So after First Round...

[furpal87]

Thoughts on how committee did?

Nichols acquitted themselves well.
Monmouth was killed but at least they were 9-2.
UNH apparently looked terrible in their win
UNA what the heck was that?

So of the 4 most controversial picks 1 played well...1 was outmatched...1 won but didn't play well and 1 was just ugly.

Other thoughts:
Was disappointed in Samford.
Furman-Elon and Nichols-SD were great games.

Looking forward to Round 2..

[JSUSoutherner]

UNA isn't in the playoffs.

Austin Peay got royally screwed.

[TennBison]

UNA isn't in the playoffs.

Austin Peay got royally screwed.
I am sure that he means NAU

[McNeese72]

UNA isn't in the playoffs.

Austin Peay got royally screwed.

Sort of how the McNeese fans feel. Monmouth and NAU really showed that they belonged in the playoffs. ;)

Doc

[JSUSoutherner]

I am sure that he means NAU
I know he does, but damn, I feel like we've gone over this like 8 times in the past two weeks.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Sort of how the McNeese fans feel. Monmouth and NAU really showed that they belonged in the playoffs. ;)

Doc


Every year teams could say "see, we would have done better". But after watching Monmouth play, every Valley team would have beaten them. Northern Arizona looked like crap. I was looking forward to watching their QB play but he laid an egg.

[PantherRob82]

Thoughts on how committee did?

Nichols acquitted themselves well.
Monmouth was killed but at least they were 9-2.
UNH apparently looked terrible in their win
UNA what the heck was that?

So of the 4 most controversial picks 1 played well...1 was outmatched...1 won but didn't play well and 1 was just ugly.

Other thoughts:
Was disappointed in Samford.
Furman-Elon and Nichols-SD were great games.

Looking forward to Round 2..

I'm not sure Nicholls acquitted themselves. It's possible both of those teams shouldn't have been in.

I honestly felt bad for Monmouth. They were not even close to a playoff team. Is it better to get in and get beat down or get left out?

UNH did look awful. The Wildcats and Blue Devils both had moments where they looked good.

NAU is confusing. Unless USD competes next week we will assume they were a bad pick.

I'd say NAU and Monmouth were the most obvious terrible picks so far. UNH right behind them. Nicholls/USD we will see next week.

All the games were pretty good outside of UNI-Monmouth and Stony Brook-Lehigh.

[Gangtackle11]

There are probably 12-16 teams worthy of being in a playoff format as ”competitive” FCS contenders.

The rest are fillers. Similiar to March Madness. The NCAA gives the little guys a chance to make the dance. Rarely does it turn out for them.

Monmouth was case in point. They showed poorly against a big name FCS program.

[ElCid]

I'm not sure Nicholls acquitted themselves. It's possible both of those teams shouldn't have been in.

I honestly felt bad for Monmouth. They were not even close to a playoff team. Is it better to get in and get beat down or get left out?

UNH did look awful. The Wildcats and Blue Devils both had moments where they looked good.

NAU is confusing. Unless USD competes next week we will assume they were a bad pick.

I'd say NAU and Monmouth were the most obvious terrible picks so far. UNH right behind them. Nicholls/USD we will see next week.

All the games were pretty good outside of UNI-Monmouth and Stony Brook-Lehigh.


Good thoughts. One thing about NH. Not sure that they were a bad pick. So many teams, including them, have a tendency to play up and down to their competition. I put that on the coaches in any event. I suspect that there is some of that with NH right now.

As far as NAU goes, I wonder if there was any impact due to their whole coaching issue....he was out, he is in. Did it impact his prep? Just wondering, not saying it did, but damn.

[PantherRob82]

Good thoughts. One thing about NH. Not sure that they were a bad pick. So many teams, including them, have a tendency to play up and down to their competition. I put that on the coaches in any event. I suspect that there is some of that with NH right now.

As far as NAU goes, I wonder if there was any impact due to their whole coaching issue....he was out, he is in. Did it impact his prep? Just wondering, not saying it did, but damn.

I don't think UNH plays up and down. Did you watch the game? They have a lack of execution. Feels like they have never had a kicker. I think a focus on special teams would really help them.

[WrenFGun]

Just waiting for fifteen pages on the fix with NAU and monmouth. Someone pm me when we get there.

- - - Updated - - -


I don't think UNH plays up and down. Did you watch the game? They have a lack of execution. Feels like they have never had a kicker. I think a focus on special teams would really help them.

Game has passed the coach by IMO.

[cx500d]

I don't think UNH plays up and down. Did you watch the game? They have a lack of execution. Feels like they have never had a kicker. I think a focus on special teams would really help them.

