whittle down to 12 to fill out the Round of 16.

Celebration Bowl could still be held around New Years. In the off chance that either the MEAC or SWAC champ was still alive at that point (i.e. they made the title game), the #2 in their conference would go to the bowl game.

So here would've been the field this year with auto-bids in BOLD:

Patriot: Holy Cross
Pioneer: San Diego
Ivy: Dartmouth, Yale
MEAC: NC A&T
Big Sky: Weber State, Sacramento State, Montana State, Montana
Big South: Monmouth, Kennesaw State
CAA: JMU, Albany, Villanova
Indy: North Dakota
MVFC: North Dakota State, Northern Iowa, Illinois State, South Dakota State
NEC: Central Connecticut State
OVC: Austin Peay, SEMO
SWAC: Alcorn State
SoCon: Wofford, Furman
Southland: Nicholls, Central Arkansas, SE Louisiana

Top 4 Seeds (first round bye): NDSU, JMU, Weber State, Sacramento State

[NY Crusader 2010]

I voted for 16 with 4 seeds. But I'd also be in favor of eliminating the auto-bids. Not sure if that's even legal per NCAA rules.

Definitely wouldn't be legal nor would it ever be considered. Part of the whole college sports selling point is getting to root for the underdog and seeing what happens when Cinderella gets her chance on the big stage.

[NY Crusader 2010]

To those that say a 24 team bracket allows garbage to participate, do you say the same thing about the basketball tournament with their 68 team bracket? There are many conferences with little no chance to win the national championship. My Alma Mater's conference is one of them. Guess what, UMBC is a member of America East and they knocked off #1 Virginia in the first #16 over #1 victory.

With current NCAA rules and ten conferences that want to participate, the reality is going to be a minimum of 20 teams. So, unless those of you that favor 16 teams have a method to get outside funding so the FCS Playoffs aren't a NCAA event, you're basically howling at the moon. When you compare the two only possible scenarios in the current NCAA sponsored event, I've found the 24 team option significantly better than a 20 team format. Seeding 8 teams being the most significant advantage.

History has show there will always be blowouts no matter what the size of the field is and attendance will be poor on Thanksgiving Saturday and actually down from the regular season for many reasons (bad weather, short time to plan travel, long distances to travel, schools charging high prices for games in butt ugly cold conditions, holiday responsibilities taking precedence, under reporting, etc.).

One last thing, seeding the entire field isn't the improvement many on here seem to think. As someone above stated, it is very difficult to seed the bottom teams. That is very accurate and it's why the rankings got manipulated when all teams were seeded. Miraculously, the NCAA still got their bus games!! Moving a team up or down in the seeding was very easy to do with the relative ranking of teams at many levels of the field. This tactic would be used to get bus games, don't kid yourself.



Bad example. UMBC won the America East AUTOMATIC BID. Whether the NCAA tournament expanded or not had no bearing whatsoever as to UMBC making the tournament. IMO, a tournament is over-expanded when the last AT LARGE teams in the field have no shot to compete for the national championship. In hoops, VCU went from the FIRST FOUR (meaning they were one of the last 4 at-large bids to make the NCAA) to the FINAL FOUR so a 68 team field seems to be working out.

As far as the FCS playoff field is concerned, have any bubble teams that made the field ever made it as far as the semis? So far Youngstown State is the only team ever to make it to Frisco without an opening weekend bye.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Bad example. UMBC won the America East AUTOMATIC BID. Whether the NCAA tournament expanded or not had no bearing whatsoever as to UMBC making the tournament. IMO, a tournament is over-expanded when the last AT LARGE teams in the field have no shot to compete for the national championship. In hoops, VCU went from the FIRST FOUR (meaning they were one of the last 4 at-large bids to make the NCAA) to the FINAL FOUR so a 68 team field seems to be working out.

As far as the FCS playoff field is concerned, have any bubble teams that made the field ever made it as far as the semis? So far Youngstown State is the only team ever to make it to Frisco without an opening weekend bye.

James Madison won it all in 2004 all on the road, if you're willing to go back that far.

By the way, it is unbelievably harder to win three straight road playoff games in football than to win five basketball games in two weeks at neutral venues. Home advantage in the FCS playoffs is an enormous advantage, and winning ONE game is certainly doable, but doing it three different times is different, especially if you have to fly to all three games.

[NY Crusader 2010]

James Madison won it all in 2004 all on the road, if you're willing to go back that far.

By the way, it is unbelievably harder to win three straight road playoff games in football than to win five basketball games in two weeks at neutral venues. Home advantage in the FCS playoffs is an enormous advantage, and winning ONE game is certainly doable, but doing it three different times is different, especially if you have to fly to all three games.

2004 JMU finished 2nd in the Atlantic 10 behind William & Mary and the field was 16 back then so they were easily a Top 15 team heading into the playoffs if not Top 10. They would not have been a bubble team by any stretch under the current 24 team format. That 2004 Lehigh team probably gets a seed today too FWIW.

I understand your point about it being much more difficult to win on the road in football as opposed to on a neutral court in basketball. But you're kind of proving my point. If it's so impossible for a team to win 4 road games to get to Frisco, why have those teams in the tournament?

[Catbooster]

2004 JMU finished 2nd in the Atlantic 10 behind William & Mary and the field was 16 back then so they were easily a Top 15 team heading into the playoffs if not Top 10. They would not have been a bubble team by any stretch under the current 24 team format. That 2004 Lehigh team probably gets a seed today too FWIW.

I understand your point about it being much more difficult to win on the road in football as opposed to on a neutral court in basketball. But you're kind of proving my point. If it's so impossible for a team to win 4 road games to get to Frisco, why have those teams in the tournament?
Because it's more fun and excitement for more fans and more players? (Nonetheless, I wouldn't expand the field, but I think 24 is about right).

[NY Crusader 2010]

Because it's more fun and excitement for more fans and more players? (Nonetheless, I wouldn't expand the field, but I think 24 is about right).

I love college football. I love FCS football. So I'm all for celebrating the sport and all but I think you need to draw some kind of line of standard when it comes to at-large teams in any tournament. There had been talk about expanding March Madness to 96 teams a decade or so ago. Those in favor billed it as a "celebration of college basketball". Why not invite all of Division I then? Do we really need to have St. John's or South Carolina pretend to compete for the national championship in a year where they finish 17-15 and 6-12 in conference? I'll pass. In a 32-team FCS playoff, you'd have the likes of 7-5 Southern Illinois, 7-5 Towson and 6-6 UNH making the field. All good teams but deserving of playing for a national title? No.

I actually said before that I wouldn't mind seeing FCS Bowl Games for teams that finish .500 but don't make the field. Play them at a home site and try to make the game somewhat regional if possible. Reward the seniors on those squads in addition to the extra practice time for the underclassmen. Sound like a crazy idea? They have bowl games in Division III (or at least they did 10 years ago when I had friends playing in them) and at the high school level for good teams that don't make regional or state. The Pioneer League and NEC champs played each other in a bowl game for a few years before both conferences secured auto-bids.

But in the end we agree 24 is the correct number right now. I'm tempted to say 20 but I like the fact that a 24-team field limits the number of seeds to 8, which puts a premium on the first round bye. In a 20 team field, it's a little more awkward where the Top 12 get byes and the next 8 play in four pillow-fights to make the Round of 16.

[LetsGoPeay]

So here's my preferred playoff format:

All 13 conferences (to include the Ivy League, SWAC and MEAC) send their conference champ to the playoffs. As a result, a minimum of 13 at-large teams would be required to fill out the field. So I would propose a 28 team field (13 auto, 15 at-large). This number would put a premium on the first round bye as only the top 4 seeds would receive one. The remaining 24 teams would play opening weekend and whittle down to 12 to fill out the Round of 16.

Celebration Bowl could still be held around New Years. In the off chance that either the MEAC or SWAC champ was still alive at that point (i.e. they made the title game), the #2 in their conference would go to the bowl game.

So here would've been the field this year with auto-bids in BOLD:

Patriot: Holy Cross
Pioneer: San Diego
Ivy: Dartmouth, Yale
MEAC: NC A&T
Big Sky: Weber State, Sacramento State, Montana State, Montana
Big South: Monmouth, Kennesaw State
CAA: JMU, Albany, Villanova
Indy: North Dakota
MVFC: North Dakota State, Northern Iowa, Illinois State, South Dakota State
NEC: Central Connecticut State
OVC: Austin Peay, SEMO
SWAC: Alcorn State
SoCon: Wofford, Furman
Southland: Nicholls, Central Arkansas, SE Louisiana

Top 4 Seeds (first round bye): NDSU, JMU, Weber State, Sacramento State

If you go to 28 teams, you may as well go to 32 teams to balance everything out and make the playoffs more regional until the Semifinals.

[LetsGoPeay]

Is there actually talk of expanding it besides on here? If it went to 32 it might actually be good for FCS football. It might get more fans from other schools at least interested in the postseason.

