What conference next in line to receive auto bid...

[*****]

I personally agree with this statement...however...that currently does not happen...it is the 8 best from the AQ conferences and then the 8 other teams who are best in the committee's eyes....If you are the champ of one of the best eight conferences available you should get an AQ. xtwocentsx The PFL and the NEC have not proved they are in the top eight yet so the questioning has not happened. But ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, the future!

[CCU97]

I agree...2010 the question will have to be answered if things continue as they have....

[appfan2008]

That's why my personal preference is for no AQs. But realistically that's not going to happen. I'd love to see a shakeup with some conferences loosing the AQ and others gaining one. There'd be lots of action trying to win back the AQ for the next season. xnodx
so you want a sixteen team field with no aq's?

[appfan2008]

I agree...2010 the question will have to be answered if things continue as they have....
but as of today, 2007, i dont think any of the conferences on the outside looking in deserve, though i do agree 2010 may be different

[*****]

... Lemme see if I can remember any NCAA D-I football champions that weren't in an AQ conference............. there must be at least one........Well there is GEORGIA SOUTHERN...

Oh yeah, YOUNGSTOWN STATE...

[lizrdgizrd]

so you want a sixteen team field with no aq's?
Yep. But I'm not going to get it. xbawlingx xlolx

[appfan2008]

Yep. But I'm not going to get it. xbawlingx xlolx
i guess i would be ok with that... exact opposite of what i was going for but it is better than the current...

but you are right.. that will never happen

[CCU97]

but as of today, 2007, i dont think any of the conferences on the outside looking in deserve, though i do agree 2010 may be different


And you would be correct....the Big South doesn't currently have enough teams...the NEC and PFL don't play tough enough schedules...although the NEC is trying to change that....but the problem that some have is that we can't look at just what is happening today(2007)....we have to plan for the future and assume that in the next 20 years...there will be a conference that is better for an extended period of time than the current 8 AQ conferences....there needs to be a plan in place of what will be done when that happens....We ask schools and conferences to try and plan for the future...if a president of a school said...I have no idea of what the school will be like in 5 years....I can only take things one year at a time....most people would run him out of the school....why would we let the NCAA do the same thing....It just makes sense to plan for things and have a policy in place for something before it happens and not after it has happened. Reactive policy making just means that you had no clue it would ever happen or either you just didn't care enough to do your job.

[89Hen]

I agree...2010 the question will have to be answered if things continue as they have....
For the record, I have no problem saying the question may have to be answered in the future. I've never said anything to the contrary.

[appfan2008]

I just dont think you can predict which ones will be better in the future!

[89Hen]

we have to plan for the future and assume that in the next 20 years...there will be a conference that is better for an extended period of time than the current 8 AQ conferences....there needs to be a plan in place of what will be done when that happens....
And as I said, I'd be open to hearing your plan. I just think it is impossible to pass regulations on if you do X you will be in. What if 9 conferences do X? Are you really willing to expand by 8 teams to accomodate 1? You have to keep in that any rule change for autos and at-larges could have impact across all sports.

[appfan2008]

if we dropped a conference would be the first to go? pl, ovc?

[CCU97]

And as I said, I'd be open to hearing your plan. I just think it is impossible to pass regulations on if you do X you will be in. What if 9 conferences do X? Are you really willing to expand by 8 teams to accomodate 1? You have to keep in that any rule change for autos and at-larges could have impact across all sports.

And I agree the decision would be a tough one....but would you then advocate taking one of the current 8 AQ conference's autobid away from them? or just saying well this is the way it is and tough luck for any newer conference who has proven themselves...

[lizrdgizrd]

Are the AQs voted on every year before the season starts?

[danefan]

Are the AQs voted on every year before the season starts?
I think so, but lets be honest...its a complete rubber stamp process. Do you think they even get together and talk it out? I'm asking because I have no clue.

[*****]

Are the AQs voted on every year before the season starts?Yes. I think they voted on them last month and there is discussion. But as stated there is no reason to change them yet.