What is this kicking game you speak of?

[PantherRob82]

- - - Updated - - -
Game has passed the coach by IMO.

Sometimes it seems that way.

[ElCid]

I don't think UNH plays up and down. Did you watch the game? They have a lack of execution. Feels like they have never had a kicker. I think a focus on special teams would really help them.

I got about 20 minutes in real time watching between the others. Compared to some of their other games this year, they were not with it. I don't think they are a great team, but they were not in it mentally due to their opponent is all I was thinking. Easy to do.

[X-Factor]

Good thoughts. One thing about NH. Not sure that they were a bad pick. So many teams, including them, have a tendency to play up and down to their competition. I put that on the coaches in any event. I suspect that there is some of that with NH right now.

As far as NAU goes, I wonder if there was any impact due to their whole coaching issue....he was out, he is in. Did it impact his prep? Just wondering, not saying it did, but damn.

Maybe, but I’m looking at UNH’s last 5 games that includes 2 shutout losses thinking here is a team with some serious offensive issues.

[katss07]

Monmouth wasn’t a playoff team, but I think they should have still been in over NAU and UNH. Those two were killers for me. Nicholls played fine, as did USD.

Should be a great second round.

[ElCid]

Maybe, but I’m looking at UNH’s last 5 games that includes 2 shutout losses thinking here is a team with some serious offensive issues.

True, with one of those losses to JMU. They have been inconsistent for sure is my main point.

[kalm]

One off games...especially in the playoffs are fairly poor measuring stick.

The two biggest flaws I see are the last two teams getting in paired together, two high quality top 10ish teams in Weber and WIU having to square off in the 1st round, and a **** ton of rematches including Wofford-Furman and SUU-Weber next week.

[Gangtackle11]

Most seasons there are maybe 4 teams that can truly win it all. Maybe a few more/less, but 4 is probably the median number. The rest have little to no chance. That’s 16-20 teams on average.

How many teams play in the FCS championship that play on the 1st Saturday? Not many. Youngstown Stare last season? Any others?

Point is that the committee rewards lesser teams because in the end it doesn’t really matter.

[Gangtackle11]

One off games...especially in the playoffs are fairly poor measuring stick.

The two biggest flaws I see are the last two teams getting in paired together, two high quality top 10ish teams in Weber and WIU having to square off in the 1st round, and a **** ton of rematches including Wofford-Furman and SUU-Weber next week.

The Dirty FCS word: Regionalization

[kalm]

The Dirty FCS word: Regionalization

Yep but South Dakota, Nicholls, or San Diego could have been paired against Weber and or WIUM (USD is over 400 miles to Flagstaff).

[UNHWildcat18]

Monmouth wasn’t a playoff team, but I think they should have still been in over NAU and UNH. Those two were killers for me. Nicholls played fine, as did USD.

Should be a great second round.

Okay we get it you love to hate on UNH, Monmouth could have lost 75-0 at San Diego and you’d still be sitting there like(mouthful of a Big Mac) “Yeah I think Monmouth shouldn’t have gotten in but UNH is a worse pick”

Also I watched most of the games, Nichols and USD didn’t wow me by any means

[Reign of Terrier]

Another thought I would add to this thread:

Samford/Chris Hatcher can only reliably beat one good team in the last 5-10 years, Wofford, but collapses down the stretch. It's the second year in a row that they basically didn't show up in the playoffs. Credit to Kennesaw, in more ways than one they remind me of the Wofford team in 2003, but if you take away Samford's wins against Wofford, they don't really have a quality win to speak of and sit perennially at a mediocre 6-4 mark.


One off games...especially in the playoffs are fairly poor measuring stick.

The two biggest flaws I see are the last two teams getting in paired together, two high quality top 10ish teams in Weber and WIU having to square off in the 1st round, and a **** ton of rematches including Wofford-Furman and SUU-Weber next week.


Yep but South Dakota, Nicholls, or San Diego could have been paired against Weber and or WIUM (USD is over 400 miles to Flagstaff).

The thing about regionalization is that when the field was 16, you rarely saw rematches before the quarter or semifinals (heck, there was a rule against first round rematches) but now there are so many teams that regionalization comes back to bite them.

I don't like it because it inherently favors the conferences that have more teams in the field. There's a circular logic we use to say that because x conference has y amount of teams in the playoffs and advances, that must mean they are really good/better than everyone else. So the conferences with more teams are more likely to have better representation in the quarterfinals, and that can influence perception of conference strength.