If it went to 32 they could seed it 1-8 in 4 different quadrants.

https://www.anygivensaturday.com/image/jpeg;base64,/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQAAAQABAAD/2wCEAAkGBxMTEhUTExMVFhUVFxcYFxYWFRUXFxUXFxUXGBgXGh cYHSggGB4lHRUVIjEhJSkrLi4uFx8zODMtNygtLisBCgoKDg0O GxAQGi0fHSAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS 0tLS0tKy0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS03K//AABEIAMIBAwMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAcAAABBAMBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAAQFBwECAwj/xABXEAACAQMCAwQGAwcODAQHAAABAgMABBEFIQYSMQcTQVEiMm FxgZEUobEII0JScrPBFyQzNXN0dYKSk7LCw9EVFjRTVFVilKLh 4/AlNkVjJkNkhaO00v/EABkBAAMBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAgMEBf/EACURAAICAgICAgIDAQAAAAAAAAABAhEDIRIxQVEEYRMiFDIzU v/aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8Aqu9mZtidqYMa2lmJrnQxCrZVzWOWt akhGM4rVmzWCaxRYHSB8HNbXV2DgZ6Vxq5Pub4wXv8gHa36gH/AD1NPwFFM94POt4ZlzV dqugganpF2qgA3cEEmBjfvlePb3d78hUj28xKNJchQD3sXQAfh UDo86zyDIFdbe1JdVc9yGIHPKrKo9p2r0T2NcHwW1lDclFa4uE EhkIBZVfdUQn1Ry4zjqfhgn0jV7fUUuY 65khnktpFlVCrtHjJAyQVOds7 ygEimF4Y0e0Ef068MjSKHVUJCFT0YdzzNg4OCW3xXcQ8NyZCSR rgE5Y3K9N r9Tt06nwqZ4Y0CPT JHt03hltXaJGPNyKzhygz4Bo5Mew/GpHt60sS21mqqAXvI48gDbvEcfaBUcL7ZfL6Kh1q203mJguTjw BVyPHzXNDtxyr0cMPr I8K9ni2T8Rf5IqruxfSlSbVmKg/rxohkDH3ppDt/OD6qaVCezz4rg1gyCrZ 6GkBvbaJQByQM wA9eQj zpz9ztqK99dWjgHmVZkBA6qeR/nzJ/Jpk0U73g86627KxAzjJr0bqnDitxJaz8o5RaSORjYtGxjz/APnj VRPb7c5SzsIgA9zMCcADZSEUH2FpAf4lMKKfuIRGQqzcz/iKrMR/JyKn GOPJrRuRgSv4jgqfgTV96Ro1ppFk5jTCQxNJK4AMkvIpZmY JODt0HQYFbT2Npq9lG0sPNHPGHTnAEkfMuxVhnlYZ6g/MVLimMEF7UdOMYE0nIWHqlHYj38oOKb6D2g6VEX/XQCnfHdzfUOSobsMsDFqOoQSYYwL3RYr63dysvNg eKNePYVF/pGFG9zJnYf5qqWhUcYu0vRi4P0sBjgZMUwHxJTaj5CCAQcg7gj oQfGhXtUgUaTeEKo 9eQ/GWpzQP8lt/wBxi/NrQMf0qVKgDVqG KpyF5QcE0RTVA6nBj0239 NqmXQ12UJxfZusvM461BXdjkZFXPxbpiTx56sN6qXVcxkj24pR k2tjlFdkH9HNKuhuDSqiBlWQK6tBikjgUCO7Ecvw6VjSbHvpVj zjPU QHWmzSVtbXDRsHU4IqlV7E1rRKcQaKIMMrEqTjfGQR7qhqd3 oyTY5znHQDYU0p5HFy/XoUU62YNXN9zX69/7rb 2qmcVc33Nfr3/utv7aoRaLf17ShcJGp2Mc9vMp8jDMkn1hWH8agvt8/ah/3WL lRVY6vm/ubUndIoZl9z86Nj2Aov8uhXt8/ah/3WL lTGFPAY/8Msf3pb/mUoa7If8A1T E7n rRJwEc6ZY/vS3 qFBQ52Rf qfwnc/1aAILiu57vivTz524T X9JQfWwo4460/vltB JfWsnwV9/tqre1ubk4hsJPCNbRifIC6k61edxAHAz CysPepzQB05hnHj5UMcDWHdG/OMd5fzv7wRH/AHGszavjWI7XPWyklx7TPGq/Uj/KiC0t Tn/ANp2b54/uoA889scqy6xMp/ VDCnQncr3mNunr9d6HeAdRNnqtrKSQpk7tt9ikuYyT5gc2f4tS HHUhk1LUJR0E/d/GJQh yhC9csu5JwPGpvZT0j2M9mplWbHpqjoD/suyMw ca/KvPXH2r/AEjiSEA5S3uLaBfesql/jzs4 Aq/9EuGktoJG9Z4o2b3sgJ s15L4duWk1C2lc5Z7yJ2PmzTAk/M1RJ6k49/ay /elx ZeuHZt 1Vl 94/6Irvx7 1l9 9Lj8y9cOzb9qrL97x/0RQAE9mY/8d1j8s/nTRFx9/l j/vqT81Q12Yyg69rH5Tf8MxBol4 H6/0f99SfmqAHvat 1F5 5f1lqZ0D/Jbf9xi/NrUN2rnGkXn7l9rLUrw/J toAdvvMX5taAJPNYpVmgDVhQpxbM4HKpG/TIP99FmaH IdMZyJFb1R0PT30CYA2iznPP8dutA/GtqA21Huv64IhyY9LHhVfah3kwJx51HTLvQI92aVOXRgSMdKVU RY0kmJrhWwFZegDSlSpUCFSFKlQBljVl9h3FNpYtefS5hF3gg5 Mq55uXveb1QenMvzqsqzy0DLhvOP7ReIY7uOcNbNbiGWQK FzzN0K52YR FPe1/jrT7zTmgt7lZJDJGQoSQEgNvuygVSSxk9BTyxsXbn5UY8qczED ZBzAAsegBJx4bkUwsuDsp7ULeG2js75zE0XoxykEo6Z9EEgeiV G2 2AN80YnjnRbNJGiuIfvkjSMsH3x5JX6thc7nA3OBXnbQgO9UMA RnoRn6vGru0XS7eJUkSCJGYdViRT8wKxyZeHg3xYXPyC3FVncX dtf6rLE0bsIPo0TD04oIZVJZh4E7t7PS8CKsePtV0ggE3ig4GR 3c2x/kU7s5fjn3VvJYx/wCjx 8hP7qUc1oqeGnSKsvuNoDxDFfrITZRoLdp STk9OKRsdM55idsfgmrH/VU0j/TU/m5v/4ro0KqpHJEgPmA/wAkHjQ/rNgpUkR5yPWdVX5IAPrpS Ql4Kj8bk yro5BKJpQNp7m4lB8wzbYz7qE7uL198YBO/juNv8Avyqxr HcfH4bUCavAVZsdD/fSxT5Nsv5OPhFL0egNC7TdKS2gR7xQyQxqw5JdmVACNk8xXmm1 ZhyspwykMp8iDkH51nlp7o1kZp4ol6ySIvzYZ qug4Gz0PonaXY3EPc35FtMU5ZoZ1KowZcEqxGCrA Jzv8azqfaTp1pCsNmy3EioEgt7cFhsMKCwGFAxvuTjwNSHGmnR DT5TJFHJ3ULcvOitghdiOYbVSegcRRwJhERSTuwABx8KctApBF wvYXumyjVTE9x3veC jiGXUSOJOdF/C5SBn3HoCSLGj450a57qZrqDmiYvH3pMbxsVKkhXwc4Yjyprwl xPE8AYbKNgPEn/nUhb6ZaXbGSW0t5GyRzPBE5 bLmknY7BvivXxrONN07mkid0N3dcrCKKNHDcqsR6TkqMeBxjcE kWT3IUADYKAB7ABgVraQLGoVFVFHRVUKB7gNq7PTGaxGsy1uK5 O9AjUORWXcEU1tLoSOwXfl6 w VK7lVGUE4LHAHn500JsrHiGwQ3TBxtn0c VMtS7qJRgdevtq1tW0mOZCrKOmx8QfMGqr17QJEIBORk4qZKxx b6Au6iBcnalT6XSHBPWsU/xi5IAC1aGidtHBj6gDG3nmnWg6DD3i97uD5nAyKluhpNgjHGTs ASfIDP2V0ks5F3ZGHvBFXra31hbxjLRJ5 qCar7jTiK2lOIt/aBSsaXsBK6W0DSOqIpZ3YKqgZLMTgAfGtGNS3CWpi2vbedvVjl Vm/JPosfgCT8KoS7HPEfBl7Yqr3MXKjY9JWDhSfwWK qfqqEU16h4kaKeAoVEiyDGOoKmvPnFulQWlw0EYmcrg80pVQQR kcqqM zJPgdqiM7dGk8TikyIiuAKIuBrxfpJjOwmjZN9w3iVI8cgN8cV IaPqGmw2dur2gluXlBuJHhZu6hEm4QO3LIxUADG25z0we91rsI 1D6Ra2XJbDlCxpHCHOB6bkAHuyc7DI6DzNOXVBilxmmQsekcl5 3SHm39FvBh4Grm0yPESqT0GKa2l5BIwk798ZHLGLeHIPmSVBHw PhS1lpMHulDrncnIbH5CmuTI7q2d0FxbpEi2t20X7LKq426jrT 6y4jspm5Y50L WcE 7zoTj0eOROYQKrAMGLpJ3bnquzdD4UNppdxG6FrSMFskCPPo4J 88EdM5 yqUXGNidSlRbwccx2Hv94oB414okDGG2VR4NI36KmYZrj6K8vK VKqTg9dhVenTGmbmmY4O4wG WPf9lQmm96Hwa62Q10Zhv3wcnc4Od6Y64uIlJ6kgH6z