[danefan]

Are there minutes or a transcript published? Just wondering.

[CCU97]

No chance of that happening danefan....

[danefan]

No chance of that happening danefan....

Why not? xlolx;);););)xsmiley_wix

But seriously. I never understood the concept of the NCAA being so secretive. If you're objectively evaluating the conferences then you shouldn't have a problem releasing the conversation held. Maybe this is too idealistic....

[89Hen]

And I agree the decision would be a tough one....but would you then advocate taking one of the current 8 AQ conference's autobid away from them? or just saying well this is the way it is and tough luck for any newer conference who has proven themselves...
I would have it be like it is now. All 8 are up for consideration each year. Just because somebody hasn't bumped out one of the 8 in the past is no reason to think that couldn't happen in the future, no matter what Flyer would have you think. No conference that has been denied has ever ranked higher than any of the 8 that received them. If that happens in the future, then we have ourselves a debate.

[CCU97]

I have no problem with there not being transcripts posted or minutes available for us fans....

I just want to know that there is a plan for what will happen in the future to make sure that the conferences getting the AQ are the ones who have earned them...if the Big South never gets one because they don't continue to do what is needed then that is fine with me....but don't tell me we don't get one because a conference that is worse has one and we just don't want to change things from how they are...

[89Hen]

Are there minutes or a transcript published? Just wondering.
No. There aren't any from the selection committee either (for any sport).

[danefan]

Is the committee the same for AQs and for at-large bids?


My questions may seem like I'm setting someone up for the big criticism, but I'm really just trying to educate myself on the process.

[89Hen]

A couple interesting things from the NCAA Bylaws (my bold for emphasis)...

31.3.1 Size of Championships Fields. The size of all NCAA championships fields shall be established by the Management Council to provide for efficient management of the events, adequate NCAA championship
opportunities relative to the nationwide quality of competition and sound economic administration of the financial resources of the Association and its championships.

31.3.4.1.1 Notification, Automatic Qualification in Jeopardy. A governing sports committee must issue a written warning one year in advance to a conference that is in jeopardy of losing its automatic qualification. (Note: This regulation does not apply to the following championships in which a play-in system has been established: baseball, women’s softball, women’s volleyball and men’s soccer.)

[89Hen]

Is the committee the same for AQs and for at-large bids?
I would be guessing, but I think there may be some overlap, but not the same.

[danefan]

31.3.4.1.1 Notification, Automatic Qualification in Jeopardy. A governing sports committee must issue a written warning one year in advance to a conference that is in jeopardy of losing its automatic qualification. (Note: This regulation does not apply to the following championships in which a play-in system has been established: baseball, women’s softball, women’s volleyball and men’s soccer.)

The one-year warning is interesting. So we will really need two years of an outside conference being stronger than one of the current 8. One to force a warning and one to take an AQ away.

[*****]

Is the committee the same for AQs and for at-large bids?...Yes. There is only one football committee for FCS. The AQs were voted on this past 2/19 when they met.

[youwouldno]

The thing is, at this point no non-AQ conference is even close to being better than an AQ conference. And, with regard to the future, the lack of an AQ is a huge handicap that makes it difficult to reach a higher level of quality. So the system in large part dictates conference strength at the margins.

Nonetheless, at this point there is no injustice... until a conference has some kind of legitimate argument in favor of an AQ, it's all speculative. There is no reason to think such a scenario is imminent or even foreseeable.

[*****]

... There is no reason to think such a scenario is imminent or even foreseeable.Not for a few years at least.

[lizrdgizrd]

The thing is, at this point no non-AQ conference is even close to being better than an AQ conference. And, with regard to the future, the lack of an AQ is a huge handicap that makes it difficult to reach a higher level of quality. So the system in large part dictates conference strength at the margins.

Nonetheless, at this point there is no injustice... until a conference has some kind of legitimate argument in favor of an AQ, it's all speculative. There is no reason to think such a scenario is imminent or even foreseeable.
I think we're all foreseeing the scenario right now. I think Hen's quotes show that there is a mechanism in place once a conference has reached the point where it may get an autobid where another conference would loose its own.

