12th game question

[PaladinFan]

With the D-1A teams moving to a 12th game, I have heard that the 1-AA games now "count" in terms of BCS standings and such. It is obvious that a D-1A v. D-1AA game means a lot more to the D-1AA school, win or lose, but does this new format mean things like point differential, strength of schedule, etc. will create a sense of urgency at D-1A schools to win and win convincingly?

I have two "examples" floating around in my head to better illustrate where I'm going. First, I have grown up an Auburn fan. I notice that the Tigers rarely schedule a D-1AA team, but religiously play schools like Louisiana Lafayette (a team that arguably wouldn't crack the top 10 D-1AA programs). In their 13-0 season a few years back, many AU fans argued that the prescence of The Citadel on their schedule kept them out of the NC game against USC. Do schools like this have any incentive now to play I-AAs?

Second example, since the announcement of the move to 12 games, Furman has scheduled Virginia Tech, South Carolina, Clemson, UNC and Florida. As Furman is typically one of the better 1AA programs (just grant me this for the sake of argument), do 1-A schools try to schedule the upper level of 1-AAs because the games now "count" for them?

After our near win at Pitt two years ago, I thought Furman would never schedule a 1A game again as the bigger schools had no incentive. Now they are lined up to play us it would seem. Why would UNC schedule us again after we shelacked them a few years back? Even the Gamecocks are calling to avenge their loss to Furman 23 years ago...

Sorry for the long and possibly stupid question. Anyone who knows, feel free to chime in.

[Tod]

With the D-1A teams moving to a 12th game, I have heard that the 1-AA games now "count" in terms of BCS standings and such. It is obvious that a D-1A v. D-1AA game means a lot more to the D-1AA school, win or lose, but does this new format mean things like point differential, strength of schedule, etc. will create a sense of urgency at D-1A schools to win and win convincingly?

I have two "examples" floating around in my head to better illustrate where I'm going. First, I have grown up an Auburn fan. I notice that the Tigers rarely schedule a D-1AA team, but religiously play schools like Louisiana Lafayette (a team that arguably wouldn't crack the top 10 D-1AA programs). In their 13-0 season a few years back, many AU fans argued that the prescence of The Citadel on their schedule kept them out of the NC game against USC. Do schools like this have any incentive now to play I-AAs?

Second example, since the announcement of the move to 12 games, Furman has scheduled Virginia Tech, South Carolina, Clemson, UNC and Florida. As Furman is typically one of the better 1AA programs (just grant me this for the sake of argument), do 1-A schools try to schedule the upper level of 1-AAs because the games now "count" for them?

After our near win at Pitt two years ago, I thought Furman would never schedule a 1A game again as the bigger schools had no incentive. Now they are lined up to play us it would seem. Why would UNC schedule us again after we shelacked them a few years back? Even the Gamecocks are calling to avenge their loss to Furman 23 years ago...

Sorry for the long and possibly stupid question. Anyone who knows, feel free to chime in.

I can chime in with a few things, but I can't answer all of your questions (good questions, BTW).

I-A schools can claim one win each year toward bowl eligibility. IMO, that's why you'll see more games.

If I remember correctly, the same year that Auburn had the Citadel on their schedule, LSU (I believe?) also had a I-AA on their schedule, so it should be a moot point. BTW, I should look this up, I'm just going by memory of what I recall being discussed here on AGS.

I think every member of AGS would grant you that Furman is a premier team in I-AA :nod:

I look forward to the opinions/information from others on this topic. I just wonder if it's something that would be reported on, or something of conjecture for anybody.

:twocents:

[*****]

LSU didn't have a problem with their I-AA game against Western Illinois (though barely winning) while winning the crystal ball a few years ago. I think you'll see BCS schools play whomever from I-AA (win or lose) but the other oneas are running away from I-AAs.

[GeauxColonels]

I can chime in with a few things, but I can't answer all of your questions (good questions, BTW).

I-A schools can claim one win each year toward bowl eligibility. IMO, that's why you'll see more games.