iixNCRpMpGVCgDPnjbp0oa4ugPOqAeZ/RWuOScqROXG1jbZBaYg7wFunt6ZqxezWwjl1KJtiYwz7Y8sD7a g9B4YaRelH3ZNwy0F1NI3QKFHxJzXVGR5co7sM 0m5Eem3RPjGV LeiPtry0DXo3tpuuXTnX8dlH/ED ivODGnLpAnthLouuvEvKD7qtzs74lVo1VjuAc 05zVAJIRU5pOrGPxx7qUUNnqW1u1foad1SPBeuzSOvITsDnJ2x 7at7T70uASMHFaShSsiGW3TJCmdzIB8a6TTgeNcUhDtk9B4VCN G70hxaQBF2HXc 00G8SairXkfKciEMCQfwmIyPhyijDUbtYYnkcgKikk 4VVPDcXfkucjJJx7zmtMa8meV0qRZ1hLzrnNQfFUewNYgmaPZT 1rsyNLsd80nEFk0AUtzudqVEtxw03MfR qsUUzLm/RQL6s/hgU2kvpD1Y1ze3cdVI94NYaFh1FY0ddnNmz7aRFIisUxCpClXe ytXlkWONS7uwVVHVmPQUAXB2ZapLLDGJPVUGNGPjy7fMAiufaD ZQ86sz4ZdvwRke0nf9FG3APCi2dpHDKQ8qlmcj1VZ9yg/Gx0z41NR6PaBs90jMfFxzn/iziuZxfK09HdzTStXop/h0WbZ5WUcozkBic5I5SxGM O1WJwvbLcc2HI5eUkgAk56bnp6tcuP0hjhDRJEGLAEBFHMCD5e VB3D00CIwVlhuGO7MxXmGdhnNZy1K3suKuPoNNQuI4ppIjIXbI DDlOdwCM7Y6HwrHJnBHMuT1KnpURao4PMQhJOch0Jb49TRdaos iZQ7 KnqKwlt6Ka4IZzWuEyEJcj1gDynqMpC30NIyHY5I8WYn7elYbU Y7aEKxHOSfR2yBnOceHWh2HWJLucchIjjOT5Ejpnz91dKklBJ9 kQjOVtOkFdwOZJFHipx8RQHpV5HEAsuRuUzjbI86mJeM4I3ZJV dGG2Cuze1SNjVfajqhd2ZQQnMSMjHXxqJ76OjCuKaZY2oTRCLK kdPZVU61KGmzT3vZyhKPzIBvzKRjcDGfHrUHIN8Z38fjRj/tZHyGvxUiy CApUYqw9LtguSPGqn4KvAmBmra0qXmTNdGN7PNa0RnGejLdQGN vePeK83a9obxTtEB0 WK9Na5qkcIHOwGelULxxrcbXLMu4O2RW97oxaraAaSIqcMMGuk RrbULnvGzjAAwK4c1A10GnCeti3bOMgjFeg9JuEaFGXoVB qvKlgSWAFX3wkHWzVXbw291W5WZtcXZpecaIZioOADjfxOaO9J VuQM3VgDiqDu4ObUEUer3yZ9o5hmvQofC/Ch9BjW7bB7jW0M8Yi5iAdyB446ZqK4K4cMeS/TO3uohWFnkLE7eXlUlbRcoxTukJLlK2M59KUkHpTiK3Cb07rVx UWbcENTeJ5ilSNovlSo5E8WeX9W1eJySo6moie6BGBVu8TRaf4 CLPsC/ooB4jjt9 7x8AKhSNkgUJreC3ZztWjCnFnc8mdtjVIhjeWMqcHrRP2Z6gkG oRO PSDIpP4LuOVT9q/xqHLqbnbNONETNxACcAzRZPl98WpaKg6aZ6OnuLiIMxX0euQCx QoVt9SvbmY8qNHGPFlbmO/uqw59ViHojJI8AKjxq6/iMPhiuGkvJ6ik/wDkHDwvNMTzvJ5ZPKDj2bnFONN7MrJTmUSOepy5A/4cVKPxFjZUzTOfVnYk83IcgDA2JPhk1cXFdETjKXZJXXCVgkfo wICuCMZ5sjcbk5NM44nht3uGYCRfWVD6IXO4yRu2PKuGpcRwwx l5WA5NiQSckeQJ6nyqr Ju0aSZXigUojH1mOWxnoB0GfjV0pPSM7UI/syy5u5lXn25XHKzeIyNmzT6DTHVAIZo1QAcq92WHv5gwJqntH4 gkA9E/lx5 tfZ7KsLhbX0YBcjfw/RXO4uL2bclJfqS9xprlTzzRZ8xDn6y21Aet6evOFErSHPuHyHh VlTWkMqksxHmAaDuJhb26/el3bxJJPt61Tl6NITVUwb1/W RO7Gyjr8Og/TQX9PJJJ8aluJLNvoq3LZz8qDzRUfmb4sAB SfOhdWrpxY0ked8jK5Ol0Hmg6kqAZ dXVwPed5bhvbXlxLgjxr0J2SSn6CCx3yce6tYY92cjk0A/blqhN3HGrEciZIz Mf VVezknei/tTl59QlYbgcoz8KDauXYQ/rZuKXLWFNdA1SWFPZ7bRtPmToozjzNG/F3FX0cLHFjJHyHhVX6XcFWypwa31KZmbLEknzoJcbLd7IdMScP dS4ZubCg GNyfnVlatfpDGWYgYFUx2WahLCrhT6J33p9rOqvPciNnznw8BW uNcnswnPimkth7w/rYfJY1PR36k7GhPSODlC5aRjnyOMVKW3DQTcSN8avI4PoeKGRL YRI ayWqPtouX1nz76a6nr8EA9OQD41zs6iYzSoEfj6LOyuR4EKcGl SsVlIXPCki9GBHuqOfSpM42 dPDxJKeuPrrimtHO4oj9lOvBGzQspwRXMinVzdc5zXDNUSYjXP 8A31o67KtNWXU7cMByxc87DHUxr6PydkPwoMhXBqyewsg6i fG3cD UmfsoBBJwnxJzHvpMlJXcnx5MsT8sMKL5b63lyqYY fQVWFjEbd7i0J/YpnCZ8VDHl a4pyL1o2EiLuPDpXmttSaPZ/GpRUvoL5YmQn0Ux7zQxxNrkBEccb5mALyooyq4k5Vy/ng r133xXaDUXmYd4eoYhBgbAEk9fAAkmq2GoJJcSyRryqyHlHj6y HJ9pxW3x472c3ypcY0nsccf3wknTkyEMMbcmThZCD3hx UDQwo3qf4sYGZcDH3qP5kEn6zULy11Lo4JPZ1tpirq4APKQcHo 2Oqn2HpRjxVbRQRQ3lnM/dTqpEbHLRuSwMfMPLkfrk j45zQQhp2LzELxHJDNGy77KU7wHb2iQ/KhxT7BSa6JteOZSOViRtjY9fftTG518vhpCZAD6nMRkeIJ6qvu 393WoBsV1uE6EA ohY4O2QBn2ZP21CxxXgt5ZNVZMcQcVy3cSxOkSojBlCBhyhVKh RkkYAOPhUAhrJ61oDg1ZmdFq2uGNbe2sum2Ov2GqrXBwf xRXNxDG1sUA5XC45fA GQa0g6McsW iHuJWmaRz4kmoV0wcUYcFaT9JjmUdVH2jah2/g5feCQfhRJas2S0Y0zS5JieQbL1P/fWsz2pRuU060TWO4BGOtc7y8M0hc7Z6DyFQZpy5V4HtsiKufIU zuJQxA9tbSkcuM0yRN tBZZ/DUqiMJGBzMMGtb7he4EokTqDnr0qB4X1lLdstvR1b8fQY32qk2 kEYLs76XLqYwNsDzogjN 43ZV9wzTOz43t TOaZX3aGgzyKT8KWyyTudEnbdp3 BxTjT FbYDmcc7eLMeY/XQBqHHtw3qjFRScS3THl7wgMftpbDRbzLaL6OE291KgW34Od1D mVssMnc0qdfYb9FKVislaxSJERWUznbr4VMvcR93jbGOntqMtx jem1RKdmXGNvmfbU9wJr30O9hn/AAQ3K/5D7N8s5 FDz71helBReHaJpojv4rld47pRkjp3iADr7U5T/FNSP3oBQqB3bAUdSSegxTDhe5Op6E8R3ntNk8yY1DR/NSyfA0 7NrdUtm1O6OEVGMZP4Mag80nvOCB7B7a5MmHlOz0MWdLFT8Az2 kRDT7dgzBr2 BjYjpDbDHOiDwDHCk OT5VWGmevjzU/oqf1n6drF1JdR20rqx5YwF9GNF9VOY4XIzk79SaIODuz6WOYSX rwwKo2VpYXckn8QMRtjx VdMYpKkcE5OTtghxRtLGfOCA/OMVEc1WhxpwSkrRtb3luxVBGRLIkZIXdQCuVOMsOg25RQTrPB1 5bLzyRqU/HjlikHyVub6qaFZBA1sx2rlWQaYFidkvCdteNI8wEpix96JIAz nDEA kDjbw61b1zw3HgII17ogo6YGCpGx BxXnjg7iOSwukuE3A9GRP85GfWX37ZB8wPbXqiyuUmjSWMhkkU MrDxVhkH5GlQHnTtS4UWyeMoF5JC3Lj1gRglT59djQAau/7oK3Iitn8O8dce0pnP/DVJMKQjeI FbZrktdjTQyZ4b4kls2Yx4IcYZT44zgg B3qKvJuZi3mSfia4sa15qpt1QCFdI2NaAV2gTJqRDmMEinWnQA v6XSm6 yu9sX8qBhHDokbdGFdpNEjUdaGGncN61EfDtwpcCVz6W3/ACok62Wkmd9Kt fIXG1TD6WwXdDvU3w5w/brdA8xwQWAOwJHh9dEnE7KsZjjGTtv5fGi1LyKT4eCurTRe9DH py1Gw2695yk P1ii3SoCYpMEg4/TQbK45iM75OfnTxQudFZZVjUl2E68QOg5A w23xSobFgW3DdaVej/AB4 ji/kzA zcNnOMmmlzDhsCszgK5x0rRpcmvNOtuzBhrOfClvWmaCRZrUtX WNOpzjArgaAJ3hXi 6sDJ9HcAS8vOGGQeQkgjyO5HuNTPEnaRPdWgs 7SKP0eYR5AZU9WMD8FcgE9c4HxB6zSCyc03iBkASVXljAwEEzx Yx0wVz9ld01WxyxaymwegF4NveTASaHRW4qgsnY9XtQGH0Jmz6 vNdthT7kjXPh8qYSakcFUjjj5sZKhy38pmOM