[89Hen]

The one-year warning is interesting. So we will really need two years of an outside conference being stronger than one of the current 8. One to force a warning and one to take an AQ away.
That's what it sounds like to me, but the bylaws are always a little cloudy IMO. The other thing to consider is does the NCAA or the conference given the warning acknowledge it in public. xeyebrowx

[HensRock]

I beleive the executive committee at the beginning of the season which decides on the AC's is the same committee that selects the AL's. And yes, their decisions are published, but not usually until around September and then revised in October.

Just to clarify: The AC's are decided months in advance, but this decision does not appear in published form until the season is upon us. There might be press releases prior but the publication is known as the Division I Football Championship Handbook. Published every September. Here is a link to the 2006 version. Automatic qualifiers are listed on page 11. The committee members are listed on pages 8-9.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/football/2006/2006_d1_football_handbook.pdf

[appfan2008]

The thing is, at this point no non-AQ conference is even close to being better than an AQ conference. And, with regard to the future, the lack of an AQ is a huge handicap that makes it difficult to reach a higher level of quality. So the system in large part dictates conference strength at the margins.

Nonetheless, at this point there is no injustice... until a conference has some kind of legitimate argument in favor of an AQ, it's all speculative. There is no reason to think such a scenario is imminent or even foreseeable.
i dont think it is imminent but forseeable? you bet

[appfan2008]

I beleive the executive committee at the beginning of the season which decides on the AC's is the same committee that selects the AL's. And yes, their decisions are published, but not usually until around September and then revised in October.

Just to clarify: The AC's are decided months in advance, but this decision does not appear in published form until the season is upon us. There might be press releases prior but the publication is known as the Division I Football Championship Handbook. Published every September. Here is a link to the 2006 version. Automatic qualifiers are listed on page 11. The committee members are listed on pages 8-9.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/football/2006/2006_d1_football_handbook.pdf
Its not AC's it is AQ's

you spell qualifier with a q not a c!xcoffeex

[HensRock]

Its not AC's it is AQ's

you spell qualifier with a q not a c!xcoffeex

I meant Autobid Conferences. (AC's)

[*****]

... decided months in advance...They were decided and there is no change for 2007 (I checked).

[appfan2008]

I meant Autobid Conferences. (AC's)
my bad... that works too i guess

[appfan2008]

They were decided and there is no change for 2007 (I checked).
well maybe the fact that it has already been decided on for this year will cause people to shut up... then again maybe not

[andy7171]

well maybe the fact that it has already been decided on for this year will cause people to shut up... then again maybe not
I wish. I fear all it means is another year of hearing about how some teams have been in I-AA/FCS for 14, wait it'll be 15, years now and no post season invite.

[CCU97]

You won't hear a complaint from any Big South fans this year...we know we haven't done what it take to get an auto bid for the conference....we know we have to schedule a tough OOC and win....The only complaints you will get are from the usual suspects....

[UAalum72]

You won't hear a complaint from any Big South fans this year...we know we haven't done what it take to get an auto bid for the conference....we know we have to schedule a tough OOC and win
No complaints from the Big South because it doesn't qualify under the written rules ... what the Big South hasn't done is have six members.

If wins against a tough OOC were a requirement, the MEAC wouldn't have measured up last year.

[CCU97]

Basically you just restated my comment and added that the MEAC didn't play a tough OOC....All I know is that we don't have an autobid and as long as one of our teams plays a tough OOC and wins big games they will make the playoffs....we did it last year....As for the MEAC....I can't speak for them....I know SC State played us last year other than that...I don't know much about the conference as a whole.

[lizrdgizrd]

No complaints from the Big South because it doesn't qualify under the written rules ... what the Big South hasn't done is have six members.

If wins against a tough OOC were a requirement, the MEAC wouldn't have measured up last year.
So why not play up, win against tough OOC opponents, prove you're a better overall conference than the MEAC and take their AQ?

