2017 Regionalization

[aceinthehole]

Seems like this has the biggest impact of selecting the 14 at-large teams. This is what it looked like this year:

East:

Stony Brook (9-2; 7-1 CAA) – New York
Monmouth (9-2; 4-1 Big South) – New Jersey
New Hampshire (7-4; 5-3 CAA)


South:

Sam Houston State (10-1; 8-1 Southland) – Texas
Elon (8-3; 6-2 CAA) – North Carolina
Nicholls State (8-3; 7-2 Southland) – Louisiana
Furman (7-4; 6-2 SoCon) – South Carolina
Samford (8-3; 6-2 SoCon) – Alabama


Central:

South Dakota State (9-2; 6-2 MVFC)
Northern Iowa (7-4; 6-2 MVFC)
Western Illinois (8-3; 5-3 MVFC)
South Dakota (7-4; 4-4 MVFC)


West:

Weber State (9-2; 7-1 Big Sky) – Utah
Northern Arizona (7-4; 6-2 Big Sky)


Bubble Teams:

Delaware (7-4; 5-3 CAA) – EAST
McNeese State (9-2; 7-2 Southland) – SOUTH
Austin Peay (8-4; 7-1 OVC) - CENTRAL
Eastern Washington (7-4; 6-2 Big Sky) – WEST
Montana (7-4; 5-3 Big Sky) – WEST
Sacramento State (7-4; 6-2 Big Sky) – WEST


So what is everyone arguing about:
- Monmouth/UNH over Delaware/EWU? OK, maybe that's fair, but it is close.
- The SOUTH region wasn't getting another team (McNeese State)
- Austin Peay didn't have the resume out of the CENTRAL

In the end, there isn't too much to complain about based on the number of 7-4 teams.

[BisonTru]

REgionalization has no bearing on at large selections and if you believe that it's just your own ignorance of the actual process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aceinthehole]

REgionalization has no bearing on at large selections and if you believe that it's just your own ignorance of the actual process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you don't think so, I think you are being ignorant. This is FCS, not the men's hoops. I assure you it factors in whether it is explicitly said or not.

[youwouldno]

I don't think region plays a meaningful role. Balance between conferences probably does, however.

[aceinthehole]

I don't think region plays a meaningful role. Balance between conferences probably does, however.


I agree balance between conference is a factor as well, but I think the regions has more of an influence on the Committee (directly or indirectly) than most people think ...


STATS: Mr. Johnson, for fans who don’t know, can you explain the process with which the pairings will be constructed this weekend?

RJ: Absolutely. All year long, and we just completed our final national ranking, it comes about as a result of voting by each committee member. That vote occurs after we receive the rankings from the four regional advisory committees, and then after we take those rankings and talk about them on a conference call, we then vote. So we take that ranking with us into the room this weekend. We will spend Friday looking at bubble teams – those teams with five losses, those teams that might (finish) 7-4. And we’ll be taking in all those things, strength of schedule, to make sure we give everybody a good opportunity to be vetted.

https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/q-a-with-the-fcs-playoff-committee-chair-111617

[BisonTru]

If you don't think so, I think you are being ignorant. This is FCS, not the men's hoops. I assure you it factors in whether it is explicitly said or not.

Ok, maybe you can help my ignorance because this is always a popular opinion here. Why are a bunch of ADs of FCS schools going to add extra regionalization criteria into their at large selections beyond what the NCAA guidelines? They don't get a bonus. Their teams or conferences aren't going to get a check if it makes an extra buck.

So please help me understand their motivation here?

[JayMYou]

If you don't think so, I think you are being ignorant. This is FCS, not the men's hoops. I assure you it factors in whether it is explicitly said or not.

https://i.imgflip.com/1p737r.gif

[Bisonoline]

The fact is if you put 4-5 teams in the playoffs you are bound to face some of the same teams youve played before. Bu no matter how much they say they dont------when they are trying to schedule a bus trip for under 400 miles thats regionalization.

Are they trying to do more regionalization than whats called for? I dont see why they would as there really isnt a reason to do so.

[Cocky]

The chairman of the committee stated the regional rankings were used. About as much proof anyone would need? Straight from the horses mouth.

[Mattymc727]

It definitely exists, we see it every year.