I've facetiously said Nichols should get boosted in the rankings for a quality loss to an MVFC team, because that's the logic for keeping many of them ranked so high in spite of losses. Now, I think Nichols is a good team and the MVFC is the best conference, but if there's one conference that hasn't been screwed by regionalization, at least this year, it's the MVFC. And we'll hear about how great they are as they compare how many teams they get into the quarter and semifinal.

[aceinthehole]

Here's the problem with this debate ... there STILL is no consensus, even on AGS. It is totally irresponsible for anyone here (especially Coach Rocco) to really criticize and bitch about the committee's selections.

1) What at-large teams should have been left of playoffs?
Personally, without a doubt, I think Monmouth was their biggest mistake. I said it before the game and the results just proved it, a 9-2 record with that schedule just wasn't deserving. But other say New Hampshire or Northern Arizona were not deserving. Sure, the case could be made for either one (or both) of those teams as well. Again, it really doesn't matter - the last 4 (MU, NAU, UNH, and Nicholls State) were always going to be debateable with the pool of eligibles this year.

2) What team deserved at at-large selection that was left out?
Again, if we removed any team(s) from above, we still don't have a consensus on who the next team should be in. Should it be Delaware, or Eastern Washington, or even Austin Peay? How do you rank those teams and how do they compare to the last 4 in? No one (especially Coach Rocco) can say definitively that any one of these teams "deserved" to be playing this week over undeserving teams that did.

----

The real issue is the at-large pool is just too large for the amount of eligible teams today. The NCAA should reduce the bracket to 20 teams (10 AQ + 10 at-large) starting next season.

The MEAC, SWAC, and Ivy have no plans to request an AQ anytime in the immediate future, so I think the 10 AQ bids remain the same for the next 5-10 years. Not sure how many teams in total are from the 10 AQ conferences, but the pool is just too small to select 14 at-large bids.

[UpstateBison]

Another thought I would add to this thread:

Samford/Chris Hatcher can only reliably beat one good team in the last 5-10 years, Wofford, but collapses down the stretch. It's the second year in a row that they basically didn't show up in the playoffs. Credit to Kennesaw, in more ways than one they remind me of the Wofford team in 2003, but if you take away Samford's wins against Wofford, they don't really have a quality win to speak of and sit perennially at a mediocre 6-4 mark.





The thing about regionalization is that when the field was 16, you rarely saw rematches before the quarter or semifinals (heck, there was a rule against first round rematches) but now there are so many teams that regionalization comes back to bite them.

I don't like it because it inherently favors the conferences that have more teams in the field. There's a circular logic we use to say that because x conference has y amount of teams in the playoffs and advances, that must mean they are really good/better than everyone else. So the conferences with more teams are more likely to have better representation in the quarterfinals, and that can influence perception of conference strength.

I've facetiously said Nichols should get boosted in the rankings for a quality loss to an MVFC team, because that's the logic for keeping many of them ranked so high in spite of losses. Now, I think Nichols is a good team and the MVFC is the best conference, but if there's one conference that hasn't been screwed by regionalization, at least this year, it's the MVFC. And we'll hear about how great they are as they compare how many teams they get into the quarter and semifinal.

If the field were 16 teams, I don't think Furman or Samford would have made the playoffs. This year you have UNI@SDSU next weekend. Also, WIU had a tough draw at Weber State. All conferences are impacted by regionalization, it is not going to change, get over it. By the way, I am a Wofford fan but the beauty of the playoffs is all you have to do is win.

[caribbeanhen]

Rhode Island over Monmouth

[Iridebikes]

No surprises in the selections that I knew the committee had screwed up. Specifically, NAU. They were well into their traditional end of the year fade having lost two of the last three. Then they get into the playoffs, with a home game, being given the advantage and lay an egg. The committee did not do the BSC any favors with their selection of NAU and the second round matchup of Weber and SUU

[Reign of Terrier]

If the field were 16 teams, I don't think Furman or Samford would have made the playoffs. This year you have UNI@SDSU next weekend. Also, WIU had a tough draw at Weber State. All conferences are impacted by regionalization, it is not going to change, get over it. By the way, I am a Wofford fan but the beauty of the playoffs is all you have to do is win.

Yeah, if there were 16 I don't think SD gets in either. It's pretty easy to put 8-3 teams in the playoffs; The southland had 4 and only 3 got in, one in the bubble.

It's true that all you have to do is win, but I'm talking about conference representation here. If every team in the tournament has a 50% chance of winning a game (which is generous), it's just a matter of logic and or probability that 1) Teams with byes will more likely advance farther than teams who don't and 2) conferences with more representation will get more teams deeper into the playoffs.