[UAalum72]

Play a tough OOC is what an independent has to do ... it's not required of a conference with an autobid. It's no credit to the Big South for not complaining about not having an autobid because they're not eligible. Sure you can get an at-large, but that's not the what this thread is about.

[lizrdgizrd]

Play a tough OOC is what an independent has to do ... it's not required of a conference with an autobid. It's no credit to the Big South for not complaining about not having an autobid because they're not eligible. Sure you can get an at-large, but that's not the what this thread is about.
All you have to do is prove your worthy of taking another conference's autobid and you'll have one. Or the NCAA will expand (dilute) the playoffs and you'll get you own AQ. I'd much rather the PFL step up their level of competition and earn their trips to the playoffs.

[CCU97]

Play a tough OOC is what an independent has to do ... it's not required of a conference with an autobid. It's no credit to the Big South for not complaining about not having an autobid because they're not eligible. Sure you can get an at-large, but that's not the what this thread is about.

No the thread is about the next in line to take an auto bid...the Big South will be eligible in 2010 which will be the first time any conference potientially has a real case of taking anothers autobid away.....

[UAalum72]

So why not play up, win against tough OOC opponents, prove you're a better overall conference than the MEAC and take their AQ?
My point is that it's not required of them, so why should it be required of the NEC? And I'm not arguing the MEAC should lose one, either.

However, last year:
MEAC and NEC were 1-1 head to head
MEAC was 0-1 vs. the Patriot League, NEC 3-3
MEAC was 0-1 vs. Southern Conf., NEC 1-0
MEAC was 3-2 vs. a transitional team that will join them next year
MEAC didn't play A-10 or Ivy, NEC was 1-3 vs. A-10, 0-1 vs Ivy
MEAC was 1-2 vs. Big South, 0-1 vs. Southland, 1-1 vs. SWAC, 1-0 vs OVC, NEC didn't play them.
MEAC played 4 games vs. sub-D-I, NEC only two (all were wins)
MEAC also had a win against winless Savannah St., NEC 10-7 vs combined PFL and MAAC

[lizrdgizrd]

My point is that it's not required of them, so why should it be required of the NEC?

However, last year:
MEAC and NEC were 1-1 head to head
MEAC was 0-1 vs. the Patriot League, NEC 3-3
MEAC was 0-1 vs. Southern Conf., NEC 1-0
MEAC was 3-2 vs. a transitional team that will join them next year
MEAC didn't play A-10 or Ivy, NEC was 1-3 vs. A-10, 0-1 vs Ivy
MEAC was 1-2 vs. Big South, 0-1 vs. Southland, 1-1 vs. SWAC, 1-0 vs OVC, NEC didn't play them.
MEAC played 4 games vs. sub-D-I, NEC only two (all were wins)
MEAC also had a win against winless Savannah St., NEC 10-7 vs combined PFL and MAAC
Because you don't already have an autobid. You can make a case for the NEC being more competitive last year than the MEAC. Now do that again this year and I'll bet you'll get more votes for gaining an AQ. I have said before that I have no problem with conferences loosing their AQs.

[CCU97]

My point is that it's not required of them, so why should it be required of the NEC? And I'm not arguing the MEAC should lose one, either.

However, last year:
MEAC and NEC were 1-1 head to head
MEAC was 0-1 vs. the Patriot League, NEC 3-3
MEAC was 0-1 vs. Southern Conf., NEC 1-0
MEAC was 3-2 vs. a transitional team that will join them next year
MEAC didn't play A-10 or Ivy, NEC was 1-3 vs. A-10, 0-1 vs Ivy
MEAC was 1-2 vs. Big South, 0-1 vs. Southland, 1-1 vs. SWAC, 1-0 vs OVC, NEC didn't play them.
MEAC played 4 games vs. sub-D-I, NEC only two (all were wins)
MEAC also had a win against winless Savannah St., NEC 10-7 vs combined PFL and MAAC

OK...these numbers look ok as you have them listed...but would make more of a case if you compared which schools they were....if the bottom team of the MEAC was 0-1 vs. the PL and the top teams of the NEC went 3-3 then the case isn't as compelling.