If I remember correctly, the same year that Auburn had the Citadel on their schedule, LSU (I believe?) also had a I-AA on their schedule, so it should be a moot point. BTW, I should look this up, I'm just going by memory of what I recall being discussed here on AGS.

I think every member of AGS would grant you that Furman is a premier team in I-AA :nod:

I look forward to the opinions/information from others on this topic. I just wonder if it's something that would be reported on, or something of conjecture for anybody.

:twocents:
Not really. The year Auburn went 13-0 with The Citadel on their schedule, LSU lost to Auburn. Auburn was left out of the BCS title game for USC and Oklahoma. The argument was that because Auburn had The Citadel and neither USC or Oklahoma played against a I-AA school, Auburn had the weaker schedule.

[EKU05]

Auburn has played Western Kentucky 2 out of the last 3 seasons. I believe it was the season before and after the Citadel game...so they have been known to play I-AA teams for sure.

I don't think much will change. The fact that they can now count a I-AA game toward Bowl Eligibilty every year is a good thing for us. It can weaken your schedule definitely, but most teams can afford to play a single I-AA team. Every once in a while it could come back to bite you (just like in the Auburn game)..but I don't see it changing things too much. Interesting topic though.

[Keeper]

C'mon guys, how soon we forget.
Oklahoma & USC started the season ranked at the top of the polls.
Auburn had to climb up from nowhere, and with that kind of head start
was dang near impossible to catch up. Also they didn't beat their
opponents into submission as did OU & SC, and were running in their
scrubs after halftime, which also hurt them in the computers and polls.

It was the pressure from Auburn fans vs the media which eventually
alienated the Associated Press totally from the BCS. As I remember it,
at that time the BCS formula precluded the computers from input of
results against AA teams unless the AA team won. The poll voters are
hardly swayed by strength-of-schedule that include one AA opponent
(as ralph correctly pointed out per LSU). The voters were simply more
impressed with OU & SC and not AU. Citadel was barely a consideration,
but at the end a handy excuse for AU fans and BCS haters.

The simple fact is that due to the last minute of allowance of the 12th game,
the NCAA had to cave on the AA opponent rule for bowl eligibility,
as teams were made to scramble to find a 12th opponent, AND it was
obvious that some teams to finish 6 & 6 will be needed to fill all those
bowl slots. If one game made the difference between getting a bowl
bid or staying home, who would YOU schedule? Kudos to the PacTen
for adding a ninth conference game to play a full legitimate schedule.
A gutsy move considering that guarantees one extra loss for 5 teams,
and their bowl agreements past the Rose & Holiday are pretty bad.
(Did you notice Phil Steele's 2006 toughest schedules? #1 thru #6
are all Pac10 teams and all 10 in the Top 20!!) This is likely to hurt the
Pac however when BCS slots are awarded and other leagues are able
to grab the wild-card slots. (It just continues.......:bang: )

The almighty bowl dollar prevails yet again over fairness & common sense.
Let me be one of the first to say that K-State better be ready for Ill St
on Sept 2nd or there will be an upset. Go Redbirds! Go Vikings! Sic-em
AppState! Hey, NSU Demons, You Can DO It!!!

[*****]

... Oklahoma & USC ...Who exactly are those teams???? They are not in the running for the top NCAA crown so they are just more wannabes... get in line ...

[Keeper]

Who exactly are those teams???? They are not in the running for the top NCAA crown so they are just more wannabes... get in line ...

Sorry Ralph, your all-the-way-ness.
I don't understand your reply/question.
Can you expound, or am I just thick today?
Would like to tell you what I think I mean....
Keeper

[bluehenbillk]

He ignores 1-A.

[TexasTerror]

He ignores 1-A.

What's this 1-A you speak of? :eyebrow:

[MplsBison]

LSU didn't have a problem with their I-AA game against Western Illinois (though barely winning)

You consider a 35-0 win "barely winning"?

[GeauxColonels]

You consider a 35-0 win "barely winning"?
35-7, but who's counting.