What makes one team better than the other is often "the game of inches" aspect of the sport, but what makes teams in aggregate better than others is the trend-line of their overall performance. I think the MVFC is overvalued in the sense that people intuitively assess quality teams syllogistically/transitively "team A beat team B who beat team C therefore A is better than C" or "Team A played team B well (but didn't win) and we know Team B is good, therefore Team A is as well"

For the latter, that's how we assess the strength of teams in a conference given 1) how they play each other and 2)how they perform in the playoffs.

Unlike FBS football, where we have a strong sample of how each conference matches up against each other via bowl games, interstate OOC rivalries, etc for the most part, we don't really have a comparable sample at FCS for various reasons. This year we had a decent one between the Big Sky and MVFC, but that was about it.

Yet still, there's this zeal of certainty that teams, say 4-5 in the MVFC are so much clearly better than teams 3-4 in the CAA, Southland, etc, and I just don't see it. We overvalue our transitive assessment, when there's a lot more uncertainty than we think. So we put more MVFC teams in the playoff and they may win, but the 4-5 teams don't look head and shoulders above everyone else. then the next year, we rank them higher because they play in a harder conference, citing how deep they go in the playoffs on face value.

Anyway, my personal opinion is that, for the most part the top teams in each "power" conference are comparable to each other (NDSU, UNI, JMU, UCA, SHSU etc), and there's a lot more parity between the third place teams between conferences.

Basically, outside of the playoffs being the measure for the champion, it's also an experiment for how well each conference matches up with each other. And it's a very bad experiment, but people rely on it because it's the only one we have.

[Bison56]

Can we here more about how an OVC got left out? I can't get enough of it.

[ST_Lawson]

Anyone know where I go to put on a request for a Monmouth for next year? I'd like to go ahead and do that if I can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cocky]

Can we here more about how an OVC got left out? I can't get enough of it.

I know all of these multi bid league really showed out.

[PantherRob82]

I know all of these multi bid league really showed out.

Let’s wait for your single bid league to win a game before we get all...cocky...xsmiley_wix

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Of the 8 2nd round games I think half (SDSU/UNI, Weber/SUU, JSU/KSU, Furman/Wofford) will close. The other 4 have the potential to be boring to flat out ugly imo. With the current playoff structure you really need 3 rounds to weed out the nonsense imo.

[aceinthehole]

The bracket must include at least the same number of at-large selection, as AQ bids. We have 10 leagues with an AQ (and no indications of any expansion), so we have to have at least 10 at-large bids.

Any serious discussion about improving the current format starts and stops with the NCAA going back to the 20-team format that was used from 2010-2012.

NCAA I-AA/FCS Playoff Format

1978-1980: 4 teams
1981: 8 teams
1982-1985: 12 teams
1986-2009: 16 teams (8 AQ + 8 At-large)
2010-2012: 20 teams (10 AQ + 10 At-large) * NEC and Big South granted AQ status
2013-2017: 24 teams (11 AQ + 13 At-large) * Pioneer granted AQ status
2015-2017: 24 teams (10 AQ + 14 At-large) * MEAC gave up its AQ status

With the following 10 Conferences requesting AQ status, the NCAA can return to its 2010-2012 format (10 AQ + 10 At-large):

1. Big Sky
2. Big South
3. Colonial
4. Missouri Valley
5. Northeast
6. Ohio Valley
7. Patriot
8. Pioneer
9. Southern
10. Southland

The Ivy, MEAC, and SWAC have no plans to request the AQ, and teams from these league remain eligible for at-large consideration and selection.

[TheKingpin28]

The bracket must include at least the same number of at-large selection, as AQ bids. We have 10 leagues with an AQ (and no indications of any expansion), so we have to have at least 10 at-large bids.

Any serious discussion about improving the current format starts and stops with the NCAA going back to the 20-team format that was used from 2010-2012.

NCAA I-AA/FCS Playoff Format

1978-1980: 4 teams
1981: 8 teams
1982-1985: 12 teams
1986-2009: 16 teams (8 AQ + 8 At-large)
2010-2012: 20 teams (10 AQ + 10 At-large) * NEC and Big South granted AQ status
2013-2017: 24 teams (11 AQ + 13 At-large) * Pioneer granted AQ status
2015-2017: 24 teams (10 AQ + 14 At-large) * MEAC gave up its AQ status

With the following 10 Conferences requesting AQ status, the NCAA can return to its 2010-2012 format (10 AQ + 10 At-large):

1. Big Sky
2. Big South
3. Colonial
4. Missouri Valley
5. Northeast
6. Ohio Valley
7. Patriot
8. Pioneer
9. Southern
10. Southland

The Ivy, MEAC, and SWAC have no plans to request the AQ, and teams from these league remain eligible for at-large consideration and selection.