[downbythebeach]

I wish. I fear all it means is another year of hearing about how some teams have been in I-AA/FCS for 14, wait it'll be 15, years now and no post season invite.

Sorry bud, if you don't like it then don't read

If you don't like people whining (on a message board for that matter) then quit complaining about it and bumping the thread up....

[89Hen]

OK...these numbers look ok as you have them listed...but would make more of a case if you compared which schools they were....if the bottom team of the MEAC was 0-1 vs. the PL and the top teams of the NEC went 3-3 then the case isn't as compelling.
It is tough to compare. DelSt vs. St. Francis and Monmouth vs. Morgan aren't much to go on.

[andy7171]

My point is that it's not required of them, so why should it be required of the NEC? And I'm not arguing the MEAC should lose one, either.

However, last year:
MEAC and NEC were 1-1 head to head
MEAC was 0-1 vs. the Patriot League, NEC 3-3
MEAC was 0-1 vs. Southern Conf., NEC 1-0
MEAC was 3-2 vs. a transitional team that will join them next year
MEAC didn't play A-10 or Ivy, NEC was 1-3 vs. A-10, 0-1 vs Ivy
MEAC was 1-2 vs. Big South, 0-1 vs. Southland, 1-1 vs. SWAC, 1-0 vs OVC, NEC didn't play them.
MEAC played 4 games vs. sub-D-I, NEC only two (all were wins)
MEAC also had a win against winless Savannah St., NEC 10-7 vs combined PFL and MAAC
Towson plays Morgan State every year. Local Baltimore rivalry. Only 4miles away from each other. Towson wins 9 times out of 10.



Sorry bud, if you don't like it then don't read

If you don't like people whining (on a message board for that matter) then quit complaining about it and bumping the thread up....
Um, I didn't bump the thread up, it's been in the top 3 threads in this Disscussion Forum for a good 3 weeks now. And yes I can complain about hearing the same old arguement being brought up every 6 weeks or so.

[Seawolf97]

I think Stonybrook entering the Big South is a good fit. The Big South looks like a competitive conference going in the right direction and Stonybrook has never been shy to schedule tough opponents. I know we will give Coastal a run for their money in 2008. Should be interesting.

[UAalum72]

Towson plays Morgan State every year. Local Baltimore rivalry. Only 4miles away from each other. Towson wins 9 times out of 10.

I must have still been thinking of Towson in the Patriot. Make it MEAC 0-1 vs. A-10, didn't play PL.

And NEC 1-0 vs. A-10, 3-2 vs. Patriot if you don't count Stony Brook who's no longer in the NEC.

[CCU97]

I think Stonybrook entering the Big South is a good fit. The Big South looks like a competitive conference going in the right direction and Stonybrook has never been shy to schedule tough opponents. I know we will give Coastal a run for their money in 2008. Should be interesting.

We look forward to the challenge....Welcome to the conference and good luck in '08. I might just have to make a trip to Long Island for the game...lots of CCU alum live in the area...

[PantherRob82]

We look forward to the challenge....Welcome to the conference and good luck in '08. I might just have to make a trip to Long Island for the game...lots of CCU alum live in the area...

Stony Brook should make for some good competition in the Big South. Maybe now it won't be a 3 way tie every year.

[james_lawfirm]

The problem with the win a game every five years solution is that the FCS playoffs, much like March Madness, are not always geared towards fairness in matchups. For example, the MEAC Champion frequently ends up being sacrificed to the SoCon Champion (or more recently a A-10/CAA team). If the MEAC faced the OVC in the first round the scenario would change significantly.

The obvious solution for this "unfairness" is for the MEAC to schedule tougher OOC teams in the reg. season. If they actually win those tougher games, then they would be ranked higher come playoff time. Then, they would be more likely to be seeded & not be the sacrificial lamb of the FCS.

