FCS Playoff Projection 11-3

[MTfan4life]

My stab at it all.

First things first, I didn't want to match up same conferences for quarterfinal games. I'd rather take potential Big Sky vs. MVC and CAA vs. SoCon, rather than possible MVC v. MVC or other same conference matchups. I'm using slight regional bracketing, but not heavy like the committee likely will. So this is more towards how I'd do it, rather than predicting how the committee will make the bracket.

Second here's how I see it all playing out. NDSU, MSU, SHSU, App. St. win out. That's why they're seeded 1-4. I have Maine losing one of their last three, but still winning the auto bid. For at large teams. I have Cal Poly losing to Eastern, therefore no bid. Furman clearly is out because App. St. won out. Youngstown is out after losing to both power MVFC schools. Illinois St. is the last one out. Central Arkansas finishes with 7 wins straight to get in. Georgia Southern beats Wofford.

#1 North Dakota St.
play-in Central Arkansas @ Albany

Towson @ Lehigh

Wofford @ #5 Maine

#4 Appalachian St.
play-in Norfolk St. @ James Madison

#3 Sam Houston St.
play-in Stony Brook @ Montana

New Hampshire @ Georgia Southern

#2 Montana St.
play-in Eastern Kentucky @ Indiana St.

Old Dominion @ Northern Iowa

Here's to hoping this holds up through at least this weekend!

[Twentysix]

Please, feed us another NEC school. They are delicious. Before the lights dim in the FD I like to frost them with cream cheese. I think Montana has a similar taste for schools from Texas.

[andy7171]

I like getting put into NDSU's bracket. A 1983 playoff rematch!

[Twentysix]

I like getting put into NDSU's bracket. A 1983 playoff rematch!

That was a good year.

[UAalum72]

Did you really put a first-round game AT Albany?

[MTfan4life]

Did you really put a first-round game AT Albany?

Ran out of places to play. I guess that could be flip-flopped, or switch Albany with Eastern Kentucky.

[jmufan999]

I like this. A lot.

[asknoquarter21]

Looks pretty good.

That Wofford @ Maine game looks like a great game.

[Fear the Bird]

Not enough regionality here, but a lot to like

[youwouldno]

I don't see how UCA can be an at-large at this point... they have no wins of note, and even one over Northwestern St. isn't really that special. They played a non D-I game as well. There is really no history of the committee liking a team with their profile, but I guess they could underestimate how weak the Southland is this year. I think that's a bit too ignorant even for the NCAA though.

[MTfan4life]

I don't see how UCA can be an at-large at this point... they have no wins of note, and even one over Northwestern St. isn't really that special. They played a non D-I game as well. There is really no history of the committee liking a team with their profile, but I guess they could underestimate how weak the Southland is this year. I think that's a bit too ignorant even for the NCAA though.

They win out...finish 8-3. They would have one FCS loss and be ending on a 7 game win streak. The bottom of the barrel of the playoff eligible will be pretty low profile. Who can you see getting in above them in this bracket scenario? Illinois State would be my top consideration behind them.

[youwouldno]

They win out...finish 8-3. They would have one FCS loss and be ending on a 7 game win streak. The bottom of the barrel of the playoff eligible will be pretty low profile. Who can you see getting in above them in this bracket scenario? Illinois State would be my top consideration behind them.

Well Cal Poly can also finish 8-3 and you didn't include them; they aren't a lock with that record but they would basically be a superior version of UCA; 7-1 against FCS but with a tougher schedule (still no marquee win though).

Any CAA, SoCon, or MVFC team at 7-4 should be favored over UCA. So either Furman, Illinois St., or Youngstown St. who is in if they win out (good luck to them @ NDSU and @ UNI).

[MTfan4life]

Well Cal Poly can also finish 8-3 and you didn't include them; they aren't a lock with that record but they would basically be a superior version of UCA; 7-1 against FCS but with a tougher schedule (still no marquee win though).

Any CAA, SoCon, or MVFC team at 7-4 should be favored over UCA. So either Furman, Illinois St., or Youngstown St. who is in if they win out (good luck to them @ NDSU and @ UNI).

I will include more info to simplify why the bracket is that way. I have App. St. as a seeded team, therefore not losing to Furman, and Furman will not beat Florida.

[youwouldno]

Totally legit, don't get me wrong. But Cal Poly is well positioned to win out, as is Ill. St.

[tingly]

Massey has Poly, Illinois State and UCA at 30% to win out, but that's about as good as you can get with 3 weeks to go. Poly is the only one that Massey favors in all the games left. It's all about avoiding upsets or pulling off one of your own for the last at-large spots. A lot of bubble teams are favored to lose this week which could get UCA on the bubble.

[BEAR]

It's amazing how everyone points out that UCA played a sub DI team but forgets that they also scheduled 3 teams ABOVE DI-AA or FCS. They should have beaten Louisiana Tech, lost to Arkansas State and play Texas State ( a team which has MORE scholarship players than UCA due to their transition to the FBS). If UCA wins out, how many other teams that are left as possible teams for the playoffs can say they played 2.5 FBS teams? Sure makes that one D2 team (who was favored to win the Gulf South..the highest ranked D2 conference) look like a pretty lame excuse to leave them out.

Saying this as a fan of course. xlolx

[youwouldno]

Well yeah but they lost both FBS games and Texas State isn't particularly good. The problem isn't really the D-II game itself, it's the fact that UCA can only get to 7 D-I wins. UCA isn't too strong in the quality win department, and can't make it up with quantity... the chances still aren't bad though because a lot of bubble teams are going to fall off with losses.

[BEAR]

Well yeah but they lost both FBS games and Texas State isn't particularly good. The problem isn't really the D-II game itself, it's the fact that UCA can only get to 7 D-I wins. UCA isn't too strong in the quality win department, and can't make it up with quantity... the chances still aren't bad though because a lot of bubble teams are going to fall off with losses.

True. Saturday will decide it for MANY teams in every conference. UCA wins out with 7 DI wins in a row, that shows they have progressed and gotten better as the year went on. Also remember that 2 of UCA's losses they were VERY shorthanded (thanks to the Bearkats late hit) and losing multiple players during the La. Tech game.....now all of them are back and the Bears haven't lost since...that says they are playing strong football. 7 DI wins in a row, a fully healthy team and a coach that has taken the team to the best record in the conference in 2008, alright in 2009 and 7-4 in 2010 should get some love.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Well yeah but they lost both FBS games and Texas State isn't particularly good. The problem isn't really the D-II game itself, it's the fact that UCA can only get to 7 D-I wins. UCA isn't too strong in the quality win department, and can't make it up with quantity... the chances still aren't bad though because a lot of bubble teams are going to fall off with losses.

A 6 or 7 game win streak is always huge in the committee's eyes though and there are as many factors saying they should be in as there are arguments against it.

Whenever the committee has a controversial team in the first thing they will mention is the win streak, the second is the quality losses to FBS teams and that they played the FBS tough.

[Professor Chaos]

I think Illinois St gets in over Indiana St. You mentioned that you have NDSU winning out so that means that InSU is 7-4. I think a 7-4 IlSU gets in due to the head to head win over the Sycs. Splitting hairs though on that one. Overall it looks very good. xthumbsupx

[SLOSTYLE]

It's amazing how everyone points out that UCA played a sub DI team but forgets that they also scheduled 3 teams ABOVE DI-AA or FCS. They should have beaten Louisiana Tech, lost to Arkansas State and play Texas State ( a team which has MORE scholarship players than UCA due to their transition to the FBS). If UCA wins out, how many other teams that are left as possible teams for the playoffs can say they played 2.5 FBS teams? Sure makes that one D2 team (who was favored to win the Gulf South..the highest ranked D2 conference) look like a pretty lame excuse to leave them out.

Saying this as a fan of course. xlolx

Poly will finish with the same situation as UCA. We play two D1 teams and a "transition team" at South Alabama. We also played a d2 team as well. It is really fascinating how similar these two teams situations will be IF they both win out. I think the edge in strength of schedule goes to poly, but UCA is from an auto-bid conference and would be a very deserving candidate as well

edit: we would also be finishing with a 7 game winstreak. crazy similarities.

[youwouldno]

True. Saturday will decide it for MANY teams in every conference. UCA wins out with 7 DI wins in a row, that shows they have progressed and gotten better as the year went on. Also remember that 2 of UCA's losses they were VERY shorthanded (thanks to the Bearkats late hit) and losing multiple players during the La. Tech game.....now all of them are back and the Bears haven't lost since...that says they are playing strong football. 7 DI wins in a row, a fully healthy team and a coach that has taken the team to the best record in the conference in 2008, alright in 2009 and 7-4 in 2010 should get some love.

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for UCA... still though I think the committee should be as objective as possible, not looking at past years and things of that nature. The Southland is really down this year and so it would be hard for me to agree that UCA get in before a 7 D-I win team from a tougher conference.

[MTfan4life]

I think if Poly wins out they will have the upper hand. They have a fair amount of decent wins. Both teams have a couple tough games left. It may be where they both stumble.


I think Illinois St gets in over Indiana St. You mentioned that you have NDSU winning out so that means that InSU is 7-4. I think a 7-4 IlSU gets in due to the head to head win over the Sycs. Splitting hairs though on that one. Overall it looks very good. xthumbsupx

I noticed the head to head right after I posted it. I almost changed it and still am debating that fact. I saw Indiana State's win over a plus .500 FBS team and jumped at the opportunity to add them. Western Kentucky might win the Sun Belt. That tie probably goes to Illinois St., but oh well for now. Illinois State's most quality win is Indiana St., and they have the worst loss between the two teams. I'll project again next week and revisit that. It could end up being both teams considering the fact multiple teams could miss the 7 win boat. It's still very possible not all 5 CAA teams get in. Good point though.

[MTfan4life]

The Southland is really down this year and so it would be hard for me to agree that UCA get in before a 7 D-I win team from a tougher conference.

Where is the reasoning for this to be repeated so many times? Have you looked at the Southland's non conference schedules? The weakest loss is South Alabama, and many of the teams had two FBS opponents. Where can you compare them to other conferences for being weak this season? They have few losses because they all had brutal non-conference schedules. The 8 teams played 12 combined FBS games, and that is not including the Texas St. and South Alabama games involving FBS transitional schools. I think you've been caught in a web of strictly ranking assumptions.

[youwouldno]

Where is the reasoning for this to be repeated so many times? Have you looked at the Southland's non conference schedules? The weakest loss is South Alabama, and many of the teams had two FBS opponents. Where can you compare them to other conferences for being weak this season? They have few losses because they all had brutal non-conference schedules.

It's tough because the Southland scheduled so few OOC FCS games. But all computer rankings are unanimous on it and looking at the individual teams and games bears it out to me.

[MTfan4life]

They have to schedule to their region. South Alabama, Texas State, and UTSA all need games. Then they all need money, I'm sure, so that explains the FBS build up. Everyone says Sam Houston State hasn't played anyone. Well the teams they've played have faced extremely tough competition. That's why they have such poor records. Herein lies the flaw with the computer ratings. Schools like Harvard are rated so high because of the records of their competition, but that's simply because they've all played each other. The Southland is only full of poor records because of the insane out of conference schedules.

[youwouldno]

They have to schedule to their region. South Alabama, Texas State, and UTSA all need games. Then they all need money, I'm sure, so that explains the FBS build up. Everyone says Sam Houston State hasn't played anyone. Well the teams they've played have faced extremely tough competition. That's why they have such poor records. Herein lies the flaw with the computer ratings. Schools like Harvard are rated so high because of the records of their competition, but that's simply because they've all played each other. The Southland is only full of poor records because of the insane out of conference schedules.

That's not how computer rankings work. Jacksonville is 6-2 and the median computer ranking is below 50. Sacred Heart is 5-3 and around #90.

The Ivies actually played more OOC games against FCS competition than any other conference except the Patriot. For comparison- the Ivy played 24, the Southland played 4. The FBS games are used as well though so the Southland is still measurable.

A truly insulated league couldn't be rated. There is one... I forget the name but I think it's a D-III or NAIA conference in the northeast.

[ysubigred]

I think Illinois St gets in over Indiana St. You mentioned that you have NDSU winning out so that means that InSU is 7-4. I think a 7-4 IlSU gets in due to the head to head win over the Sycs. Splitting hairs though on that one. Overall it looks very good. xthumbsupx


Hey professor! What if YSU ends up 7-4? We beat Il St. Would we get in over both IN and IL ST?

[tingly]

Hard to say since, theoretically, Indiana State could beat NDSU and Illinois State could beat UNI.

[MTfan4life]

I don't believe I said that computer rankings revolve around the specific teams record, but instead the teams they play. The Ivies and Patriots all have FCS teams in their region that need games. The Southland teams have transitional teams within their normal schedules, and FBS teams in their area. This shouldn't make the Ivy and Patriot better than the Southland simply because they are able to play each other in non conference games. It's easy to schedule convenient FCS games when traveling is minimal. Computer ratings at the FCS level reward convenience. It's impossible to compare with those circumstances.

[MTfan4life]

Hey professor! What if YSU ends up 7-4? We beat Il St. Would we get in over both IN and IL ST?

If Youngstown ends up 7-4, that means they beat either NDSU or UNI on the road. Therefore, yes, they hold an advantage over the other two.

[ysubigred]

If Youngstown ends up 7-4, that means they beat either NDSU or UNI on the road. Therefore, yes, they hold an advantage over the other two.

Sweeew......... Finally some love for my flightless birds xsmileyclapx

[Professor Chaos]

Hey professor! What if YSU ends up 7-4? We beat Il St. Would we get in over both IN and IL ST?
That would get you in, not because you beat Ill St but because you'd either have to beat NDSU or UNI on the road to get there.

EDIT: MTfan4life beat me to it. I agree with his take.

[youwouldno]

I don't believe I said that computer rankings revolve around the specific teams record, but instead the teams they play. The Ivies and Patriots all have FCS teams in their region that need games. The Southland teams have transitional teams within their normal schedules, and FBS teams in their area. This shouldn't make the Ivy and Patriot better than the Southland simply because they are able to play each other in non conference games. It's easy to schedule convenient FCS games when traveling is minimal. Computer ratings at the FCS level reward convenience. It's impossible to compare with those circumstances.

Nowhere in the algorithm is a team rewarded for playing weaker opponents. That's because most systems measure the margin of victory/defeat against what would be expected, based on the teams' past performances. Losing a close game to a good FBS team is better than narrowly beating a weak FCS team.

Look at Cal Poly and UCA. Both have very similar seasons on the surface, in terms of W/L, FBS opponents, etc. However, the computer algorithms accurately pick up the fact that Cal Poly has played tougher opponents and performed better against them.

The computer ratings in no way "reward convenience." I have no idea what the mathematical basis for that theory would be.

[katstrapper]

True. Saturday will decide it for MANY teams in every conference. UCA wins out with 7 DI wins in a row, that shows they have progressed and gotten better as the year went on. Also remember that 2 of UCA's losses they were VERY shorthanded (thanks to the Bearkats late hit) and losing multiple players during the La. Tech game.....now all of them are back and the Bears haven't lost since...that says they are playing strong football. 7 DI wins in a row, a fully healthy team and a coach that has taken the team to the best record in the conference in 2008, alright in 2009 and 7-4 in 2010 should get some love.

I wish yall would quit whining about that. You act like it was done on purpose. Both players were committed to their respective moves and it happened the way it happened. It was too late to pull up after Nathan Dick started his LATE slide. Players get hurt all the time. The 15 yds penalty was going to happen, but I TOTALLY DISAGREED with the one game suspension of the player. If the hit was worthy of a suspension then why didnt he get ejected from the game. UCA cried and whined to the SLC office enough to warrant the player suspension.

[katstrapper]

]They have to schedule to their region.[/B] South Alabama, Texas State, and UTSA all need games. Then they all need money, I'm sure, so that explains the FBS build up. Everyone says Sam Houston State hasn't played anyone. Well the teams they've played have faced extremely tough competition. That's why they have such poor records. Herein lies the flaw with the computer ratings. Schools like Harvard are rated so high because of the records of their competition, but that's simply because they've all played each other. The Southland is only full of poor records because of the insane out of conference schedules.

Thank you!! I have said it several times that when the season started, the SLC had three teams in the top 20, SFA..McNese and UCA and depending on the poll you looked at Western Illinois was ranked 24 or 25 to start the season. Here were the FBS games that the SLC teams played..

NW St played SMU & LSU
SE Lousiana played Tulane and So. Mississippi
McNeese St played Kansas
C. Arkansas played Arkansas St and La. Tech
Sam Houston played New Mexico
SFA played Baylor
Lamar played South Alabama
Nicholls St played La-Lafayette and Western Michigan

Throw in the OOC FCS schools played.... W. Illinois, Northern Iowa, UTSA and Tx State


And there are more FBS schools that will line up and play the SLC rather than FCS schools. Since 2004, this is the list of FCS and FBS OOC schools that played against SHSU...

FCS....(6) Montana, W. Illinois, Missouri St, North Dakota St, Gardner Webb, Northern Colorado

FBS... (9) Houston, Tx Tech, Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma St, Kansas, SMU, New Mexico, Tulsa

Only FCS programs SHSU has been able to get on a consistent basis is W. Illinois and Missouri St. Nobody else wants to do a home and home. I know for a fact we have contacted several schools regarding a home and home and many of them said you can come play at our place but we arent traveling to Huntsville. Back in the early 90's, SHSU had several home and home series with Montana St. OOC FCS games are not easy to schedule for SHSU. Most include a lot of travel.

[MTfan4life]

Nowhere in the algorithm is a team rewarded for playing weaker opponents. That's because most systems measure the margin of victory/defeat against what would be expected, based on the teams' past performances. Losing a close game to a good FBS team is better than narrowly beating a weak FCS team.

Look at Cal Poly and UCA. Both have very similar seasons on the surface, in terms of W/L, FBS opponents, etc. However, the computer algorithms accurately pick up the fact that Cal Poly has played tougher opponents and performed better against them.

The computer ratings in no way "reward convenience." I have no idea what the mathematical basis for that theory would be.

The convenience is the ability of games against similar competition. It's easier to win games and avoid injury totals when your non-conference games are Bucknell and Fordham compared to LSU and Southern Miss. Put the Southland non-conference schedule in the Ivy, Patriot, OVC, MEAC, and I bet they all would appear to be in a really down year as well. Even in the power conferences, that schedule would be brutal and extremely tough to garner solid records and appear tough. The Southland simply is hurt by their location and the fact that teams won't schedule them. That's the convenience factor.

And of course teams aren't rewarded for playing weaker opponents. I was saying that they all have weak schedules and so in a combination, someone's going to look like a strong team that shouldn't because someone has to win the games.

[bjtheflamesfan]

I think Liberty will come into the game with Stony Brook rested after the bye week and will come in with more confidence in their road performance. Also, they know how to stop SBU's running game (as evidenced by last year's win in Lynchburg) so that should also give them an advantage.

[MTfan4life]

I think Liberty will come into the game with Stony Brook rested after the bye week and will come in with more confidence in their road performance. Also, they know how to stop SBU's running game (as evidenced by last year's win in Lynchburg) so that should also give them an advantage.

Using the previous season to gain an advantage. I feel like that's not the best way to predict a game. I'm willing to guess there might be a couple adjustments.

[MSUBobcat]

Using the previous season to gain an advantage. I feel like that's not the best way to predict a game. I'm willing to guess there might be a couple adjustments.

Adjustments to your schemes relative to your opponent are ONLY allowed during halftime adjustments. NCAA rule 7-4-3-1 (b). I thought everyone knew that. xrolleyesx

[BEAR]

I wish yall would quit whining about that. You act like it was done on purpose. Both players were committed to their respective moves and it happened the way it happened. It was too late to pull up after Nathan Dick started his LATE slide. Players get hurt all the time. The 15 yds penalty was going to happen, but I TOTALLY DISAGREED with the one game suspension of the player. If the hit was worthy of a suspension then why didnt he get ejected from the game. UCA cried and whined to the SLC office enough to warrant the player suspension.

They did? Really? Show me the proof of that. Otherwise your just assuming they did and you know what assuming does. I do believe I heard coach say he is hands off about the situation. At a bear-backers meeting he even said it was a tough situation..and that's all he said about the hit! He's been coaching for too long to give a crap about that play. He might mention that it was a late hit, but I've known Clint for nearly 12 years..that isn't the way he is.

[BEAR]

Look, when it comes down to it in the end UCA MIGHT have 7 D1 wins, might not. With 7 DI wins they are in consideration for the playoffs but still might not get in. There are other teams that will have 7 DI wins and not make it in also. That's the breaks.

[Squealofthepig]

Adjustments to your schemes relative to your opponent are ONLY allowed during halftime adjustments. NCAA rule 7-4-3-1 (b). I thought everyone knew that. xrolleyesx

Yup, that's why the Griz are still watching game film of Julius Lloyd for Brawl preparation! We'll adjust to his graduation at halftime. *heh*

[MSUBobcat]

Yup, that's why the Griz are still watching game film of Julius Lloyd for Brawl preparation! We'll adjust to his graduation at halftime. *heh*

That's why I respect the Griz. You follow rules. As an aside, rumor has it, Coach Ash thinks he has a way to bottle up Reynolds. Keep it under your hat though. I probably shouldn't have said anything.

[youwouldno]

The convenience is the ability of games against similar competition. It's easier to win games and avoid injury totals when your non-conference games are Bucknell and Fordham compared to LSU and Southern Miss. Put the Southland non-conference schedule in the Ivy, Patriot, OVC, MEAC, and I bet they all would appear to be in a really down year as well. Even in the power conferences, that schedule would be brutal and extremely tough to garner solid records and appear tough. The Southland simply is hurt by their location and the fact that teams won't schedule them. That's the convenience factor.

And of course teams aren't rewarded for playing weaker opponents. I was saying that they all have weak schedules and so in a combination, someone's going to look like a strong team that shouldn't because someone has to win the games.

The problem with the geography argument is that the Southland is much weaker than it has been in recent years' computer rankings. Why is it suddenly in 2011 that they are being underrated? Why didn't the same thing happen in 2009? 2010?

With respect to weak teams playing each other- no, no one looks strong as a result. While the Ivies play a lot of PL matchups, they also played games against the CAA. The Patriot played a lot of CAA games and even one against NDSU. There is more than enough connectivity, more than most FCS conferences actually. If an Ivy team is ranked high by the computers, the likely reason is that they are good.

[Dallas Demon]

The problem with the geography argument is that the Southland is much weaker than it has been in recent years' computer rankings. Why is it suddenly in 2011 that they are being underrated? Why didn't the same thing happen in 2009? 2010?

With respect to weak teams playing each other- no, no one looks strong as a result. While the Ivies play a lot of PL matchups, they also played games against the CAA. The Patriot played a lot of CAA games and even one against NDSU. There is more than enough connectivity, more than most FCS conferences actually. If an Ivy team is ranked high by the computers, the likely reason is that they are good.

Southland teams typically play AT LEAST 2 FBS teams a year. Conferences such as the Southern only play AT MOST 1 FBS team a year. So, unless we have a major upset, Southland teams already have a built in extra loss to start the season. Let teams from any other conference including the Southern play a Southland OOC schedule, the results would be identical.

[youwouldno]

Southland teams typically play AT LEAST 2 FBS teams a year. Conferences such as the Southern only play AT MOST 1 FBS team a year. So, unless we have a major upset, Southland teams already have a built in extra loss to start the season. Let teams from any other conference including the Southern play a Southland OOC schedule, the results would be identical.

The computer rankings don't punish FCS teams for FBS games. UCA's loss against La Tech actually helped their rating. Sagarin Predictor for instance doesn't take wins and losses into account at all, it is simply not part of the formula. Yet it thinks the Southland is weak. I'm pretty sure it's not because the equation is biased against one particular conference.

[Dallas Demon]

The computer rankings don't punish FCS teams for FBS games. UCA's loss against La Tech actually helped their rating. Sagarin Predictor for instance doesn't take wins and losses into account at all, it is simply not part of the formula. Yet it thinks the Southland is weak. I'm pretty sure it's not because the equation is biased against one particular conference.

It would be interesting to see the Sagarin formula. I believe it heavily weighs in past years into the equation. So a conference with weaker ratings makes it extremely difficult for a team to raise a ranking to a higher level because all other teams are ranked in a similar fashion. Why would the Southern Conference have such a high ranking currently? It is certainly not based on their OOC schedule, that has been very weak IMO.

[FargoBison]

It would be interesting to see the Sagarin formula. I believe it heavily weighs in past years into the equation. So a conference with weaker ratings makes it extremely difficult for a team to raise a ranking to a higher level because all other teams are ranked in a similar fashion. Why would the Southern Conference have such a high ranking currently? It is certainly not based on their OOC schedule, that has been very weak IMO.

Sagarin is only influenced by previous years early in the year but by the time the BCS is usually released the ratings are based entirely on the current season.

The SoCon I'm sure is helped by playing basically great FBS opponents..Clemson, Va Tech, Georgia Tech, Nebraska etc.

[youwouldno]

It would be interesting to see the Sagarin formula. I believe it heavily weighs in past years into the equation. So a conference with weaker ratings makes it extremely difficult for a team to raise a ranking to a higher level because all other teams are ranked in a similar fashion. Why would the Southern Conference have such a high ranking currently? It is certainly not based on their OOC schedule, that has been very weak IMO.

At this point last year has no weight at all in the formula. If you want to know more about computer ratings, there is plenty of info out there.

With respect to the SoCon; it went 8-1 against FCS, 5-0 against sub D-I, and 0-5 against the BCS, though Wofford only lost 35-27 to Clemson. It's ranked highly because it is a strong conference.

[putter]

For the FCS playoffs to be 100% legit - regionalization needs to get thrown out.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

For the FCS playoffs to be 100% legit - regionalization needs to get thrown out.

Ahh, I've said this 100 times but it still would not work. Now if the NCAA wasn't doing the ranking and it came from a totally autonomous source and they followed those rankings then it might work. The NCAA somehow always found a way to keep those rankings so that there were a lot of regional matchups even when they did rank the field.

It is about finding one team each year, that is the goal so it doesn't really matter a whole lot to me anyway to mark out a way for a lot of pretty good teams to have their best path to be also rans in that particular year.

[LakesBison]

time for FCS to put on it's big boy pants and stop with the regionalization and move to 16 team playoff and eliminate the stupid first round and seed 1-16 and fly them to wherever. 1 v 16 2 v 15 3 v 14 etc..

[MTfan4life]

It is very likely that there will be possible UNI/NDSU, two So Con teams, two CAA, and two Big Sky teams facing off in the quarterfinals. They like that regional gig so much that I can see that happening all too much. It wouldn't be that bad to mix up the powers with Southland/Big Sky/MVFC & CAA/Socon, but they don't do that too often. It's just a little more boring to see like a Montana/Montana St. or App. St/GSU quarterfinal because the teams just played. Half of the excitement of the playoffs is the fact that the teams aren't facing their normal conference foe unless if it's in the semis or final. I guess at least it's not the full form of regionalization like the lower divisions.

[WileECoyote06]

For the FCS playoffs to be 100% legit - regionalization needs to get thrown out.

Said this dozens of times. I believe pod-seeding/regionalization has led to the extreme stratification of the FCS conferences.

[SumItUp]

For the FCS playoffs to be 100% legit - regionalization needs to get thrown out.

Agreed, but the cost is too great. FCS needs an infusion of cash from an outside source (media and sponsors). The field is going to continue to grow whether we like it or not. Ideally, 16 teams would be seeded without regionalization and additional teams would play the lower seeds with some regional considerations. The minimum bid should be changed to a default bid. All seeded teams would host the unseeded teams if they were willing to accept the default bid. The remaining games would be played at the site of the higher seed unless they chose to not accept the default bid.

[Squealofthepig]

Agreed, but the cost is too great. FCS needs an infusion of cash from an outside source (media and sponsors). The field is going to continue to grow whether we like it or not. Ideally, 16 teams would be seeded without regionalization and additional teams would play the lower seeds with some regional considerations. The minimum bid should be changed to a default bid. All seeded teams would host the unseeded teams if they were willing to accept the default bid. The remaining games would be played at the site of the higher seed unless they chose to not accept the default bid.

This is the reality. We have a huge concentration of playoff-caliber teams on the East coast; a moderate concentration of teams in the midwest and south; and a handful of teams in the west. There is no way to have a legitimate playoff system based on region (e.g., four west teams, four east teams, four south teams, four north teams), as that would just be silly, so a system like the pod system has to be considered the least evil of several lesser options. Using pods you can minimize costs for most playoff teams in the first round, but it leads to all sorts of weird bracketing in the east, and you may still have to send an East coast team out to Fargo or Missoula or San Luis Obispo or Bozeman, or send those teams out east.

What makes this really cantankerous is that some teams (like Montana or NDSU) could more easily aggressively bid for home games if, for no other reason, the cost of travel would be more than the chunk of change they'd give up to the NCAA. They have more money to throw at the problem - which is good for our programs, but underlines a bit of inequity present in the current system. As an example: NDSU could easily bid aggressively for that first round game, as they average a healthy 16k plus (SCENARIO ONLY - I believe the Bison easily get a seed). Georgetown, averaging 2500, couldn't offer nearly the same guarantee without taking a pretty big loss from the gate. It's a system that ultimately rewards the bigger programs to the detriment of the smaller schools.

I like the idea of seeding everyone, but I can also understand why the NCAA went with a more diplomatic approach. I would love to see a good playoff system where money doesn't factor into things, but unfortunately, despite all of my best efforts, I'm required to live in reality and all of the nasty consequences that entails.

[Go Apps]

time for FCS to put on it's big boy pants and stop with the regionalization and move to 16 team playoff and eliminate the stupid first round and seed 1-16 and fly them to wherever. 1 v 16 2 v 15 3 v 14 etc..

That is exactly what used to happen until 9/11 - the move to only seed the top 5 teams was established - to keep teams out of the air and close to bus rides it also became more cost effective - and the last I believe all upper seeded teams - 1-8 played at home and this allowed for bidding to occur and raise for more money as many games in the 80's had some very small crowds - I agree with you - would see everyone and only guarentee home games to the top 8

[LakesBison]

Dam Al Quida !

[Dallas Demon]

At this point last year has no weight at all in the formula. If you want to know more about computer ratings, there is plenty of info out there.

With respect to the SoCon; it went 8-1 against FCS, 5-0 against sub D-I, and 0-5 against the BCS, though Wofford only lost 35-27 to Clemson. It's ranked highly because it is a strong conference.

I'm not trying to pick on the Southern conference, it's ability to do well in the playoffs has been well documented. However, I'm scratching my head on how the OOC schedule translates into high ratings this year. Of your OOC FCS schedule up to this point, it includes wins over North Carolina AT&T, Savannah St., Presbyterian (3 wins), Jacksonville (non-scholly), Gardner-Webb, Virginia Military - teams quite frankly are gimmies with regards to wins this year. The two good wins were by Chattanooga over Jacksonville St. and Eastern Kentucky. You had a loss against Coastal Carolina.

In Division II (or less), all teams were very weak except Mars Hill. You got blown out by all FBS teams except Wofford's loss against Clemson.

So how does this translate into high ratings for the Southern Conference's OOC schedule? I don't see it, I think there is a major influence from year to year on the computer ratings with more of an influence on recent wins, but the conference ratings are already intact by the time the recent wins against conference foes come into play.

[youwouldno]

I'm not trying to pick on the Southern conference, it's ability to do well in the playoffs has been well documented. However, I'm scratching my head on how the OOC schedule translates into high ratings this year. Of your OOC FCS schedule up to this point, it includes wins over North Carolina AT&T, Savannah St., Presbyterian (3 wins), Jacksonville (non-scholly), Gardner-Webb, Virginia Military - teams quite frankly are gimmies with regards to wins this year. The two good wins were by Chattanooga over Jacksonville St. and Eastern Kentucky. You had a loss against Coastal Carolina.

In Division II (or less), all teams were very weak except Mars Hill. You got blown out by all FBS teams except Wofford's loss against Clemson.

So how does this translate into high ratings for the Southern Conference's OOC schedule? I don't see it, I think there is a major influence from year to year on the computer ratings with more of an influence on recent wins, but the conference ratings are already intact by the time the recent wins against conference foes come into play.

Well again, the key factor with many computer rankings is scoring margin. So playing weak teams isn't a problem, so long as you blow them out. There are various formulas used by different systems, but they all work more or less the same on a basic level: the teams are all connected to each other through their opponents, then their opponents opponents, and so on. Here's an example:

Marist played Jacksonville. Jacksonville played Citadel. Citadel played Furman. Therefore, Marist is connected to Furman. Now, obviously that connection is weak. But the system has thousands of connections, which taken together are pretty accurate. The main problem is that, if a conference plays a relatively small number of OOC games, those games could misrepresent the conference's strength to some extent. That is one of two main sources of error, the other being that scores can be misleading without game data.

If every team played every other team, computer rankings would be essentially perfect, though they could vary a little depending on the algorithm (e.g., whether wins & losses are considered or only score). As it is, there are limitations, but by being aware of them you can then look and see if that is actually happening. I don't see any evidence of that with the Southland. Their OOC results seem pretty straightforward.

[tingly]

That just shows that the upper conferences are fairly consistent. SOS isn't just who you play, but who your opponents play. For instance, Georgia Southern played Alabama which also put LSU on their SOS resume, the top 2 teams in the nation.

[Dallas Demon]

Well again, the key factor with many computer rankings is scoring margin. So playing weak teams isn't a problem, so long as you blow them out. There are various formulas used by different systems, but they all work more or less the same on a basic level: the teams are all connected to each other through their opponents, then their opponents opponents, and so on. Here's an example:

Marist played Jacksonville. Jacksonville played Citadel. Citadel played Furman. Therefore, Marist is connected to Furman. Now, obviously that connection is weak. But the system has thousands of connections, which taken together are pretty accurate. The main problem is that, if a conference plays a relatively small number of OOC games, those games could misrepresent the conference's strength to some extent. That is one of two main sources of error, the other being that scores can be misleading without game data.

If every team played every other team, computer rankings would be essentially perfect, though they could vary a little depending on the algorithm (e.g., whether wins & losses are considered or only score). As it is, there are limitations, but by being aware of them you can then look and see if that is actually happening. I don't see any evidence of that with the Southland. Their OOC results seem pretty straightforward.

They are interconnected, but there is not a normalization of the interconnections as you might think. The ratings for a particular team are strongly influenced/weighted moreso on recent games. If a conference comes into the season with high ratings for most of the teams in the conference, they will maintain those high ratings assuming major upsets don't occur against weak opponents. By the time they get to conference play a loss won't hurt that much as the conference team they are playing also has a high rating. The reset button cannot be pressed later in the season as this would be difficult to explain to the marketplace who has been following the ratings all year.

Bottom line, based on the current system, it is key for a conference to get as many teams in the playoffs as possible and then do well in the playoffs. This will set the stage for the following season and onwards. Also, it is important to play well in interconference games, although across the board these games are far and few between. The Southern Conference is well positioned in this model, as they are:

1) geographically placed in a location where OOC teams are plenty and not as strong

2) The Southern Conference always is unbalanced, so the *same* stronger teams float to the top while the *same* weaker teams sink to the bottom, hence giving at least 3 8-3 teams or better available to be selected for the playoffs. Occasionally one of the teams will jump from one group to the other, but otherwise you see the same teams over and over that are successful/unsuccessful.

3) the Southern Conference has traditionally done well in the playoffs when they get there, perhaps because they haven't had the schedule where they beat each other up week-after-week like some of the other more competitive conferences from top to bottom.

[youwouldno]

They are interconnected, but there is not a normalization of the interconnections as you might think. The ratings for a particular team are strongly influenced/weighted moreso on recent games. If a conference comes into the season with high ratings for most of the teams in the conference, they will maintain those high ratings assuming major upsets don't occur against weak opponents. By the time they get to conference play a loss won't hurt that much as the conference team they are playing also has a high rating. The reset button cannot be pressed later in the season as this would be difficult to explain to the marketplace who has been following the ratings all year.

You are just mistaken about this. Some computer systems use only in-season data and wait until there is enough for sufficient inter-connectivity (around mid-season). Those systems agree with the others.

For those that do begin the season with ratings carried over, there is no additional bias. In other words, once that factor is no longer present (around mid-season), the rankings are generated purely from what has happened in that season. They are recalculated every week in their entirety. Changes are usually mild though because the ratings are typically linear, using least squares. Ratings of certain teams only seem to be stable over time, because those programs have a certain degree of strength which tends to produce similar results.

For instance, App St is always ranked highly because they are always good. Savannah St. is always poorly rated because they always stink. There is no statistical error causing long-term bias. If you have some hard evidence of this though please share it.

[alvinkayak6]

Time and time again, computers outshine the human element. Only the slimmest of percentages can match and defeat computers in game predictions, chess, calculation speed, etc. It's time we yield our balance as masters of decision-making to our wirebrained inventions.

[Dallas Demon]

You are just mistaken about this. Some computer systems use only in-season data and wait until there is enough for sufficient inter-connectivity (around mid-season). Those systems agree with the others.

For those that do begin the season with ratings carried over, there is no additional bias. In other words, once that factor is no longer present (around mid-season), the rankings are generated purely from what has happened in that season. They are recalculated every week in their entirety. Changes are usually mild though because the ratings are typically linear, using least squares. Ratings of certain teams only seem to be stable over time, because those programs have a certain degree of strength which tends to produce similar results.

For instance, App St is always ranked highly because they are always good. Savannah St. is always poorly rated because they always stink. There is no statistical error causing long-term bias. If you have some hard evidence of this though please share it.

Thank you for conversing in a constructive way, this is a really good topic of conversation that would be interesting to explore further if we could get our hands on the actual formulas. I believe that the computers (especially Sagarin) take into account the most recent games as more of an influence on the rating. In fact, I believe it says so in its description. So if all of the teams in a conference are rated high, and the games are relatively close, their ratings will remain high. If teams are rated low, it will pull down the ratings unless there is a blowout for every game for the team ranked higher. Oh well, we could probably go on and on about this and in the end we are probably both right in different ways.

Now on to watching some Texas High School football tonight! xthumbsupx