I would suggest 16, but that is a NGTH idea, so going back to 20 would be solid.

[TennBison]

I would suggest 16, but that is a NGTH idea, so going back to 20 would be solid.
Top 16 teams all seeded no AQ (no free rides). You either put up or shut up. One week off for all after the last week of the regular season, and one week off between the semi finals and the championship.

[aceinthehole]

Top 16 teams all seeded no AQ (no free rides). You either put up or shut up. One week off for all after the last week of the regular season, and one week off between the semi finals and the championship.

I agree that would be the most competitive format, but that just isn't going to happen. The NCAA is built on the premise of member (conference) access to its Championships.

A 16-team at-large format is just an expanded BCS playoff for FCS teams. You don't need the NCAA to run that and you won't be able to get the conferences to establish a committee for selection. Finally, there just isn't any $$$ outside of the NCAA to fund that format, so there is no real interest to do that on the FCS level.

The FCS Championship is always going to look more like the NCAA Field Hockey or Ice Hockey format, rather than the BCS playoff model.

[TennBison]

I agree that would be the most competitive format, but that just isn't going to happen. The NCAA is built on the premise of member (conference) access to its Championships.

A 16-team at-large format is just an expanded BCS playoff for FCS teams. You don't need the NCAA to run that and you won't be able to get the conferences to establish a committee for selection. Finally, there just isn't any $$$ outside of the NCAA to fund that format, so there is no real interest to do that on the FCS level.

The FCS Championship is always going to look more like the NCAA Field Hockey or Ice Hockey format, rather than the BCS playoff model.
All the teams in college football would have a shot at the playoffs, no one would be left out as long as they are a top 16 team. I get what you are saying though. The NCAA wants to hand out participation trophies to teams in conferences that make no real effort to put a quality product on the field. Look at basketball, 68 teams, what a joke. Football is getting to be the same way, Lehigh gets in at 5-6, with an AQ from a 6 team conference,lol.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Sort of how the McNeese fans feel. Monmouth and NAU really showed that they belonged in the playoffs. ;)

Doc

NAU may have faded and laid a big egg in playoff, but they were a 7-4 team that played a top 15 schedule .. so their inclusion is not hard to understand. Monmouth played a very easy schedule and blew most of them out .. so that was clearly debatable at large. Austin Peay had zero quality wins and several weak wins against a weak schedule .. they should not have been even in discussion.

Same for Nicholls St .. but they stepped up against a beat up USD team with luxury of home game. That doesn't change the fact that their resume was just not as good as say NAU or EWU or Delaware. Losing a game late should not disqualify anyone .. have to look at entire resume, with a little extra weight on latter half of schedule over earlier half if you have 2 roughly equal resumes, along with SOS. Good teams should blow out most weak teams. Elon deserved a bid but was not all that .. barely beat every weak team on their schedule.

[kalm]

What makes one team better than the other is often "the game of inches" aspect of the sport, but what makes teams in aggregate better than others is the trend-line of their overall performance. I think the MVFC is overvalued in the sense that people intuitively assess quality teams syllogistically/transitively "team A beat team B who beat team C therefore A is better than C" or "Team A played team B well (but didn't win) and we know Team B is good, therefore Team A is as well"

For the latter, that's how we assess the strength of teams in a conference given 1) how they play each other and 2)how they perform in the playoffs.

Unlike FBS football, where we have a strong sample of how each conference matches up against each other via bowl games, interstate OOC rivalries, etc for the most part, we don't really have a comparable sample at FCS for various reasons. This year we had a decent one between the Big Sky and MVFC, but that was about it.

Yet still, there's this zeal of certainty that teams, say 4-5 in the MVFC are so much clearly better than teams 3-4 in the CAA, Southland, etc, and I just don't see it. We overvalue our transitive assessment, when there's a lot more uncertainty than we think. So we put more MVFC teams in the playoff and they may win, but the 4-5 teams don't look head and shoulders above everyone else. then the next year, we rank them higher because they play in a harder conference, citing how deep they go in the playoffs on face value.

Anyway, my personal opinion is that, for the most part the top teams in each "power" conference are comparable to each other (NDSU, UNI, JMU, UCA, SHSU etc), and there's a lot more parity between the third place teams between conferences.

Basically, outside of the playoffs being the measure for the champion, it's also an experiment for how well each conference matches up with each other. And it's a very bad experiment, but people rely on it because it's the only one we have.

Correct.