OKZVg0CNQa2rBFIGgDNXv2D8Rd5bvZufSgPNHnqYnOcfxWz7gy 1RFTnBWvGyvYbjPohuWQecT7P8tm96ikMs/7oe4Hd2UfiXmf4KqL/AGlUmRVndu pLLdW8akERwltv/dYEfUgqsz/AM6AOdbjpWtJTQITVrW5rmDQBuKneHZUDHOAcbE/XTCDTGeESruO9MbDxB5VYH3EE/KpZ9AQKMOObHSi6Hwclo4avKveeiQdt8dM1gXeFrvw/pqNKwk35RsPA1vr1gkcmF6EZI8qfezJSqXEiA Woj0TQ5GUzEYVemftpnoGnd7KAozjwo14gsbmOALGvoHrispyr R24cXJcmPOGtRW59Hoy7Ag7071LWXiJikG/gd9/bQt2f2Ti43OCNxmj3jXQzND3gIDpuD isYSqf0a5cblD7IjT79UtXc7ZH99VzBqoR2Y75J 2jjUkjWw5ebLYwR7etVeIyxwBnetsc9uiM0UoxROtrJJyNgfCl UR9FYbYpV0fnn7OT8K9Di40oyT8ijY1ta6ckcxV98eFPLTUCjB/KmV/d88nOPGsZWbx41vs568UwOQYBP2VDU71OXJA8h9tMgacejObTZ kmtKya1NMgwaVKlSAyprpXIVuKaA2zSzWKRpgLNYNKlSEJTW1c 63U0DOtzdNIVLsWKqqAnc8qjCj4CtAa5sa3HjQBqaUgwayevvp T saANQatfifTEGgWxmiRLiKON1ZVAcI7hVVuhPMrAkeB38KqhTU lrev3N0czzMQNgo8BhVAAwNulJjRtodzglCfRJ5se3GM1vqJIk 5gTUXathgak7ubnx7KdFqX60Ytrkg5yQfOpKa3Rk5ifSIzzE1A Snesd 2MZOPKgwlFt2FfDmqLAFdcf7XvoxuOMGeLcAg1UGKnrO4LRY8q yyRvZ1/HyOCpk8mqEPzrsc1IahxXO0e7bDqPOhNJa3v5sJWSx7OmXyLQQ 3bK8SyIfDceYoejxG3NjNMLe9K7A7eVSlrDzjJqmuJnilzVeST ilRgDtvWabppz426Uqz5P2dVfRF6lAFiyDvTLT7ctEx8qf3GnS nmTGcGnNvByWxU7NXbR5aWwUkPWuea6SjBrlSJETVjcFdlDahZ rdi7EXMZBydxz45GK t3g648qrg16U7E/2lj/ACp/zj0Aiso yhjpf Efpg/yY3Hddx5Rl Tn7z2Yzj4Vy/UrkOlf4RW5DHuO/wC57kj0QOZhz8/goJ9Xwq0rf/yv/wDbW/MGprs4jDaRZqwyrW6Ag9CCuCKYyitb7OWt9Kj1L6SG544H7ruc Y77l25 c5xzeW PCiwdgzYB/wgu OtsfH297RF2saf8AR Hvo c9yttHnzCMig/VRB2jH9Yxn/6my/8A2YqAKO4s7N7mxmt45JEeK5lWJJkB9FmIGGQ9DgkjB3x1oz/UDb/WA/3X/rUU9s3qad/CNv8AY9TfaHwtLqEEcUVwbdklDlwGOQEZeX0WB/CB FAUU7wf2TNfQyS/TBHyTSw47jmz3ZA5s94MZz0rTi/siuLK2e5SdJ0jHM4CFGCeLAZYMB1O42qyuwmMrpzqTkrczgnzI 5RmtuJohp2gTQMWm 8zRho42K5mL4JxkIq94NyfD4UCorrg/sie6tUu7m5FvHIOZFCBm5D6rszMAueoG xG46U34g7JJrW5tYvpCvDdSiETd2Q0bkFgGj5sHZTght8Hptmx CLm11bRVsTJhkgSGZAQJIzGFCuAeqkqrA9PDqCKBO2O61aPu4b t42g70SQzwxmPLqrLg kSjYcnHj4E4NAyW/UDb/WA/wB1/wCtUTb9jjtey2n0wYihjlMn0fqZHdQnL3m37GTnPwqwuzqZm4e RmZmYw3R5ixLZ7ybxO9QP3OkbNDdzuzOWeKPLEscRoWxk/utAAR2hdmraXBHcG5EweUR8vc93glHcHPO2fUNbal2XSJpY1Jb kPmGKcw9zjCyBWb0 c55QxPTflqxe0yX6Zw79IG55YJh57uoJ9mFdqK ELRZdItInGUksoUYeavAqkfImgCjeLOzNrKziu/pQk71ol5O55eXvVJzzd4c4x5b0Tv2CP/rBc GbYj 1oi7Zbcx6Tbxk5KT2yk ZVWGfqqe7Sj6Fj/CVl dxQBQnGvA0 lyIsrJIkobu5EyASuOZWU qd8 II8euJDs64DfVBORciHuSgwYu85ucMc uuMYo/wDui/8AJrQ/35pqbfc4 pfflw/wBB6ABufsll/wAJJY/SgQ1s0/fdwduWTkKcneeZXfP4XSm/GfZc1gLb9diT6RcJB wcnJz59P8AZDzYx0299XtNGneJf7YS1lU eGaKTHw7s0JdtHTTf4Qg/rUADX6gj/6xH 6/9aqztITHJLETnkd0zjGeRiuceHSvSPaBwxLqEEcUU/cFJRIWw5yAjry gynq4PXwrzRagoXBOSrMCd9yGIJ386TAdMMUpF5xjyps8pNIOc bVFFWNZhg7eFObbUGUbGmRc5OaytNpPsSk49E0muuBilUITSo4 R9F/mn7Lc4d7sK5lI5s O1QvFsSBS6 NQr6iW5iD4mmU96zDlJzWak7NXVUiD7vmOKydNl8EJz5YNdu65 WqWbUAiitTmrezGm8CXsuD3axr M7qNvyVJb6qu/sYAGmtb8wLwTTxuOm5cspx4AhgRVecK68ZUZSegNQs19LHO0sE skMh2LROV5gOgYdGHvFJP2DS8FwapCbTht4rjEbpYmJgSpxI0f IFyCQTzMBsaaWmrm04dtLnfES2bNjqU kRBx8VLD41SHFetXdwVW5uZZlHpKHPog7jIUADPtxneo6XW7po Po7XMxgAA7kyMY8KQVHJnGAQD8KqwPRHbowOjTEbgvCR/OrRDxZpMl1axxR4yJrZzzHACxzI7fHCnavLF3r93LF3Mt1O8Xo ju3ldkwvq iTjbAp4OMdR/0 7/AJ TmFl69s8g5dNXIydRgIHiQoYE49nMvzFSnalwtcahbRRW0iRuk wcs7OoKiN1wCgJzlhXme81S4ldZJZ5pJEwVd5HZkwcjlLH0d99 qkP8cdR/wBPu/5 TgVl9diNm0NhLC5BaK7uI2IyQWQqpIzvjIpvpg/wDhib963v8ASnqhrTiW9iDCO8uUDMzsFmcczscsxwdyT1NaJr9 2IjALq4EJDKY 9fkKtnmBXOMHJz76Asurh/hWGTRobrToVF/3CFJY35H75CBICxYLuVYENsckHY0/7e3UaUok5eczRcv5YDcxX Lz/A1RGicQ3dpn6NcSwhtyqt6BO25Q5UnYb4zXHV9YuLpw9zNJMw6 F2JCg4yFHReg6CgLPQnZt/wCXI/3C6/OTVy7BbUR6QHPSWWaQ/DEf2RVQttxDeRxdzHd3CRAECNZXCAMSWHKDjBJPzrNlxFeRRiK K7uI4xkBEldVAJJOFBxvk/OgLPRkxtrzQZvoSEQPbTiFCCCCnOAMEn8NKapq/0TRtMnJwqrYBz5I6ojn S7H4V58tOIryGMQxXdxHEMgRpK6oAxJOFBxuST8a5XGt3Twi3e 5maFQoETSMYwE9UBc4AGBilYWeg 3b9ro/31B/Xom4x0eS5W1EfL96vLed Y49CJ ZsbbnyFeWL/iC7mQRzXVxIgIIV5XZQV6HBPUU7/xy1H/T7v8An5P76LCy3PujZ17i0TI5jK7AeOFjwT82Hzrl9zh6l7 XD/QeqWu76ad eaWSV8Y5pXZ2x1xlicDrtTrTdWubfmEFxNDz4LCKRk5iNgTjr1 NMD0Jdasf8BXb5wV lwg R kSwp9q037aOmm/whB/WqntLikmt 7e/uESWU80WeaNm763HOwMg3Mk6vnH4DHrUlPYTTiDv9Vnk9GOVMs ziORigVlLOM47w kN/Qb4Ay5e1Hhe41C2jhtpEjdJhIWdnUcojkXAKAnOXWvPL6c0Zli OC8MkkbFSSCUcqSM74JHjRdEL1grDWbr03RVUyPzYdEfBw A H9XO Ovk3tdAVQzSXRLSSAtzqDIS8aysWPMRz mTjO M5qZPRcI26Awkg1vmis8NRbMbkYZlAHIOYBo1k39LAYBvVz4He sf4vxFFYykd5HzLkIAn3yAZc82CoWZicdORvLFShyhQEE71uoq b1bQFiXKyMzlsCPlQMoCd43ecrkKQozgZ2I6VJ23BySM6pc7KG AzGMsyyzRYwHOxMOxz GtUzKgRIrFWr pTGxYrcMBzOACUJwrEDJA9lZqeRf45Fa2Z2b31nxFZpVPkpdIz f9VptderWaVXHoiXZLcFsedt/CnVx yH30qVDJRG8TD0U95 yh lSpoGKkKVKmIzWaVKgBUhSpUAKsVmlQIwaQpUqBmKVKlSAVKlS oA3h9YU5frWKVMaOUgrtZKPKlSoY12TEJ5V5l9Fl3DDYg YI3FYt3L kxLMxyWY5JPtJ3NKlWMuj0Pi/6GNSHpimk4pUqePwT8z/SRZPYlbI0shZFOAMZUHHzq0rm1RZMqiqSNyFA ylSqpnNi/sC qSHvX3PXzPkKzSpVys9BdH/2Q==https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRIQf8WmzLCTqbcpgLtAZd1iwuvKdsOH dyFFuuJU8LEnfIwQalD&s

[Catbooster]

I love college football. I love FCS football. So I'm all for celebrating the sport and all but I think you need to draw some kind of line of standard when it comes to at-large teams in any tournament. There had been talk about expanding March Madness to 96 teams a decade or so ago. Those in favor billed it as a "celebration of college basketball". Why not invite all of Division I then? Do we really need to have St. John's or South Carolina pretend to compete for the national championship in a year where they finish 17-15 and 6-12 in conference? I'll pass. In a 32-team FCS playoff, you'd have the likes of 7-5 Southern Illinois, 7-5 Towson and 6-6 UNH making the field. All good teams but deserving of playing for a national title? No.

I actually said before that I wouldn't mind seeing FCS Bowl Games for teams that finish .500 but don't make the field. Play them at a home site and try to make the game somewhat regional if possible. Reward the seniors on those squads in addition to the extra practice time for the underclassmen. Sound like a crazy idea? They have bowl games in Division III (or at least they did 10 years ago when I had friends playing in them) and at the high school level for good teams that don't make regional or state. The Pioneer League and NEC champs played each other in a bowl game for a few years before both conferences secured auto-bids.

But in the end we agree 24 is the correct number right now. I'm tempted to say 20 but I like the fact that a 24-team field limits the number of seeds to 8, which puts a premium on the first round bye. In a 20 team field, it's a little more awkward where the Top 12 get byes and the next 8 play in four pillow-fights to make the Round of 16.
Well, with 20 teams you could have 4 teams with byes and have the other 16 play. But personally, I think 24 is a good number. Doesn't seem as awkward to me for scheduling and about 20% in the field isn't excessive IMO. I'd rather not see it go bigger than that.

I really dislike the idea of dropping the auto-bids. A common complaint about FBS is that the P5 control the playoffs and keep the other teams locked out. I don't know how many times I've heard people say that they'd rather be in the FCS because a team can earn a spot in the playoffs whether the polls value them or not. It's settled on the field. You especially hear that with teams like UCF a couple years ago in FBS. Why would we want to move toward that model?

[Professor Chaos]

I love college football. I love FCS football. So I'm all for celebrating the sport and all but I think you need to draw some kind of line of standard when it comes to at-large teams in any tournament. There had been talk about expanding March Madness to 96 teams a decade or so ago. Those in favor billed it as a "celebration of college basketball". Why not invite all of Division I then? Do we really need to have St. John's or South Carolina pretend to compete for the national championship in a year where they finish 17-15 and 6-12 in conference? I'll pass. In a 32-team FCS playoff, you'd have the likes of 7-5 Southern Illinois, 7-5 Towson and 6-6 UNH making the field. All good teams but deserving of playing for a national title? No.

I actually said before that I wouldn't mind seeing FCS Bowl Games for teams that finish .500 but don't make the field. Play them at a home site and try to make the game somewhat regional if possible. Reward the seniors on those squads in addition to the extra practice time for the underclassmen. Sound like a crazy idea? They have bowl games in Division III (or at least they did 10 years ago when I had friends playing in them) and at the high school level for good teams that don't make regional or state. The Pioneer League and NEC champs played each other in a bowl game for a few years before both conferences secured auto-bids.

But in the end we agree 24 is the correct number right now. I'm tempted to say 20 but I like the fact that a 24-team field limits the number of seeds to 8, which puts a premium on the first round bye. In a 20 team field, it's a little more awkward where the Top 12 get byes and the next 8 play in four pillow-fights to make the Round of 16.
Agreed. I think every FCS conference that wants an autobid should get one. Right now there's only 10 that want one so they could get away with a 20 team field but give me the extra 3 seeds which allows the quarterfinals and on to act as a true tournament since it's very unlikely that any quarterfinal or semifinal will not have a seeded team in it (I think it's only happened once since 2013). It's a good trade-off for making teams 9-12 have to play an additional game on Thanksgiving weekend in 24 team field compared to a 20 team field IMO.

[JayJ79]

never understood why people want more regionalization.
though I suppose it makes sense for the east-coasters who want to force the tougher western and midwestern schools to knock each other out

[uni88]

Well, with 20 teams you could have 4 teams with byes and have the other 16 play. But personally, I think 24 is a good number. Doesn't seem as awkward to me for scheduling and about 20% in the field isn't excessive IMO. I'd rather not see it go bigger than that.

I really dislike the idea of dropping the auto-bids. A common complaint about FBS is that the P5 control the playoffs and keep the other teams locked out. I don't know how many times I've heard people say that they'd rather be in the FCS because a team can earn a spot in the playoffs whether the polls value them or not. It's settled on the field. You especially hear that with teams like UCF a couple years ago in FBS. Why would we want to move toward that model?

With 20 teams, you have 8 play over Thanksgiving and the other 12 have a bye. Then you have 16 teams left for 2nd round.

[Catbooster]

With 20 teams, you have 8 play over Thanksgiving and the other 12 have a bye. Then you have 16 teams left for 2nd round.
Whoops - You're right.

[Mocs123]

24 seems right to me. I think every conference deserves a path via auto-but, and 24 ensures the deserving at-larges will get in as well (debates about the flawed bubble teams aside). Also, since we are not going to seed the whole tourney 24 gives your 8 seeds a true benefit that they have earned.

I agree with this. For example, I felt like the 2013 Chattanooga team should have been in with 8 D1 wins, but for whatever reason we weren't. I can say however that we had our chance, every FCS team has their chance, just win and your in. You can't say the same about FBS football, just ask UCF. Do I think UCF was the best team in the nation either year they were undefeated? No, but I do think they deserved a chance to prove it, just like I think an undefeated Pioneer League team gets a chance to win the NC, only in FCS they get that opportunity.

[JayJ79]

the definition of "deserving at-large" is just a moving goalpost that depends on the field size. There will always be arguments about what teams "deserve" to be in when it comes to the last few spots.
and if all "D1 wins" are regarded equally, I can see why many schools don't bother trying to schedule competitive non-conference opponents.

[NY Crusader 2010]

the definition of "deserving at-large" is just a moving goalpost that depends on the field size. There will always be arguments about what teams "deserve" to be in when it comes to the last few spots.
and if all "D1 wins" are regarded equally, I can see why many schools don't bother trying to schedule competitive non-conference opponents.

This is why the line ought to be drawn at the point where the last at-large teams making the tournament have a puncher's chance to compete for the national championship. Results from past tournaments can quantitatively help us come to a conclusion as to where the line should be drawn.

If we want to reward the seniors on also-ran teams that had good seasons, play a few one-off bowl games:

7-5 Southern Illinois v. 7-5 Eastern Washington
6-6 Citadel v. 6-6 Chuck South
7-5 Robert Morris v. 7-5 Towson
6-5 UNH v. 7-5 Sam Houston State

[NY Crusader 2010]

Regionalization is never going away. People need to give up lobbying against it. Every NCAA tournament outside of Men's and Women's Basketball is seeded regionally, not nationally.

One thing I would like the committee to try to accommodate -- absolutely no potential re-matches until the quarterfinals or later. Right now this policy is upheld only for the Round of 24. I'm OK with conference mates playing each other even in the opening round as long as it's a scenario where they didn't play in the regular season. Albany and Villanova COULD have theoretically matched up last weekend under this scenario.

[LetsGoPeay]

This is why the line ought to be drawn at the point where the last at-large teams making the tournament have a puncher's chance to compete for the national championship. Results from past tournaments can quantitatively help us come to a conclusion as to where the line should be drawn.

If we want to reward the seniors on also-ran teams that had good seasons, play a few one-off bowl games:

7-5 Southern Illinois v. 7-5 Eastern Washington
6-6 Citadel v. 6-6 Chuck South
7-5 Robert Morris v. 7-5 Towson
6-5 UNH v. 7-5 Sam Houston State

Are you just going to award someone an extra home game, and call it a bowl game? Because there's no way that fans from UNH and Sam Houston St are traveling to a neutral site, for a meaningless bowl game featuring mediocre teams. This isn't like the HBCU schools, where teams routinely play at neutral site "classics". So the only way you could do this, is to designate one of those teams as the home team, and call it a "bowl game".