Plus, those tougher matchups, even if they lose, would strengthen their team's chances for the playoffs. Its easy to win when you consistently play cupcakes, but the team does not grow any.

Specifically, when ASU called the MEAC teams for a playdate this year, they should have agreed. Alas.

But, the "win a game every 5 years" or lose the auto. bid, does not seem all that unfair to me.

[UAalum72]

Originally Posted by walliver
The problem with the win a game every five years solution is that the FCS playoffs, much like March Madness, are not always geared towards fairness in matchups. For example, the MEAC Champion frequently ends up being sacrificed to the SoCon Champion (or more recently a A-10/CAA team). If the MEAC faced the OVC in the first round the scenario would change significantly.


The obvious solution for this "unfairness" is for the MEAC to schedule tougher OOC teams in the reg. season. If they actually win those tougher games, then they would be ranked higher come playoff time. Then, they would be more likely to be seeded & not be the sacrificial lamb of the FCS.
...
But, the "win a game every 5 years" or lose the auto. bid, does not seem all that unfair to me.
Exactly. Having the MEAC face off vs. the OVC may be 'fair' to them, but not to the conferences that don't have an autobid. Matching them against each other would be just a ploy to prevent creating an opening for the non-bid conferences under that solution.

[Seawolf97]

Given the Big South has a bid in 2010 I would expect the NEC would be next especially if they go to 45 scholarships. There are too many good programs , playing good schedules in that conference to ignore them. Question is do you expand the bids or take away another conference's bid?
Then what about the expected re shuffle of conferences or the AE taking up football in several years?

[PantherRob82]

Given the Big South has a bid in 2010 I would expect the NEC would be next especially if they go to 45 scholarships. There are too many good programs , playing good schedules in that conference to ignore them. Question is do you expand the bids or take away another conference's bid?
Then what about the expected re shuffle of conferences or the AE taking up football in several years?

Does the Big South get a bid in 2010, or are the elgible for one?

[PantherRob82]

Then, they would be more likely to be seeded & not be the sacrificial lamb of the FCS.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a seeded Hampton team bow out early in 2005?

[rokamortis]

Does the Big South get a bid in 2010, or are the elgible for one?

eligible

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

If there is anything I think the history of the playoffs has shown us is that you cannot overlook anyone. I don't think many people gave UMass a chance in '98, WKU a chance in '02, Colgate a chance (to reach the NC) in '03, JMU a chance in '04, or UNI a chance (to reach the NC) in '05.

Why not add the 8 teams to the playoffs but play the semi-final round on a weekday the week that the NC is usually played? The exams are over at most institutions by then.

[lizrdgizrd]

If there is anything I think the history of the playoffs has shown us is that you cannot overlook anyone. I don't think many people gave UMass a chance in '98, WKU a chance in '02, Colgate a chance (to reach the NC) in '03, JMU a chance in '04, or UNI a chance (to reach the NC) in '05.

Why not add the 8 teams to the playoffs but play the semi-final round on a weekday the week that the NC is usually played? The exams are over at most institutions by then.
And not give the players a week to rest before the NC game? That sounds like a bad idea to me.

[james_lawfirm]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a seeded Hampton team bow out early in 2005?

You are exactly right. I thought at the time that they were ranked WAAAAYY too high. I was right. My point was that if they played a decent SOS, then a high (legit) ranking could translate into a seed. Further, I don't think they just bowed out - they got CRUSHED in the 2005 first round.

[PantherRob82]

If there is anything I think the history of the playoffs has shown us is that you cannot overlook anyone. I don't think many people gave UMass a chance in '98, WKU a chance in '02, Colgate a chance (to reach the NC) in '03, JMU a chance in '04, or UNI a chance (to reach the NC) in '05.

Why not add the 8 teams to the playoffs but play the semi-final round on a weekday the week that the NC is usually played? The exams are over at most institutions by then.

way too short of notice and rest