The Socon's best OOC win this year was against Kennesaw, a team who's conference's best win was by 2 points on the road to the Big Sky #7. The CAA's best wins are FBS against ECU and Georgia Southern. Best win against FCS is Elon beating Furman but aside from that they scheduled a bunch of PFL's, MEAC's, NEC's and Ivies.

And FTR, it's not just this year that the MVFC and BSC have been aggressively scheduling other top tier FCS conferences nor is it changing for now. EWU has played H&H's with SHSU, UNI, NDSU, and will face WIU and JSU in the next few years. UNC and Sac have been squaring off against the likes of ACU, HBU, and ICW over the past few years. Poly, SUU, Weber and UNC have faced NDSU and UNI recently. MSU played SDSU this year. Sam Houston played Richmond this year. UD has home and home with NDSU. JSU scheduled tough but the opponents were weaker than expected. Furman is similar.

I'm not faulting the Socon, or CAA for scheduling the way they do but compared to the MFVC, Big Sky, and a lesser extent, SLC and OVC they leave quite a bit to the imagination. So you have to use the metrics that are available regardless of the warts on those metrics.

Along those lines, the committee chair claimed the lack of FCS competition of APSU for not getting an at-large. At least they scheduled up and not down and were being financially responsible...a notion that any FCS AD should appreciate. But that's another contradiction to this year's selections as the message they are clearly sending an EWU for example is don't schedule too hard because if you were 8-3 like Nicholls you would have been in. Of course a 9-2 McNeese is a different story.

Challenging OOC games between power conference programs are great for the FCS brand. They have compelling story lines, sell tickets, and provide important comparisons for playoff selections and seeds. They should be encouraged and rewarded.

[Bison56]

Okay we get it you love to hate on UNH, Monmouth could have lost 75-0 at San Diego and you’d still be sitting there like(mouthful of a Big Mac) “Yeah I think Monmouth shouldn’t have gotten in but UNH is a worse pick”

Also I watched most of the games, Nichols and USD didn’t wow me by any means

How dare you attack the FCS guru. Shame on you!

[Reign of Terrier]

Correct.

The Socon's best OOC win this year was against Kennesaw, a team who's conference's best win was by 2 points on the road to the Big Sky #7. The CAA's best wins are FBS against ECU and Georgia Southern. Best win against FCS is Elon beating Furman but aside from that they scheduled a bunch of PFL's, MEAC's, NEC's and Ivies.

And FTR, it's not just this year that the MVFC and BSC have been aggressively scheduling other top tier FCS conferences nor is it changing for now. EWU has played H&H's with SHSU, UNI, NDSU, and will face WIU and JSU in the next few years. UNC and Sac have been squaring off against the likes of ACU, HBU, and ICW over the past few years. Poly, SUU, Weber and UNC have faced NDSU and UNI recently. MSU played SDSU this year. Sam Houston played Richmond this year. UD has home and home with NDSU. JSU scheduled tough but the opponents were weaker than expected. Furman is similar.

I'm not faulting the Socon, or CAA for scheduling the way they do but compared to the MFVC, Big Sky, and a lesser extent, SLC and OVC they leave quite a bit to the imagination. So you have to use the metrics that are available regardless of the warts on those metrics.

Along those lines, the committee chair claimed the lack of FCS competition of APSU for not getting an at-large. At least they scheduled up and not down and were being financially responsible...a notion that any FCS AD should appreciate. But that's another contradiction to this year's selections as the message they are clearly sending an EWU for example is don't schedule too hard because if you were 8-3 like Nicholls you would have been in. Of course a 9-2 McNeese is a different story.

Challenging OOC games between power conference programs are great for the FCS brand. They have compelling story lines, sell tickets, and provide important comparisons for playoff selections and seeds. They should be encouraged and rewarded.

Yeah, the socon needs to step up its scheduling. Wofford's scheduling is pretty bad. Samford, Chattanooga and Furman usually schedule well OOC but the Citadel and Wofford usually just schedule a weak Big South team.

[PaladinNation]

Yeah, the socon needs to step up its scheduling. Wofford's scheduling is pretty bad. Samford, Chattanooga and Furman usually schedule well OOC but the Citadel and Wofford usually just schedule a weak Big South team.

Furman opens 2018…
@ CLEMSON
@ ELON
COLGATE

[ElCid]

Yeah, the socon needs to step up its scheduling. Wofford's scheduling is pretty bad. Samford, Chattanooga and Furman usually schedule well OOC but the Citadel and Wofford usually just schedule a weak Big South team.

Well we got Chas So, Towson, and Ala-freaking-bama next year. Not bad. Towson was midland this year, 5-6 I think. Chas So may be down for year or two, who knows. They definite took a hit with their coach leaving. But not bad.

[Panthers1995]

Anyone know where I go to put on a request for a Monmouth for next year? I'd like to go ahead and do that if I can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Go to your state government and ask for more money. If Western could host they would get better draws. We will never see a Monmouth/Western Illinois game because neither team can host.

[Reign of Terrier]

Furman opens 2018…
@ CLEMSON
@ ELON
COLGATE


Well we got Chas So, Towson, and Ala-freaking-bama next year. Not bad. Towson was midland this year, 5-6 I think. Chas So may be down for year or two, who knows. They definite took a hit with their coach leaving. But not bad.

Wofford has Wyoming, which is a winnable FBS game, but nothing else on the schedule as of yet because we are slow at it (I think it's not on our AD's radar tbh)

[katss07]

Okay we get it you love to hate on UNH, Monmouth could have lost 75-0 at San Diego and you’d still be sitting there like(mouthful of a Big Mac) “Yeah I think Monmouth shouldn’t have gotten in but UNH is a worse pick”

Also I watched most of the games, Nichols and USD didn’t wow me by any means

I have absolutely no hatred of UNH. In fact, this is the first time on here I have posted anything bad about you guys. I have respect for UNH, but they are not a playoff team. Would Monmouth have beaten UNH? I dunno, would have been a good game IMO. It would have been a lot better of a game than CCStU at UNH. My point here is, a clearly down UNH team shouldn’t have been in over McNeese, EWU maybe Austin Peay. And if it came down to a choice between UNH and Monmouth, I would put in the Hawks.

[ElCid]

Wofford has Wyoming, which is a winnable FBS game, but nothing else on the schedule as of yet because we are slow at it (I think it's not on our AD's radar tbh)

Well, we just lost our AD, so glad he got er done before he left.

[Southern Bison]

Wofford has Wyoming, which is a winnable FBS game, but nothing else on the schedule as of yet because we are slow at it (I think it's not on our AD's radar tbh)Not if Craig Bohl is still the head coach. He'll pull old tape from the 2012 playoffs and both GaSo playoff games.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[UNHWildcat18]

I have absolutely no hatred of UNH. In fact, this is the first time on here I have posted anything bad about you guys. I have respect for UNH, but they are not a playoff team. Would Monmouth have beaten UNH? I dunno, would have been a good game IMO. It would have been a lot better of a game than CCStU at UNH. My point here is, a clearly down UNH team shouldn’t have been in over McNeese, EWU maybe Austin Peay. And if it came down to a choice between UNH and Monmouth, I would put in the Hawks.

EWU and UD you could make an argument, however Monmouth USD NAU UNH all looked like garbage. CCSU with their back up is still better than the San Diego team that demolished the mighty NAU lumberjacks IMO.

All I have seen you do is just say UNH sucks they aren't a playoff team on almost every thread since selection day. Out of all the "unworthy" at larges NAU deserves to get kicked off the island first IMO, based off the round 1 games.

[cx500d]

Not if Craig Bohl is still the head coach. He'll pull old tape from the 2012 playoffs and both GaSo playoff games.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


Wyoming plays air force every year, so its not like they haven't seen the option....

[OL FU]

Not sure if it is the case or not, but I think the SoCon and most other southeastern teams and northeastern teams schedules the way they do because there are a large number of FCS schools within a manageable driving distance. That isn't the case in the west and, while not quite as bad as the western states, the Midwest.

[Professor Chaos]

EWU and UD you could make an argument, however Monmouth USD NAU UNH all looked like garbage. CCSU with their back up is still better than the San Diego team that demolished the mighty NAU lumberjacks IMO.

All I have seen you do is just say UNH sucks they aren't a playoff team on almost every thread since selection day. Out of all the "unworthy" at larges NAU deserves to get kicked off the island first IMO, based off the round 1 games.
It's pretty comical you call out USD (assuming that's South Dakota) for "looking like garbage" in their first playoff game but leave out the team they beat on the road in your **** list.

[BNATION]

Safe to say that neither team looked great, but Nicholls definately looked like a better team and outgained them in every category. Still should have won the game with 5 turnovers. Long story short, both teams were going to lose in the second round so both are losers anyway. Go KATS!


It's pretty comical you call out USD (assuming that's South Dakota) for "looking like garbage" in their first playoff game but leave out the team they beat on the road in your **** list.

[Professor Chaos]

Safe to say that neither team looked great, but Nicholls definately looked like a better team and outgained them in every category. Still should have won the game with 5 turnovers. Long story short, both teams were going to lose in the second round so both are losers anyway. Go KATS!
No, they didn't outgain USD in every category. Look at the box score, it was pretty darn even. Nicholls outgained USD by 12 total yards while USD averaged more yards per play. Nicholls shot themselves in the foot with 4 turnovers (compared to USD's 1) while USD shot themselves in the foot with penalties in the 2nd half (12 for 102 yards - most all of them in the 2nd half IIRC). I thought it was an entertaining game between 2 pretty evenly matched teams but it's really a stretch to act like Nicholls dominated a game that they never led once in.

[BNATION]

Respectfully..

Nich to SD

1st downs-28-22
3rd dwn eff-6-15, 3-11
total yards-464, 452
Turnover-4-1
TOP 35:18, 24:42

Nicholls dominated TOP, controlled the line of scrimmage, and should have run the ball 50 times. They held SD to less plays and points than they are accustomed to and if you watched the game through neutral glasses and had to bet on a rematch you would absolutely take Nicholls. At least that would be my bet.



No, they didn't outgain USD in every category. Look at the box score, it was pretty darn even. Nicholls outgained USD by 12 total yards while USD averaged more yards per play. Nicholls shot themselves in the foot with 4 turnovers (compared to USD's 1) while USD shot themselves in the foot with penalties in the 2nd half (12 for 102 yards - most all of them in the 2nd half IIRC). I thought it was an entertaining game between 2 pretty evenly matched teams but it's really a stretch to act like Nicholls dominated a game that they never led once in.

[UNIFanSince1983]

I honestly think Monmouth vs 0-11 Indiana State may have been a pretty good game. They were absolutely not worthy of a playoff spot. 9-2 against nobody shouldn't get you anything unless you win your conference.

[BNATION]

Agree, them and NH were real head scratchers IMO.


I honestly think Monmouth vs 0-11 Indiana State may have been a pretty good game. They were absolutely not worthy of a playoff spot. 9-2 against nobody shouldn't get you anything unless you win your conference.

[UNIFanSince1983]

Respectfully..

Nich to SD

1st downs-28-22
3rd dwn eff-6-15, 3-11
total yards-464, 452
Turnover-4-1
TOP 35:18, 24:42

Nicholls dominated TOP, controlled the line of scrimmage, and should have run the ball 50 times. They held SD to less plays and points than they are accustomed to and if you watched the game through neutral glasses and had to bet on a rematch you would absolutely take Nicholls. At least that would be my bet.

Respectfully the final score was USD 38 NSU 31. Which is the only stat that matters. The game was at Nicholls. This was a reeling USD team that came in losing it's last 3. I think Nicholls had all the advantages and still couldn't win. And TOP means nothing if you cannot hold onto the ball. We could say Nicholls gave up 4 TOs. Or could look at it a different way that USD forced 4 TOs. Either way it was evenly matched and the better team probably won.

[JimmyJack]

I was kind of grumpy about the first round, watching a lot of bad football teams that really don't deserve to be there, but this is the system we have. It does get a lot better quickly. SDSU/UNI this week is a pretty good one and whoever wins that will be a handful in the next round. Assuming all the seeded teams advance (or the seeded teams plus UNI), round three will be pretty exciting.

[Professor Chaos]

Respectfully..

Nich to SD

1st downs-28-22
3rd dwn eff-6-15, 3-11
total yards-464, 452
Turnover-4-1
TOP 35:18, 24:42

Nicholls dominated TOP, controlled the line of scrimmage, and should have run the ball 50 times. They held SD to less plays and points than they are accustomed to and if you watched the game through neutral glasses and had to bet on a rematch you would absolutely take Nicholls. At least that would be my bet.
TOP means nothing to an offense like USD's. They're trying to run as many plays as they can as quick as possible. They beat Drake this year 77-7 and had a 1 minute TOP advantage in that game. Nicholls dominated their run game which was impressive but they still gave up 10+ yards per pass. I wouldn't bet on USD in a rematch unless I got points because I don't have much confidence in them but if I had to I'd probably predict them to win just because their QB play is far superior to Nicholls. Nonetheless it would probably be another entertaining game no matter who won.

[McNeese72]

It is amazing. It went from South Dakota is going to blow Nicholls out the water last week at this time to South Dakota, who was in decline the last few games of the season, did well to hold on and beat Nicholls on the road even though they didn't play well and had injuries.

Doc

[Grizalltheway]

Every year teams could say "see, we would have done better". But after watching Monmouth play, every Valley team would have beaten them. Northern Arizona looked like crap. I was looking forward to watching their QB play but he laid an egg.
At least he made it through the whole game.