[LetsGoPeay]

never understood why people want more regionalization.
though I suppose it makes sense for the east-coasters who want to force the tougher western and midwestern schools to knock each other out

The only Western team to even make it to the semis since going to the 24 team format, is Eastern Washington. Having the playoffs be more regional would assure that a West team could break through a lot more easier.

[NY Crusader 2010]

Are you just going to award someone an extra home game, and call it a bowl game? Because there's no way that fans from UNH and Sam Houston St are traveling to a neutral site, for a meaningless bowl game featuring mediocre teams. This isn't like the HBCU schools, where teams routinely play at neutral site "classics". So the only way you could do this, is to designate one of those teams as the home team, and call it a "bowl game".

Bowl games would absolutely have to be played at a home site. HBCU classics are a completely different animal. Heck, even the G5 conference championship games have to be played at home sites to ensure adequate attendance.

[TennBison]

My vote.
16 teams, all seeded, no conference autobids (just flat out the best 16), everyone gets a week off before the first round starts.

[JayJ79]

This is why the line ought to be drawn at the point where the last at-large teams making the tournament have a puncher's chance to compete for the national championship.

so only a 2 team playoff field this year?

[NY Crusader 2010]

so only a 2 team playoff field this year?

Three. SDSU v. JMU in a play-in game to face the Bison in Frisco. Done.

Giving SDSU the benefit of the doubt since they played their rivals within a score earlier this year. Plus I thought the Valley deserved two bids.

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

My vote.
16 teams, all seeded, no conference autobids (just flat out the best 16), everyone gets a week off before the first round starts.

I'm 100% on-board with this!

[Professor]

That Autobid needs to go. And the NCAA pay all the expenses

[MR. CHICKEN]

......LOOKS LIKE......WE'RE........SEVERALAH.....GAZILLION SIGNATURES SHORT......UH GETTIN'........NCAA's ATTENTION.................BRAWK!!


....EDITTED FO' CLARITY.........POLL SHOWS MAJORITY LIKE DUH WAY IT IS..........HENCE....NOT 'NUFF VOTERS TA CHANGE.......CURRENT.....FORMAT........WHICH IS MAH FORMAT PREFERENCE...........AWK!

[Sycamore62]

......LOOKS LIKE......WE'RE........SEVERALAH.....GAZILLION SIGNATURES SHORT......UH GETTIN'........NCAA's ATTENTION.................BRAWK!!

I suspect you could get it done your way if you were willing to pay all travel expenses for each team

[MR. CHICKEN]

I suspect you could get it done your way if you were willing to pay all travel expenses for each team

......YOU MISCONSTRUE.......AH'M ONE IN FAVOR...UH DUH WAY IT IS.......WHICH IS WHAT DUH POLL SHOWS.........'TWEEN ALL DUH CRYIN' IT SHOOD BE....LIKE BACK IN DUH DAY........BRAWK!

[Outsider1]

Can I say that my biggest wish would be that they spread the games out a little so it would easier to watch them? Trying to watch 3 games at the same time sucks...

[Chalupa Batman]

Can I say that my biggest wish would be that they spread the games out a little so it would easier to watch them? Trying to watch 3 games at the same time sucks...

They did this last year IIRC and thought it was great. Do the schools have any input as to what starting times are for games the first 2 rounds? Maybe that's why they didn't do it the same way this year.

[Sycamore62]

......YOU MISCONSTRUE.......AH'M ONE IN FAVOR...UH DUH WAY IT IS.......WHICH IS WHAT DUH POLL SHOWS.........'TWEEN ALL DUH CRYIN' IT SHOOD BE....LIKE BACK IN DUH DAY........BRAWK!

I meant "you" as in anyone who wants to change the regionalization

[Professor Chaos]

They did this last year IIRC and thought it was great. Do the schools have any input as to what starting times are for games the first 2 rounds? Maybe that's why they didn't do it the same way this year.
The schools will send the NCAA first, second, and quarterfinal preferred start times as part of the forms they send in with bids and all that stuff. I don't know if last year it was just coincidental that the ESPN3 kickoffs were more spread out or if the NCAA (I'd guess ESPN doesn't really care for the ESPN3 games) did that purposefully.

In any case it didn't happen this year and I'd guess they just let any ESPN3 games kickoff whenever the host school preferred.

[putter]

If the NCAA does not stop to evaluate the numbers watching the FCS playoffs and negotiates TV appropriately, they are crazy. I like 24 as it gives a bye to the seeded teams and also gets more schools into the playoffs. More excitement across the country can only help

[Outsider1]

If the NCAA does not stop to evaluate the numbers watching the FCS playoffs and negotiates TV appropriately, they are crazy. I like 24 as it gives a bye to the seeded teams and also gets more schools into the playoffs. More excitement across the country can only help

I understand that with streaming apps they may not be thinking bigger picture like with TV, but I agree that a major piece of growing the numbers watching would be improving the ability to see more of it. Without risking local ticket sales, would schools be willing to adjust times, or even dates, a little to increase coverage? And..would the percentage of revenue increse be worth it? Are we REALLY the only ones that want to watch more than our school play?

[Hammerhead]

The only Western team to even make it to the semis since going to the 24 team format, is Eastern Washington. Having the playoffs be more regional would assure that a West team could break through a lot more easier.
In the FCS landscape, NDSU and Sam Houston are western teams. http://i21.servimg.com/u/f21/09/00/80/81/fcsmap10.jpg

[Tazman2664]

If the NCAA does not stop to evaluate the numbers watching the FCS playoffs and negotiates TV appropriately, they are crazy. I like 24 as it gives a bye to the seeded teams and also gets more schools into the playoffs. More excitement across the country can only help

The results of today's game spells disaster for FCS popularity. The UNI & SDSU was a close call but the other 6 teams that won prove that outside the top in this league there is nothing. Look at the score of the Montana and Montana St. games. Those scores are a disgrace. Sac St. has yet to play but as things look, the playoffs should just be 8 teams and I believe that will create excitement for the FCS. When you have 4 very good games people will take interest. But when you have 2 weeks of a playoff that has teams getting beat by 30, 40 or more points, people think nothing of you. After 2 weeks of this, next weeks games can be close and competitive but the interest in gone. The only people who want 16, 24 or 32 teams are the people here on this site. That is it. People outside of this site think the FCS is a joke. The only way to get interest is to create games that are competitive and good. Not games that are 21-24 between 2 teams that can't hold a stick to the best of the league. Nobody cares about how Monmouth beat Holy Cross when those 2 teams no way to hold a candle to the best in this league. Just sad, FCS is just considered the better teams of DII.

[Sader87]

Actually, many of the FCS teams were D2 or lower not that long ago in the grand scheme of things.

The FCS level is sort of in a quandary now....it's basically dominated by a few schools that are in the netherworld between FBS and FCS sort of emphasis with their programs: some of the MVFC, JMU, some Big Sky....and basically everyone else.....all the other competitive FCS programs have gone FBS.

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

Actually, many of the FCS teams were D2 or lower not that long ago in the grand scheme of things.

The FCS level is sort of in a quandary now....it's basically dominated by a few schools that are in the netherworld between FBS and FCS sort of emphasis with their programs: some of the MVFC, JMU, some Big Sky....and basically everyone else.....all the other competitive FCS programs have gone FBS.

The separation at the top over the last decade is staggering and kind of sad. Private programs like Villanova, Richmond, Furman, Wofford, Monmouth etc and yes even the better PL teams like Colgate last year basically have no shot at this point unless the stars align in a ridiculous manner. Some of it's self inflicted (PL self-inflicted and them some) but a lot of it is simply not being able to build enough depth and recruit those 4-5 extra difference makers due to university demographics.

[ElCid]

The separation at the top over the last decade is staggering and kind of sad. Private programs like Villanova, Richmond, Furman, Wofford, Monmouth etc and yes even the better PL teams like Colgate last year basically have no shot at this point unless the stars align in a ridiculous manner. Some of it's self inflicted (PL self-inflicted and them some) but a lot of it is simply not being able to build enough depth and recruit those 4-5 extra difference makers due to university demographics.

This year sure. The last few years. Sure. But I don't necessarily agree with this as a permanent state if things. All things go in cycles.

[Sader87]

The separation at the top over the last decade is staggering and kind of sad. Private programs like Villanova, Richmond, Furman, Wofford, Monmouth etc and yes even the better PL teams like Colgate last year basically have no shot at this point unless the stars align in a ridiculous manner. Some of it's self inflicted (PL self-inflicted and them some) but a lot of it is simply not being able to build enough depth and recruit those 4-5 extra difference makers due to university demographics.

It's an interesting question/discussion....I love the FCS-level but one of the problems with it, and in many ways the reason for its existence is that many schools/leagues are playing at this level for differing reasons.

The vast majority of the FCS programs, if you really got an honest answer out of their school's admin., are really not playing at this level to win a national championship. They have a football team at this level for students (both playing and watching) and for alumni (Homecoming, Family Weekend, fundraising etc)...possibly for community support in some instances.

I'm not saying that this level shouldn't exist....it should....but if we're being completely honest, only a handful of programs exist to win a national title.

[LetsGoPeay]

It's an interesting question/discussion....I love the FCS-level but one of the problems with it, and in many ways the reason for its existence is that many schools/leagues are playing at this level for differing reasons.

The vast majority of the FCS programs, if you really got an honest answer out of their school's admin., are really not playing at this level to win a national championship. They have a football team at this level for students (both playing and watching) and for alumni (Homecoming, Family Weekend, fundraising etc)...possibly for community support in some instances.

I'm not saying that this level shouldn't exist....it should....but if we're being completely honest, only a handful of programs exist to win a national title.

This is a fair assessment. And I'd say the same thing exists on the FBS level.

[dewey]

This is a fair assessment. And I'd say the same thing exists on the FBS level.

I completely agree. There are only about 10-15 programs in the FBS that can win the FBS title on any given year.

I 6 years of the FBS ayoff system only 11 teams have made it and only 3 teams have won the title.

Dewey

[Sader87]

This is a fair assessment. And I'd say the same thing exists on the FBS level.

Agreed....though to a somewhat lesser extent...FBS programs, even the G5, are more heavily invested in their programs financially and otherwise obviously than the FCS programs.

[TheKingpin28]

Agreed....though to a somewhat lesser extent...FBS programs, even the G5, are more heavily invested in their programs financially and otherwise obviously than the FCS programs.

At least the FCS gives every conference, who wants to participate, a chance to win the national title, unlike the good ole' boys club known as the "College Football Playoff". At least if they went to 8 and gave the G5 a spot plus 2 at-larges, it would be less of a joke. No reason why the FBS cannot go to 16 teams. 10 AQs and 6 at-larges. Would allow for all the teams who "should/could" win to get a chance plus give every conference a representative. No reason why they could not incorporate this into the bowl season.

[Sader87]

At least the FCS gives every conference, who wants to participate, a chance to win the national title, unlike the good ole' boys club known as the "College Football Playoff". At least if they went to 8 and gave the G5 a spot plus 2 at-larges, it would be less of a joke. No reason why the FBS cannot go to 16 teams. 10 AQs and 6 at-larges. Would allow for all the teams who "should/could" win to get a chance plus give every conference a representative. No reason why they could not incorporate this into the bowl season.

No doubt....though I'm of the opinion that no more than 3 playoff games...hence 8 teams, should be in the playoffs after a 12 game regular season.

[NY Crusader 2010]

I completely agree. There are only about 10-15 programs in the FBS that can win the FBS title on any given year.

I 6 years of the FBS ayoff system only 11 teams have made it and only 3 teams have won the title.

Dewey

Exactly. Pretty much any school in the G5 or moving up to FBS knows that in doing so they will never in a million years even pretend to compete a national title. The best you can hope for is to be the next Boise State and knock off a power school in a New Years Bowl if you're lucky enough to be the ONE "major bowl game" entrant from the G5.

Miami (Ohio) beat Central Michigan to win the MAC yesterday. Their reward? A trip to Mobile, Alabama to play the second place team in the Sun Belt.

Consider me someone who would like to see FBS go our direction as far as an all-inclusive playoff. 10 auto-bids, 10 OR 14 at large for either 20 or 24. First couple rounds at home sites. As a fan of the game, wouldn't it be fun to see what App State could do in the opening round of a playoff against, say Auburn? Or Miami (Ohio) heading to Wisconsin (they'd get killed this year).

Also my thoughts watching the MAC Championship -- NDSU and JMU would DESTROY those teams. That's a league that probably belongs in FCS, IMO.

[R.A.]

Space it out to give room for important traditional games, conference title games, and Bowl Games that teams want to play.

Last Weekend in November: Rivalry Weekend
First Weekend in December: Conference Title Games
Second Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs First Round
Third Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs Second Round
Fourth Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs Third Round
First Weekend in January: FCS Playoffs Fourth Round
Second Weekend in January: Pause for Potential FCS Bowls, HBCU National Title Game, Preparation for National Title teams, etc. (There's already a three week gap between SemiFinals and National Title Game-- fill it with something!!)
Third Weekend in January: FCS National Title Game

-The FCS could encourage the FBS to expand their playoff so that our FCS Title game happens on January's 3rd Weekend (Friday Night or Saturday Afternoon) while their FBS National Title Game happens the following Monday... which maintains that the FBS Title Game is the Final College Football game of the year... FBS goes from 4 to 8, their title game will probably be a week later, which works for us.

-As for all of the conversation about competing with the FBS Bowl Games, it's hard to do worse than what's already happening with FCS Playoff Attendance. That Sac. State game?? Geez...

-No expansion. 24 teams are fine, the seeded teams getting a bye is fine.

[JayJ79]

Space it out to give room for important traditional games, conference title games, and Bowl Games that teams want to play.

Last Weekend in November: Rivalry Weekend
First Weekend in December: Conference Title Games
Second Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs First Round
Third Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs Second Round
Fourth Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs Third Round
First Weekend in January: FCS Playoffs Fourth Round
Second Weekend in January: Pause for Potential FCS Bowls, HBCU National Title Game, Preparation for National Title teams, etc. (There's already a three week gap between SemiFinals and National Title Game-- fill it with something!!)
Third Weekend in January: FCS National Title Game.
I think attendance would tank even more with that setup. And even more conflict with final exams.

[R.A.]

I think attendance would tank even more with that setup. And even more conflict with final exams.
Why doesn't HBCU FCS Attendance tank during the same time frame as I mentioned?

Perhaps the entire FCS may benefit from a different playoff format.

Why focus so much on a student population, focused on Exams and leaving for the holidays? The local communities that our schools reside in, aren't going anywhere. Focus on them.

Also, focus on the alums. The rivalry weekend gives schools more time to convince alums to come to the game, and while they're on campus; promote the conference titles and FCS Playoffs to them.

One of the benefits that the Bayou Classic and other HBCUs have is the Holiday Weekend. You all could promote your rivalry weekends all season long...
...One of you all in another post said other schools could do the same thing as Southern and Grambling if given the time, so go do it. It'll benefit the entire FCS.

[Mattymc727]

24 or 32 but seed every team. Remove regionalization.

[katss07]

Space it out to give room for important traditional games, conference title games, and Bowl Games that teams want to play.

Last Weekend in November: Rivalry Weekend
First Weekend in December: Conference Title Games
Second Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs First Round
Third Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs Second Round
Fourth Weekend in December: FCS Playoffs Third Round
First Weekend in January: FCS Playoffs Fourth Round
Second Weekend in January: Pause for Potential FCS Bowls, HBCU National Title Game, Preparation for National Title teams, etc. (There's already a three week gap between SemiFinals and National Title Game-- fill it with something!!)
Third Weekend in January: FCS National Title Game

-The FCS could encourage the FBS to expand their playoff so that our FCS Title game happens on January's 3rd Weekend (Friday Night or Saturday Afternoon) while their FBS National Title Game happens the following Monday... which maintains that the FBS Title Game is the Final College Football game of the year... FBS goes from 4 to 8, their title game will probably be a week later, which works for us.

-As for all of the conversation about competing with the FBS Bowl Games, it's hard to do worse than what's already happening with FCS Playoff Attendance. That Sac. State game?? Geez...

-No expansion. 24 teams are fine, the seeded teams getting a bye is fine.
Waiting for the second weekend in December seems like a long wait for the playoffs to begin. And think about those seeded teams. They might get three weeks off, as the gap between the final weekend in the regular season and their second round game. Almost seems like a disadvantage to me. I wouldn’t want three weeks off at all.

While I’d love to see HBCUs participate in the playoffs and compete for a national title, see what they’re really made of, it just doesn’t seem realistic under the current format and with the Celebration Bowl it would be hard to change. But that’s okay. The Celebration Bowl is a good thing for HBCUs with the attendance and money. Enjoy it.

[R.A.]

Waiting for the second weekend in December seems like a long wait for the playoffs to begin. And think about those seeded teams. They might get three weeks off, as the gap between the final weekend in the regular season and their second round game. Almost seems like a disadvantage to me. I wouldn’t want three weeks off at all.

While I’d love to see HBCUs participate in the playoffs and compete for a national title, see what they’re really made of, it just doesn’t seem realistic under the current format and with the Celebration Bowl it would be hard to change. But that’s okay. The Celebration Bowl is a good thing for HBCUs with the attendance and money. Enjoy it.

Most of the seeded schools would be in their conference title game, which I listed at the First Week of December.
The seeded teams would then play the Third Week of December.

So it's still just a week gap.

For example: in 2019, only South Dakota State, Montana, and Montana State would have had a two week break under my format, the other five seeds still would only have a one week break because those schools would have competed in their conference championship games.

[A&T AGGIE96]

I'm in favor of ANY format that puts at least $800,000 directly into the coffers of NCAT. Since 2015, the Celebration Bowl has done just that. Regardless of the format, the NCAA needs to abolish the bid format and foot all of the expenses of the playoff games. In fact, they need to get a muliyear TV deal to pay for the FCS Playoffs.

^^^THIS^^^

I got my tickets and booked my hotel for the Celebration Bowl this this year. No way I want to see A&T "pay" to participate in the FCS Playoffs. You guys bid to host playoff games that are not well attended...add insult to the injury by the NCAA taking the lions share of the gate.

Football is not like Basketball, the current FCS Playoff system doesn't make sense and that's way it loses money, is not well attended, and has no major sponsorship. At least try to stop the bleeding with regional games that will generate some fan interest instead of expecting fans to travel to schools and towns they have never heard of xthumbsdownx

[uni88]

Why doesn't HBCU FCS Attendance tank during the same time frame as I mentioned?

Perhaps the entire FCS may benefit from a different playoff format.

Why focus so much on a student population, focused on Exams and leaving for the holidays? The local communities that our schools reside in, aren't going anywhere. Focus on them.

Also, focus on the alums. The rivalry weekend gives schools more time to convince alums to come to the game, and while they're on campus; promote the conference titles and FCS Playoffs to them.

One of the benefits that the Bayou Classic and other HBCUs have is the Holiday Weekend. You all could promote your rivalry weekends all season long...
...One of you all in another post said other schools could do the same thing as Southern and Grambling if given the time, so go do it. It'll benefit the entire FCS.

Much of FCS isn't like the HBCU's ...

1) Temperature averages in Cedar Falls are between the mid 20's to mid 40's which isn't as conducive to tailgating as it is in the South.

2) Our rivalries aren't longstanding and shift based on how competitive we are. UNI has had rivalries with a number of teams through the years but none have been anywhere close to what the HBCU's have.

3) We're directional state schools and as such red-headed step-children when it comes to community support. Iowa is #1 in the Waterloo/Cedar Falls area and UNI has to fight for support. It would be foolish to ignore the students and focus just on the community for support.

Just because it works for Southern and Grambling doesn't mean it will work for the rest of FCS. The HBCU's have a good thing with their rivalry games, conference championships and Celebration Bowl. The rest of FCS has a format that works for them. I don't expect the HBCU's to change and I don't think they should expect the rest of FCS to change for them.

[R.A.]

Much of FCS isn't like the HBCU's ...

1) Temperature averages in Cedar Falls are between the mid 20's to mid 40's which isn't as conducive to tailgating as it is in the South.

Are not the people in Cedar Falls and other geographically similar locations, used to the climate? Montana State's game looked well attended.



2) Our rivalries aren't longstanding and shift based on how competitive we are. UNI has had rivalries with a number of teams through the years but none have been anywhere close to what the HBCU's have.

HBCUs worked to build our rivalries up. Having rivalry games at consistent times with plenty of ancillary events around them, help the rivalries to grow. A holiday weekend seems like a good time for a rivalry game since locals are home and are looking for something to do.



3) We're directional state schools and as such red-headed step-children when it comes to community support. Iowa is #1 in the Waterloo/Cedar Falls area and UNI has to fight for support.

Preach'n to the choir... we're HBCUs



It would be foolish to ignore the students and focus just on the community for support.

I didn't say ignore the students, I said why focus so much on them, when the alumni and local fan bases are larger? Every school's alumni fan base is larger than its student fan base. So if the late season rivalry games and post season are targeted at Alums; if they care, they'll show.


Just because it works for Southern and Grambling doesn't mean it will work for the rest of FCS. The HBCU's have a good thing with their rivalry games, conference championships and Celebration Bowl. The rest of FCS has a format that works for them. I don't expect the HBCU's to change and I don't think they should expect the rest of FCS to change for them.

If it works so well for the FCS Schools, then why is FCS Post-Season attendance down? Why even move the FCS Title Game from ESPN2 to ABC if it was working so well before? If the FCS Championship game is going to follow the Celebration Bowl's lead, why not look at HBCUs as a valuable partner as opposed to "what works well for them..."

Shouldn't the mentality be "What works well for all of US?"

Why not merge the two formats and have a best of both worlds scenario?
--------------------------------
The FCS Post Season leadership are some interesting folks...
The FCS Post Season Attendance is down. The SWAC and the MEAC in 2018 were numbers 1 and 3 in FCS attendance.

Solution??? Make it difficult for HBCUs to be in the FCS PostSeason by starting the FCS Postseason the same weekend the HBCU traditional games take place, then telling all the FCS that they can only participate in one post-season format.
Genius

HBCUs Choose HBCU tradition over FCS PostSeason. HBCU attendance still Top 3, FCS PostSeason does worse in attendance.

"It could all be so simple, but you rather make it hard."

[Professor Chaos]

Are not the people in Cedar Falls and other geographically similar locations, used to the climate? Montana State's game looked well attended.


HBCUs worked to build our rivalries up. Having rivalry games at consistent times with plenty of ancillary events around them, help the rivalries to grow. A holiday weekend seems like a good time for a rivalry game since locals are home and are looking for something to do.



Preach'n to the choir... we're HBCUs


I didn't say ignore the students, I said why focus so much on them, when the alumni and local fan bases are larger? Every school's alumni fan base is larger than its student fan base. So if the late season rivalry games and post season are targeted at Alums; if they care, they'll show.


If it works so well for the FCS Schools, then why is FCS Post-Season attendance down? Why even move the FCS Title Game from ESPN2 to ABC if it was working so well before? If the FCS Championship game is going to follow the Celebration Bowl's lead, why not look at HBCUs as a valuable partner as opposed to "what works well for them..."

Shouldn't the mentality be "What works well for all of US?"

Why not merge the two formats and have a best of both worlds scenario?
Attendance is down and attendance would be worse with your format of playing games right around or shortly after Christmas. That being said I don't think attendance is down because of frustration with the format, it's down because people just don't go to live sporting events like they used to. Even NFL teams have issues selling out playoff games these days.

The reason why many of these also-ran FBS bowl games work isn't because of attendance it's because of the TV money... they're horrible attended for the most part as well. The fact that the FCS championship is moving to ABC the fact that they moved another quarterfinal to national television means that ESPN is clearly starting to value the FCS playoff as a product more (6 of the remaining 7 games in the FCS playoffs will be nationally televised) which tells me that viewers are valuing it more. Despite the downturn in attendance this leads me to believe that the FCS playoffs are still plenty strong and sustainable.

The HBCU's, the SWAC in particular, have better fan support as a whole than any other FCS conference and that support has been built upon over a long time. I don't know if the other conferences could pull off what the SWAC does... I know it would be a struggle to start off with. That's why I don't see your proposal of the rest of the FCS adopting the SWAC scheduling model ever catching on.

[R.A.]

Attendance is down and attendance would be worse with your format of playing games right around or shortly after Christmas. That being said I don't think attendance is down because of frustration with the format, it's down because people just don't go to live sporting events like they used to. Even NFL teams have issues selling out playoff games these days.

The reason why many of these also-ran FBS bowl games work isn't because of attendance it's because of the TV money... they're horrible attended for the most part as well. The fact that the FCS championship is moving to ABC the fact that they moved another quarterfinal to national television means that ESPN is clearly starting to value the FCS playoff as a product more (6 of the remaining 7 games in the FCS playoffs will be nationally televised) which tells me that viewers are valuing it more. Despite the downturn in attendance this leads me to believe that the FCS playoffs are still plenty strong and sustainable.

The HBCU's, the SWAC in particular, have better fan support as a whole than any other FCS conference and that support has been built upon over a long time. I don't know if the other conferences could pull off what the SWAC does... I know it would be a struggle to start off with. That's why I don't see your proposal of the rest of the FCS adopting the SWAC scheduling model ever catching on.


Putting a Championship Game on ABC caught on. The MEAC and SWAC did that first... why not adopt some of the other HBCU methods and work together with us? Why force us to choose HBCU Tradition or FCS Playoffs??

You'll never get there if you don't start. Even when the MEAC had our automatic bid, many of our first round games were on ESPN2. We'll make your playoffs, better and more attractive.
---------------------------------------
Wait until ESPN has to tell the FCS what we've been telling you all along...

[Professor Chaos]

Putting a Championship Game on ABC caught on. The MEAC and SWAC did that first... why not adopt some of the other HBCU methods and work together with us? Why force us to choose HBCU Tradition or FCS Playoffs??

You'll never get there if you don't start. Even when the MEAC had our automatic bid, many of our first round games were on ESPN2. We'll make your playoffs, better and more attractive.
---------------------------------------
Wait until ESPN has to tell the FCS what we've been telling you all along...
The championship game was not moved to ABC because the Celebration Bowl was on ABC... these are not mutually exclusive things.

And when were first round playoff games on ESPN2? I know it wasn't anytime since 2010.

I'm sure you'll take this the wrong way but I don't really care all that much that HBCUs choose tradition over the playoffs. I don't think the HBCUs would add a whole lot in terms of quality teams capable of making a deep playoff run. I think the HBCUs have found something that works for them and that's great, they should keep doing it and they have the support to do it so more power to them. I'd much rather see the Ivies in the playoffs.

[Outsider1]

They still just need to spread the games out regardless of who is televising/streaming. The scheduling this year so far has sucked royally...

[JayJ79]

They still just need to spread the games out regardless of who is televising/streaming. The scheduling this year so far has sucked royally...

when the game are being streamed online (rather than on an actual television network), I'd much rather have game times scheduled to best suit the schedules of the teams playing and those actually attending the game, rather than putting games at suboptimal times just to spread out the internet streams.

[R.A.]

They still just need to spread the games out regardless of who is televising/streaming. The scheduling this year so far has sucked royally...

Spread 'em out. Nothing wrong with that.

[LetsGoPeay]

^^^THIS^^^

I got my tickets and booked my hotel for the Celebration Bowl this this year. No way I want to see A&T "pay" to participate in the FCS Playoffs. You guys bid to host playoff games that are not well attended...add insult to the injury by the NCAA taking the lions share of the gate.

Football is not like Basketball, the current FCS Playoff system doesn't make sense and that's way it loses money, is not well attended, and has no major sponsorship. At least try to stop the bleeding with regional games that will generate some fan interest instead of expecting fans to travel to schools and towns they have never heard of xthumbsdownx

Exactly!

[Outsider1]

when the game are being streamed online (rather than on an actual television network), I'd much rather have game times scheduled to best suit the schedules of the teams playing and those actually attending the game, rather than putting games at suboptimal times just to spread out the internet streams.


Sorry, but constantly switching back and forth between 3-4 games at one time on an 11 inch screen just doesn't cut it. You can't focus on any one game and you miss so much of each game it's pathetic.