AGS Poll Results - WEEK 0 POLL - 2019 SEASON

[Redbird 4th & short]

Just of note, the PL won playoff games in 2010 (MVFC), 2011 (CAA), 2013 (NEC), 2014 (NEC), 2015(CAA) and 2018 (CAA).
yes, some isolated success, though 2 of the wins were over Sacred Heart (NEC) followed by easy losses to Colonial I believe. But the others were mostly quality wins for Fordham, Lehigh, and most recently for Colgate. So I'll agree, Patriot hasn't always been a weak autobid .. just a few years in there of undeserving playoff teams IMO. Bu taken along with NEC, MEAC, and Big South .. there were usuall 2 to 3 weak autobids for several years.

But again, the last few years has been the strongest group of autobids the FCS has had across the board in a while .. so I'm not saying it is still the case.

[Reign of Terrier]

I obviously can much better than you as I've made abundantly clear through this whole thread. All of the OVC wins were either at home or against Butler. the Patriot's were on the road against the CAA or MVFC.

You are both intentional dense and immensely stupid.

[Reign of Terrier]

yes, some isolated success, though 2 of the wins were over Sacred Heart (NEC) followed by easy losses to Colonial I believe. But the others were mostly quality wins for Fordham, Lehigh, and most recently for Colgate. So I'll agree, Patriot hasn't always been a weak autobid .. just a few years in there of undeserving playoff teams IMO. Bu taken along with NEC, MEAC, and Big South .. there were usuall 2 to 3 weak autobids for several years.

But again, the last few years has been the strongest group of autobids the FCS has had across the board in a while .. so I'm not saying it is still the case.

You kind of proved my point that you don't actually think through these stupid comments without consoling the stats first, your intuition is that the Patriot league obviously sucks and has bull**** wins compared to the OVC, when the OVC has only played one road game in the first round where they've won, against the Pioneer team. Not to mention that Patriot League wins are distributed among 3 teams (Lehigh, Fordham, Colgate) whereas SEMO was the first OVC team not named Jacksonville State in like 20+ years (no hyperbole!) to beat a team in the playoffs that had full scholarships and wasn't from the OVC.

[kalm]

I'm developing this theory slowly over time (because I have a social life), but I think a combination of geography and crowd size will determine how easy your draw is. Put another way, if you're unseeded, but play West of the Mississippi river and have a history of strong crowd sizes, you'll probably get a favorable first round draw.

Wofford beat App State in 2011, but App State got a home game, while Wofford got shipped to MVFC co-champ UNI. Meanwhile, if you look at JMU, the game @ Colgate and @ NDSU were 66% of the away games they've played out of conference PERIOD in the last decade. Youngstown State has similarly only played 2 OOC games in the last 10 years or so, both in the playoffs in 2016.

Out west, UNI/SDSU/NDSU are in good shape to get a first round home game most of the time (without checking the details, I think SDSU is the least likely of these), while Montana and Montana State are more likely to get a home game as at large teams (EWU usually gets one as a seed) which usually entails a touch of creampuffs, but I'm not really sure about Weber, Cal Poly, etc. Big Sky teams have better attendance in general I think.

So, it's kind of weird IMO, regardless of what you think about comparative playoff quality, that you can bet that western teams and New England teams are more likely to get these "easy" games. It's easy to dump on Jacksonville State, but they've never had an NEC/Patriot/Pioneer and they've never had to play an OVC team in the play-in game (OVC teams in Illinois/Tennessee can't say that). It's also easy to dump on Kennesaw State or Charleston Southern from a few years ago, but compared to the first round games of Coastal Carolina/Stony Brook that almost certainly involved flights or involved proximity to New England(Western Illinois in 2010, Villanova and Albany, Bethune Cookman 2012-2013), they've had comparably more difficult games, playing the second best socon team/co-champ in the first game too.

And this isn't just a Socon/OVC/Big South thing. As a matter of fact, I'd argue it's limited to the geography of the carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, and Virginia because that's where all these smaller schools (attendance-wise) who play good ball are. Tennessee and Illinois are in the sweet spot because their geography is more central, so they play teams in the MVFC, Southland, and even the likes of the Patriot. But if you look at Richmond, Elon or William & Mary, who are like fellow CAA member JMU with similar geography, but different in terms of crowd size, you'll see their first round scheduling is similarly daunting the aforementioned Socon/OVC/Big South teams. JMU doesn't have that problem because of their crowd size.

So yeah, Weber State is probably the exception to the rule, and Cal Poly probably would be too if they actually won home playoff games, but I see a pervasive pattern in the southeast that hoses teams in this geographic area in terms of first round games more so than others.

Powerhouse programs that draw well, win AQ's, and earn seeds skew the win total. Yes. I just think you're selling short the advantages of the CAA's geography compared to Western teams. Again, my recollection is not the same as yours...

SUU has won two conference titles and received one at large. They played at SHSU twice in the playoffs and hosted a very good Weber State who beat a very good WIU in round one and almost picked off JMU.

Since 2010, Montana State has played NDSU twice, UNH, SHSU twice, and SDSU compared to the two easy games against SBU and ICW.

Only two of Montana's eight playoff opponents over that same stretch have not been elite teams.

In the case of both Montana's only one game each was not an early round game so it's also not just a matter of facing better teams after the AQ's and weaker bubble teams are out of the way.

[Reign of Terrier]

Has anyone used # of home playoff games and opponent’s strength as metrics in this grand debate?


Your recollection is different than mine.

Almost every year it seems like the CAA gets an NEC and/or Patriot.

Throw out San Diego 3 times and the Big Sky playoff matchups look more like this...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weber_State_Wildcats_football


Powerhouse programs that draw well, win AQ's, and earn seeds skew the win total. Yes. I just think you're selling short the advantages of the CAA's geography compared to Western teams. Again, my recollection is not the same as yours...

SUU has won two conference titles and received one at large. They played at SHSU twice in the playoffs and hosted a very good Weber State who beat a very good WIU in round one and almost picked off JMU.

Since 2010, Montana State has played NDSU twice, UNH, SHSU twice, and SDSU compared to the two easy games against SBU and ICW.

Only two of Montana's eight playoff opponents over that same stretch have not been elite teams.

In the case of both Montana's only one game each was not an early round game so it's also not just a matter of facing better teams after the AQ's and weaker bubble teams are out of the way.

Yeah, that's why my original data points were more about first round games than second round games, because of course second round games are going to be tougher. It's not like NCAA basketball where the 1 plays the winner of the 2 16's, obviously.

By that measure, I think it's clear that the Big Sky/MVFC will have equal or greater difficulty in the second round, especially since the playoff committee doesn't schedule conference rematches in the first round unless they didn't play in the first round. Why? Because the committee still tries to roughly regionalize everyone. There's clear geographic concentration among the weaker autobid leagues (namely the NEC and Patriot), with the pioneer being the wild card of the entire subdivision, who could basically fly anywhere.

If you're an unseeded team in the Southland, Big Sky, MVFC, and New England CAA, you'll almost certainly fly somewhere (or have your opponent fly to you) or play a Patriot/NEC/Pioneer team at home. If you're in the OVC/or a Tennessee Socon team, you're in the optimal position to play anyone from the NEC/Patriot/Big South/CAA/MVFC or Southland, pending on the field.

Whereas the Bama/GA/SC/NC/VA Southern teams will almost certainly play each other, and the frustrating thing for any of these teams is that they're roughly the same quality. Maybe I'm underplaying the novelty here (No team has played the same playoff opponents in back-to-back seasons as far as I can tell), but what's frustrating for me as a fan of the game is that we know that these teams are roughly the same caliber (Elon, Wofford, Furman, JSU, KSU, etc) and we also know that they aren't as good as "semfinalist quality teams" like SDSU/NDSU/Maine last year, etc but we really don't know how they match up with, say, the third best team in the Big Sky or MVFC because they rarely match up with each other anymore. Granted, we all collectively laid an egg against YSU in 2016, but YSU's geography sort of demonstrates the exception. I think YSU making the playoffs every year at 7-4 or so would be fun.

But they were a one-hit wonder and we're not going to see that opportunity repeat often. As far as I can tell, South Carolina and North Carolina produced 11 playoff teams (2015 CCU/CSU/Citadel, 2016 Citadel/CSU/Wofford, 2017 Elon/Wofford/Furman 2018 Wofford/Elon), playing 11 games total. Only 4 of them left the Carolinas and only 2 of them left the South (both Wofford).

We know these teams are roughly the same quality to each other, but our sample for other games outside of this tight little region is small

[Redbird 4th & short]

I obviously can much better than you as I've made abundantly clear through this whole thread. All of the OVC wins were either at home or against Butler. the Patriot's were on the road against the CAA or MVFC.

You are both intentional dense and immensely stupid.
yeah ok .. this is good debate !!!

[Redbird 4th & short]

You kind of proved my point that you don't actually think through these stupid comments without consoling the stats first, your intuition is that the Patriot league obviously sucks and has bull**** wins compared to the OVC, when the OVC has only played one road game in the first round where they've won, against the Pioneer team. Not to mention that Patriot League wins are distributed among 3 teams (Lehigh, Fordham, Colgate) whereas SEMO was the first OVC team not named Jacksonville State in like 20+ years (no hyperbole!) to beat a team in the playoffs that had full scholarships and wasn't from the OVC.
I try not to "console" stats, I prefer to be objective about all this. Couldn't resist since you rather oddly made fun of my posts having typo's .... dude in glass house throwing lot of stones ???

So .. I'm very confused ... where did the Patriot comparison to OVC come from ... I never compared those 2 conferences. Did you just make that sh-t up out of nowhere, act like you were correcting me, and then declare victory on a point no one was arguing till you just said it ??

But again .. Patriot has a .375 win %, which is 4th worst of all conferences for 2011-18 period .. and slightly worse than OVC's .391. But if you thinking a .375 win %, which includes 2 wins over NEC/Sacred Heart is somehow good .. well ok, I guess .. you can have that one. My point is unchanged .. they are historically a one bid conference who loses a lot more than they win.

Back to reality and indisputable facts ... below is what I based many of my conclusions on from the other thread ... this and then later when Professor did something by conf vs conf for 2010-18.

Bottom line, most conferences should have close to .500 record in playoffs in proving their playoff legitimacy over a period of time. Those doing notably better than .500 probably deserve more playoff bids. Those doing notably worse probably deserve less playoff bids .... taken over a period of time adds to credibility of this approach, though greater weight can always be given to more recent years, and there will certainly be teams that come out of nowhere (KSU) or conferences that get better or worse. Or in the case of Southern, lose 2 very good programs and struggle for a time.








2011-18
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011


Conference
Pool
Games
W-L%
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L


Big Sky
A
47
0.447
21
26
6
4
2
3
2
4
1
3
2
3
2
4
3
3
3
2


Colonial
A
66
0.515
34
32
3
6
6
4
8
3
3
4
4
4
6
3
1
3
3
5


MVFC
A
78
0.718
56
22
7
2
8
4
7
4
8
4
10
4
5
1
6
2
5
1


MVFC - NDSU
A
31
0.968
30
1
4
0
4
0
2
1
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0


MVFC - not NDSU
A
47
0.553
26
21
3
2
4
4
5
3
4
4
6
4
1
1
2
2
1
1


Southern
A
35
0.429
15
20
1
2
2
3
3
4
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
3
2
3


Southland
A
40
0.500
20
20
1
3
2
3
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
4
2


Big South
B
23
0.478
11
12
1
1
2
2
0
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
1


MEAC
B
6
0.000
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
1


NEC
B
10
0.200
2
8
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1


OVC
B
23
0.391
9
14
2
2
0
1
0
1
3
2
0
2
4
3
0
1
0
2


Patriot
B
16
0.375
6
10
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
0
1
1
1


Pioneer
B
8
0.250
2
6
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0


Total

352
0.500
176
176
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
19
19
19
19






























2011-18
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011


Conference Pool
Pool
Games
W-L%
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L


Pool A
A
266
0.549
146
120
18
17
20
17
22
17
17
15
20
15
16
13
16
13
17
13


Pool A exc NDSU
A*
235
0.494
116
119
14
17
16
17
20
16
13
15
16
15
12
13
12
13
13
13


Pool A excl MVFC
A*
188
0.479
90
98
11
15
12
13
15
13
9
11
10
11
11
12
10
11
12
12


Pool B
B
86
0.349
30
56
5
6
3
6
1
6
6
8
3
8
7
10
3
6
2
6


Total exc NDSU
AB*
321
0.455
146
175
19
23
19
23
21
22
19
23
19
23
19
23
15
19
15
19

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

The Patriot League has gotten brutal draws this decade. I'm not sure who is doing any better....

2010 Lehigh beat UNI in Cedar Falls, then loses to National Finalist Delaware on the road
2011 Lehigh (bye) then beats Towson on the road, loses to at National Champ NDSU
2013 Fordham beats Sacred Heart at home, then loses to National Finalist Towson on the road
2014 Fordham beats Sacred Heart at home, then loses to #1 overall seed UNH on the road
2015 Colgate beats UNH on the road, JMU on the road, then loses to SHSU in Huntsville
2018 Colgate (seed/bye) beats JMU then loses to national champ NDSU on the road

[BEAR]

Back to reality and indisputable facts ... below is what I based many of my conclusions on from the other thread ... this and then later when Professor did something by conf vs conf for 2010-18.

Bottom line, most conferences should have close to .500 record in playoffs in proving their playoff legitimacy over a period of time. Those doing notably better than .500 probably deserve more playoff bids. Those doing notably worse probably deserve less playoff bids .... taken over a period of time adds to credibility of this approach, though greater weight can always be given to more recent years, and there will certainly be teams that come out of nowhere (KSU) or conferences that get better or worse. Or in the case of Southern, lose 2 very good programs and struggle for a time.







Southland
A
40
0.500
20
20




Would this mean that the SLC should USUALLY get more playoff spots. I mean usually the conference champ gets an opening round home game or even a bye sometimes (SHSU has been the top team this decade). But the second place team or even a third if they make it go on the road to a top team in another conference. Do second or third place teams in other conferences go on the road or host? Asking because I honestly don't know.

[KPSUL]

I obviously can much better than you as I've made abundantly clear through this whole thread. All of the OVC wins were either at home or against Butler. the Patriot's were on the road against the CAA or MVFC.

You are both intentional dense and immensely stupid.

You can't have it both ways R of T. In one post you disparage UNH's recent 1st round playoff wins because they faced primarily PL autobids. Now you commend PL 1st round performance noting they can win on the road against opponents from quality conferences. Which is it? Be more careful slinging the insults at other posters, when your own arguments are inconsistent and applied selectively.

[FUBeAR]

You can't have it both ways R of T. In one post you disparage UNH's recent 1st round playoff wins because they faced primarily PL autobids. Now you commend PL 1st round performance noting they can win on the road against opponents from quality conferences. Which is it? Be more careful slinging the insults at other posters, when your own arguments are inconsistent and applied selectively.
* RoT

[Redbird 4th & short]

You can't have it both ways R of T. In one post you disparage UNH's recent 1st round playoff wins because they faced primarily PL autobids. Now you commend PL 1st round performance noting they can win on the road against opponents from quality conferences. Which is it? Be more careful slinging the insults at other posters, when your own arguments are inconsistent and applied selectively.
thanks Kpsul .. I don't know or care if you agree with any of my posts on this topic, but Reign is a very slippery one to argue with .. glad someone else sees thru it.

Full disclosure .. I'm not really arguing with Reign because I want to him to concede anything.

First, I have made this argument before .. here nd on Redbird Forum ... I started it back in 2011 .. the harder I looked, the more I found over the years.

Second, it does feel like this will be a strong year for MVFC .. maybe not as strong as 2014, but possibly pretty close. So rather than wait till week 11 to make the case when it is too late to chanbge minds already made up, I'm doing it now to raise awareness of all these stats .. not just my opinions of what these stats say.

And I know the AGS poll is carrying more and more weight across FCS simply because of all the posters and pollsters, because it provides a very public forum that creates debate and transparency. Very valuable and in that sense becoming more influential in a positive way.

[caribbeanhen]

https://www.udiscovermusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Paul-McCartney-And-Wings-Wild-Life-press-photo-web-optimised-1000-CREDIT-MPL-Communicatons-Ltd.jpg

this is all you need to know about the MVFC..... We all know who Paul is.... but who in the heck are the Wings .....

[kalm]

https://www.udiscovermusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Paul-McCartney-And-Wings-Wild-Life-press-photo-web-optimised-1000-CREDIT-MPL-Communicatons-Ltd.jpg

this is all you need to know about the MVFC..... We all know who Paul is.... but who in the heck are the Wings .....

The session musicians who’ve put as many teams in the Championship since 2011 as the CAA?

[kalm]

Now I have to shower after shilling for the MVFC...ugh.

[uni88]

https://www.udiscovermusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Paul-McCartney-And-Wings-Wild-Life-press-photo-web-optimised-1000-CREDIT-MPL-Communicatons-Ltd.jpg

this is all you need to know about the MVFC..... We all know who Paul is.... but who in the heck are the Wings .....

Can I request CAAn't Buy Me Natty's?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[cx500d]

https://www.udiscovermusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Paul-McCartney-And-Wings-Wild-Life-press-photo-web-optimised-1000-CREDIT-MPL-Communicatons-Ltd.jpg

this is all you need to know about the MVFC..... We all know who Paul is.... but who in the heck are the Wings .....

Silly Paul, he’s got his guitar upside down...he should leave the playing to a pro like Denny Laine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Yeah, that's why my original data points were more about first round games than second round games, because of course second round games are going to be tougher. It's not like NCAA basketball where the 1 plays the winner of the 2 16's, obviously.

By that measure, I think it's clear that the Big Sky/MVFC will have equal or greater difficulty in the second round, especially since the playoff committee doesn't schedule conference rematches in the first round unless they didn't play in the first round. Why? Because the committee still tries to roughly regionalize everyone. There's clear geographic concentration among the weaker autobid leagues (namely the NEC and Patriot), with the pioneer being the wild card of the entire subdivision, who could basically fly anywhere.

If you're an unseeded team in the Southland, Big Sky, MVFC, and New England CAA, you'll almost certainly fly somewhere (or have your opponent fly to you) or play a Patriot/NEC/Pioneer team at home. If you're in the OVC/or a Tennessee Socon team, you're in the optimal position to play anyone from the NEC/Patriot/Big South/CAA/MVFC or Southland, pending on the field.

Whereas the Bama/GA/SC/NC/VA Southern teams will almost certainly play each other, and the frustrating thing for any of these teams is that they're roughly the same quality. Maybe I'm underplaying the novelty here (No team has played the same playoff opponents in back-to-back seasons as far as I can tell), but what's frustrating for me as a fan of the game is that we know that these teams are roughly the same caliber (Elon, Wofford, Furman, JSU, KSU, etc) and we also know that they aren't as good as "semfinalist quality teams" like SDSU/NDSU/Maine last year, etc but we really don't know how they match up with, say, the third best team in the Big Sky or MVFC because they rarely match up with each other anymore. Granted, we all collectively laid an egg against YSU in 2016, but YSU's geography sort of demonstrates the exception. I think YSU making the playoffs every year at 7-4 or so would be fun.

But they were a one-hit wonder and we're not going to see that opportunity repeat often. As far as I can tell, South Carolina and North Carolina produced 11 playoff teams (2015 CCU/CSU/Citadel, 2016 Citadel/CSU/Wofford, 2017 Elon/Wofford/Furman 2018 Wofford/Elon), playing 11 games total. Only 4 of them left the Carolinas and only 2 of them left the South (both Wofford).

We know these teams are roughly the same quality to each other, but our sample for other games outside of this tight little region is small

Well that’s kind of the point of the discussion ain’t it? Didn’t it start with overall winning percentages and not just round 1?

Pinch me when unappreciated conferences without home field and weaker opening round playoff opponents make it out of that “tight little region” and then make some noise.

[Reign of Terrier]

I try not to "console" stats, I prefer to be objective about all this. Couldn't resist since you rather oddly made fun of my posts having typo's .... dude in glass house throwing lot of stones ???

So .. I'm very confused ... where did the Patriot comparison to OVC come from ... I never compared those 2 conferences. Did you just make that sh-t up out of nowhere, act like you were correcting me, and then declare victory on a point no one was arguing till you just said it ??

But again .. Patriot has a .375 win %, which is 4th worst of all conferences for 2011-18 period .. and slightly worse than OVC's .391. But if you thinking a .375 win %, which includes 2 wins over NEC/Sacred Heart is somehow good .. well ok, I guess .. you can have that one. My point is unchanged .. they are historically a one bid conference who loses a lot more than they win.

Back to reality and indisputable facts ... below is what I based many of my conclusions on from the other thread ... this and then later when Professor did something by conf vs conf for 2010-18.

Bottom line, most conferences should have close to .500 record in playoffs in proving their playoff legitimacy over a period of time. Those doing notably better than .500 probably deserve more playoff bids. Those doing notably worse probably deserve less playoff bids .... taken over a period of time adds to credibility of this approach, though greater weight can always be given to more recent years, and there will certainly be teams that come out of nowhere (KSU) or conferences that get better or worse. Or in the case of Southern, lose 2 very good programs and struggle for a time.








2011-18
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011


Conference
Pool
Games
W-L%
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L


Big Sky
A
47
0.447
21
26
6
4
2
3
2
4
1
3
2
3
2
4
3
3
3
2


Colonial
A
66
0.515
34
32
3
6
6
4
8
3
3
4
4
4
6
3
1
3
3
5


MVFC
A
78
0.718
56
22
7
2
8
4
7
4
8
4
10
4
5
1
6
2
5
1


MVFC - NDSU
A
31
0.968
30
1
4
0
4
0
2
1
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0


MVFC - not NDSU
A
47
0.553
26
21
3
2
4
4
5
3
4
4
6
4
1
1
2
2
1
1


Southern
A
35
0.429
15
20
1
2
2
3
3
4
2
2
1
1
1
2
3
3
2
3


Southland
A
40
0.500
20
20
1
3
2
3
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
4
2


Big South
B
23
0.478
11
12
1
1
2
2
0
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
1


MEAC
B
6
0.000
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
1


NEC
B
10
0.200
2
8
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1


OVC
B
23
0.391
9
14
2
2
0
1
0
1
3
2
0
2
4
3
0
1
0
2


Patriot
B
16
0.375
6
10
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
0
1
1
1


Pioneer
B
8
0.250
2
6
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0


Total

352
0.500
176
176
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
19
19
19
19






























2011-18
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011


Conference Pool
Pool
Games
W-L%
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L
W
L


Pool A
A
266
0.549
146
120
18
17
20
17
22
17
17
15
20
15
16
13
16
13
17
13


Pool A exc NDSU
A*
235
0.494
116
119
14
17
16
17
20
16
13
15
16
15
12
13
12
13
13
13


Pool A excl MVFC
A*
188
0.479
90
98
11
15
12
13
15
13
9
11
10
11
11
12
10
11
12
12


Pool B
B
86
0.349
30
56
5
6
3
6
1
6
6
8
3
8
7
10
3
6
2
6


Total exc NDSU
AB*
321
0.455
146
175
19
23
19
23
21
22
19
23
19
23
19
23
15
19
15
19




the 4-6 number (or really 4-7, I didn't count 2008/2009 because the wiki page didn't come up, but fixed it) is the record of the first placed team in the playoffs in the first round. Meaning, without any at large team, the expected win total of the first place team win put in the playoffs, period. I think this method (looking at how placing in your conference race) it's a more reliable than raw record because the FCS is pretty top heavy. Most of the wins in the last few years from the OVC and Big South come from JSU/KSU. Most of the wins in the last decade for the Big Sky have come from EWU. Most of the wins from the MVFC comes from the top 3. Most of the playoff wins in the Socon have come from Wofford. By looking at first game win probability by the first place team and cross referencing it with the record of the second, third, fourth, etc, of the conference you can get an idea
1) how deep that conference (spoiler: some are deeper than others!) and
2) how many wins, for the weaker conferences, are due to random scheduling, assuming the first place teams play roughly the average quality opponent in the first round, play roughly the same home/away, etc.

In this sense, you can say that Patriot is expected to do better, if only slightly, than the OVC, if only slightly. You can quarrel about how comparable their matchups are, but I'd argue they are roughly the same, but with the Patriot teams going on the road more, I'm a little more impressed.

Both of them are better than the MEAC, who can't get a win no matter who they match up with. So, on average, the MEAC is the worst. That's the point.

Meanwhile, there's usually no point in debating the CAA/MVFC deserve more bids than the other leagues, but it's weird to argue that the fourth and fifth place team in a conference deserve special consideration because because the top 3 always do well. This method is more about specific positioning. It's the same logic for saying we should be weary of getting an OVC/Big South team the at large given their playoff history.

I only brought up the 4-7 stat as a fun fact, there's not a huge difference in the SOS in the first round of the OVC/Patriot, but given that the the Patriot has more wins on the road against scholarshipped teams, I'm inclined to consider it a better record.


You can't have it both ways R of T. In one post you disparage UNH's recent 1st round playoff wins because they faced primarily PL autobids. Now you commend PL 1st round performance noting they can win on the road against opponents from quality conferences. Which is it? Be more careful slinging the insults at other posters, when your own arguments are inconsistent and applied selectively.

My point was that UNH benefits from geography, in that their first round game is usually an easier draw than some in the subdivision. To the extent that I was "commending PL 1st round performance" it was only *relative to the OVC*, which usually play a home game (Patriot doesn't) and whose games are roughly on the same caliber, yet they have less wins.

Again, my comment about the Patriot was relative to the OVC. Anyone can argue a conference's performance is commendable compared to another. I'm obviously not arguing that the first place Patriot league team is elite, but they're more likely to win a game or two in the playoffs than the OVC/Pioneer/MEAC.

That's a different argument from saying that the Patriot is top-to-bottom a better conference than the OVC or that you can expect a Patriot League team to get farther more often, but the statistic is a good baseline.


Well that’s kind of the point of the discussion ain’t it? Didn’t it start with overall winning percentages and not just round 1?

Pinch me when unappreciated conferences without home field and weaker opening round playoff opponents make it out of that “tight little region” and then make some noise.

The whole point is that, relative to New England CAA teams/MVFC teams/Big Sky teams, the tight little regions don't have the opportunity to do that almost exclusively because of geography, not because of the quality of the teams.

We rank teams and anchor their playoff position in our brains based on a point of reference, and these teams don't have a strong point of reference. A team from New Hampshire, Maine, Tennessee, Illinois, or west of the Mississippi will get matched up with more diverse conferences in the first round. The "tight little region" teams don't. They get matched up with the same teams, and they're better than the average FCS team, even if they aren't on the level of EWU/SDSU/NDSU. It's basically like selecting a round of 16 and being more selective from that region, relative to other regions.

The "tight little region" teams have played 2 games outside of the southeast in the playoffs, both by Wofford. If you include Kennesaw State and Jacksonville, things get slightly better, but only marginally. Those are the only three teams that get recognition outside of that region and it's usually against teams that make the semifinals or better. Meanwhile, when teams from this region go out of conference and have a decent performance (CSU in Fargo in 2016) they are rarely rewarded. (and spare me "schedule harder" nonsense, 99% of the FCS schedules locally, I have another spreadsheet for this:D)

[Redbird 4th & short]

Now I have to shower after shilling for the MVFC...ugh.
resistence was futile !!!

on more serious note, Big Sky had a great year in 2018. I could kind of see it building the last 3 years, but 2018 went better than I would have guessed for Big Sky. What is your prediction for say the upper half teams in Big Sky in 2018 ... who gets better (both Montana's a bit, Idaho St, maybe ?, others ?), falls off (EWU and Weber St a little ?), or stays about same in your eyes (UCD) ?? My guesses are in parentheses.

I'm dying without keepratings site being updated for FCS - I check 3-4 times each week .. nothing for FCS. My guess is FBS interest ($$) is taking him away from finishing FCS .. hope it's that and nothing unfortunate happened. It's usually up before now.

[Redbird 4th & short]

the 4-6 number (or really 4-7, I didn't count 2008/2009 because the wiki page didn't come up, but fixed it) is the record of the first placed team in the playoffs in the first round. Meaning, without any at large team, the expected win total of the first place team win put in the playoffs, period. I think this method (looking at how placing in your conference race) it's a more reliable than raw record because the FCS is pretty top heavy. Most of the wins in the last few years from the OVC and Big South come from JSU/KSU. Most of the wins in the last decade for the Big Sky have come from EWU. Most of the wins from the MVFC comes from the top 3. Most of the playoff wins in the Socon have come from Wofford. By looking at first game win probability by the first place team and cross referencing it with the record of the second, third, fourth, etc, of the conference you can get an idea
1) how deep that conference (spoiler: some are deeper than others!) and
2) how many wins, for the weaker conferences, are due to random scheduling, assuming the first place teams play roughly the average quality opponent in the first round, play roughly the same home/away, etc.

In this sense, you can say that Patriot is expected to do better, if only slightly, than the OVC, if only slightly. You can quarrel about how comparable their matchups are, but I'd argue they are roughly the same, but with the Patriot teams going on the road more, I'm a little more impressed.

Both of them are better than the MEAC, who can't get a win no matter who they match up with. So, on average, the MEAC is the worst. That's the point.

Meanwhile, there's usually no point in debating the CAA/MVFC deserve more bids than the other leagues, but it's weird to argue that the fourth and fifth place team in a conference deserve special consideration because because the top 3 always do well. This method is more about specific positioning. It's the same logic for saying we should be weary of getting an OVC/Big South team the at large given their playoff history.

I only brought up the 4-7 stat as a fun fact, there's not a huge difference in the SOS in the first round of the OVC/Patriot, but given that the the Patriot has more wins on the road against scholarshipped teams, I'm inclined to consider it a better record.



My point was that UNH benefits from geography, in that their first round game is usually an easier draw than some in the subdivision. To the extent that I was "commending PL 1st round performance" it was only *relative to the OVC*, which usually play a home game (Patriot doesn't) and whose games are roughly on the same caliber, yet they have less wins.

Again, my comment about the Patriot was relative to the OVC. Anyone can argue a conference's performance is commendable compared to another. I'm obviously not arguing that the first place Patriot league team is elite, but they're more likely to win a game or two in the playoffs than the OVC/Pioneer/MEAC.

That's a different argument from saying that the Patriot is top-to-bottom a better conference than the OVC or that you can expect a Patriot League team to get farther more often, but the statistic is a good baseline.



The whole point is that, relative to New England CAA teams/MVFC teams/Big Sky teams, the tight little regions don't have the opportunity to do that almost exclusively because of geography, not because of the quality of the teams.

We rank teams and anchor their playoff position in our brains based on a point of reference, and these teams don't have a strong point of reference. A team from New Hampshire, Maine, Tennessee, Illinois, or west of the Mississippi will get matched up with more diverse conferences in the first round. The "tight little region" teams don't. They get matched up with the same teams, and they're better than the average FCS team, even if they aren't on the level of EWU/SDSU/NDSU. It's basically like selecting a round of 16 and being more selective from that region, relative to other regions.

The "tight little region" teams have played 2 games outside of the southeast in the playoffs, both by Wofford. If you include Kennesaw State and Jacksonville, things get slightly better, but only marginally. Those are the only three teams that get recognition outside of that region and it's usually against teams that make the semifinals or better. Meanwhile, when teams from this region go out of conference and have a decent performance (CSU in Fargo in 2016) they are rarely rewarded. (and spare me "schedule harder" nonsense, 99% of the FCS schedules locally, I have another spreadsheet for this:D)
Reign,

you don't have to agree with all or any of my opinions, but you seem to be in serious denial over acknowledging obvious facts. You keep parsing the data and looking hard to find something to save face (e.g. looking at 4th place playoff rsults for CAA vs 4th place MVFC results) .. and then declare that by itself proves Colonial deserves 4 teams and MVFC does not. This while also acknowledging UNH in particular has gotten more easy playing games than most teams. And speaking of UNH, they were not onyl getting more easy playin games at home, but they are the only team who can say they have been a playoff lock at 7-4, arguably because their AD Scarano has been a driving force oon the selection committee for 16 years, during which UNH made playoffs every year on his watch until they fell off last year ... no other team in FCS can say this. And yes, UNH had a few very good teams and deserved "most" of their bids ... but they also had a lot of help over the years .. not just with a couple question bids, but also questionable seeds and pairings. So I wonder what Colonial's 4th place results look like excl UNH, since you already pointed out they have had favorable 1st round scheduling .. because they would be an anomoly who got a fair amount of help over the years, particularly in 1st round games.

[uni88]

the 4-6 number (or really 4-7, I didn't count 2008/2009 because the wiki page didn't come up, but fixed it) is the record of the first placed team in the playoffs in the first round. Meaning, without any at large team, the expected win total of the first place team win put in the playoffs, period. I think this method (looking at how placing in your conference race) it's a more reliable than raw record because the FCS is pretty top heavy. Most of the wins in the last few years from the OVC and Big South come from JSU/KSU. Most of the wins in the last decade for the Big Sky have come from EWU. Most of the wins from the MVFC comes from the top 3. Most of the playoff wins in the Socon have come from Wofford. By looking at first game win probability by the first place team and cross referencing it with the record of the second, third, fourth, etc, of the conference you can get an idea
1) how deep that conference (spoiler: some are deeper than others!) and
2) how many wins, for the weaker conferences, are due to random scheduling, assuming the first place teams play roughly the average quality opponent in the first round, play roughly the same home/away, etc.

In this sense, you can say that Patriot is expected to do better, if only slightly, than the OVC, if only slightly. You can quarrel about how comparable their matchups are, but I'd argue they are roughly the same, but with the Patriot teams going on the road more, I'm a little more impressed.

Both of them are better than the MEAC, who can't get a win no matter who they match up with. So, on average, the MEAC is the worst. That's the point.

Meanwhile, there's usually no point in debating the CAA/MVFC deserve more bids than the other leagues, but it's weird to argue that the fourth and fifth place team in a conference deserve special consideration because because the top 3 always do well. This method is more about specific positioning. It's the same logic for saying we should be weary of getting an OVC/Big South team the at large given their playoff history.

I only brought up the 4-7 stat as a fun fact, there's not a huge difference in the SOS in the first round of the OVC/Patriot, but given that the the Patriot has more wins on the road against scholarshipped teams, I'm inclined to consider it a better record.



My point was that UNH benefits from geography, in that their first round game is usually an easier draw than some in the subdivision. To the extent that I was "commending PL 1st round performance" it was only *relative to the OVC*, which usually play a home game (Patriot doesn't) and whose games are roughly on the same caliber, yet they have less wins.

Again, my comment about the Patriot was relative to the OVC. Anyone can argue a conference's performance is commendable compared to another. I'm obviously not arguing that the first place Patriot league team is elite, but they're more likely to win a game or two in the playoffs than the OVC/Pioneer/MEAC.

That's a different argument from saying that the Patriot is top-to-bottom a better conference than the OVC or that you can expect a Patriot League team to get farther more often, but the statistic is a good baseline.



The whole point is that, relative to New England CAA teams/MVFC teams/Big Sky teams, the tight little regions don't have the opportunity to do that almost exclusively because of geography, not because of the quality of the teams.

We rank teams and anchor their playoff position in our brains based on a point of reference, and these teams don't have a strong point of reference. A team from New Hampshire, Maine, Tennessee, Illinois, or west of the Mississippi will get matched up with more diverse conferences in the first round. The "tight little region" teams don't. They get matched up with the same teams, and they're better than the average FCS team, even if they aren't on the level of EWU/SDSU/NDSU. It's basically like selecting a round of 16 and being more selective from that region, relative to other regions.

The "tight little region" teams have played 2 games outside of the southeast in the playoffs, both by Wofford. If you include Kennesaw State and Jacksonville, things get slightly better, but only marginally. Those are the only three teams that get recognition outside of that region and it's usually against teams that make the semifinals or better. Meanwhile, when teams from this region go out of conference and have a decent performance (CSU in Fargo in 2016) they are rarely rewarded. (and spare me "schedule harder" nonsense, 99% of the FCS schedules locally, I have another spreadsheet for this:D)

Is all of this word salad really just to complain that regionalization has hurt the teams in your tight little nether region in 1st round games? Regionalization has hurt the MVFC in 2nd and 3rd round games and it's probably benefited UNH in 1st round games but it's a reality. It isn't fair but it isn't going to change unless the FCS playoffs become more popular and the NCAA can justify the expense.

[clenz]

Is all of this word salad really just to complain that regionalization has hurt the teams in your tight little nether region in 1st round games? Regionalization has hurt the MVFC in 2nd and 3rd round games and it's probably benefited UNH in 1st round games but it's a reality. It isn't fair but it isn't going to change unless the FCS playoffs become more popular and the NCAA can justify the expense.
You mean the fact that half of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses have been to NDSU over the last like 6 years doesn't help the MVFC?

UNI's last 4 playoff appearances have ended NDSU NDSU SDSU UCD
SDSU's last 5 have been NDSU Montana NDSU JMU NDSU

9 playoff losses - 5 to NDSU and a 6th to another MVFC team

That's 66% of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses over the last 5 seasons has been to MVFC teams.

But yeah - that SoCon really gets ****ed by regionalization

[POD Knows]

You mean the fact that half of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses have been to NDSU over the last like 6 years doesn't help the MVFC?

UNI's last 4 playoff appearances have ended NDSU NDSU SDSU UCD
SDSU's last 5 have been NDSU Montana NDSU JMU NDSU

9 playoff losses - 5 to NDSU and a 6th to another MVFC team

That's 66% of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses over the last 5 seasons has been to MVFC teams.

But yeah - that SoCon really gets ****ed by regionalizationYou must spread some Reputation around before giving it to clenz again.

[ysubigred]

You mean the fact that half of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses have been to NDSU over the last like 6 years doesn't help the MVFC?

UNI's last 4 playoff appearances have ended NDSU NDSU SDSU UCD
SDSU's last 5 have been NDSU Montana NDSU JMU NDSU

9 playoff losses - 5 to NDSU and a 6th to another MVFC team

That's 66% of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses over the last 5 seasons has been to MVFC teams.

But yeah - that SoCon really gets ****ed by regionalization

The playoff's are really exciting for your team until you get in the same bracket with NDSU xbawlingx

[KPSUL]

Reign,

you don't have to agree with all or any of my opinions, but you seem to be in serious denial over acknowledging obvious facts. You keep parsing the data and looking hard to find something to save face (e.g. looking at 4th place playoff rsults for CAA vs 4th place MVFC results) .. and then declare that by itself proves Colonial deserves 4 teams and MVFC does not. This while also acknowledging UNH in particular has gotten more easy playing games than most teams. And speaking of UNH, they were not onyl getting more easy playin games at home, but they are the only team who can say they have been a playoff lock at 7-4, arguably because their AD Scarano has been a driving force oon the selection committee for 16 years, during which UNH made playoffs every year on his watch until they fell off last year ... no other team in FCS can say this. And yes, UNH had a few very good teams and deserved "most" of their bids ... but they also had a lot of help over the years .. not just with a couple question bids, but also questionable seeds and pairings. So I wonder what Colonial's 4th place results look like excl UNH, since you already pointed out they have had favorable 1st round scheduling .. because they would be an anomoly who got a fair amount of help over the years, particularly in 1st round games.

The only thing distinctive about UNH 7-4 playoff teams is that they have performed better than most 7-4 playoff teams. 2010 we lost on the road to eventual runner-up Delaware in the 2nd round. 2013 we beat two seeded conference champions in the 2nd round (CAA) and Quarterfinals (Southland) before losing to eventual FCS champ NDSU. 2015 we lost to a PL team that went on to beat JMU in the 2nd round. 2016 we trounced a favored Lehigh and lost to eventual FCS champ JMU. 2017 we beat a seeded conference champion (Southland) in the 2nd round before losing to SDSU in the Quarterfinals. So which of those 7-4 teams would you like to argue had no business in the playoffs when compared to the 6-5 2016 Ill St. team?

[Redbird 4th & short]

The only thing distinctive about UNH 7-4 playoff teams is that they have performed better than most 7-4 playoff teams. 2010 we lost on the road to eventual runner-up Delaware in the 2nd round. 2013 we beat two seeded conference champions in the 2nd round (CAA) and Quarterfinals (Southland) before losing to eventual FCS champ NDSU. 2015 we lost to a PL team that went on to beat JMU in the 2nd round. 2016 we trounced a favored Lehigh and lost to eventual FCS champ JMU. 2017 we beat a seeded conference champion (Southland) in the 2nd round before losing to SDSU in the Quarterfinals. So which of those 7-4 teams would you like to argue had no business in the playoffs when compared to the 6-5 2016 Ill St. team?
Fair question .. i think each year determines basis for comparison .. so question is who, if anyone, from 2016 deserved a bid over ISUr. And then compare that answer to any questionable bids that UNH got as of season end. .. I think I saw 2 questionable bids .. putting aside favorable 1st round draws and seeds.

Im away from my PC and will look closer later today.

[Reign of Terrier]

Reign,

you don't have to agree with all or any of my opinions, but you seem to be in serious denial over acknowledging obvious facts. You keep parsing the data and looking hard to find something to save face (e.g. looking at 4th place playoff rsults for CAA vs 4th place MVFC results) .. and then declare that by itself proves Colonial deserves 4 teams and MVFC does not. This while also acknowledging UNH in particular has gotten more easy playing games than most teams. And speaking of UNH, they were not onyl getting more easy playin games at home, but they are the only team who can say they have been a playoff lock at 7-4, arguably because their AD Scarano has been a driving force oon the selection committee for 16 years, during which UNH made playoffs every year on his watch until they fell off last year ... no other team in FCS can say this. And yes, UNH had a few very good teams and deserved "most" of their bids ... but they also had a lot of help over the years .. not just with a couple question bids, but also questionable seeds and pairings. So I wonder what Colonial's 4th place results look like excl UNH, since you already pointed out they have had favorable 1st round scheduling .. because they would be an anomoly who got a fair amount of help over the years, particularly in 1st round games.

I haven't parsed the data wrt how many times UNH is the fourth best team in the CAA. Often times they aren't. The point is, fourth place MVFC teams don't do too hot usually, and if they do, it's because their name is SDSU/UNI, full stop.

Your "obvious facts" (raw playoff wins) don't tell us anything about the balanced strength of the conference. It tells us how strong the top tier of a conference is. When we're looking at bubble teams, it matters if the fifth place MVFC/CAA team is expected to go farther than the third place Socon/Southland/etc team, because looking exclusively at conference affiliation (what you are proposing) won't tell you much.

Because when we're placing teams in the playoffs, the question of whether or not a bubble team is more deserving is a value judgment and ultimately unfalsifiable. My method is simply counterfactual. Do you expect the fifth place MVFC team to beat the third place Southland team? (yes) What about the fourth place CAA? (yes) Third place socon? (yes) third place big Sky? (yes) Second place OVC? (no) etc etc

Is all of this word salad really just to complain that regionalization has hurt the teams in your tight little nether region in 1st round games? Regionalization has hurt the MVFC in 2nd and 3rd round games and it's probably benefited UNH in 1st round games but it's a reality. It isn't fair but it isn't going to change unless the FCS playoffs become more popular and the NCAA can justify the expense.

Regionalization and having to play tough teams catches up to everyone. It's a playoff, after all. My issue is that MVFC fans complain about it when it hits the second round (when it effects everyone at that point) whereas it hits my outlined geographic area in the first round (across conferences).

Then the next year, when we discuss rankings and stuff we're inclined to give more leeway to MVFC teams for bubble considerations. Or, just look at the bids the Southland got last year. There was no reason to give them 3 bids.

Our perception of how good these teams are is comparative and our brains grasp the concrete. We're going to look at teams more favorably for winning a playoff game, no matter how the weak the opponent was, over a similar bubble team even when that bubble team would more than likely done just as well.

You mean the fact that half of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses have been to NDSU over the last like 6 years doesn't help the MVFC?

UNI's last 4 playoff appearances have ended NDSU NDSU SDSU UCD
SDSU's last 5 have been NDSU Montana NDSU JMU NDSU

9 playoff losses - 5 to NDSU and a 6th to another MVFC team

That's 66% of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses over the last 5 seasons has been to MVFC teams.

But yeah - that SoCon really gets ****ed by regionalization

Talk to me when UNI or SDSU gets matched up with NDSU in the first round. The second round is where everyone gets ****ed by geography, but geography allows 3rd-5th place MVFC teams to pad their playoff stats.

Let's assume that Wofford and UNI are roughly the same position in their respective conferences.
UNI's first round opponents since 2010:

Lamar
Monmouth
Eastern Illinois
Stephen F Austin
Wofford
Lehigh


All of the above were at home.

Wofford's slate

Elon
Furman
Charleston Southern
New Hampshire
UNI (away)
Jacksonville State (away)


Can you look at these and tell me they are of equal quality? 4 of the 6 opponents for Wofford made the playoffs the year before, except for Furman and JSU (which won 8 games the year before and beat Ole Miss the opening game of that year). UNI's opponents had 5 playoff wins since the turn of the century (3 of them Wofford), while Wofford's opponents had, well, more (I'm not looking through all of UNI/Furman/New Hampshire's playoff wins since 2000 to know the answer to that).

[SonuvaHenx2]

The playoff's are really exciting for your team until you get in the same bracket with NDSU xbawlingx

In a way, isn't everyone in the same bracket as NDSU? xchinscratchx

[Redbird 4th & short]

I haven't parsed the data wrt how many times UNH is the fourth best team in the CAA. Often times they aren't. The point is, fourth place MVFC teams don't do too hot usually, and if they do, it's because their name is SDSU/UNI, full stop.

Your "obvious facts" (raw playoff wins) don't tell us anything about the balanced strength of the conference. It tells us how strong the top tier of a conference is. When we're looking at bubble teams, it matters if the fifth place MVFC/CAA team is expected to go farther than the third place Socon/Southland/etc team, because looking exclusively at conference affiliation (what you are proposing) won't tell you much.

Because when we're placing teams in the playoffs ...


blah blah blah ....




Can you look at these and tell me they are of equal quality? 4 of the 6 opponents for Wofford made the playoffs the year before, except for Furman and JSU (which won 8 games the year before and beat Ole Miss the opening game of that year). UNI's opponents had 5 playoff wins since the turn of the century (3 of them Wofford), while Wofford's opponents had, well, more (I'm not looking through all of UNI/Furman/New Hampshire's playoff wins since 2000 to know the answer to that).

So we've only gotten 4 or 5 teams in 3 playoffs .. and I already showed what our 9th and 10th place teams did to other teams in 2012 and 2014 regular seasons, including Patriot's autobid Colgate .. that is 0-8 US beat 6-0 Colgate in 2014 regular season, but sure Patriot was not a weak autobid conference back then !!!

But for life of me, I don't understand how you can repeatedly say with a straight face, "the point is Colonial's 4th place teams have been track record than MVFC's 4th place teams .... if, we redial back the clock to 2008" ... translated, because if we only dial back the clock to 2011, it contradict's Reign's argument ... so move the goal posts and add the 3 dominant CAA years from 2008-10, then argue the point and hope no one noticed I added 3 years, which really helped my case a sh-t ton.

I've lost track of how many times you've moved the goal posts from your original statement, which was something like, no 4th and 5th place MVFC teams ever deserve playoffs, nor have they ever won a game ... which for 2014-16, we've had five 4th or 5th place teams in playoffs and 3 of 5 won a 1st round game - does that atter at all ?? And yes, like most teams, not named NDSU, they all eventually lose .. 2 of the 5 to other MVFC teams.

But you think the deciding point is Colonial's 4th place team record, but only if you go back to 2008 .. it is apparently not meaningful if we only go back to 2011 ???

[F'N Hawks]

So we've only gotten 4 or 5 teams in 3 playoffs .. and I already showed what our 9th and 10th place teams did to other teams in 2012 and 2014 regular seasons, including Patriot's autobid Colgate .. that is 0-8 US beat 6-0 Colgate in 2014 regular season, but sure Patriot was not a weak autobid conference back then !!!

But for life of me, I don't understand how you can repeatedly say with a straight face, "the point is Colonial's 4th place teams have been track record than MVFC's 4th place teams .... if, we redial back the clock to 2008" ... translated, because if we only dial back the clock to 2011, it contradict's Reign's argument ... so move the goal posts and add the 3 dominant CAA years from 2008-10, then argue the point and hope no one noticed I added 3 years, which really helped my case a sh-t ton.

I've lost track of how many times you've moved the goal posts from your original statement, which was something like, no 4th and 5th place MVFC teams ever deserve playoffs, nor have they ever won a game ... which for 2014-16, we've had five 4th or 5th place teams in playoffs and 3 of 5 won a 1st round game - does that atter at all ?? And yes, like most teams, not named NDSU, they all eventually lose .. 2 of the 5 to other MVFC teams.

But you think the deciding point is Colonial's 4th place team record, but only if you go back to 2008 .. it is apparently not meaningful if we only go back to 2011 ???

Imagine how lopsided this argument is going to once UND joins the valley next season.

[Redbird 4th & short]

You mean the fact that half of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses have been to NDSU over the last like 6 years doesn't help the MVFC?

UNI's last 4 playoff appearances have ended NDSU NDSU SDSU UCD
SDSU's last 5 have been NDSU Montana NDSU JMU NDSU

9 playoff losses - 5 to NDSU and a 6th to another MVFC team

That's 66% of UNI's and SDSU's playoff losses over the last 5 seasons has been to MVFC teams.

But yeah - that SoCon really gets ****ed by regionalization
so I have NDSU ending SDSU's season 4 times and UNIs' once ?

[uni88]

Regionalization and having to play tough teams catches up to everyone. It's a playoff, after all. My issue is that MVFC fans complain about it when it hits the second round (when it effects everyone at that point) whereas it hits my outlined geographic area in the first round (across conferences).

Then the next year, when we discuss rankings and stuff we're inclined to give more leeway to MVFC teams for bubble considerations. Or, just look at the bids the Southland got last year. There was no reason to give them 3 bids.

So MVFC fans are wrong to complain that they feel their teams get screwed in the 2nd & 3rd rounds but it's ok for you to complain that you feel the teams in your tight little nether region (let's call it the Virgin's Vagina for simplicity's sake) get screwed in the 1st round? The winner of the Virgin Vagina 1st round regional game is likely going to have an easier 2nd or 3rd round game. Would you rather play another southeastern team or NDSU in the 2nd or 3rd round? Screwed is screwed.

Does it really matter that the Southland got 3 bids last year? Was ISUb more deserving? Was Furman? Maybe. Were either of them likely to threaten the favorites? No.

[Bisonoline]

I haven't parsed the data wrt how many times UNH is the fourth best team in the CAA. Often times they aren't. The point is, fourth place MVFC teams don't do too hot usually, and if they do, it's because their name is SDSU/UNI, full stop.

Your "obvious facts" (raw playoff wins) don't tell us anything about the balanced strength of the conference. It tells us how strong the top tier of a conference is. When we're looking at bubble teams, it matters if the fifth place MVFC/CAA team is expected to go farther than the third place Socon/Southland/etc team, because looking exclusively at conference affiliation (what you are proposing) won't tell you much.

Because when we're placing teams in the playoffs, the question of whether or not a bubble team is more deserving is a value judgment and ultimately unfalsifiable. My method is simply counterfactual. Do you expect the fifth place MVFC team to beat the third place Southland team? (yes) What about the fourth place CAA? (yes) Third place socon? (yes) third place big Sky? (yes) Second place OVC? (no) etc etc


Regionalization and having to play tough teams catches up to everyone. It's a playoff, after all. My issue is that MVFC fans complain about it when it hits the second round (when it effects everyone at that point) whereas it hits my outlined geographic area in the first round (across conferences).

Then the next year, when we discuss rankings and stuff we're inclined to give more leeway to MVFC teams for bubble considerations. Or, just look at the bids the Southland got last year. There was no reason to give them 3 bids.

Our perception of how good these teams are is comparative and our brains grasp the concrete. We're going to look at teams more favorably for winning a playoff game, no matter how the weak the opponent was, over a similar bubble team even when that bubble team would more than likely done just as well.


Talk to me when UNI or SDSU gets matched up with NDSU in the first round. The second round is where everyone gets ****ed by geography, but geography allows 3rd-5th place MVFC teams to pad their playoff stats.

Let's assume that Wofford and UNI are roughly the same position in their respective conferences.
UNI's first round opponents since 2010:

Lamar
Monmouth
Eastern Illinois
Stephen F Austin
Wofford
Lehigh


All of the above were at home.

Wofford's slate

Elon
Furman
Charleston Southern
New Hampshire
UNI (away)
Jacksonville State (away)


Can you look at these and tell me they are of equal quality? 4 of the 6 opponents for Wofford made the playoffs the year before, except for Furman and JSU (which won 8 games the year before and beat Ole Miss the opening game of that year). UNI's opponents had 5 playoff wins since the turn of the century (3 of them Wofford), while Wofford's opponents had, well, more (I'm not looking through all of UNI/Furman/New Hampshire's playoff wins since 2000 to know the answer to that).

Fact is if the NCAA seeded every team like they are supposed to and ran the playoffs like a real tournament the argument of regionalization would be moot. Plus the biggest rub on regionalization is the fact you have to play teams youve already played before during the season. That gets old
If they ran it like a real tournament then you let the chips fall as they may. Saving money on bus trip doesnt come in to play.

[Derby City Duke]

I've read term papers shorter than some of these posts...

Wasn't this thread about the AGS Poll?

[SonuvaHenx2]

I've read term papers shorter than some of these posts...

Wasn't this thread about the AGS Poll?

^^^+1

[Reign of Terrier]

So MVFC fans are wrong to complain that they feel their teams get screwed in the 2nd & 3rd rounds but it's ok for you to complain that you feel the teams in your tight little nether region (let's call it the Virgin's Vagina for simplicity's sake) get screwed in the 1st round? The winner of the Virgin Vagina 1st round regional game is likely going to have an easier 2nd or 3rd round game. Would you rather play another southeastern team or NDSU in the 2nd or 3rd round? Screwed is screwed.

Does it really matter that the Southland got 3 bids last year? Was ISUb more deserving? Was Furman? Maybe. Were either of them likely to threaten the favorites? No.My point is the likes of Redbird want us to give him a participation trophy when finishing 6-5 simply based on conference affiliation alone, and playoff committee/pollsters are inclined to be sympathetic and that's bad for the rest of the subdivision. I've only been explaining the mechanism for why they have the sympathy. It's not blind homerism, but it's an extent of structural advantage.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

Fact is if the NCAA seeded every team like they are supposed to and ran the playoffs like a real tournament the argument of regionalization would be moot. Plus the biggest rub on regionalization is the fact you have to play teams youve already played before during the season. That gets old
If they ran it like a real tournament then you let the chips fall as they may. Saving money on bus trip doesnt come in to play.Not gonna lie, when I got the notification from Tapatalk I thought "oh god here we go" but I actually agree with you 100%.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

so I have NDSU ending SDSU's season 4 times and UNIs' once ?Having your season ended by NDSU doesn't make you special or better than everyone else it happens to.

What has made SDSU/UNI special the last few years (but more so SDSU in the last couple) is who they have beaten, not who they have lost to.

Tournaments are great at determining a champion, but they're terrible at establishing rank order, but in SDSU's case they're clearly a top 5 program right now. UNI is somewhere in the top 15, but you rarely see them play any of these southeast teams anymore for a good size up.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Reign of Terrier]

1) I mentioned in the initial post that the 2008 number was arbitrary and I would gladly add on, expand the frame, etc but I don't see it as necessary because the fourth place team doesn't do all that much worse relative to the third place team. Here's a screenshot of the data. It's true that the 2008-2010 data makes it look better but those other years don't look that much worse (can't see it in detail rn bc of the resolution on my phone)

2) I never made the claims that you said I made about a 4th and 5th MVFC team never deserving a spot. Okay, maybe the 5th, but 4th not so much. The CAA has a longer record of depth in their top 4 stretching back 2 decades or so. Though they laid a major egg last year, I'm not yet willing to revoke that status. Similarly, bc if the strength of the MVFC, they'll probably deserve a fourth bid, pending on the strength of the third.

3) I'm not really moving the goal post so much as you are terrible communicator, I've literally not acknowledged the element of the frame since the first post bc it was irrelevant (relative performance to conference teams' of higher standings is just as important as it is relative to other conferences). That's not moving the goal post so much as it is filtering relevancy.

The fact that you're hung up on it while failing to grasp other, more basic and essential elements of my argument just because it triggers you that the CAA is better than the MVFC at something is, um, something.

Looking back, it would actually be an incomplete data set to not go farther than 2008, the fourth place CAA team in 2007 was National runner up Delaware and the 4th place team in 2004 was New Hampshire who also got a playoff win or two.

Fact is, the CAA has a revolving door of teams that wins playoff games. But for the MVFC, if you told me a fourth place team won some playoff games it's almost always SDSU/UNI.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190808/9c2778a365431cca9ae03e80a213c269.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

So MVFC fans are wrong to complain that they feel their teams get screwed in the 2nd & 3rd rounds but it's ok for you to complain that you feel the teams in your tight little nether region (let's call it the Virgin's Vagina for simplicity's sake) get screwed in the 1st round? The winner of the Virgin Vagina 1st round regional game is likely going to have an easier 2nd or 3rd round game. Would you rather play another southeastern team or NDSU in the 2nd or 3rd round? Screwed is screwed.

Does it really matter that the Southland got 3 bids last year? Was ISUb more deserving? Was Furman? Maybe. Were either of them likely to threaten the favorites? No.
I don't care if the scewed team has any chance at all to win the Natty ... it is the playoffs, goal is to reward the best teams with a shot at postseason. It means something to that team that deserves that shot ... it does not matter if it means something to someone else unaffected by the selection. But as MVFC proved in 2014 and 2015, those teams can win games too ... and that is the point of playoffs ... be rewarded for being one of the 24 best teams, then see how far you can go. The players, coaches, and fans all care about it for sure.

FCS Selection Committee needs to keep fine tuning process. It has improved somewhat over the years, but there are still mistakes IMO. Putting aside weak autobids that take bids from more deserving teams, the playoff results prove there is room for improvement. Amd 2018 was no exception .. they made obvious mistakes.

It's simple ... playoffs are a reward for the best teams and SOS needs more attention.

[Reign of Terrier]

I don't care if the scewed team has any chance at all to win the Natty ... it is the playoffs, goal is to reward the best teams with a shot at postseason. It means something to that team that deserves that shot ... it does not matter if it means something to someone else unaffected by the selection. But as MVFC proved in 2014 and 2015, those teams can win games too ... and that is the point of playoffs ... be rewarded for being one of the 24 best teams, then see how far you can go. The players, coaches, and fans all care about it for sure.

FCS Selection Committee needs to keep fine tuning process. It has improved somewhat over the years, but there are still mistakes IMO. Putting aside weak autobids that take bids from more deserving teams, the playoff results prove there is room for improvement. Amd 2018 was no exception .. they made obvious mistakes.

It's simple ... playoffs are a reward for the best teams and SOS needs more attention.It has sufficient attention.

Weird that your argument is predicated on a performance put forth when the only players on current teams were redshirts.

(Also I think you've been saying moving the goal posts when you've meant cherry picking this whole time)

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

It has sufficient attention.

Weird that your argument is predicated on a performance put forth when the only players on current teams were redshirts.

(Also I think you've been saying moving the goal posts when you've meant cherry picking this whole time)

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
no, I meant "moving goal posts" .. since you originally declared something with certain criteria, then back pedaled and changed your criteria so that what you said was less untrue .. emphasis on the word "less".

But yes, "cherry picking" also applies to things like only acknowledging WIU win over Dayton .. thanks for admission. But the larger point there was part of the original provably wrong mis-statement relative to your criterai, and you changing your criteria at least twice, but I think 3 times.

[Redbird 4th & short]

It has sufficient attention.

Weird that your argument is predicated on a performance put forth when the only players on current teams were redshirts.

(Also I think you've been saying moving the goal posts when you've meant cherry picking this whole time)

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

then explain why three 6-4 teams in lesser conferences with lower ranked SOS got bids and ISUb did not.

[uni88]

Having your season ended by NDSU doesn't make you special or better than everyone else it happens to.

What has made SDSU/UNI special the last few years (but more so SDSU in the last couple) is who they have beaten, not who they have lost to.

Tournaments are great at determining a champion, but they're terrible at establishing rank order, but in SDSU's case they're clearly a top 5 program right now. UNI is somewhere in the top 15, but you rarely see them play any of these southeast teams anymore for a good size up.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using TapatalkUNI has clearly demonstrated a willingness to travel for OOC games (lots of Big Sky and before that some Southland home and homes) so my guess is that it's not UNI that is preventing games with SoCon teams. Are they willing to come to Cedar Falls?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[clenz]

UNI has clearly demonstrated a willingness to travel for OOC games (lots of Big Sky and before that some Southland home and homes) so my guess is that it's not UNI that is preventing games with SoCon teams. Are they willing to come to Cedar Falls?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
UNI has played 12 road and 7 home games since the start of the 2015 season through 2020
@ Iowa State
vs EWU
@ Cal Poly
----
@ Iowa State
vs Montana
@ EWU
----
@ Iowa State
vs Cal Poly
@ SUU
----
@ Montana
@ Iowa
vs Hampton late replacement of Big Sky game...were free due to conference move
---
@ Iowa State
vs SUU
vs Idaho State
@ Weber State
-----
@ Iowa State
@ Idaho State
vs Weber
12 road 7 home


That's 6 years of OOC games and UNI will have played 7 home OOC games. On top of that 6 of the 7 home games were part of a H/H and the one buy game - Hampton - was a result of a Big Sky team (SUU) buying out of the return game to Cedar Falls for a year to play at Oregon State (moved to this year) late and Hampton's conference debacle they went through making them cheap and available.

It's not UNI that's the problem and unwilling to travel.

AAMOF UNI has played SFA thrice - including on the road - in the last decade. We also played McNeese State in 2013. Need a reminder how that game went?

UNI won 41-6 and pulled the starters very early in the 4th after going up 38-6 and had stopped throwing midway through the third. UNI outgained McNeese 466-280. Honestly UNI didn't even play that great. McNeese was just really bad.

Want a remember how that season played out? McNeese came into that game ranked #6. UNI finished 2013 5-6 and McNeese had their way with a weak ass SLC to the tune of a 6 seed.


Maybe if the teams in the SE would be willing to come to the Dome Farley and the AD would be willing to listen. It's not like UNI is NDSU or SDSU or Montana and just buying every OOC game and not leaving the Dome.


If you look at teams - outside of current/former conferencemates - that UNI has played the most it's McNeese and SFA - IIRC those are the only two non FBS/former conferencemates that UNI has played double digit times.

After them it's like Montana, EWU, NAU and basically all bunches together after that.

[Redbird 4th & short]

UNI has played 12 road and 7 home games since the start of the 2015 season through 2020
@ Iowa State
vs EWU
@ Cal Poly
----
@ Iowa State
vs Montana
@ EWU
----
@ Iowa State
vs Cal Poly
@ SUU
----
@ Montana
@ Iowa
vs Hampton late replacement of Big Sky game...were free due to conference move
---
@ Iowa State
vs SUU
vs Idaho State
@ Weber State
-----
@ Iowa State
@ Idaho State
vs Weber
12 road 7 home


That's 6 years of OOC games and UNI will have played 7 home OOC games. On top of that 6 of the 7 home games were part of a H/H and the one buy game - Hampton - was a result of a Big Sky team (SUU) buying out of the return game to Cedar Falls for a year to play at Oregon State (moved to this year) late and Hampton's conference debacle they went through making them cheap and available.

It's not UNI that's the problem and unwilling to travel.

AAMOF UNI has played SFA thrice - including on the road - in the last decade. We also played McNeese State in 2013. Need a reminder how that game went?

UNI won 41-6 and pulled the starters very early in the 4th after going up 38-6 and had stopped throwing midway through the third. UNI outgained McNeese 466-280. Honestly UNI didn't even play that great. McNeese was just really bad.

Want a remember how that season played out? McNeese came into that game ranked #6. UNI finished 2013 5-6 and McNeese had their way with a weak ass SLC to the tune of a 6 seed.


Maybe if the teams in the SE would be willing to come to the Dome Farley and the AD would be willing to listen. It's not like UNI is NDSU or SDSU or Montana and just buying every OOC game and not leaving the Dome.


If you look at teams - outside of current/former conferencemates - that UNI has played the most it's McNeese and SFA - IIRC those are the only two non FBS/former conferencemates that UNI has played double digit times.

After them it's like Montana, EWU, NAU and basically all bunches together after that.
UNI has always played one of the toughest OOC schedules in all of FCS, plus the MVFC conf schedule ... moreso than NDSU or ISUr who usually have one patsy, never mind our rival EIU getting less competitive lately. My guess is UNI average SOS combining in and out of conference games since I've been following FCS (2010 & subsequent) is probably top 2 or 3, if not #1 over the entire 2010-18 period.

But having said that, I don't think you can include FBS buy games in your home vs road analysis for OOC ... so removing FBS buy road games, UNI has had just 6 road games and 7 home games .... everyone who plays FBS games has that inequity.

[clenz]

But having said that, I don't think you can include FBS buy games in your home vs road analysis for OOC ... so removing FBS buy road games, UNI has had just 6 road games and 7 home games .... everyone who plays FBS games has that inequity.
Which as I pointed out - is only 1 extra home game over those 6 seasons - still essentially just 1 home game per season. It also only happened because SUU moved a game back a year and UNI needed a 5th home game. Had SUU not moved that game it's still 50/50 because of H/Hs and that Hampton game is replaced by a road game or a front edge of a H/H

[IBleedYellow]

Having your season ended by NDSU doesn't make you special or better than everyone else it happens to.

What has made SDSU/UNI special the last few years (but more so SDSU in the last couple) is who they have beaten, not who they have lost to.

Tournaments are great at determining a champion, but they're terrible at establishing rank order, but in SDSU's case they're clearly a top 5 program right now. UNI is somewhere in the top 15, but you rarely see them play any of these southeast teams anymore for a good size up.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk


I would tend to agree with this statement 100%. Besides 2016 everyone in the FCS playoffs had their season ended by NDSU or the team that ended their season did, at least since Frisco has been host.

[clenz]

I would tend to agree with this statement 100%. Besides 2016 everyone in the FCS playoffs had their season ended by NDSU or the team that ended their season did, at least since Frisco has been host.However...

In the context of the discussion regarding conference win% in the playoffs, which conferences have teams making deeper runs, balance, etc. it must be noted that the east coast continually gets NEC, MEAC, Big South teams fed to them meanwhile the MVFC and Big Sky get to go "Welp, here we go again" with rematches on rematches.

You want to sit here and bang on about "LOOK HOW THIS NON CONFERENCE CHAMP FROM THIS CONFERENCE OUT EAST THAT NO ONE EXPECTED GOT TO THE SEMIS" meanwhile going "Yeah, but your conferences team didn't get that far" while the paths are

NEC, MEAC, Big South compared to SLC into SDSU/NDSU and if you get past that you get EWU/Big Sky champ

Hypothetical are mostly bull**** in these types of things but that 2014 UNI team that gets pointed at as "another Farley failure" of a season because out in the quarters lost to NDSU twice that year...both in Fargo..by a combined 13 points. That UNI team won their first playoff game 53-17, went on the road and beat seeded big sky champ 29-17 and it wasn't as close as the score showed. That UNI team gets **** all over as a failure and would have been a semi final team - or deeper - in any other bracket.
Sure that NDSU team lost by 3 to USD (****ing how) and at Montana in Stitts first game in a hot box level of smoke stadium. Outside of that the playoff games NDSu played that year were:
A rematch vs that Montana team and they won 37-6 - which would have been SDSU having a 4th playoff run ended by NDSU had SDSU beaten Montana
Richmond was 33-7 in the semis
Jacksonville State was 37-10 in the title game

NDSU called the dogs off on all of those teams.

How many of those 3 SDSU teams are in the semis or a title game without NDSU in the way. Hearing someone bitch about regionalization playing MEAC, Patriot, Big South or SoCon teams while being regionally forced into SDSU/NDSU/EWU every single year out west is just "well I'm going to move the goal post and say that's just what it is" is pretty bull****.

[Reign of Terrier]

no, I meant "moving goal posts" .. since you originally declared something with certain criteria, then back pedaled and changed your criteria so that what you said was less untrue .. emphasis on the word "less".

But yes, "cherry picking" also applies to things like only acknowledging WIU win over Dayton .. thanks for admission. But the larger point there was part of the original provably wrong mis-statement relative to your criterai, and you changing your criteria at least twice, but I think 3 times.

I didn't say I was cherry-picking, just saying complaining about the years I choose is arguably cherry picking if you want to bitch about it.

I have backed down from none of my original claims. You're just bad at reading comprehension and communicating a point. If you're in the MVFC and you're not South Dakota State, North Dakota State, or Northern Iowa and finish outside of the top 3, you have no business getting a playoff bid over a third place team in the Big Sky, fourth place team in the CAA, third place team in the Socon, etc because you'll not get that far and the counterfactual teams will likely do just as good.

And a fifth place team? Get out of here.

I never said a fourth place team or fifth place team should never get a shot as you have claimed, though I'm pretty sure 80% of the time the fifth place team doesn't deserve it.

None of this has really been debunked, you just keep rambling incoherently and then attributing claims to me that I didn't make.

UNI has clearly demonstrated a willingness to travel for OOC games (lots of Big Sky and before that some Southland home and homes) so my guess is that it's not UNI that is preventing games with SoCon teams. Are they willing to come to Cedar Falls?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Here's the thing though:

The barrier to scheduling tough OOC games is the costs. We're not power five teams. You don't get a huge pay day for playing someone tough, the only reward is possible playoff consideration, which as we've seen in recent years (2017 EWU, 2018 Furman) is somewhat spurious. The reason why the Big Sky/MVFC schedule these tough OOC games is because it's barely to not more expensive for them to play these games. If you pull up a map of the FCS teams, the Big Sky and MVFC are kind of alone west of the Mississippi. There's a reason why lots of Big Sky schools play another Big Sky team "non-conference."

So, for example, when Eastern Washington plays NDSU OOC there are more benefits and comparable costs to doing that compared to playing Cal Poly (is the flight more expensive?)

But even then, scheduling tough isn't even widespread in those conferences if you take out the teams that aren't geographically going to fly anyway. The other week, I took a random sample of 27 FCS teams, looking at their schedule. All of these teams made the playoffs. I looked at their scheduling in the last 10 years or so, seeing how many away games they played OOC with teams outside their state. I make the away game distinction because it's obviously more costly. The most was SDSU with 7. There were 8 with 6, 4 with 5, 7 with 4, and it sort of goes down from there.

If you expand this footprint and take out teams that were an immediately neighboring state, there's only 6 teams in the FCS that have played more than 3 games (EWU, UNI, and Maine with 6). If you scale it out farther (and granted, I eyeballed this with the map on the FCS teams wiki page) and see how many teams scheduled games that were farther away than their farthest conference opponent, only 10 played 2 or more games away outside of this distance (and all of them were state schools for what it is worth).

And even then, if you look at this sample and look for teams that have name/playoff recognition in the FCS, no team played more than one away game that was outside the geographic footprint their team is accustomed to that would be a challenge (like scheduling NDSU, EWU, etc).

Admittedly, I didn't look at the future schedules (and that's kind of a big deal), but the usual suspects are the ones scheduling these games. For the MVFC, the bottom 7 don't travel much. For instance Illinois State played Northern Arizona but that's the only OOC regular season flight I can find that they made. Youngstown State will play it's first OOC road game not in the playoffs in over a decade against Samford.

I have to reiterate: none of this is to say that we should reward teams for playing a tough OOC, but we have to remember that playing these games is a financial cost that many/most institutions don't usually or want to incur. Well over 95% of FCS OOC games are scheduled to minimize costs by scheduling as local as possible. So, I'm in favor of rewarding UNI, EWU etc, for scheduling tough, but I'm not a fan of rewarding, say either of the ISU teams or Western Illinois because teams in their conference schedule tough.

[clenz]

So it's okay that teams out east don't travel for OOC games - but when teams like ISUr or WIU don't travel that is a negative?

[Reign of Terrier]

So it's okay that teams out east don't travel for OOC games - but when teams like ISUr or WIU don't travel that is a negative?

I'm saying the primary financial purpose of all of these programs is not to win championships (but to provide scholarship opportunities and compete at a high level) and to expect even a sizeable minority of teams to schedule cross country trips is unreasonable. AD's just won't do it. AD's college presidents, etc don't want to spend thousands more than they need to do accomplish that goal. We're the stamp collectors here on AGS, expecting way too much out of these institutions.

There's a reason why the SLC plays 9 conference games, Big Sky teams usually schedule a weak sub-FCS team, the CAA weak northeastern teams, and the Socon schedules Big South teams. It's cheaper. When we see schedules, we stamp collectors see a lack of ambition, but ADs see the status quo. The arguments to change aren't great from their perspective.

So it's totally cool and understandable that like 5 FCS schools can afford to do this and they should be rewarded (even though they aren't for some reason, historically), but let's not push the narrative that this is a conference-wide thing in the MVFC (when it's 3 teams) or that the Big Sky doesn't have the greatest incentive to schedule this way (they can schedule an extra Big Sky game, non D1 game or do this with it being just as expensive as the Big Sky Game), and thus should reward the entire conference.

I'm not saying it's "wrong" that WIU and ISUR schedule the way they do, but the perception that they are part of this greater movement to schedule tougher, national games that they wouldn't otherwise schedule is a little misleading.

[uni88]

Here's the thing though:

The barrier to scheduling tough OOC games is the costs. We're not power five teams. You don't get a huge pay day for playing someone tough, the only reward is possible playoff consideration, which as we've seen in recent years (2017 EWU, 2018 Furman) is somewhat spurious. The reason why the Big Sky/MVFC schedule these tough OOC games is because it's barely to not more expensive for them to play these games. If you pull up a map of the FCS teams, the Big Sky and MVFC are kind of alone west of the Mississippi. There's a reason why lots of Big Sky schools play another Big Sky team "non-conference."

So, for example, when Eastern Washington plays NDSU OOC there are more benefits and comparable costs to doing that compared to playing Cal Poly (is the flight more expensive?)

But even then, scheduling tough isn't even widespread in those conferences if you take out the teams that aren't geographically going to fly anyway. The other week, I took a random sample of 27 FCS teams, looking at their schedule. All of these teams made the playoffs. I looked at their scheduling in the last 10 years or so, seeing how many away games they played OOC with teams outside their state. I make the away game distinction because it's obviously more costly. The most was SDSU with 7. There were 8 with 6, 4 with 5, 7 with 4, and it sort of goes down from there.

If you expand this footprint and take out teams that were an immediately neighboring state, there's only 6 teams in the FCS that have played more than 3 games (EWU, UNI, and Maine with 6). If you scale it out farther (and granted, I eyeballed this with the map on the FCS teams wiki page) and see how many teams scheduled games that were farther away than their farthest conference opponent, only 10 played 2 or more games away outside of this distance (and all of them were state schools for what it is worth).

And even then, if you look at this sample and look for teams that have name/playoff recognition in the FCS, no team played more than one away game that was outside the geographic footprint their team is accustomed to that would be a challenge (like scheduling NDSU, EWU, etc).

Admittedly, I didn't look at the future schedules (and that's kind of a big deal), but the usual suspects are the ones scheduling these games. For the MVFC, the bottom 7 don't travel much. For instance Illinois State played Northern Arizona but that's the only OOC regular season flight I can find that they made. Youngstown State will play it's first OOC road game not in the playoffs in over a decade against Samford.

I have to reiterate: none of this is to say that we should reward teams for playing a tough OOC, but we have to remember that playing these games is a financial cost that many/most institutions don't usually or want to incur. Well over 95% of FCS OOC games are scheduled to minimize costs by scheduling as local as possible. So, I'm in favor of rewarding UNI, EWU etc, for scheduling tough, but I'm not a fan of rewarding, say either of the ISU teams or Western Illinois because teams in their conference schedule tough.

You're the one that stated "UNI is somewhere in the top 15, but you rarely see them play any of these southeast teams anymore for a good size up." I was just pointing out that UNI plays tough OOC games and travels for them so if they're not playing southeastern teams it's probably because the southeastern teams don't want to go to Cedar Falls and that's on them not UNI.

You also state that "we have to remember that playing these games is a financial cost that many/most institutions don't usually or want to incur." Why should the NCAA shell out more money if the schools themselves aren't willing to? Regionalization sucks but I don't think the FCS Tournament is profitable so regionalization helps reduce the costs. Why should the NCAA subsidize the tournament even more than they do now? It would be a form of welfare. Where is the money going to come from? Are they going to take money away from Men's BB Tournament participants? Are they going to take a bigger piece of the gate from the hosts who do sell lots of tickets (thank you NDSU, JMU, Montana, etc.)?

The odd thing about UNI's OOC schedule is that playing those games might cost them money and wins. The Valley schedule is tough enough that they don't need 2 Big Sky OOC games per year to have a tough schedule. They could probably buy home games with Pioneer or similar teams and sell enough tickets to make it worth their while but they don't. It's frustrating. Winning more earlier in the season would increase excitement and attendance for the rest of the season and for future seasons.

[Reign of Terrier]

You're the one that stated "UNI is somewhere in the top 15, but you rarely see them play any of these southeast teams anymore for a good size up." I was just pointing out that UNI plays tough OOC games and travels for them so if they're not playing southeastern teams it's probably because the southeastern teams don't want to go to Cedar Falls and that's on them not UNI.

You also state that "we have to remember that playing these games is a financial cost that many/most institutions don't usually or want to incur." Why should the NCAA shell out more money if the schools themselves aren't willing to? Regionalization sucks but I don't think the FCS Tournament is profitable so regionalization helps reduce the costs. Why should the NCAA subsidize the tournament even more than they do now? It would be a form of welfare. Where is the money going to come from? Are they going to take money away from Men's BB Tournament participants? Are they going to take a bigger piece of the gate from the hosts who do sell lots of tickets (thank you NDSU, JMU, Montana, etc.)?

The odd thing about UNI's OOC schedule is that playing those games might cost them money and wins. The Valley schedule is tough enough that they don't need 2 Big Sky OOC games per year to have a tough schedule. They could probably buy home games with Pioneer or similar teams and sell enough tickets to make it worth their while but they don't. It's frustrating. Winning more earlier in the season would increase excitement and attendance for the rest of the season and for future seasons.

I meant in the playoffs (and I probably should have clarified that). I'm not wagging my finger at UNI here. They schedule FCS teams more than anyone, but unfortunately the ones they have scheduled in the regular season have not turned out *in the year they scheduled them.* So UNI schedules ambitiously year-to-year but because of the fluid nature of lots of FCS programs (SFA, Cal Poly, etc) it doesn't necessarily translate to a top 15 matchup when weighing resumes on selection sunday. Make sense? UNI is a team that constantly fascinates me because, yes, they've been boat raced by NDSU/SDSU but all of these other teams like JSU/Wofford/KSU have had similar fortune and I would love to see that matchup more. I guess we kind of saw it with UC Davis, but still...

I think the NCAA should foot more of the costs because they already make a hell of a lot of money anyway and their entire point is organizing competition, so if they're going to do that, it better be optimal! It's not welfare if the NCAA is a billion-dollar nonprofit....

[BEAR]

Good lord it's like reading an encyclopedia with no pictures..........:pumpuke:xlolx

[Daytripper]

The thread that refuses to die.

[F'N Hawks]

This is getting quite intense and super specific, so much so that I need an excedrin migraine. Lets get the season going already!

[uni88]

I'm not saying it's "wrong" that WIU and ISUR schedule the way they do, but the perception that they are part of this greater movement to schedule tougher, national games that they wouldn't otherwise schedule is a little misleading.

Don't both ISU's (and WIU to an extent) tend to schedule OOC games with OVC teams? Don't a number of SoCon teams do the same thing? In the current cycle (the MVFC is on top now, the CAA and SoCon have been on top in the past), the MVFC is tougher top to bottom than the SoCon. So if the OOCs are similar aren't the ISU's schedules by default tougher than your typical SoCon schedule? Why should they make it even tougher by scheduling more challenging OOC games? Wouldn't that be counterproductive kind of like spending money to travel that you couldn't afford and didn't need to?

[Reign of Terrier]

Don't both ISU's (and WIU to an extent) tend to schedule OOC games with OVC teams? Don't a number of SoCon teams do the same thing? In the current cycle (the MVFC is on top now, the CAA and SoCon have been on top in the past), the MVFC is tougher top to bottom than the SoCon. So if the OOCs are similar aren't the ISU's schedules by default tougher than your typical SoCon schedule? Why should they make it even tougher by scheduling more challenging OOC games? Wouldn't that be counterproductive kind of like spending money to travel that you couldn't afford and didn't need to?

I don't see the need to schedule tough OOC if you're winning your conference and can reliably win a couple playoff games every year. But giving a team in the 6-5 to 7-4 range brownie points for the conference they play in is wrong to me. Like I just don't see how one could put (hypothetically) Indiana State in last year (who finished 6-4 against FCS competition, with one win against a team with a winning record and a loss to a team with a losing record) over Furman (who also finished 6-4 against FCS competition, but who didn't have one loss as bad as ISUB but had a quality win against Wofford).

[clenz]

UNI is a team that constantly fascinates me because, yes, they've been boat raced by NDSU/SDSU but all of these other teams like JSU/Wofford/KSU have had similar fortune and I would love to see that matchup more. I guess we kind of saw it with UC Davis, but still..
You know so little if you believe that....

[Bison56]

I've read shorter novels than some of these posts.xboringx

[Reign of Terrier]

You know so little if you believe that....

I'm sorry if my lazy language of not conveying "lost convincingly, but in the weird area of not close yet not a blowout" is not up to your standards but sheesh give me a break.

[clenz]

I'm sorry if my lazy language of not conveying "lost convincingly, but in the weird area of not close yet not a blowout" is not up to your standards but sheesh give me a break.You haven't really looked at or watched the games

Or even looked at scores.


But okay.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[ST_Lawson]

I'm not saying it's "wrong" that WIU and ISUR schedule the way they do, but the perception that they are part of this greater movement to schedule tougher, national games that they wouldn't otherwise schedule is a little misleading.

I'm very confused now. What are you trying to say about our scheduling? That we don't travel, but we play tough opponents? Or we do travel? Or that one of those is wrong?

https://i.giphy.com/media/3o7btPCcdNniyf0ArS/giphy.gif

[Reign of Terrier]

You haven't really looked at or watched the games

Or even looked at scores.


But okay.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

I'll give you 2015 NDSU, but 2017 SDSU UNI lost and was down 34-7 early in the fourth. That SDSU team went on to get absolutely manhandled by JMU. I was around AGS when the former game happened and it was not competitive and to pretend like it was is pretty revisionist.

Either way, you look at who/how they play and it's hard to distinguish UNI from a team like Kennesaw, who has also been handled by the likes of SDSU in the playoffs. The fact that we have to argue about it is the point.

[Redbird 4th & short]

I'm saying the primary financial purpose of all of these programs is not to win championships (but to provide scholarship opportunities and compete at a high level) and to expect even a sizeable minority of teams to schedule cross country trips is unreasonable. AD's just won't do it. AD's college presidents, etc don't want to spend thousands more than they need to do accomplish that goal. We're the stamp collectors here on AGS, expecting way too much out of these institutions.

There's a reason why the SLC plays 9 conference games, Big Sky teams usually schedule a weak sub-FCS team, the CAA weak northeastern teams, and the Socon schedules Big South teams. It's cheaper. When we see schedules, we stamp collectors see a lack of ambition, but ADs see the status quo. The arguments to change aren't great from their perspective.

So it's totally cool and understandable that like 5 FCS schools can afford to do this and they should be rewarded (even though they aren't for some reason, historically), but let's not push the narrative that this is a conference-wide thing in the MVFC (when it's 3 teams) or that the Big Sky doesn't have the greatest incentive to schedule this way (they can schedule an extra Big Sky game, non D1 game or do this with it being just as expensive as the Big Sky Game), and thus should reward the entire conference.

I'm not saying it's "wrong" that WIU and ISUR schedule the way they do, but the perception that they are part of this greater movement to schedule tougher, national games that they wouldn't otherwise schedule is a little misleading.
Ok,so you just did it again ... making sh-t up out of nowhere. Who ever said ISUr claimed to be "part of a movement" trying to schedule tougher games on a national scale ? I sure never said it or implied it, and very few other Redbird fans post here. So who are you reprimanding for creating the "misleading perception" you speak of ... who exactly ??

p.s. I have said ad nauseum that our MVFC schedule combined with an FBS game most years is more than tough enough.

[Reign of Terrier]

I'm very confused now. What are you trying to say about our scheduling? That we don't travel, but we play tough opponents? Or we do travel? Or that one of those is wrong?

https://i.giphy.com/media/3o7btPCcdNniyf0ArS/giphy.gif

My argument is that people see UNI/NDSU/SDSU scheduling hard and say "ah yes the MVFC Schedules hard OOC and thus should be rewarded relative to other conferences" when it's really just those three teams. So the conclusion ("we should reward MVFC teams relative to other conferences") doesn't follow from the evidence (UNI/NDSU/SDSU schedule hard, but everyone else not so much).

Now, the other evidence (the MVFC is hard) is compelling, but absent a big win (against the top 3 in the MVFC), I don't really care about it.

[TheKingpin28]

I'm very confused now. What are you trying to say about our scheduling? That we don't travel, but we play tough opponents? Or we do travel? Or that one of those is wrong?

https://i.giphy.com/media/3o7btPCcdNniyf0ArS/giphy.gif

Since when was WIU allowed to play OOC home games? xlolx

[clenz]

I'll give you 2015 NDSU, but 2017 SDSU UNI lost and was down 34-7 early in the fourth. That SDSU team went on to get absolutely manhandled by JMU. I was around AGS when the former game happened and it was not competitive and to pretend like it was is pretty revisionist.

Either way, you look at who/how they play and it's hard to distinguish UNI from a team like Kennesaw, who has also been handled by the likes of SDSU in the playoffs. The fact that we have to argue about it is the point.Sigh


You don't follow the MVFC clearly

Less than 2 months before that UNI bitch slapped SDSU into submission and was up like 28-0 in the first half.



https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190808/1264182e665d346742216f093fe04922.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

I'm very confused now. What are you trying to say about our scheduling? That we don't travel, but we play tough opponents? Or we do travel? Or that one of those is wrong?

https://i.giphy.com/media/3o7btPCcdNniyf0ArS/giphy.gif

touche


But be honest Lawson ... are you the one falsely claiming WIU and ISUr are part of this movement ?? And if there is a movement, why the heck was I excluded ????????

[Reign of Terrier]

Ok,so you just did it again ... making sh-t up out of nowhere. Who ever said ISUr claimed to be "part of a movement" trying to schedule tougher games on a national scale ? I sure never said it or implied it, and very few other Redbird fans post here. So who are you reprimanding for creating the "misleading perception" you speak of ... who exactly ??

p.s. I have said ad nauseum that our MVFC schedule combined with an FBS game most years is more than tough enough.


"My Socon/CAA/Big Sky schedule on top of an FBS game is tough enough"

I'm not making **** up. Everyone outside of the MVFC rolls our eyes whenever you guys talk about how tough your conference is and when we bring up that everyone loses games in conference you bring up out of conference, when it's only applicable to a couple teams within it.

[ST_Lawson]

My argument is that people see UNI/NDSU/SDSU scheduling hard and say "ah yes the MVFC Schedules hard OOC and thus should be rewarded relative to other conferences" when it's really just those three teams. So the conclusion ("we should reward MVFC teams relative to other conferences") doesn't follow from the evidence (UNI/NDSU/SDSU schedule hard, but everyone else not so much).

Now, the other evidence (the MVFC is hard) is compelling, but absent a big win (against the top 3 in the MVFC), I don't really care about it.

Everyone else not so much? Have you seen our schedule the last few years?
2018 - @ Montana State, @ U of Illinois, vs Montana (at the time ranked ~15th)
2017 - @ Tennessee Tech, @ Northern Arizona, @ Coastal Carolina (and we went 3-0 in that stretch)
2016 - @ Eastern Illinois, vs Northern Arizona (17th ranked), @ Northern Illinois (3-0 in that stretch also)
2015 - Eastern Illinois (25th ranked), @ U of Illinois, @ Coastal Carolina (#1 ranked)
2014 - a 12 game season...we did go easy with the home schedule (Drake and Valparaiso), but we also played two Big 10 teams...Wisconsin and Northwestern.

Last time we played a non-full scholarship DI team was 5 years ago. Where's the "easy"?


touche

But be honest Lawson ... are you the one falsely claiming WIU and ISUr are part of this movement ?? And if there is a movement, why the heck was I excluded ????????

I don't even know what's going on here. I can't keep track of who's arguing what points, but I saw WIU get mentioned and something about us having an "easy" OOC schedule, and was like...wtf are you drinking? Nearly all we play are FBS and "power conference" FCS teams.

[Reign of Terrier]

Sigh


You don't follow the MVFC clearly

Less than 2 months before that UNI bitch slapped SDSU into submission and was up like 28-0 in the first half.



https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190808/1264182e665d346742216f093fe04922.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

You're pedantically derailing the bigger point over a sidenote.

Regardless of what happens in the regular season, the emergent top 2 teams in the MVFC have their way with whomever MVFC team they face below them in the playoffs. I don't follow the MVFC in the regular season (never claimed I did), but this is obvious. I'm not even going to bother to look up the NDSU scores because we know how those go, but since 2014 the second ranked MVFC teams are 3-0 against lower ranked MVFC teams and the margins have been 15, 17, and 20 points.

Regardless of outcomes in the regular season this is a consistent pattern. Everyone loses to the second best MVFC team in the place, even third and fourth place MVFC teams and I would love to see those third and fourth place teams against the likes of Jacksonville state, Kennesaw State, Wofford etc. At heart, these teams aren't national title worthy, but we don't know how good they are relative to each other because regionalization has them not play each other.

[Reign of Terrier]

Everyone else not so much? Have you seen our schedule the last few years?
2018 - @ Montana State, @ U of Illinois, vs Montana (at the time ranked ~15th)
2017 - @ Tennessee Tech, @ Northern Arizona, @ Coastal Carolina (and we went 3-0 in that stretch)
2016 - @ Eastern Illinois, vs Northern Arizona (17th ranked), @ Northern Illinois (3-0 in that stretch also)
2015 - Eastern Illinois (25th ranked), @ U of Illinois, @ Coastal Carolina (#1 ranked)
2014 - a 12 game season...we did go easy with the home schedule (Drake and Valparaiso), but we also played two Big 10 teams...Wisconsin and Northwestern.

Last time we played a non-full scholarship DI team was 5 years ago. Where's the "easy"?



I don't even know what's going on here. I can't keep track of who's arguing what points, but I saw WIU get mentioned and something about us having an "easy" OOC schedule, and was like...wtf are you drinking? Nearly all we play are FBS and "power conference" FCS teams.

Thanks for pointing that out, in my "random sample of FCS teams schedules I monitored WIU was the one I left out (I'm not being sarcastic, thanks for point out the mistake). I can't remember if I was the one who originally brought up WIU in this conversation, but if I did it was a mistake and a bad example (i.e I was wrong). The only follow up I would give is that I omit FBS games and I don't consider OVC teams hard scheduling (heck, socon schools get flack for scheduling them, so if we don't get them no one does lol)

Full disclosure, this was my "sample" feel free to point out if I missed some teams. I didn't pick these teams knowing much about their scheduling. Though I learned both JMU and YSU almost never play OOC out of state/away from home


South Dakota


UNI


EWU


Montana


Jacksonville st


Kennesaw State


Maine


Towson


SDSU


Central Arkansas


UNH


Chattanooga


Elon


NDSU


Montana State


Richmond


Samford


McNeese


weber state


Citadel


Delaware


Furman


Wofford


SHSU


JMU


Illinois State


Youngstown

[clenz]

You're pedantically derailing the bigger point over a sidenote.
.

Oh the irony




You've bent the goal posts so many times over pedantic **** it's comical.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[ST_Lawson]

Thanks for pointing that out, in my "random sample of FCS teams schedules I monitored WIU was the one I left out (I'm not being sarcastic, thanks for point out the mistake). I can't remember if I was the one who originally brought up WIU in this conversation, but if I did it was a mistake and a bad example (i.e I was wrong). The only follow up I would give is that I omit FBS games and I don't consider OVC teams hard scheduling (heck, socon schools get flack for scheduling them, so if we don't get them no one does lol)

Fair enough. Why omit FBS games though? They're still games that are played...they still count for wins/losses. I get that there's a wildly different level of difficulty between someone like Clemson and someone like Coastal Carolina, but even the bottom of the FBS would still be fairly decent FCS teams generally.

I agree on the OVC teams outside of JSU and the occasional other decent team...Austin Peay a couple of years ago, EIU back in the Garoppolo or Romo days. We play them when we have to, but they're not the toughest opponents usually.

[Redbird 4th & short]

"My Socon/CAA/Big Sky schedule on top of an FBS game is tough enough"

I'm not making **** up. Everyone outside of the MVFC rolls our eyes whenever you guys talk about how tough your conference is and when we bring up that everyone loses games in conference you bring up out of conference, when it's only applicable to a couple teams within it.

But no, you are clearly makning sh-t up ... you specifically said WIU and ISUr claimed to be "part of a movement" trying to schedule tougher national games, and that it was "misleading" .. meaning untrue. You didn't say MVFC teams in general say that. Now I did say in another thread (I think) that UNI consistently plays one of the toughest OOC SOS, and combining OOC and conf games probably ranks #1 in FCS in SOS since 2010 ... beyond that, I think I said UNIs OOC was tougher than NDSU and ISUr for sure. I said nothing else relative to rest of FCS and OOC strength other than claims UNI was way up there in SOS.

The point in this case is this ... you just made something else up and argued an opposing position .. for something no one else said ... again.

Please stop doing that.

[mainejeff]

Surprised nobody is complaining about my poll like is per usual. Did I actually do a decent job or is it really just that much of a crapshoot this season?

You did a great job....Maine is not a pre-season Top 25 team.

xeyebrowx

[Reign of Terrier]

Oh the irony




You've bent the goal posts so many times over pedantic **** it's comical.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

You guys keep saying that without actually providing evidence. The specific claims that Redbird has said I made and subsequently "moved out the goal posts" he pulled out of his ass. He's pretty quick on his responses but when I called him out when he coherently made the accusation about 18 hours ago and challenged him to find where I said specific things he said I said, he has not answered the call.

I'll take the fact that you're not going to dispute the claim that the third place or below MVFC team doesn't do so hot against the second best team as win on my part.


But no, you are clearly makning sh-t up ... you specifically said WIU and ISUr claimed to be "part of a movement" trying to schedule tougher national games, and that it was "misleading" .. meaning untrue. You didn't say MVFC teams in general say that. Now I did say in another thread (I think) that UNI consistently plays one of the toughest OOC SOS, and combining OOC and conf games probably ranks #1 in FCS in SOS since 2010 ... beyond that, I think I said UNIs OOC was tougher than NDSU and ISUr for sure. I said nothing else relative to rest of FCS and OOC strength other than claims UNI was way up there in SOS.

The point in this case is this ... you just made something else up and argued an opposing position .. for something no one else said ... again.

Please stop doing that.



Again, you're making **** up. I never said ISUr/WIU "claimed" to be part of this movement, just that MVFC fanboys who want to talk up the conference. Here's the original comment:


I'm not saying it's "wrong" that WIU and ISUR schedule the way they do, but the perception that they are part of this greater movement to schedule tougher, national games that they wouldn't otherwise schedule is a little misleading. (post 303)


From there you said, in post 317


k,so you just did it again ... making sh-t up out of nowhere. Who ever said ISUr claimed to be "part of a movement" trying to schedule tougher games on a national scale ?


So let's review: I said that the perception that these two teams were part of a movement is a little bit misleading

You then asked "who ever said ISU claimed to be part of a movement." when my original claim was specifically not that, but rather that there's a perception by the MVFC types that scheduling tough is something all of them do, not just a handful. It had nothing to do with what ISUr claimed to do.


You then specifically said
you specifically said WIU and ISUr claimed to be "part of a movement" when I did *not* say that. This is clearly made up. Obviously made up. Hilariously obvious. And then you chastise me for not defending the claim I didn't make? ROFL


So you're clearly bad at reading because you're making up claims for me and telling me I'm moving the goal posts for not answering them, when a more likely answer is that you don't have good reading comprehension skills, you're misunderstanding my specific claims, and then getting mad when I don't defend the bad arguments you think I'm making.. I'm still waiting for you to show, with direct quotes, the specific claims you attributed to me in this thread: https://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?231473-FCS-Conferences-from-best-to-wrost&p=2786755&viewfull=1#post2786755

I mean, you're pretty quick on the response and you keep making claims about what I have specifically said but when I challenge you to, you know, actually cite what I said, you don't do it. Maybe because you know it would expose you as wrong or at the very least you've been very lazy in your reading and I haven't said what you think I said.

[JSUSoutherner]

I'll take the fact that you're not going to dispute the claim that the third place or below MVFC team doesn't do so hot against the second best team as win on my part.

He literally spoon-fed you an example of UNI putting SDSU in the ground. I think it's interesting you decided to just gloss over that.

[clenz]

He literally spoon-fed you an example of UNI putting SDSU in the ground. I think it's interesting you decided to just gloss over that.
I'll do it again

He wants to ignore this game, less than 2 months before "SDSU put UNI in the mud" - also in Brookings. It was 38-12 with 6 minutes left.
https://i.imgur.com/rTU96cf.png

UNI's defense forced Chrision to go 14-35
SDSU had 52 yards on 23 carries




But that game doesn't count.



Also, let's not tell him that year that UNI finished 2nd and SDSU finished 3rd in the MVFC...and as I've said many many many times in different places...the reason SDSU gets the seeds over UNI playing Thanksgiving weekend is beacuse of the OOC schedules. SDSU plays Duquesne, Drake, and Alabama A&M in the OOC going 3-0 while UNI is playing Iowa/Iowa State, Montana, EWU, SUU, Weber State, etc. not because SDSU actually finished higher in the conferencexcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeex xcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxc offeexxcoffeexxcoffeex

[JSUSoutherner]

I'll do it again

He wants to ignore this game, less than 2 months before "SDSU put UNI in the mud" - also in Brookings. It was 38-12 with 6 minutes left.
https://i.imgur.com/rTU96cf.png

UNI's defense forced Chrision to go 14-35
SDSU had 52 yards on 23 carries




But that game doesn't count.

I mean UNI has beat SDSU 2 out of the last 3 games.

If he wants to drag UNI for losing to NDSU then we should be able to drag Wofford for the same thing, right?

[clenz]

I mean UNI has beat SDSU 2 out of the last 3 games.

If he wants to drag UNI for losing to NDSU then we should be able to drag Wofford for the same thing, right?
I added this as an edit while you were replying so I'll add it here for you

Also, let's not tell him that year that UNI finished 2nd and SDSU finished 3rd in the MVFC...and as I've said many many many times in different places...the reason SDSU gets the seeds over UNI playing Thanksgiving weekend is beacuse of the OOC schedules. SDSU plays Duquesne, Drake, and Alabama A&M in the OOC going 3-0 while UNI is playing Iowa/Iowa State, Montana, EWU, SUU, Weber State, etc. not because SDSU actually finished higher in the conferencexcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeex xcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxc offeexxcoffeexxcoffeex

[JSUSoutherner]

I added this as an edit while you were replying so I'll add it here for you

Also, let's not tell him that year that UNI finished 2nd and SDSU finished 3rd in the MVFC...and as I've said many many many times in different places...the reason SDSU gets the seeds over UNI playing Thanksgiving weekend is beacuse of the OOC schedules. SDSU plays Duquesne, Drake, and Alabama A&M in the OOC going 3-0 while UNI is playing Iowa/Iowa State, Montana, EWU, SUU, Weber State, etc. not because SDSU actually finished higher in the conferencexcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeex xcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxc offeexxcoffeexxcoffeex

You guys should play some SoCon teams and soften up the OOC.

Playing SoCon teams has been great for us.

[clenz]

You guys should play some SoCon teams and soften up the OOC.

Playing SoCon teams has been great for us.
My letters to the AD haven't worked on the current, or previous, AD about that.

Maybe Farley bitch slapping our AD during media day about our schedule compared to other MVFC schools will be a wake up call (and I realize this plays right into whatever goalpoast ROT is aiming at now).

He said almost exactly what I've been saying about the schedule. How it would be nice if the schedule makers would decide that 7 home games has value, like the other schools in our conference, rather than the 5 UNI gets to play - especially when your conference slate involves playing 6 or 7 of your 8 games against top 25 ranked teams. No reason to play an FBS and 2 top 25 teams OOC

[ysubigred]

In a way, isn't everyone in the same bracket as NDSU? xchinscratchx

You sir are correct xbowx

https://www.bing.com/th?id=OGC.e0ef7d4b355b9ba20548b64a9501ad79&pid=1.7&rurl=https%3a%2f%2fmedia.giphy.com%2fmedia%2fOK27w INdQS5YQ%2fgiphy.gif&ehk=HP%2ftFbuS9Dkj0XinjgK%2fjg

[ysubigred]

My letters to the AD haven't worked on the current, or previous, AD about that.

Maybe Farley bitch slapping our AD during media day about our schedule compared to other MVFC schools will be a wake up call (and I realize this plays right into whatever goalpoast ROT is aiming at now).

He said almost exactly what I've been saying about the schedule. How it would be nice if the schedule makers would decide that 7 home games has value, like the other schools in our conference, rather than the 5 UNI gets to play - especially when your conference slate involves playing 6 or 7 of your 8 games against top 25 ranked teams. No reason to play an FBS and 2 top 25 teams OOC

Just join the OVC and UNI would win it every year

https://www.bing.com/th?id=OGC.b3d8ca705e1e8c17964284de21cbea50&pid=1.7&rurl=https%3a%2f%2fmedia.giphy.com%2fmedia%2f1L5Yu A6wpKkNO%2f200.gif&ehk=yj2kymKkW42MUubfPqWzhg

[clenz]

Just join the OVC and UNI would win it every year

https://www.bing.com/th?id=OGC.b3d8ca705e1e8c17964284de21cbea50&pid=1.7&rurl=https%3a%2f%2fmedia.giphy.com%2fmedia%2f1L5Yu A6wpKkNO%2f200.gif&ehk=yj2kymKkW42MUubfPqWzhg
That's EIU's level of thinking mid 1990s and why they aren't in the Gateway/Valley anymore

[Reign of Terrier]

I'll do it again

He wants to ignore this game, less than 2 months before "SDSU put UNI in the mud" - also in Brookings. It was 38-12 with 6 minutes left.
https://i.imgur.com/rTU96cf.png

UNI's defense forced Chrision to go 14-35
SDSU had 52 yards on 23 carries




But that game doesn't count.



Also, let's not tell him that year that UNI finished 2nd and SDSU finished 3rd in the MVFC...and as I've said many many many times in different places...the reason SDSU gets the seeds over UNI playing Thanksgiving weekend is beacuse of the OOC schedules. SDSU plays Duquesne, Drake, and Alabama A&M in the OOC going 3-0 while UNI is playing Iowa/Iowa State, Montana, EWU, SUU, Weber State, etc. not because SDSU actually finished higher in the conferencexcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeex xcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxcoffeexxc offeexxcoffeexxcoffeex


Okay, it looks like we've been talking past each other and I am wrong about something (I'm about to recap mine and Redbird's disagreement in a minute because why not)

1) I'm talking about using playoff performance as predictive as future performance, not the regular season. So the reason I'm not really paying that much attention to what happens in the regular season is because of that consistent pattern.

2) I see my mistake for the 2017 season. I was wrong. I'm not incapable of admitting I'm wrong, I just want it shown to me and you have done that.

3) Still, my point about the fourth and fifth place MVFC teams not doing too hot historically (especially if those teams aren't named SDSU/UNI) still holds up, even in spite of this error, because SDSU/UNI were tied at second so neither was less than third. If you just look at final conference standing, you can safely bet that non-UNI/SDSU/NDSU teams that finish lower than 3rd will not make it far in the playoffs. Most of the fourth/fifth place losses are not to MVFC teams.

[JSUSoutherner]

Just join the OVC and UNI would win it every year

https://www.bing.com/th?id=OGC.b3d8ca705e1e8c17964284de21cbea50&pid=1.7&rurl=https%3a%2f%2fmedia.giphy.com%2fmedia%2f1L5Yu A6wpKkNO%2f200.gif&ehk=yj2kymKkW42MUubfPqWzhg

Doubt.

[ysubigred]

That's EIU's level of thinking mid 1990s and why they aren't in the Gateway/Valley anymore

xthumbsupx

[clenz]

Doubt.
At very very very very very worst UNI finishes tied for the conference title or second

If you'll recall 2015 the last two OVC games UNI has played

2014 - Tennessee Tech. Final was 50-7. UNI pulled starters in the second quarter after going up 34-0. Tech's drives that game were

Plays/Yards
3/-4
5/8
3/2
3/-1
2/-2
3/6
3/4
3/1
3/-5
3-10
1/84 - broken trick reverse play against 4th string defense
1-0
3-1
3-0

0-12 on 3rd down
2 first downs - one of them came from a penalty


Then 2015 we played 7-1 in OVC play EIU - you'll remember this as this was your introduction to the OVC being **** and not talking trash to an MVFC team

53-17 was the final...and we had guys scoring touchdowns I forgot existed as I'm looking at the box score.

I don't even need to go into that game. Just post a photo from it that sums up the entire game

http://sidearm.sites.s3.amazonaws.com/uni.sidearmsports.com/custompages/gallery/FB_vsEasternIllinois_112815/MD1_5765.jpghttp://sidearm.sites.s3.amazonaws.com/uni.sidearmsports.com/custompages/gallery/FB_vsEasternIllinois_112815/MD1_5765.jpghttp://sidearm.sites.s3.amazonaws.com/uni.sidearmsports.com/custompages/gallery/FB_vsEasternIllinois_112815/MD1_5765.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/i9Rpb7p.jpg

[JSUSoutherner]

At very very very very very worst UNI finishes tied for the conference title or second

If you'll recall 2015 the last two OVC games UNI has played

2014 - Tennessee Tech. Final was 50-7. UNI pulled starters in the second quarter after going up 34-0. Tech's drives that game were

Plays/Yards
3/-4
5/8
3/2
3/-1
2/-2
3/6
3/4
3/1
3/-5
3-10
1/84 - broken trick reverse play against 4th string defense
1-0
3-1
3-0

0-12 on 3rd down
2 first downs - one of them came from a penalty


Then 2015 we played 7-1 in OVC play EIU - you'll remember this as this was your introduction to the OVC being **** and not talking trash to an MVFC team

53-17 was the final...and we had guys scoring touchdowns I forgot existed as I'm looking at the box score.

I don't even need to go into that game. Just post a photo from it that sums up the entire game

http://sidearm.sites.s3.amazonaws.com/uni.sidearmsports.com/custompages/gallery/FB_vsEasternIllinois_112815/MD1_5765.jpghttp://sidearm.sites.s3.amazonaws.com/uni.sidearmsports.com/custompages/gallery/FB_vsEasternIllinois_112815/MD1_5765.jpghttp://sidearm.sites.s3.amazonaws.com/uni.sidearmsports.com/custompages/gallery/FB_vsEasternIllinois_112815/MD1_5765.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/i9Rpb7p.jpg

Oh you guys would be second every season and trash everyone else but the OVC is OUR bitch.

[Reign of Terrier]

I've gone through this thread, and here are the relevant highlights of me and Redbirds disagreement:

1) he has said that I don't think the MVFC deserves 4 teams in the playoffs and that I have "specifically said so"

2) In reality, I have never said that in this thread. I may have said it in a previous thread, but when my errors in reasoning were pointed out, I adjusted my position to be, basically:


I feel comfortable if the MVFC gets at least 3 bids a year,

The above is a verbatim quote from this thread clarifying my position. But Redbird still says I don't hold this position over and over, but we'll get to that.

I have not said anything in this thread contradicting this position and I'm not moving the goal post if I've changed my mind when someone pointed out that I was wrong. If I were to change my mind over the course of a conversation/argument, that's changing the goal post. I didn't do that.

My most original claim of this thread that hasn't been rebutted yet is this:

The MVFC is the best conference in the FCS with presence of NDSU, SDSU, UNI and the competitive nature of the next 4-5 other teams. The competitive nature of those other teams usually has us talking about another team worthy of playoff consideration between ISUR/ISUB/Western Illinois/Youngstown State. But let's not be fooled. Unless those latter 4 teams usurp UNI or SDSU for third place in the MVFC they're historically not likely to make any sort of playoff run. The only MVFC team to not embarrass itself when entering the field with less than 7 total wins is UNI. Everyone else not so much.


Redbird asked:

So you're saying 6-5 MVFC team that goes 4-4 in conf is an average team (?)...he 4-4 MVFC would be top 20 in FCS, whereas the 4-4 Pioneer team might be luck to make the top 100 in FCS.


I basically agreed with him, but followed:

T
o answer your rhetorical question, a 6-5/7-4 with 1 d2 win (4-4) MVFC team is an average team compared to the average team of the CAA, Big Sky, and Southern team, yes. Unless that team is UNI, in which case they're above average. I didn't say that the team was on par with the average FCS team, in fact I implied they're better than the average FCS program, but compared to the average "power" conferences, a 7-4/6-5 (4-4) ISUB, ISUR, YSU, and Western Illinois are quite average.

He then goes on to argue against a position that I haven't made in this thread, relitigating an old argument that I changed my mind on because I was wrong about certain facts. I changed my opinion to fit the facts, but apparently I'm not allowed to do that


You only acknowledged the WIU won over Dayton as an example of a 3-5th place MVFC team beating a 1-3rd place team from another conference .. but I know, you've previously moved your goal posts back twice on that statement eaarlier in our exchange .. because I gave you 7 or 8 examples that factually disputed your original blanket claim .. and you only mention the LEAST impressive example of the 7 or 8 I gave you .... right ???




But to be clear, I'm still pretty sure I never said anything as asinine like saying the 3-5 MVFC team (especially when I've talked up the 3rd place MVFC team since forever) especially since the NEC/Patriot/etc exist. So at this point, it's pretty essential to keep in mind that Redbird is arguing against a version of me that is half in his imagination and half outdated.

And this is where the communication breaks down. He then eventually said:


Just for you Reign (and general consumption) as we head into this season, I'm going to figure out the playoff results for 2011-18 and count the home vs away games by MVFC, Colonial, and Big Sky ... and further noting how all the 4-4 teams did from each conference.

And cites a .631 win percentage a couple times (that doesn't include NDSU), but he never makes clear if this is an overall ranking or just by 4-4 teams from the MVFC (I think it's overall). But again, win percentage isn't helpful for the specific conversation we're having IMO because if you have two good teams who keep winning and run up the win percentage definitely makes the conference look good, but it doesn't tell us how well we can expect the fourth and fifth place team in a conference is going to be.

He then again repeats a claim I didn't make

So answer this simple question .. if no conference should have more than 3 teams as you have stated,

by your random criteria, Colonial only gets 3 teams instead of 6 .. right ???

Again, I think I have said this about fourth place teams, but I'm fairly certain I've never made that claim about third place teams. You can show me evidence to the contrary, but I'm pretty sure I never said that. In post #215 I basically said that but I'm not going to quote that post because it's really long like this one:D

I did make a factual error though when I said this:

If you're in the MVFC, in the first round you are either going to play a traveling nobody (NEC, Patriot, Pioneer, etc), a bubble team from a not-strong conference traditionally (2nd place OVC/Big South, 3rd place Southland) or a Big Sky team because that's how geography works.



It's factually incorrect because MVFC doesn't play those teams I've mentioned and to lump them all together is wrong. However, Redbird said I was making **** up, dismissing the entire post (notice I made 3 claims and 2 of them are correct) and so I kind of brushed off the criticism. Again, poor communications skills. But hey, I was wrong, I will own up to that and I will adjust my theory to fit the facts. It's still the case that first round MVFC teams usually get matched up with programs with minimal playoff experience relative to, say, the Southeast regional teams I'm talking about.


And then there's this whole dispute about the dataset we're using, I went back to 2008 because I was lazy and didn't want to go back farther, whereas Clenz/Redbird thought it was unfair because we're "in a new era" and...I understand that. But my thinking was that it's more accurate to have the entire dataset because the CAA has been getting 4 in forever (since like 2004 or 2005) and I'm biased in favor of more data than less. I also agree that if you look at 2010-2011 as they suggest that the gap between the CAA and MVFC shrinks, if not reverses.

However, the reason why I didn't do that is because the fourth place CAA team hasn't been all that bad in that time and the win percentage between the fourth and third CAA are still pretty similar, suggesting some parity, more so than the third place MVFC team and the fourth place MVFC (reiterate: third place MVFC is undefeated in their first round games). So the reason why I include the entire sample as opposed to a smaller version is because I'm not quite convinced that the CAA has jumped the shark and gotten worse (though that may be changing...see last year) so much as the MVFC has gotten better at the top.

So, with that disagreement in mind, I still think the fourth place CAA team is more likely to do better than the fourth place MVFC (unless that MVFC team is UNI/NDSU) but I'm definitely open to the argument that they're slipping over time. It's something we'll have to monitor going forward.

[clenz]

You claim you have a social life.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/COG3yi7UAAAc0ns.png

[Reign of Terrier]

You claim you have a social life.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/COG3yi7UAAAc0ns.png

>resists the temptation to fact check whether or not I made such a claim

[clenz]

>resists the temptation to fact check whether or not I made such a claim

I'm developing this theory slowly over time (because I have a social life), but I think a combination of geography and crowd size will determine how easy your draw is. Put another way, if you're unseeded, but play West of the Mississippi river and have a history of strong crowd sizes, you'll probably get a favorable first round draw.

Wofford beat App State in 2011, but App State got a home game, while Wofford got shipped to MVFC co-champ UNI. Meanwhile, if you look at JMU, the game @ Colgate and @ NDSU were 66% of the away games they've played out of conference PERIOD in the last decade. Youngstown State has similarly only played 2 OOC games in the last 10 years or so, both in the playoffs in 2016.

Out west, UNI/SDSU/NDSU are in good shape to get a first round home game most of the time (without checking the details, I think SDSU is the least likely of these), while Montana and Montana State are more likely to get a home game as at large teams (EWU usually gets one as a seed) which usually entails a touch of creampuffs, but I'm not really sure about Weber, Cal Poly, etc. Big Sky teams have better attendance in general I think.

So, it's kind of weird IMO, regardless of what you think about comparative playoff quality, that you can bet that western teams and New England teams are more likely to get these "easy" games. It's easy to dump on Jacksonville State, but they've never had an NEC/Patriot/Pioneer and they've never had to play an OVC team in the play-in game (OVC teams in Illinois/Tennessee can't say that). It's also easy to dump on Kennesaw State or Charleston Southern from a few years ago, but compared to the first round games of Coastal Carolina/Stony Brook that almost certainly involved flights or involved proximity to New England(Western Illinois in 2010, Villanova and Albany, Bethune Cookman 2012-2013), they've had comparably more difficult games, playing the second best socon team/co-champ in the first game too.

And this isn't just a Socon/OVC/Big South thing. As a matter of fact, I'd argue it's limited to the geography of the carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, and Virginia because that's where all these smaller schools (attendance-wise) who play good ball are. Tennessee and Illinois are in the sweet spot because their geography is more central, so they play teams in the MVFC, Southland, and even the likes of the Patriot. But if you look at Richmond, Elon or William & Mary, who are like fellow CAA member JMU with similar geography, but different in terms of crowd size, you'll see their first round scheduling is similarly daunting the aforementioned Socon/OVC/Big South teams. JMU doesn't have that problem because of their crowd size.

So yeah, Weber State is probably the exception to the rule, and Cal Poly probably would be too if they actually won home playoff games, but I see a pervasive pattern in the southeast that hoses teams in this geographic area in terms of first round games more so than others.

Took 3 seconds

[Redbird 4th & short]

Okay, it looks like we've been talking past each other and I am wrong about something (I'm about to recap mine and Redbird's disagreement in a minute because why not)

1) I'm talking about using playoff performance as predictive as future performance, not the regular season. So the reason I'm not really paying that much attention to what happens in the regular season is because of that consistent pattern.

2) I see my mistake for the 2017 season. I was wrong. I'm not incapable of admitting I'm wrong, I just want it shown to me and you have done that.

3) Still, my point about the fourth and fifth place MVFC teams not doing too hot historically (especially if those teams aren't named SDSU/UNI) still holds up, even in spite of this error, because SDSU/UNI were tied at second so neither was less than third. If you just look at final conference standing, you can safely bet that non-UNI/SDSU/NDSU teams that finish lower than 3rd will not make it far in the playoffs. Most of the fourth/fifth place losses are not to MVFC teams.
many teams are not expected to make it far in the tournament ... what does that matter ?

Reward the best 24 teams, putting aside weak autobids debate for moment, and see what they can do in playoff. MVFCs 4th and 5th place teams have about a .500 record .. which is better than every conferences records, excluding their 1st place team only, except for maybe Colonial .. but all other conferences are well below .500 in playoffs if you exclude just their top performing team .. ,any are well below .500 including their best team .. those usually being the weak autobid conferences.

So not sure how you conclude MVFC should not get more than 3 teams no matter what... but Colonial should.

.

[JSUSoutherner]

I've gone through this thread, and here are the relevant highlights of me and Redbirds disagreement:

1) he has said that I don't think the MVFC deserves 4 teams in the playoffs and that I have "specifically said so"

2) In reality, I have never said that in this thread. I may have said it in a previous thread, but when my errors in reasoning were pointed out, I adjusted my position to be, basically:



The above is a verbatim quote from this thread clarifying my position. But Redbird still says I don't hold this position over and over, but we'll get to that.

I have not said anything in this thread contradicting this position and I'm not moving the goal post if I've changed my mind when someone pointed out that I was wrong. If I were to change my mind over the course of a conversation/argument, that's changing the goal post. I didn't do that.

My most original claim of this thread that hasn't been rebutted yet is this:


Redbird asked:


I basically agreed with him, but followed:


He then goes on to argue against a position that I haven't made in this thread, relitigating an old argument that I changed my mind on because I was wrong about certain facts. I changed my opinion to fit the facts, but apparently I'm not allowed to do that



But to be clear, I'm still pretty sure I never said anything as asinine like saying the 3-5 MVFC team (especially when I've talked up the 3rd place MVFC team since forever) especially since the NEC/Patriot/etc exist. So at this point, it's pretty essential to keep in mind that Redbird is arguing against a version of me that is half in his imagination and half outdated.

And this is where the communication breaks down. He then eventually said:



And cites a .631 win percentage a couple times (that doesn't include NDSU), but he never makes clear if this is an overall ranking or just by 4-4 teams from the MVFC (I think it's overall). But again, win percentage isn't helpful for the specific conversation we're having IMO because if you have two good teams who keep winning and run up the win percentage definitely makes the conference look good, but it doesn't tell us how well we can expect the fourth and fifth place team in a conference is going to be.

He then again repeats a claim I didn't make



Again, I think I have said this about fourth place teams, but I'm fairly certain I've never made that claim about third place teams. You can show me evidence to the contrary, but I'm pretty sure I never said that. In post #215 I basically said that but I'm not going to quote that post because it's really long like this one:D

I did make a factual error though when I said this:



It's factually incorrect because MVFC doesn't play those teams I've mentioned and to lump them all together is wrong. However, Redbird said I was making **** up, dismissing the entire post (notice I made 3 claims and 2 of them are correct) and so I kind of brushed off the criticism. Again, poor communications skills. But hey, I was wrong, I will own up to that and I will adjust my theory to fit the facts. It's still the case that first round MVFC teams usually get matched up with programs with minimal playoff experience relative to, say, the Southeast regional teams I'm talking about.


And then there's this whole dispute about the dataset we're using, I went back to 2008 because I was lazy and didn't want to go back farther, whereas Clenz/Redbird thought it was unfair because we're "in a new era" and...I understand that. But my thinking was that it's more accurate to have the entire dataset because the CAA has been getting 4 in forever (since like 2004 or 2005) and I'm biased in favor of more data than less. I also agree that if you look at 2010-2011 as they suggest that the gap between the CAA and MVFC shrinks, if not reverses.

However, the reason why I didn't do that is because the fourth place CAA team hasn't been all that bad in that time and the win percentage between the fourth and third CAA are still pretty similar, suggesting some parity, more so than the third place MVFC team and the fourth place MVFC (reiterate: third place MVFC is undefeated in their first round games). So the reason why I include the entire sample as opposed to a smaller version is because I'm not quite convinced that the CAA has jumped the shark and gotten worse (though that may be changing...see last year) so much as the MVFC has gotten better at the top.

So, with that disagreement in mind, I still think the fourth place CAA team is more likely to do better than the fourth place MVFC (unless that MVFC team is UNI/NDSU) but I'm definitely open to the argument that they're slipping over time. It's something we'll have to monitor going forward.

Man imagine spending all that time on a post no one will read...

[clenz]

Man imagine spending all that time on a post no one will read...
Accurate. I skimmed it for 2 seconds and went straight to the Maury meme

[Reign of Terrier]

many teams are not expected to make it far in the tournament ... what does that matter ?

Reward the best 24 teams, putting aside weak autobids debate for moment, and see what they can do in playoff. MVFCs 4th and 5th place teams have about a .500 record .. which is better than every conferences records, excluding their 1st place team only, except for maybe Colonial .. but all other conferences are well below .500 in playoffs if you exclude just their top performing team .. ,any are well below .500 including their best team .. those usually being the weak autobid conferences.

So not sure how you conclude MVFC should not get more than 3 teams no matter what... but Colonial should.

.

I never made such a conclusion and I have pointed that out multiple times in this thread

- - - Updated - - -


Man imagine spending all that time on a post no one will read...

It's Friday and my day job isn't the most challenging. I'm killing time bruh.

[JSUSoutherner]

I never made such a conclusion and I have pointed that out multiple times in this thread

- - - Updated - - -



It's Friday and my day job isn't the most challenging. I'm killing time bruh.

Yeah I imagine Subway isn't very busy this early in the morning. :D

[Redbird 4th & short]

I've gone through this thread, and here are the relevant highlights of me and Redbirds disagreement:

1) he has said that I don't think the MVFC deserves 4 teams in the playoffs and that I have "specifically said so"

2) In reality, I have never said that in this thread. I may have said it in a previous thread, but when my errors in reasoning were pointed out, I adjusted my position to be, basically:



The above is a verbatim quote from this thread clarifying my position. But Redbird still says I don't hold this position over and over, but we'll get to that.

I have not said anything in this thread contradicting this position and I'm not moving the goal post if I've changed my mind when someone pointed out that I was wrong. If I were to change my mind over the course of a conversation/argument, that's changing the goal post. I didn't do that.

My most original claim of this thread that hasn't been rebutted yet is this:


Redbird asked:


I basically agreed with him, but followed:


He then goes on to argue against a position that I haven't made in this thread, relitigating an old argument that I changed my mind on because I was wrong about certain facts. I changed my opinion to fit the facts, but apparently I'm not allowed to do that



But to be clear, I'm still pretty sure I never said anything as asinine like saying the 3-5 MVFC team (especially when I've talked up the 3rd place MVFC team since forever) especially since the NEC/Patriot/etc exist. So at this point, it's pretty essential to keep in mind that Redbird is arguing against a version of me that is half in his imagination and half outdated.

And this is where the communication breaks down. He then eventually said:



And cites a .631 win percentage a couple times (that doesn't include NDSU), but he never makes clear if this is an overall ranking or just by 4-4 teams from the MVFC (I think it's overall). But again, win percentage isn't helpful for the specific conversation we're having IMO because if you have two good teams who keep winning and run up the win percentage definitely makes the conference look good, but it doesn't tell us how well we can expect the fourth and fifth place team in a conference is going to be.

He then again repeats a claim I didn't make



Again, I think I have said this about fourth place teams, but I'm fairly certain I've never made that claim about third place teams. You can show me evidence to the contrary, but I'm pretty sure I never said that. In post #215 I basically said that but I'm not going to quote that post because it's really long like this one:D

I did make a factual error though when I said this:



It's factually incorrect because MVFC doesn't play those teams I've mentioned and to lump them all together is wrong. However, Redbird said I was making **** up, dismissing the entire post (notice I made 3 claims and 2 of them are correct) and so I kind of brushed off the criticism. Again, poor communications skills. But hey, I was wrong, I will own up to that and I will adjust my theory to fit the facts. It's still the case that first round MVFC teams usually get matched up with programs with minimal playoff experience relative to, say, the Southeast regional teams I'm talking about.


And then there's this whole dispute about the dataset we're using, I went back to 2008 because I was lazy and didn't want to go back farther, whereas Clenz/Redbird thought it was unfair because we're "in a new era" and...I understand that. But my thinking was that it's more accurate to have the entire dataset because the CAA has been getting 4 in forever (since like 2004 or 2005) and I'm biased in favor of more data than less. I also agree that if you look at 2010-2011 as they suggest that the gap between the CAA and MVFC shrinks, if not reverses.

However, the reason why I didn't do that is because the fourth place CAA team hasn't been all that bad in that time and the win percentage between the fourth and third CAA are still pretty similar, suggesting some parity, more so than the third place MVFC team and the fourth place MVFC (reiterate: third place MVFC is undefeated in their first round games). So the reason why I include the entire sample as opposed to a smaller version is because I'm not quite convinced that the CAA has jumped the shark and gotten worse (though that may be changing...see last year) so much as the MVFC has gotten better at the top.

So, with that disagreement in mind, I still think the fourth place CAA team is more likely to do better than the fourth place MVFC (unless that MVFC team is UNI/NDSU) but I'm definitely open to the argument that they're slipping over time. It's something we'll have to monitor going forward.
I think I've been clear on how I got to the .631 win % .. it is all MVFC playoff games from 2011-18, excl all NDSU games, and excl all head to head MVFC games (9 games per Professor). That .631 compares favorable to Colonial's .510 no matter how you include or exclude UNH or JMU .. their 2 best teams, because they are both right around .500 as well over this period.

Big Sky and Southland both have about .500 including EWU and SHSU but fall way off when you exclude them each ... to about .360 and .250 respectively. Hence my more recent statement that MVFC's 4th and 5th place teams have close to .500 record .. which while limited game sample size, still compares very favorably to every other conference excl only their top team, except for Colonial who is about .500 no matter how you look at them.

In you most recent posts, you said you are just evaluating how teams and conferences have done during playoffs .. not so much based on regular season. So why you are adamant that our 4th and 5th place teams don't belong in playoffs is beyond me .. they hold their own and do bettter in aggregate than most conferences 2nd-5th place teams, except for Colonial.

But if you add back our 2nd and 3rd place teams we do much better than Colonial. Yet you think Colonial deserves 4 teams and MVFC gets max of 3. And you never answered my other question ... how do you get to 24 teams if Colonial gets 4 and MVFC gets max of 3. I mean clearly on average, MVFC deserves more teams than Big Sky, Southern, Southland, and OVC ... and the remaining conferences are usually 1 bid conference who rarely get 2 bids .. so how do you get to 24 teams ... much less the best 24 teams if MVFC gets max of 3 ??

[bobcathpdevil56]

Soo many words. Eyes crossing, mind numbing

[Reign of Terrier]

I think I've been clear on how I got to the .631 win % .. it is all MVFC playoff games from 2011-18, excl all NDSU games, and excl all head to head MVFC games (9 games per Professor). That .631 compares favorable to Colonial's .510 no matter how you include or exclude UNH or JMU .. their 2 best teams, because they are both right around .500 as well over this period.

Big Sky and Southland both have about .500 including EWU and SHSU but fall way off when you exclude them each ... to about .360 and .250 respectively. Hence my more recent statement that MVFC's 4th and 5th place teams have close to .500 record .. which while limited game sample size, still compares very favorably to every other conference excl only their top team, except for Colonial who is about .500 no matter how you look at them.

In you most recent posts, you said you are just evaluating how teams and conferences have done during playoffs .. not so much based on regular season. So why you are adamant that our 4th and 5th place teams don't belong in playoffs is beyond me .. they hold their own and do bettter in aggregate than most conferences 2nd-5th place teams, except for Colonial.

But if you add back our 2nd and 3rd place teams we do much better than Colonial. Yet you think Colonial deserves 4 teams and MVFC gets max of 3. And you never answered my other question ... how do you get to 24 teams if Colonial gets 4 and MVFC gets max of 3. I mean clearly on average, MVFC deserves more teams than Big Sky, Southern, Southland, and OVC ... and the remaining conferences are usually 1 bid conference who rarely get 2 bids .. so how do you get to 24 teams ... the best 24 teams ??

Again and Again, I have not said that the fourth and fifth place teams don't belong in the playoffs (or at least the fifth place team probably doesn't, but it also depends on the field). I have said that the MVFC deserves at least 3. To clarify, if we're going to give fourth and fifth bids, it should be because we expect those teams to do better than alternative bubble teams. I'm pro-affirmative action for UNI and SDSU and NDSU if they finish fourth.

I concede your point about win percentages, controlling for head to head games because it doesn't contradict my point. Of Southern Illinois, Western Illinois, Illinois State, Youngstown State, Missouri State, Indiana State, and South Dakota, who has (in the same postseason) finished fourth or lower, made the playoffs, and gone on a run where they were eliminated by an MVFC team? Because most of those teams lose to OOC opponents in the playoffs more often than the MVFC.

Looking exclusively at win percentage isn't good enough, because every decent conference has a better win percentage as you go up conference placement (first place is better than second, etc).

And again, you keep saying this:


Yet you think...MVFC gets max of 3.

I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT. NEVER. FOR **** SAKE WTF

- - - Updated - - -


Yeah I imagine Subway isn't very busy this early in the morning. :D

Nah man, nonprofit life = no market efficiency

[JSUSoutherner]

Again and Again, I have not said that the fourth and fifth place teams don't belong in the playoffs (or at least the fifth place team probably doesn't, but it also depends on the field). I have said that the MVFC deserves at least 3. To clarify, if we're going to give fourth and fifth bids, it should be because we expect those teams to do better than alternative bubble teams. I'm pro-affirmative action for UNI and SDSU and NDSU if they finish fourth.

I concede your point about win percentages, controlling for head to head games because it doesn't contradict my point. Of Southern Illinois, Western Illinois, Illinois State, Youngstown State, Missouri State, Indiana State, and South Dakota, who has (in the same postseason) finished fourth or lower, made the playoffs, and gone on a run where they were eliminated by an MVFC team? Because most of those teams lose to OOC opponents in the playoffs more often than the MVFC.

Looking exclusively at win percentage isn't good enough, because every decent conference has a better win percentage as you go up conference placement (first place is better than second, etc).

And again, you keep saying this:



I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT. NEVER. FOR **** SAKE WTF

- - - Updated - - -



Nah man, nonprofit life = no market efficiency

Oh so you work at a bad Subway, got it.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Again and Again, I have not said that the fourth and fifth place teams don't belong in the playoffs (or at least the fifth place team probably doesn't, but it also depends on the field). I have said that the MVFC deserves at least 3. To clarify, if we're going to give fourth and fifth bids, it should be because we expect those teams to do better than alternative bubble teams. I'm pro-affirmative action for UNI and SDSU and NDSU if they finish fourth.

I concede your point about win percentages, controlling for head to head games because it doesn't contradict my point. Of Southern Illinois, Western Illinois, Illinois State, Youngstown State, Missouri State, Indiana State, and South Dakota, who has (in the same postseason) finished fourth or lower, made the playoffs, and gone on a run where they were eliminated by an MVFC team? Because most of those teams lose to OOC opponents in the playoffs more often than the MVFC.

Looking exclusively at win percentage isn't good enough, because every decent conference has a better win percentage as you go up conference placement (first place is better than second, etc).

And again, you keep saying this:



I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT. NEVER. FOR **** SAKE WTF

- - - Updated - - -



Nah man, nonprofit life = no market efficiency
yeah .... ok

[Reign of Terrier]

yeah .... ok

I have said multiple times that MVFC should have at least 3. I never said a cap at 3 for the MVFC, though I'm sympathetic for a cap at 4 for the entire subdivision. Your reading comprehension is terrible, I've cited every instance of you misinterpreting my words or flat out repeating corrections. You've yet to actually correct your statements or provide evidence for the claims you've said I've made.

Again, you are immensely stupid.

[POD Knows]

I have said multiple times that MVFC should have at least 3. I never said a cap at 3 for the MVFC, though I'm sympathetic for a cap at 4 for the entire subdivision. Your reading comprehension is terrible, I've cited every instance of you misinterpreting my words or flat out repeating corrections. You've yet to actually correct your statements or provide evidence for the claims you've said I've made.

Again, you are immensely stupid.A cap at 4 is immensely stupid.

[clenz]

A cap at 4 is immensely stupid.
A 5th MVFC/CAA/Big Sky team is warranted over an extra MEAC/Big South/Pioneer and even Patriot team 99/100 times. Maybe 100/100

[POD Knows]

A 5th MVFC/CAA/Big Sky team is warranted over an extra MEAC/Big South/Pioneer and even Patriot team 99/100 times. Maybe 100/100Absolutely but I kind of like the playoffs being watered down so maybe the MVFC should be limited to 3 or 4. The conference schedule is enough stress for me, I need to wind down when the playoffs come around. :D

[Reign of Terrier]

A cap at 4 is immensely stupid.

I don't think so

A 5th MVFC/CAA/Big Sky team is warranted over an extra MEAC/Big South/Pioneer and even Patriot team 99/100 times. Maybe 100/100

I agree, but usually we're not debating between a 5th place team from the MEAC/Big South/Pioneer/Patriot, but between a 5th (or 6th) from the MVFC/CAA and a third/fourth from Big Sky/Southern/Southland.

I don't think the MEAC/Big South/Pioneer/Patriot/OVC need a second bid at all, unless said second bid has a recent history of playoff success and or a big regular season S.O.S. (so, for instance, if Kennesaw State wins the Big South this year and wins a playoff team or two, but doesn't next year but finishes like 9-2 or something and beats Wofford in the regular season, they would qualify for this special consideration).

[clenz]

I don't think so


I agree, but usually we're not debating between a 5th place team from the MEAC/Big South/Pioneer/Patriot, but between a 5th (or 6th) from the MVFC/CAA and a third/fourth from Big Sky/Southern/Southland.

I don't think the MEAC/Big South/Pioneer/Patriot/OVC need a second bid at all, unless said second bid has a recent history of playoff success and or a big regular season S.O.S. (so, for instance, if Kennesaw State wins the Big South this year and wins a playoff team or two, but doesn't next year but finishes like 9-2 or something and beats Wofford in the regular season, they would qualify for this special consideration).
I'm still taking a 5th MVFC over a 3rd SLC.

[Reign of Terrier]

I'm still taking a 5th MVFC over a 3rd SLC.

we saw that matchup in 2017 and it was a good one. Yes, USD won that one but it wasn't like they were *that much* better.

My point in all of this is that all of these edge teams are within margin of error of each other and the national field benefits from as much representation from the power conferences as possible.

Having said that, the SLC does have its problems and needs to win some games, as they are the weakest link, usually, outside of SHSU

[clenz]

we saw that matchup in 2017 and it was a good one. Yes, USD won that one but it wasn't like they were *that much* better.

My point in all of this is that all of these edge teams are within margin of error of each other and the national field benefits from as much representation from the power conferences as possible.

Having said that, the SLC does have its problems and needs to win some games, as they are the weakest link, usually, outside of SHSU
That USD team was a 1 man team. It was legit the 5th place team. No tie breakers needed. It won 4 MVFC games that year

It went on the road and beat 7-2 in the SLC, 3rd place, Nicholls - who was 5-0 at home on the season. Put up over 450 yards of offense on that team.

Then because you like to complain about back to back plane travel games

went to SHSU the next week - 8-1 in conference play and beat Nicholls 66-14 earlier in the season. Put up 42 points and 640 yards of offense. The entire game changed because of a 4 minute stretch at the end of the first. SHSU scored a TD, USD threw a pick that turned into a TD for SHSU - SHSU scored to make it 14-7 and the ensuring possession was a pick which was turned into a 21-7 lead. The second quarter avalanched from there AND YET USD had made it a 42-44 game with 10 minutes left in the game.

In Houston
2nd straight week flying halfway across the country - something you said is terrible

5th place and barely ranked USD had top 5, only consistently good, SLC team on the ****ing ropes.

That same program went winless in MVFC play the same year they puckered Montana's buttholes as tight as they can be puckered...in Missoula. Had a lead in the third quater - and once again a turn over lead to two quick strike TDs to give Montana the win.

I think if we look at the SLC history vs the MVFC you're going to see a pattern emerge REAL quick

[IBleedYellow]

Go Bison.

[Reign of Terrier]

That USD team was a 1 man team. It was legit the 5th place team. No tie breakers needed. It won 4 MVFC games that year

It went on the road and beat 7-2 in the SLC, 3rd place, Nicholls - who was 5-0 at home on the season. Put up over 450 yards of offense on that team.

Then because you like to complain about back to back plane travel games

went to SHSU the next week - 8-1 in conference play and beat Nicholls 66-14 earlier in the season. Put up 42 points and 640 yards of offense. The entire game changed because of a 4 minute stretch at the end of the first. SHSU scored a TD, USD threw a pick that turned into a TD for SHSU - SHSU scored to make it 14-7 and the ensuring possession was a pick which was turned into a 21-7 lead. The second quarter avalanched from there AND YET USD had made it a 42-44 game with 10 minutes left in the game.

In Houston
2nd straight week flying halfway across the country - something you said is terrible

5th place and barely ranked USD had top 5, only consistently good, SLC team on the ****ing ropes.

That same program went winless in MVFC play the same year they puckered Montana's buttholes as tight as they can be puckered...in Missoula. Had a lead in the third quater - and once again a turn over lead to two quick strike TDs to give Montana the win.

I think if we look at the SLC history vs the MVFC you're going to see a pattern emerge REAL quick

Explaining the specific details of a team winning/losing doesn't explain away the consistent trend of 4th/5th place MVFC teams to the general FCS. <shrug emoji> USD wasn't head and shoulders above either of those teams as your rhetoric suggests.

Losing close to a good team in the playoffs isn't something to boast about. It's still losing. There's lots of FCS teams in all conferences that can boast about the shoulda/coulda/woulda but very few from the power conferences (even the SLC, which we've established is weaker) get blown out. Everyone's in the margin of error in the playoffs, unless they're playing NDSU

[clenz]

Oh...and that SHSU team that beat USD went to get ****ed by NDSU 55-13

giving up more points and scoring less points than USD did against that same NDSU team



You love facts - unless your logic is used against you.

FOH

[Reign of Terrier]

Oh...and that SHSU team that beat USD went to get ****ed by NDSU 55-13

giving up more points and scoring less points than USD did against that same NDSU team



You love facts - unless your logic is used against you.

FOH

The only thing you've proven here is that the transitive property doesn't work in football and or NDSU is a different team in the playoffs than the regular season.


The entire MVFC ethos is based on this transitive property, computer ranking correlation mode of thinking which isn't really predictive. I don't see how "our average team got beaten by SHSU by double digits before NDSU curbstomped them" is a coherent argument for anything other than the undependable nature of transitive comparison.

[clenz]

You want trends and not details? Tell me what this trend looks like to you

MVFC/Gatewayvs. each conference (regular season and playoffs)
Big Sky 62-41
Big South 10-3
CAA 24-18 (Yankee and A10 are CAA)
Great West 18-6
MEAC 21-1
NEC 22-0
OVC 139-67-1
Patriot 5-3
Pioneer 40-2
Southern 12-15 (App State, Marshall and Georgia Southern account for 12 of those wins)
Southland 56-49-2 and about 90% of those wins came before 2007
SWAC 17-1
Indy 84-55 (now FBS teams account for 38 of them...Youngstown State (now a conference member) is has 11 of them

[IBleedYellow]

Joe Biden.

I mean Go Bison.

[IBleedYellow]

You want trends and not details? Tell me what this trend looks like to you

MVFC/Gatewayvs. each conference (regular season and playoffs)
Big Sky 62-41
Big South 10-3
CAA 24-18 (Yankee and A10 are CAA)
Great West 18-6
MEAC 21-1
NEC 22-0
OVC 139-67-1
Patriot 5-3
Pioneer 40-2
Southern 12-15 (App State, Marshall and Georgia Southern account for 12 of those wins)
Southland 56-49-2 and about 90% of those wins came before 2007
SWAC 17-1
Indy 84-55 (now FBS teams account for 38 of them...Youngstown State (now a conference member) is has 11 of them


SoCon is nothing without those guys.

[Reign of Terrier]

You want trends and not details? Tell me what this trend looks like to you

MVFC/Gatewayvs. each conference (regular season and playoffs)
Big Sky 62-41
Big South 10-3
CAA 24-18 (Yankee and A10 are CAA)
Great West 18-6
MEAC 21-1
NEC 22-0
OVC 139-67-1
Patriot 5-3
Pioneer 40-2
Southern 12-15 (App State, Marshall and Georgia Southern account for 12 of those wins)
Southland 56-49-2 and about 90% of those wins came before 2007
SWAC 17-1
Indy 84-55 (now FBS teams account for 38 of them...Youngstown State (now a conference member) is has 11 of them

Cool Cool, now tell me about non-seeded teams without autobids.

No one is disputing that the MVFC is the best conference, but most playoff accomplishments are clustered around UNI/SDSU/NDSU, just like most Southern Conference playoff accomplishments were clustered around App State/Marshall/GSU

If we're making specific comparisons, we have to get specific with which teams we're comparing. With bubble teams, you have to factor out the top couple teams. It's not moving the goal posts to say that if we've established that every year the MVFC deserves no less than 3 teams while most other conferences can only be assured two. There's a greater distribution of "solid, in, not on the bubble" teams in the MVFC than anywhere else, but those teams on the bubble are less impressive.

[clenz]

Cool Cool, now tell me about non-seeded teams without autobids.

No one is disputing that the MVFC is the best conference, but most playoff accomplishments are clustered around UNI/SDSU/NDSU, just like most Southern Conference playoff accomplishments were clustered around App State/Marshall/GSU
YSU and ISUr making titles games in the last half decade don't count?

SDSU and UNI haven't done that.

[IBleedYellow]

Cool Cool, now tell me about non-seeded teams without autobids.

No one is disputing that the MVFC is the best conference, but most playoff accomplishments are clustered around UNI/SDSU/NDSU, just like most Southern Conference playoff accomplishments were clustered around App State/Marshall/GSU


How many different times do you want to move the goalposts?

Also Redbird and Short has create these records without NDSU in them, by the way.

[Reign of Terrier]

YSU and ISUr making titles games in the last half decade don't count?

SDSU and UNI haven't done that.

They were in the top 3 of the MVFC so it wasn't unexpected. As for their general accomplishments, they've done little outside of those same years, while other teams like Towson have performed similarly, making a title and not doing much else.

[clenz]

How many different times do you want to move the goalposts?

Also Redbird and Short has create these records without NDSU in them, by the way.
Let's take JMU UNH and say Richmond out of the CAA over the last decade

Let's take Marshall, App and Georgia Southern out of the SoCon

Lets take Montana EWU and like Weber or SUU out of the Big Sky

What a ****ed up goal post movement.

[clenz]

They were in the top 3 of the MVFC so it wasn't unexpected. As for their general accomplishments, they've done little outside of those same years, while other teams like Towson have performed similarly, making a title and not doing much else.
Oh..so now it's based on "expected"

Cool...


YSU wasn't expected to do what they did. won @ Jacksonville State and @ EWU to get to the title game. Jax State was coming off a title game appearance.
ISUr was projected like 6th in the conference that year

[Reign of Terrier]

How many different times do you want to move the goalposts?

Also Redbird and Short has create these records without NDSU in them, by the way.

It's not moving the goal posts. I've conceded that the top 3 in the MVFC, whoever that may be deserves to be in the playoffs no matter what, usually. Most playoff wins by the MVFC are clustered among teams that finish in the top 3, usually being NDSU/SDSU/UNI.

We're trying to figure out the bubble teams and compare them based on playoff performance. Those teams are less likely to win playoff games than the top 3 and they're more in line with other bubble teams.

I'm not moving the goal posts, I've made my claim pretty clear and it has yet to be disproven: If you're outside of the top 3 of the MVFC and your name isn't UNI/NDSU/SDSU, you're very likely not going far in the playoffs and your performance is indistinguishable from other playoff teams.

This is a testable theory and it's a relevant one for comparing bubble teams. I don't need to compare how the fifth place team in the MVFC will do compared to the 1st place Southern/Big Sky/Southland/etc because it's not a fair comparison because we know the first place teams will likely get farther. Similarly, it's not fair to compare the third place Big Sky team to the third place MVFC because MVFC is more likely to get farther. The third place MVFC team isn't going to be on the bubble whereas a third/fourth Big Sky team is. You compare bubble teams to bubble teams, basically.

[Redbird007]

A cap at 4 is immensely stupid.

Have to agree that caps for any conference is nonsense. Just another obstacle to getting the best football teams into the playoffs.

[Reign of Terrier]

Let's take JMU UNH and say Richmond out of the CAA over the last decade

Let's take Marshall, App and Georgia Southern out of the SoCon

Lets take Montana EWU and like Weber or SUU out of the Big Sky

What a ****ed up goal post movement.

Moving the goal post is saying we should give ISU-B a playoff bid, who has 2 wins all time, because NDSU has 30. It shifts the burden of proof from the all time performance of the team in question unto the conference on a whole, which relies heavily (by definition) on the performance of non-bubble teams.

You can take out App/Marshall/GSU and you still have two socon teams likely to win their playoff game. The same goes for the CAA. That's what having a relatively deep conference does.

The FCS is a subdivision of teams more than they are a subdivision of conferences, with the same teams winning playoff games at a predictable rate. I like looking at the subdivision through the lens of tears (as there are 3-4 distinct tears), but if we're talking about playoff bubble teams and whether or not someone should get a bid, looking at how teams in the same conference ranking have faired (given that they are not one of the playoff stalwarts like Wofford, KSU, UNI, SDSU, EWU, etc) is more helpful than just saying "well this team plays in this conference and they are good" because the latter can lead to over-representation which isn't fair to everyone else, especially if similar teams would do just as well.


Oh..so now it's based on "expected"

Cool...


YSU wasn't expected to do what they did. won @ Jacksonville State and @ EWU to get to the title game. Jax State was coming off a title game appearance.
ISUr was projected like 6th in the conference that year

But they finished in the top 3 in the MVFC that's what counts here. I can't tell you who will get anywhere in the playoffs in the preseason, but if you show me the final conference standings, with this little formula I can predict who is likely to win a playoff game before even seeing the matchup.

This is true not just for the MVFC, but for like every other conference too. It's not perfect but at least it's falsifiable.

This was always about expected outcome (winning at least one playoff game) because that's the entire point of getting in the playoffs...because you expect to win

[Redbird 4th & short]

I have said multiple times that MVFC should have at least 3. I never said a cap at 3 for the MVFC, though I'm sympathetic for a cap at 4 for the entire subdivision. Your reading comprehension is terrible, I've cited every instance of you misinterpreting my words or flat out repeating corrections. You've yet to actually correct your statements or provide evidence for the claims you've said I've made.

Again, you are immensely stupid.
too funny dude .. you said it many times and in contrast to Colonial possibly deserving 4, while capping MVFC at 3.

So here is yet another (roll eyes everyone !!!) way to look at Colonial vs MVFC since 2011 - actually less numbers and possibly more interesting. Since 2011 (turning point IMO), they've each gotten 5 bids (or more) twice each. Presumably they each got these bids because they had obviously strong years compared to rest of FCS in the eyes of the FCS selection committee .. let's see how each fared in their most dominant years sinc 2011

- 2011 CAA got 5 teams .. they went 3-5 .. note, no Colonial head to head games .. interesting how they used to go out of their way to help Colonial avoide head to head when they were the dominant conference.

- 2014 MVFC got 5 teams .. we went 10-4, or 6-4 without NDSU .. remove the 3-3 head to head MVFC, and we went 7-1 against all other conferences

- 2015 MVFC got 5 teams .. we went 8-4, or 4-4 without NDSU .. remove the 2-2 head to head MVFC, and we went 6-2 against all other conferences; note all 5 MVFC teams got placed on same half of bracket - that never happened when Colonial was dominating the playoffs. And the selection committee issued public statement acknowledging this slight to MVFC.

- 2018 CAA got 6 teams .. they went 3-6, remove the 1 head to head game and they went 2-5.

So a survey of 4 playoff seasons when Colonial or MVFC was viewed as most dominant. MVFC went 13-3 against all the other conferences playoff teams, while Colonial went 5-10 ... in their 2 strongest seasons.

Most people would call that a slam dunk ... both conferences at their peak too. xcoffeex


p.s. I'll let Reign analyze how the 4th place teams did those years .. I'm too afraid it might tip scales back in Colonial favor. xlolx

[lucchesicourt]

You know what's funny? What you do in the past does not necessarily carry over to the future. The All Star baseball game was owned by the American league for years, and then, all of sudden the National league owned it for many years. Now the American league has owned it for several years. This will and is the same with football. Teams will never be able to continue winning as long as they run into someone they do not match up with, or cannot avoid injuries, or the weather affects the games they play, etc. There are many things that give advantages to other teams regardless of how good a team is. And, when this happens it can easily alter the results. UC Davis is playing NDSU this year in there place. So, they have homefield advantage.
Let's assume the Aggies lose by 1- which is the better team? Does the visit team get a win even thought they are outscored? No. NDSU was better than the Aggies many years in D2. Oh, and then a QB named Ken O'Brien walked onto campus. So, can 1 player make a team better for a short time? Of course. NDSU always has controlled the game by the run, and lately has found some QB's added to the pot who have been very good. Will NDSU continue to get these QBs? who knows. When UCD went D1 and was placed on probation as a (newbie) we could no longer get QBs of the caliber we use to get. Now, they are showing up in droves.
All I know is NDSU is a formidable opponent. But, can they continue to win? Well, a bad break here and there and they could lose a game or two. And, if it happens in the playoffs their season ends. So, even in the past how many games have been won on a bad break or a bad call or missed call? So, forget who is a better league this changes EVERY year. If the national champion loses a playoff game on a bad call, does not mean they were not as good or better than an opponent on a given day?
Or what if they win on a fortunate call? It is very hard to predict winners year in and out and be very accurate especially about an entire league. All you have to go on is wins, who they beat, and who beat them. What league wins the most playoff games does not mean that league was better than another. Like I said it sometimes ends up as to who you are matched up with, weather, calls by officials, a bad break ( such as wide receiver heading into the end zone and shows off too early and drops the ball) and it goes out of the end zone. All I could say is he was an idiot for not doing the fundamentals (PROTECT the BALL).

[clenz]

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/391/899/609.jpg

[Bisonoline]

You know what's funny? What you do in the past does not necessarily carry over to the future. The All Star baseball game was owned by the American league for years, and then, all of sudden the National league owned it for many years. Now the American league has owned it for several years. This will and is the same with football. Teams will never be able to continue winning as long as they run into someone they do not match up with, or cannot avoid injuries, or the weather affects the games they play, etc. There are many things that give advantages to other teams regardless of how good a team is. And, when this happens it can easily alter the results. UC Davis is playing NDSU this year in there place. So, they have homefield advantage.
Let's assume the Aggies lose by 1- which is the better team? Does the visit team get a win even thought they are outscored? No. NDSU was better than the Aggies many years in D2. Oh, and then a QB named Ken O'Brien walked onto campus. So, can 1 player make a team better for a short time? Of course. NDSU always has controlled the game by the run, and lately has found some QB's added to the pot who have been very good. Will NDSU continue to get these QBs? who knows. When UCD went D1 and was placed on probation as a (newbie) we could no longer get QBs of the caliber we use to get. Now, they are showing up in droves.
All I know is NDSU is a formidable opponent. But, can they continue to win? Well, a bad break here and there and they could lose a game or two. And, if it happens in the playoffs their season ends. So, even in the past how many games have been won on a bad break or a bad call or missed call? So, forget who is a better league this changes EVERY year. If the national champion loses a playoff game on a bad call, does not mean they were not as good or better than an opponent on a given day?
Or what if they win on a fortunate call? It is very hard to predict winners year in and out and be very accurate especially about an entire league. All you have to go on is wins, who they beat, and who beat them. What league wins the most playoff games does not mean that league was better than another. Like I said it sometimes ends up as to who you are matched up with, weather, calls by officials, a bad break ( such as wide receiver heading into the end zone and shows off too early and drops the ball) and it goes out of the end zone. All I could say is he was an idiot for not doing the fundamentals (PROTECT the BALL).

xeekxxdontknowx

[Preferred Walk-On]

Bump.

[Redbird 4th & short]

You know what's funny? What you do in the past does not necessarily carry over to the future. The All Star baseball game was owned by the American league for years, and then, all of sudden the National league owned it for many years. Now the American league has owned it for several years. This will and is the same with football. Teams will never be able to continue winning as long as they run into someone they do not match up with, or cannot avoid injuries, or the weather affects the games they play, etc. There are many things that give advantages to other teams regardless of how good a team is. And, when this happens it can easily alter the results. UC Davis is playing NDSU this year in there place. So, they have homefield advantage.
Let's assume the Aggies lose by 1- which is the better team? Does the visit team get a win even thought they are outscored? No. NDSU was better than the Aggies many years in D2. Oh, and then a QB named Ken O'Brien walked onto campus. So, can 1 player make a team better for a short time? Of course. NDSU always has controlled the game by the run, and lately has found some QB's added to the pot who have been very good. Will NDSU continue to get these QBs? who knows. When UCD went D1 and was placed on probation as a (newbie) we could no longer get QBs of the caliber we use to get. Now, they are showing up in droves.
All I know is NDSU is a formidable opponent. But, can they continue to win? Well, a bad break here and there and they could lose a game or two. And, if it happens in the playoffs their season ends. So, even in the past how many games have been won on a bad break or a bad call or missed call? So, forget who is a better league this changes EVERY year. If the national champion loses a playoff game on a bad call, does not mean they were not as good or better than an opponent on a given day?
Or what if they win on a fortunate call? It is very hard to predict winners year in and out and be very accurate especially about an entire league. All you have to go on is wins, who they beat, and who beat them. What league wins the most playoff games does not mean that league was better than another. Like I said it sometimes ends up as to who you are matched up with, weather, calls by officials, a bad break ( such as wide receiver heading into the end zone and shows off too early and drops the ball) and it goes out of the end zone. All I could say is he was an idiot for not doing the fundamentals (PROTECT the BALL).

This all started with a preseason poll and then the inevitable comparisons to last years season ending poll, which inevitably led to discussion of playoffs and regular season .. and progosticating in general, all with the purpose of determine who deserves the at large bids. Ignoring history would be downright foolish. Then as season progresses, that becomes part of your history and it gradually puts less weight on prior seasons. But you always consider a programs history. Teams that consistently reload and rebuild deserve the early season benefit of doubt. And team that play tougher SOS get full credit .. and sometimes 7-4 is way better than 9-2.

[uni88]

Cool Cool, now tell me about non-seeded teams without autobids.

No one is disputing that the MVFC is the best conference, but most playoff accomplishments are clustered around UNI/SDSU/NDSU, just like most Southern Conference playoff accomplishments were clustered around App State/Marshall/GSU

If we're making specific comparisons, we have to get specific with which teams we're comparing. With bubble teams, you have to factor out the top couple teams. It's not moving the goal posts to say that if we've established that every year the MVFC deserves no less than 3 teams while most other conferences can only be assured two. There's a greater distribution of "solid, in, not on the bubble" teams in the MVFC than anywhere else, but those teams on the bubble are less impressive.

Does that mean that if you don't finish first in the SoCon and your name isn't App State/Marshall/GSU that you shouldn't get a bid?

[JSUSoutherner]

Does that mean that if you don't finish first in the SoCon and your name isn't App State/Marshall/GSU that you shouldn't get a bid?

That's what it sounds like to me.

[lucchesicourt]

I thought this was about what league is better,and not individual school

[Redbird 4th & short]

I thought this was about what league is better,and not individual school
from my perpsective, all the back and forth on which league is better was really about SOS inside your own conf and who deserves more playoff bids.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

from my perpsective, all the back and forth on which league is better was really about SOS inside your own conf and who deserves more playoff bids.


Best: Valley

Conference that has been hosed during playoff selection: Valley

[F'N Hawks]

Best: Valley

Conference that has been hosed during playoff selection: Valley

It's The Valley to you.

[JSUSoutherner]

It's The Valley to you.

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"

[POD Knows]

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"
xlmaoxxlmaox

[F'N Hawks]

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"

Don't get it......

[POD Knows]

Don't get it......
You will. Give it a couple years

[F'N Hawks]

You will. Give it a couple years

The comment will apply in a couple years?

[TheRevSFA]

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"

This is gold.

[TheKingpin28]

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"

Well ****ing played!

[F'N Hawks]

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"

The Valley is ****ing tougher than ****, best conference in FCS. Should get 5 teams a year minimum in playoffs, IMO. Every game is tough.

[TheRevSFA]

The Valley is ****ing tougher than ****, best conference in FCS. Should get 5 teams a year minimum in playoffs, IMO. Every game is tough.

You still don’t get it

[F'N Hawks]

You still don’t get it

You're just jealous cause The Valley is so ****ing powerful top to bottom. Waayyyy better than the Southland, not even close.

[TheKingpin28]

You're just jealous cause The Valley is so ****ing powerful top to bottom. Waayyyy better than the Southland, not even close.

The humor is lost on you.

[TheRevSFA]

You're just jealous cause The Valley is so ****ing powerful top to bottom. Waayyyy better than the Southland, not even close.

Please keep not getting the joke made about you. It’s really ****ing amusing.

[Bisonoline]

Why does this post read like a Vanderbilt fan chanting "SEC! SEC! SEC!"

xbowx xlmaoxxlmaox

[Daytripper]

This may be the longest, most excruciating, thread is the history of AGS. Somebody prove me wrong.

[JSUSoutherner]

This may be the longest, most excruciating, thread is the history of AGS. Somebody prove me wrong.

https://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?135592-Official-2013-Chattanooga-Who-is-laughing-now-Thread/page296&p=2367122#post2367122

[Bisonoline]

https://www.anygivensaturday.com/showthread.php?135592-Official-2013-Chattanooga-Who-is-laughing-now-Thread/page296&p=2367122#post2367122

Oh my that was epic. Hey what happened to that mentally challenged bozo?

[JSUSoutherner]

Oh my that was epic. Hey what happened to that mentally challenged bozo?Chattanooga became irrelevant.

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

This may be the longest, most excruciating, thread is the history of AGS. Somebody prove me wrong.



https://i.imgflip.com/d68xm.gif (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj9jqPo3_rjAhUMB50JHXhbArAQjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgflip.com%2Fgif%2Fd68xm&psig=AOvVaw1ci24Q8X0wc8p5ryyuv3HY&ust=1565610510263461)

[F'N Hawks]

Please keep not getting the joke made about you. It’s really ****ing amusing.
You need to keep not getting how much of an absolute gauntlet The Valley is. It's the Cargill of football - total meat grinder. So amusing.

[TheRevSFA]

You need to keep not getting how much of an absolute gauntlet The Valley is. It's the Cargill of football - total meat grinder. So amusing.

No one has insulted the valley; they’ve just insulted you and your school, dumbass.

[TheRevSFA]

Oh my that was epic. Hey what happened to that mentally challenged bozo?

I wonder if FH is chattown as a grad transfer.

[JSUSoutherner]

I wonder if FH is chattown as a grad transfer.

Please, that fool couldn't graduate. Even from Shattanooga.

[F'N Hawks]

No one has insulted the valley; they’ve just insulted you and your school, dumbass.

Hate on, hata. The Valley rules.

[JSUSoutherner]

Hate on, hata. The Valley rules.

SEC! SEC! SEC!

[TheKingpin28]

I wonder if FH is chattown as a grad transfer.


Please, that fool couldn't graduate. Even from Shattanooga.


SEC! SEC! SEC!

SUBWAY! SUBWAY! SUBWAY!

[JSUSoutherner]

SUBWAY! SUBWAY! SUBWAY!

No.

[TheKingpin28]

No.

Maybe

[JSUSoutherner]

Maybe

No.

[F'N Hawks]

SEC! SEC! SEC!

MVFC, MVFC, MVFC!!!! All day. Our conference is the bestest of the best.

[JSUSoutherner]

MVFC, MVFC, MVFC!!!! All day. Our conference is the bestest of the best.Yup. You and whoever Mer is.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190811/cf4190e7496643d53bd4ede7e9202c1e.jpg

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk

[F'N Hawks]

Yup. You and whoever Mer is.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190811/cf4190e7496643d53bd4ede7e9202c1e.jpg

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk

What's your point, bro?

[JSUSoutherner]

What's your point, bro?I'm just curious if you guys have ever beaten an MVFC team with a winning record.

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

too funny dude .. you said it many times and in contrast to Colonial possibly deserving 4, while capping MVFC at 3.

So here is yet another (roll eyes everyone !!!) way to look at Colonial vs MVFC since 2011 - actually less numbers and possibly more interesting. Since 2011 (turning point IMO), they've each gotten 5 bids (or more) twice each. Presumably they each got these bids because they had obviously strong years compared to rest of FCS in the eyes of the FCS selection committee .. let's see how each fared in their most dominant years sinc 2011

- 2011 CAA got 5 teams .. they went 3-5 .. note, no Colonial head to head games .. interesting how they used to go out of their way to help Colonial avoide head to head when they were the dominant conference.

- 2014 MVFC got 5 teams .. we went 10-4, or 6-4 without NDSU .. remove the 3-3 head to head MVFC, and we went 7-1 against all other conferences

- 2015 MVFC got 5 teams .. we went 8-4, or 4-4 without NDSU .. remove the 2-2 head to head MVFC, and we went 6-2 against all other conferences; note all 5 MVFC teams got placed on same half of bracket - that never happened when Colonial was dominating the playoffs. And the selection committee issued public statement acknowledging this slight to MVFC.

- 2018 CAA got 6 teams .. they went 3-6, remove the 1 head to head game and they went 2-5.

So a survey of 4 playoff seasons when Colonial or MVFC was viewed as most dominant. MVFC went 13-3 against all the other conferences playoff teams, while Colonial went 5-10 ... in their 2 strongest seasons.

Most people would call that a slam dunk ... both conferences at their peak too. xcoffeex


p.s. I'll let Reign analyze how the 4th place teams did those years .. I'm too afraid it might tip scales back in Colonial favor. xlolx

oops, warned you I wasn't done yet .. xpeacex .. I missed 2017, got 5 that year, not 4 .. so MVFC has 3 years in last 8 where we got 5 teams

- 2017 MVFC got 5 teams .. we went 8-4, or 4-4 without NDSU .. remove the 1-1 head to head MVFC, and we went 7-3 against all other conferences

So in our 3 peak years over 2011-18, MVFC went 20-6 against non-MVFC playoff teams, or 8-6 excluding NDSU .. compared to Colonial's 5-10 in their 2 peak years ... years where both teams were viewed by committee as most dominant.

And one last observation .... in Colonials 2 most dominant years according to committee (2011, 2018), when they got 11 total teams that went 5-10 in non-Colonial games, MVFC got just 5 teams total (2 being NDSU) and went 4-2 in non-MVFC playoff games (excl NDSU), or 12-2 including NDSU. Note how our 3 non-NDSU MVFC teams won 4 non-MVFC games (still excl NDSU's 8 wins), while Colonial's 11 playoff teams won just 5 games against non-Colonial teams ... transated, just 1 more win across all 11 of their teams to our 3 teams ... in the 2 alleged dominant Colonial years since 2011.

And with that, I rest my case ...

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/dd/7b/5b/dd7b5b53a1a34bd42d569832a8469f3a.jpg
(https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjphOSQ9PrjAhVSGs0KHaB4BI0QjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fpin%2F505388 389429029819%2F&psig=AOvVaw0ZmBGrL2JQUruJzq3s9tX6&ust=1565615947721282)

[TheRevSFA]

I'm just curious if you guys have ever beaten an MVFC team with a winning record.

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk

The last time they beat a current mvfc team who had a winning record, it was when South Dakota was in the great west conference

[POD Knows]

The last time they beat a current mvfc team who had a winning record, it was when South Dakota was in the great west conferenceYea, but they have dominated the other tier of South Dakota college football, they bitch slapped the School of Mines, Black Hills State and the University of Sioux Falls, oh wait, they lost to the USF. Sorry, my bad.

[F'N Hawks]

I'm just curious if you guys have ever beaten an MVFC team with a winning record.

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk

Never have, too tough of a league. Shows how ridiculously strong the MVFC is! Curb stompin fools.

[JSUSoutherner]

Never have, too tough of a league. Shows how ridiculously strong the MVFC is! Curb stompin fools.

Here's an alternative theory:

UND hasn't spent enough time in the weight room.

[Redbird 4th & short]

The last time they beat a current mvfc team who had a winning record, it was when South Dakota was in the great west conference

And how did South Dakota do their 1st year in MVFC ??? 0-8 in conf, 1-10 overall .... but they did beat Patriots 6-0 autobid Colgate in OOC game .. Colgate was 8-3 overall, lost in playoffs to powerhouse from NEC, Wagner. To be fair to USD, they weren't exactly getting blown out every game in 2012. But 2 years later, they went 0-8 again and were getting beat worse. But they put it together eventually in 2017 .. that was a very good team that got beat up as season progressed or they would have made more noise in playoffs.

UND, welcome to MVFC ... I tend to doubt you will go 0-8 in your first year, but be thankful you didnt have to join this year. You got your hands full this year compared to your schedule last year.

[TheRevSFA]

Never have, too tough of a league. Shows how ridiculously strong the MVFC is! Curb stompin fools.

Congrats on being the Vanderbilt of the MVFC

[FUBeAR]

Yup. You and whoever Mer is.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190811/cf4190e7496643d53bd4ede7e9202c1e.jpg

Sent from my Galaxy S9+ using Tapatalk
Merrimack, I believe...or, possibly, the other SoCon schools have secretly voted Mercer off the island.

[F'N Hawks]

And how did South Dakota do their 1st year in MVFC ??? 0-8 in conf, 1-10 overall .... but they did beat Patriots 6-0 autobid Colgate in OOC game .. Colgate was 8-3 overall, lost in playoffs to powerhouse from NEC, Wagner. To be fair to USD, they weren't exactly getting blown out every game in 2012. But 2 years later, they went 0-8 again and were getting beat worse. But they put it together eventually in 2017 .. that was a very good team that got beat up as season progressed or they would have made more noise in playoffs.

UND, welcome to MVFC ... I tend to doubt you will go 0-8 in your first year, but be thankful you didnt have to join this year. You got your hands full this year compared to your schedule last year.

We aren't in The Valley this year? Wut

[TheRevSFA]

We aren't in The Valley this year? Wut

You technically aren’t.

[Redbird 4th & short]

We aren't in The Valley this year? Wut
You play a Big Sky schedule ... right ?

[F'N Hawks]

You play a Big Sky schedule ... right ?

I was told we are the Vandy of the MVFC, which is the best conference ever in FCS, so I believed it. But, it's hard to wear that title when you aren't even a part of the conference.
Whatever, the MVFC is still a mother ****ing meat grinder and better than everyone else.

[JSUSoutherner]

I was told we are the Vandy of the MVFC, which is the best conference ever in FCS, so I believed it. But, it's hard to wear that title when you aren't even a part of the conference.
Whatever, the MVFC is still a mother ****ing meat grinder and better than everyone else.

When were you told that?

[IBleedYellow]

When were you told that?

He went to UND, his education and reading comprehension is showing.