[*****]

You consider a 35-0 win "barely winning"?WIU held LSU to 13 points through nearly three full quarters as the Leathernecks were behind by just six points with 20 minutes remaining in the game. “That’s as hard as anyone has ever played against us,” said LSU head coach Nick Saban. “That’s as physical as anyone has ever played against us."

[GeauxColonels]

WIU held LSU to 13 points through nearly three full quarters as the Leathernecks were behind by just six points with 20 minutes remaining in the game. “That’s as hard as anyone has ever played against us,” said LSU head coach Nick Saban. “That’s as physical as anyone has ever played against us."
I was at that game and I think that WIU played a very good game and surprised alot of the fans in Baton Rouge. Most of them thought it would be a cakewalk....the same thing with App. St. this past year.

[Mr. C]

Don't judge everything by final scores. Western Illinois and Appalachian State gave LSU strong challenges. You have to look at the whole game. Often times, these bigger schools pile on points in the fourth quarter so things don't look so bad, particularly if they are trying to impress voters for the polls.

[MplsBison]

Ok, fair enough.

[PaladinFan]

C'mon guys, how soon we forget.
Oklahoma & USC started the season ranked at the top of the polls.
Auburn had to climb up from nowhere, and with that kind of head start
was dang near impossible to catch up. Also they didn't beat their
opponents into submission as did OU & SC, and were running in their
scrubs after halftime, which also hurt them in the computers and polls.

It was the pressure from Auburn fans vs the media which eventually
alienated the Associated Press totally from the BCS. As I remember it,
at that time the BCS formula precluded the computers from input of
results against AA teams unless the AA team won. The poll voters are
hardly swayed by strength-of-schedule that include one AA opponent
(as ralph correctly pointed out per LSU). The voters were simply more
impressed with OU & SC and not AU. Citadel was barely a consideration,
but at the end a handy excuse for AU fans and BCS haters.

The simple fact is that due to the last minute of allowance of the 12th game,
the NCAA had to cave on the AA opponent rule for bowl eligibility,
as teams were made to scramble to find a 12th opponent, AND it was
obvious that some teams to finish 6 & 6 will be needed to fill all those
bowl slots. If one game made the difference between getting a bowl
bid or staying home, who would YOU schedule? Kudos to the PacTen
for adding a ninth conference game to play a full legitimate schedule.
A gutsy move considering that guarantees one extra loss for 5 teams,
and their bowl agreements past the Rose & Holiday are pretty bad.
(Did you notice Phil Steele's 2006 toughest schedules? #1 thru #6
are all Pac10 teams and all 10 in the Top 20!!) This is likely to hurt the
Pac however when BCS slots are awarded and other leagues are able
to grab the wild-card slots. (It just continues.......:bang: )

The almighty bowl dollar prevails yet again over fairness & common sense.
Let me be one of the first to say that K-State better be ready for Ill St
on Sept 2nd or there will be an upset. Go Redbirds! Go Vikings! Sic-em
AppState! Hey, NSU Demons, You Can DO It!!!

This thread wasn't meant to be a digression on Auburn football, but go back and check the scores. Outside of a close game against LSU at the beginning of the season and VT in the Sugar Bowl, no team really came within sniffing distance of beating AU that year. They smacked around pretty much all comers. The same cannot be said, however for the Trojans and Sooners. They squeaked by plenty that season, check the scores.


I also don't find it necessary really to compare scores from D-1A to D-1AA games. I think it is safe to assume that most of these D-1A powers don't play their guns for the entire game. In some instances, the starting QB might see a series or two. The question more pretained to how this would effect scheudling.

[GeauxColonels]

With regards to scheduling, I think we'll see many more of the non-BCS conferences signing agreements with I-AA teams (C-USA, WAC, MWC, MAC, Sun Belt) trying to get more home games.

Obviously, you will still have some BCS schools looking for the "sure-win" 7th or 8th home game for the extra revenue stream provided by the additional game. Overall, I think we may see a slight increase in the # of I-A/I-AA matchups in the years to come, but I don't think it will be too significant.:twocents: