If You Could Ask The Selection Committee A Question...

[ursus arctos horribilis]

what would it be?

[cx500d]

Does this suit make me look fat?

[putter]

Can they PLEASE end regionalization?

[cx500d]

Can they remove sanctioning for schools that don’t participate in post season play

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Can they PLEASE end regionalization?


This and please no use of the coaches poll.

[Sycamore62]

Do you watch football?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Can they PLEASE end regionalization?

How would the committee do that? That is the NCAA bylaws, and the committee has to follow those, they don't have some choice in the matter.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Do you watch football?

They watch more than you and I do and probably anyone else here.

[JSUSoutherner]

I would like to ask committee chair, Greg Seitz, one question:

”When are you firing Grass?”

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I'm looking for real questions we would/could ask a committee member. If it's a **** off session I'll just close it up and move on with something more productive.

Looking for real questions like at least what Putter had on this one. I'm sorry I just don't have a bunch of time ot sift through the gravel today on the question at hand here.

[centennial]

How much do they care about SOS?

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

How would the committee do that? That is the NCAA bylaws, and the committee has to follow those, they don't have some choice in the matter.


Regionalization is in D2 and D3.

FCS playoffs specifically says they have to do this?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

How much do they care about SOS?

xthumbsupx

[Bisonoline]

Regionalization is in D2 and D3.

FCS playoffs specifically says they have to do this?

They say they try not to in the first round. After that it is what it is.
All they have to do is seed the teams the way they should be seeded without regard to saving money.

[Daytripper]

Can you explain your reasoning one more time because I don't get it?

[Bisonoline]

Do you really look at good losses and bad losses and is there really such a thing???

[jmu007]

They say they try not to in the first round. After that it is what it is.
All they have to do is seed the teams the way they should be seeded without regard to saving money.

According to past interviews they already do this. The seeding is just ranking the vote 1 - 8 and then regionalization and everything else happens after those top 8 are set.

[cx500d]

How could you have overlooked New Hampshire last year?

[Bisonoline]

According to past interviews they already do this. The seeding is just ranking the vote 1 - 8 and then regionalization and everything else happens after those top 8 are set.

Why even do that if you are going to regionalize the rest? Nothing changes.

[Hammerhead]

Isn't every D-1 tournament regionalized?


Regionalization is in D2 and D3.

FCS playoffs specifically says they have to do this?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Why even do that if you are going to regionalize the rest? Nothing changes.

There are as many arguments for as against here Oline on that matter and strict setting of the field via fairly subjective standards with a 1-24 ranking probably does not gain us too much here. This is a hybrid, not perfect by any means but there is no system that everyone is ever gonna be happy with.

The tournament is about crowning one champion and having the champions of each conference represented first and THEN all the others to fill in the bracket. So if you get a top 8 good for you but the rest has to be done to try and maximize fan support and like it or not regional matchups add that to the mix while being in the arena of cost savings which is specifically what FCS is as a division whether we like it or not.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Have you ever considered minimum requirements for auto-bid teams?

[JacksFan40]

Stop sending us to Fargo. It’s not a question but you get the point.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Have you ever considered minimum requirements for auto-bid teams?

Quantify this? Do you mean other than winning the conference? That is the minimum requirement and as it should be if the conference qualifies for the playoffs or am I completely missing what you are asking here GLTUO?

It is another thing that would probably be better served asking the NCAA representative and not the committee I think as they don't control that either.

[katss07]

Why didn’t you send SFA to Huntsville in 2014?

[Lorne_Malvo]

Stop sending us to Fargo. It’s not a question but you get the point.

Or: Why do you guys hate SDSU so much?

[MTfan4life]

Can they PLEASE end regionalization?

Do you not remember last year's playoff bracket?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Why didn’t you send SFA to Huntsville in 2014?

I don't think any of the current committee members were there back then but I could look it up and see I guess.

[MTfan4life]

Why didn’t you send SFA to Huntsville in 2014?

I feel like this should be obvious. In-conference rematches are not allowed in the first round. SHSU played SELA in 2014 because they hadn't played each other during the season.

[Professor Chaos]

Does playing and losing multiple FBS games hurt teams in terms of seeding or at-large consideration? It appears that it hurt Austin Peay in 2017 when they were left out at 8-4 (0-3 in FBS games). There are several playoff caliber teams this year that played multiple FBS games and went 0-fer like Weber St, Sac St, Furman, Nicholls, and Abilene Christian.

Last year it was reported that the committee uses the Coaches poll as a tool to determine SOS and quality wins. What is the reasoning behind using the Coaches poll instead of another poll or rankings system like the STATS Poll, the Massey Composite, or the NCAA's own SRS?

Would the committee consider expanding their midseason rankings release to the top 25 rather than just the top 10 and/or would they consider releasing them more frequently than once before Selection Sunday? Perhaps even weekly leading up to Selection Sunday like the College Football Playoff selection committee does?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Does playing and losing multiple FBS games hurt teams in terms of seeding or at-large consideration? It appears that it hurt Austin Peay in 2017 when they were left out at 8-4 (0-3 in FBS games). There are several playoff caliber teams this year that played multiple FBS games and went 0-fer like Weber St, Sac St, Furman, Nicholls, and Abilene Christian.

Last year it was reported that the committee uses the Coaches poll as a tool to determine SOS and quality wins. What is the reasoning behind using the Coaches poll instead of another poll or rankings system like the STATS Poll, the Massey Composite, or the NCAA's own SRS?

Would the committee consider expanding their midseason rankings release to the top 25 rather than just the top 10 and/or would they consider releasing them more frequently than once before Selection Sunday? Perhaps even weekly leading up to Selection Sunday like the College Football Playoff selection committee does?

Excellent.

[BisonTru]

I think I have a pretty good handle on the process but if your interviewing them a breakdown of the process from picking at larges, picking the seeds, pairing the first round, opening the bids, paring the second round, ect. I think your casual fan doesn’t really understand it all very well.

I would be interested in hearing some more detail how picking the seeds and at larges goes like how many times do you vote? Who decides on the final vote or is there a final vote? How much discussion is done before and in between votes?

Also given that a committee member can’t be part of discussions for their team, does that hurt their chances? Can the committee member still vote file them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheKingpin28]

Can you explain how the SRS system works and the mathematical formula behind it?

[cx500d]

Can you explain how the SRS system works and the mathematical formula behind it?

I forget which one of these it is, but its either e=mc^2, or a^2+b^2=c^2

[caribbeanhen]

Can you explain how the SRS system works and the mathematical formula behind it?

You would have a better chance getting Coca-Cola to publish the recipe

[BisonTru]

Can you explain how the SRS system works and the mathematical formula behind it?

Follow up question, with all the computer polls they have a much better track record than the SRS why use it or how much stock do you put into in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BisonTru]

You would have a better chance getting Coca-Cola to publish the recipe

The SRS formula has been out for some time. It’s honestly pretty simple. Too simple imo to be of much use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ursus arctos horribilis]

You would have a better chance getting Coca-Cola to publish the recipe

Well it is a tool used but I'm not sure a committee member would know the inner working of it anyway. They may have some over arching idea and if they do I'm not sure if that would be a secret or not.

I think it was PC that mentioned a few days ago how much better the SRS has gotten and if it is working and getting better they might be willing to throw us a bone and let us know the main parts of what goes into it.

[TheKingpin28]

Follow up question, with all the computer polls they have a much better track record than the SRS why use it or how much stock do you put into in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd just like to know, if they use it, as you said, how much do you use it?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Follow up question, with all the computer polls they have a much better track record than the SRS why use it or how much stock do you put into in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the thing I really want to know is how much leeway do they have to assign differering weights to each of the tools they have at their disposal, and if they want can use something on their own behalf outside of the tools they all are supposed to use. I mean it would seem like you would be able to and just say "It's my feeling on this team" even if you were only supposedly using the tools in front of you.

[BisonTru]

So here’s the SRS formula

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191104/1543d9e3d68c74ed9019730f7a82bc68.jpg

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/football/d1/2019-20D1MFB_PreChampsManual.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BisonTru]

What I don’t understand is they say there is a MOV factor in the SOS, but the SOS is just the average of a teams opponents SRS which doesn’t have a MOV factor?

I doubt the committee could clear that up but maybe someone here could.

Hammerhead?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Prime Power]

This may already be known, but do they take into account injuries and if the player is out or might come back during the playoffs into account when selecting and/or seeding. Also, do they know what a school has bid before or after selecting the 24 teams and setting up the brackets?

[caribbeanhen]

Does the committee look at the AGS poll and what is the general consensus of it?

[apaladin]

Why do you just use the final coaches poll and fill out the bracket without really looking at teams?

[Preferred Walk-On]

I might ask if there has ever been any consideration for "re-seeding" after the first round of the playoffs. For instance, after the 8 games are played, seeding the winners 9-16 and having those teams matched-up against against 1-8 accordingly. I know there are potentially some logistical issues, but then the committee could flat out "regionalize" the first round (with no apologies) without also having to "regionalize" the second round. Perhaps the seeding could be based strictly on the SRS rankings, taking out any committee bias in regionalizing the 2nd round. Probably will never happen, but a person can dream.

[Lorne_Malvo]

I might ask if there has ever been any consideration for "re-seeding" after the first round of the playoffs. For instance, after the 8 games are played, seeding the winners 9-16 and having those teams matched-up against against 1-8 accordingly. I know there are potentially some logistical issues, but then the committee could flat out "regionalize" the first round (with no apologies) without also having to "regionalize" the second round. Perhaps the seeding could be based strictly on the SRS rankings, taking out any committee bias in regionalizing the 2nd round. Probably will never happen, but a person can dream.

No to everything in the above post.

[Preferred Walk-On]

I might ask if there has ever been any consideration for "re-seeding" after the first round of the playoffs. For instance, after the 8 games are played, seeding the winners 9-16 and having those teams matched-up against against 1-8 accordingly. I know there are potentially some logistical issues, but then the committee could flat out "regionalize" the first round (with no apologies) without also having to "regionalize" the second round. Perhaps the seeding could be based strictly on the SRS rankings, taking out any committee bias in regionalizing the 2nd round. Probably will never happen, but a person can dream.


No to everything in the above post.

Ha! You are probably right.

I guess I should rephrase the question: "Will you consider "re-seeding" after the 1st round of the playoffs for the mentioned reasons in the above post, and if not, will you please tell us why not?"

I know this is an exercise in futility, but I would like someone to just flat out be honest about how they pick the bracket, period. I cannot imagine hockey is much of a money-generator (I have been to regionals not in Fargo), short of the Frozen Four, but laker mentioned it in another post - they use a Pairwise rankings system, and after the auto-bids are taken care of, they simply go down the list for at-large bids. Perhaps another question would be why not just do this in FCS?

[IBleedYellow]

I don't think you guys realize that Ursus is going to have time to schedule with the Selection Committee for an interview, and wants honest questions from the board.

Lol

[Lorne_Malvo]

I don't think you guys realize that Ursus is going to have time to schedule with the Selection Committee for an interview, and wants honest questions from the board.

Lol

Well threads go where they go. Like most here do, this one is taking a few detours before it arrives.

[kalm]

Quantify this? Do you mean other than winning the conference? That is the minimum requirement and as it should be if the conference qualifies for the playoffs or am I completely missing what you are asking here GLTUO?

It is another thing that would probably be better served asking the NCAA representative and not the committee I think as they don't control that either.

I think what he’s driving at is awarding AQ’s a reasonable minimum bid that if they meet it, will guarantee a home game. EG: Wagner is the NEC AQ and matched up against a non-seeded JSU in the first round. JSU would obviously host under current bidding rules. A lower minimum bid for a conference champ might change that.

I’m guessing the answer is no as they’d be leaving money on the table.

[that guy]

Do you think the coach's poll is an accurate measure to use in selection process since most coaches do not even fill out their own poll?

[Redbird 4th & short]

Would you consider using a composite of multiple computer and subjective polls to determine SOS ? Then measure/rank every team under consideration and put it right next to their record and margins.

I would suggest STATS or Coaches Poll (i.e. not both, they're nearly identical usually) and AGS for subjective polls, then Massey and Sagarin for objective polls. Again, not for ranking or picking the teams, just for determining relative SOS.

I have only some issue with regionalization .. I would prefer all teams be seeded and the paired according to circle seeding. But I can accept the econmic argument behind their decisions for most part. Where games have big draws, they should try to avoid regionalization were practical.

I also like the idea about minimum requirements for autobids, including multiple bid situations like we might see in Big South this year.

[TheKingpin28]

I don't think you guys realize that Ursus is going to have time to schedule with the Selection Committee for an interview, and wants honest questions from the board.

LolThe sad thing is, some people realized it right away and some went the troll route.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[Gangtackle11]

The one question would be.

Anyone hear from Marty? xpeacex

[kalm]

Would you consider using a composite of multiple computer and subjective polls to determine SOS ? Then measure/rank every team under consideration and put it right next to their record and margins.

I would suggest STATS or Coaches Poll (i.e. not both, they're nearly identical usually) and AGS for subjective polls, then Massey and Sagarin for objective polls. Again, not for ranking or picking the teams, just for determining relative SOS.

I have only some issue with regionalization .. I would prefer all teams be seeded and the paired according to circle seeding. But I can accept the econmic argument behind their decisions for most part. Where games have big draws, they should try to avoid regionalization were practical.

I also like the idea about minimum requirements for autobids, including multiple bid situations like we might see in Big South this year.

I don't for the same reason as selecting at larges. In a typical 11 game season, you're going to sometimes get an 8-3 team (think WIU in 2017) who plays a tough schedule and then has to go on the road to PL champ who they'll be favored over by two scores. There's already enough disparity when it comes to FCS scheduling.

[Professor Chaos]

Would you consider using a composite of multiple computer and subjective polls to determine SOS ? Then measure/rank every team under consideration and put it right next to their record and margins.

I would suggest STATS or Coaches Poll (i.e. not both, they're nearly identical usually) and AGS for subjective polls, then Massey and Sagarin for objective polls. Again, not for ranking or picking the teams, just for determining relative SOS.

I have only some issue with regionalization .. I would prefer all teams be seeded and the paired according to circle seeding. But I can accept the econmic argument behind their decisions for most part. Where games have big draws, they should try to avoid regionalization were practical.

I also like the idea about minimum requirements for autobids, including multiple bid situations like we might see in Big South this year.
As much as I think the AGS Poll is superior to the STATS or Coaches poll I would hope the selection committee never even entertains the notion of using a fan poll as an official tool even if just to quantify SOS. It would worry me to think about how that might skew people's AGS Poll ballots if they knew that the AGS consensus would show up in the committee board room as they were selecting teams and building the bracket even if it's just another number in a list of them next to each team's name.

The AGS Poll has it's place and it's not as a selection committee tool IMO. I wouldn't mind seeing more media publications that follow FCS publish it with the other polls but that's about as "legitimate" as I think a fan poll should ever get.

[Mayville Bison]

Are wins the end-all-be-all? For example, two teams play the exact same schedule except for one game.

Team A beats NAIA 47-3 and goes 8-3
Team B loses to SEC team 47-10 and goes 7-4

If you had to pick one and only one of those teams to go to the playoffs as the #24 team, who would get the choice? Would that answer change if they already played a different NAIA/D2 game? Would that answer change if they already played a different FBS game?

Not the greatest question as the answer would be, "It really depends on how they looked in the rest of their games", but it's still a question I have every year.

[TheKingpin28]

As much as I think the AGS Poll is superior to the STATS or Coaches poll I would hope the selection committee never even entertains the notion of using a fan poll as an official tool even if just to quantify SOS. It would worry me to think about how that might skew people's AGS Poll ballots if they knew that the AGS consensus would show up in the committee board room as they were selecting teams and building the bracket even if it's just another number in a list of them next to each team's name.

The AGS Poll has it's place and it's not as a selection committee tool IMO. I wouldn't mind seeing more media publications that follow FCS publish it with the other polls but that's about as "legitimate" as I think a fan poll should ever get.I mean the STATS poll has fans voting in it, does that automatically disqualify it as well? Serious question.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[TheKingpin28]

How does one determine seeding if let's say, 2 teams are relatively balanced across the board? Does it just come down to who garnered the most votes and then that 2nd team slides down 1 and/or out of the top 8 and dows geographic placement help dictate seeding?

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Are wins the end-all-be-all? For example, two teams play the exact same schedule except for one game.

Team A beats NAIA 47-3 and goes 8-3
Team B loses to SEC team 47-10 and goes 7-4

If you had to pick one and only one of those teams to go to the playoffs as the #24 team, who would get the choice? Would that answer change if they already played a different NAIA/D2 game? Would that answer change if they already played a different FBS game?

Not the greatest question as the answer would be, "It really depends on how they looked in the rest of their games", but it's still a question I have every year.

Same principle applies to seeds. Replace Weber's game against SDSU or Nevada with LIU, Drake, or Morehead who SDSU and JMU faced instead of a second FBS team and you see why Weber has a very legit argument for being the 2 seed if not the one if you replace Butler with an FBS in NDSU's schedule.

Again, scheduling disparity requires close scrutiny of SoS, FBS games. And it's not simply a matter of "schedule better". Some programs need the extra dough and some have geographical challenges in scheduling OOC FCS opponents.

[TheKingpin28]

Can you explain how you came to ranking the top 10 and what New Hampshire has done to move into the top 10 when the consensus is they are not a top 10 team?

[WrenFGun]

Can you explain how you came to ranking the top 10 and what New Hampshire has done to move into the top 10 when the consensus is they are not a top 10 team?

Said this in the other thread. The resumes outside the top 8 suck. I think the fact they were unranked prior to the Nova game is a bit of a slight given the CAA position and resume.

[caribbeanhen]

With the recent rise of the Ivies, does the NCAA care either way if they participate in the Playoffs or not?

I know they are not the NCAA but they do represent them

[TheKingpin28]

Said this in the other thread. The resumes outside the top 8 suck. I think the fact they were unranked prior to the Nova game is a bit of a slight given the CAA position and resume.

I just struggle to understand when using the Massey Composite, not one ranking has them above 11 and then after that it jumps to 14. I'd be fine if they were somewhere between 15-20ish and I think most would agree. If we take out Princeton and Dartmouth, then I'd be fine moving them up 2 spots to 13-18 then. 10 however, I struggle to understand that one.

[Professor Chaos]

Ok, I have a late question that we can file away for next year.

How can you use the Coaches Poll as an official tool when the final regular season poll doesn't get released until ~24 hours after the bracket is revealed?

Still not updated: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/fcs/fcs-coaches-poll

And it makes sense if you think about it. Coaches are kind of busy on Saturdays so it's a little unrealistic to ask them to fill out a top 25 ballot before Sunday morning for the committee's perusal (even though we know Coaches probably aren't the ones voting in this).

[aceinthehole]

I think they rely heavily on the SRS now, more than the polls.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Ok, I have a late question that we can file away for next year.

How can you use the Coaches Poll as an official tool when the final regular season poll doesn't get released until ~24 hours after the bracket is revealed?

Still not updated: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/fcs/fcs-coaches-poll

And it makes sense if you think about it. Coaches are kind of busy on Saturdays so it's a little unrealistic to ask them to fill out a top 25 bracket before Sunday morning for the committee's perusal (even though we know Coaches probably aren't the ones voting in this).

That is a tacit nod that they do not use it. They say it is a tool but members use what they want to use to try and figure out their own ranking but it would be a funny corner to try and get out of except the member we interviewed just flat out said it isn't anything that they have to use so.

That is pretty funny and I was thinking earlier when you posted the STATS that we never see a Coaches Poll and for good reason. You never know though they might put one together and just not release it to anyone except the committee but don't know why you would do that either.

[Schism55]

Can you explain how you came to ranking the top 10 and what New Hampshire has done to move into the top 10 when the consensus is they are not a top 10 team?
How thick was the envelope Marty Scarano handed you under the table? :D

[GAD]

Why do the playoffs start on Thanksgiving Weekend?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I think they rely heavily on the SRS now, more than the polls.

I wouldn't say heavily. If they want to break a tie then they do as far as who is in and where but they rely heavily on their Regional Advisory Committee that each member has access to in their own region as well as discussions among members and actual game watching among them all

Much like it is around here the discussions and the debates back and forth are a big part of it.

[Professor Chaos]

That is a tacit nod that they do not use it. They say it is a tool but members use what they want to use to try and figure out their own ranking but it would be a funny corner to try and get out of except the member we interviewed just flat out said it isn't anything that they have to use so.

That is pretty funny and I was thinking earlier when you posted the STATS that we never see a Coaches Poll and for good reason. You never know though they might put one together and just not release it to anyone except the committee but don't know why you would do that either.
Certainly possible that they don't use it (and this is evidence of that) but one thing that concerned me a bit was during Seitz's interview on the selection show he referenced that UND "had 3 wins over ranked opponents" to their credit. That tells me that one of the metrics they're using is ranking at the time the game was played since I believe both SHSU and UC Davis were ranked at the time UND beat them.

That worries me because the Coaches Poll is even worse earlier in the season when they're slow to move highly ranked teams down when they lose and slow to move lower ranked teams up when they're impressive. I could be reading more into this than I should be but it does seem like they must be using it for something.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Why do the playoffs start on Thanksgiving Weekend?Because the 4th of July is almost 2 months before college football starts............

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[TheKingpin28]

How thick was the envelope Marty Scarano handed you under the table? :D

Something like that. xlolx

[clenz]

The SRS want released until after 4pm Central Time.

They use things they won't put out until after. I have zero confidence they don't just make it up to fit their picks

They had 2 ivy in the top 7

And had UNI seeded in the SRS but decided not to seed them

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[grizband]

Why do the playoffs start on Thanksgiving Weekend?Formerly, I believe this was allow the entire playoffs to finish before Christmas.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

The SRS want released until after 4pm Central Time.

They use things they won't put out until after. I have zero confidence they don't just make it up to fit their picks

They had 2 ivy in the top 7

And had UNI seeded in the SRS but decided not to seed them

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


For UNI.....go out an win. San Diego is a good 1st game. Should be a win and then go to a depleted SDSU team. Hard to beat a good team a 2nd time. Good bracket for UNI.

[ejjones]

Certainly possible that they don't use it (and this is evidence of that) but one thing that concerned me a bit was during Seitz's interview on the selection show he referenced that UND "had 3 wins over ranked opponents" to their credit. That tells me that one of the metrics they're using is ranking at the time the game was played since I believe both SHSU and UC Davis were ranked at the time UND beat them.

That worries me because the Coaches Poll is even worse earlier in the season when they're slow to move highly ranked teams down when they lose and slow to move lower ranked teams up when they're impressive. I could be reading more into this than I should be but it does seem like they must be using it for something.
I don't think that's what he said...I thought he said, they went 1-3 against the field. They only have 1 good win (Mon State). They lost to NDSU, Weber, EWU, and Idaho State. so, looks like he might have misspoke. Maybe 1-2 against the field.

[Sycamore62]

Did they consider seeding 2 teams and making the rest of the field play and give the best winners a bye next week

[lionsrking2]

Certainly possible that they don't use it (and this is evidence of that) but one thing that concerned me a bit was during Seitz's interview on the selection show he referenced that UND "had 3 wins over ranked opponents" to their credit. That tells me that one of the metrics they're using is ranking at the time the game was played since I believe both SHSU and UC Davis were ranked at the time UND beat them.

That worries me because the Coaches Poll is even worse earlier in the season when they're slow to move highly ranked teams down when they lose and slow to move lower ranked teams up when they're impressive. I could be reading more into this than I should be but it does seem like they must be using it for something.

I don't have a problem with evaluating the quality of a win at the time the game is played, though agree entire season of a particular opponent has to be considered. Obviously one can quibble over the accuracy and legitimacy of a particular poll, but few teams stay the same over the course of an 11 to 12 game regular season. You can have a good team that is highly ranked in August/September, fall apart in October/November, for a variety of reasons. Injuries to key players, bad fortune, etc. And likewise, a loss to a perceived bad opponent who maybe went through a rough patch of injuries, and gets healthy, or makes some personnel changes.

[grizband]

Other than the 8 teams selected, was anyone else considered for a seed?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Laker]

What were the first two teams left out and why? Maybe someone answered this already and I missed it.

[Professor Chaos]

What were the first two teams left out and why? Maybe someone answered this already and I missed it.
They listed the first 4 out alphabetically on the selection show. They were EWU, South Carolina St, Southern Illinois, and Towson.

FWIW, the ESPN host asked the committee chairman specifically about SIU and didn't ask about any of those other teams so not sure if that means anything (and it sure looked like the committee chair had his answers rehearsed so he likely knew what questions were coming).

[WileECoyote06]

They listed the first 4 out alphabetically on the selection show. They were EWU, South Carolina St, Southern Illinois, and Towson.

FWIW, the ESPN host asked the committee chairman specifically about SIU and didn't ask about any of those other teams so not sure if that means anything (and it sure looked like the committee chair had his answers rehearsed so he likely knew what questions were coming).

I was hoping they would press him about SCSU because in that interview he mentioned performance against other playoff teams being a factor. SIU went 0-fer against playoff teams, as did Towson. Interestingly enough, so did Furman and Kennesaw State. EWU, SCSU, and UNH all had a win against another playoff bound team.

xcoffeex

I get it: Furman and Kennesaw have been highly ranked all year and maybe one loss shouldn't have tanked their season. Just say that, and own it.

[Professor Chaos]

I was hoping they would press him about SCSU because in that interview he mentioned performance against other playoff teams being a factor. SIU went 0-fer against playoff teams, as did Towson. Interestingly enough, so did Furman and Kennesaw State. EWU, SCSU, and UNH all had a win against another playoff bound team.

xcoffeex

I get it: Furman and Kennesaw have been highly ranked all year and maybe one loss shouldn't have tanked their season. Just say that, and own it.
A pet peeve I've had with the interviews the committee chairs have done on the selection show is it seems like they've always mentioned only the good parts on the resume of the last team(s) in when asked and called out only the bad parts on the resume of the last team(s) left out when asked.

It makes them look bad because, like you said, it gives the impression that they're being inconsistent in what criteria they apply to what teams. Theres nothing wrong with saying that they were splitting hairs with those last few teams and to highlight some things with the last team(s) in that almost got them left out or some things with the first team(s) out that almost got them in but say they felt the good outweighed the bad or vice versa which is why they made the decision they did.

I'm pretty confident the committee was torn in both directions when it comes to those last couple in and first couple out this year just like most years.

[F'N Hawks]

Not sure what UNI is bitching about. Get the Pioneer champ at home and then get the weakest seed in the group after that.

[reeder]

What’s the SRS formula? We have the general parameters but what’s the exact formula? For example margin of victory is considered up to 21 points but exactly how is that included?

Also, can we have SRS updates weekly? The SRS is obviously important so having it would be help to provide more visibility.

[kalm]

Has the committee/NCAA considered using a minimum SOS guideline similar to the 6 DI win guideline?

For example: “Any team with a schedule strength of less than 50 (or 60, or 100, take your pick) places themselves in jeopardy of not being selected for an at large bid.”

It’s not hard and fast allowing for some wiggle room in rare instances, and it might push teams to schedule more aggressively, eliminating some of the scheduling disparity.

And of course teams from traditionally weaker conferences could still win their AQ.

[Professor Chaos]

Has the committee/NCAA considered using a minimum SOS guideline similar to the 6 DI win guideline?

For example: “Any team with a schedule strength of less than 50 (or 60, or 100, take your pick) places themselves in jeopardy of not being selected for an at large bid.”

It’s not hard and fast allowing for some wiggle room in rare instances, and it might push teams to schedule more aggressively, eliminating some of the scheduling disparity.

And of course teams from traditionally weaker conferences could still win their AQ.
As much as I think SOS should be strongly weighed I don't like that just because it takes too much out of the hands of the teams themselves. Take, for instance, SLU this year. They scheduled Jacksonville St and Bethune-Cookman OOC which is a good thing since it wpuld give them (and the other SLC teams they would play) a good cross reference with supposed quality teams from 2 other conferences. JSU turned out to be a dumpster fire this year and their BCU game got cancelled... it's hard to hold that against SLU if they missed that threshold.

[MR. CHICKEN]

....AH'D ASK.......MENTIONIN' NEW HAMPSHIRE...........WAS DAT UH JOKE.....MEANT FO' AGS??...........BRAWK!

[Gangtackle11]

How low was Nova’s bid if there was one? xpeacex

[POD Knows]

Not sure what UNI is bitching about. Get the Pioneer champ at home and then get the weakest seed in the group after that.This, right now I would rather get SDSU in our building than either UND or Nicholls, they are banged up pretty bad and their QB looked terrible against a really, really bad USD D.

Also, did you guys hear anything about the bid process, how did Nicholls get the bid, what were the circumstances.

[kalm]

As much as I think SOS should be strongly weighed I don't like that just because it takes too much out of the hands of the teams themselves. Take, for instance, SLU this year. They scheduled Jacksonville St and Bethune-Cookman OOC which is a good thing since it wpuld give them (and the other SLC teams they would play) a good cross reference with supposed quality teams from 2 other conferences. JSU turned out to be a dumpster fire this year and their BCU game got cancelled... it's hard to hold that against SLU if they missed that threshold.

Hence the soft phrasing "may".

Or make it below 60.

On the other hand it also has the potential to demystify over valued conferences in a given year.

[Sycamore62]

This, right now I would rather get SDSU in our building than either UND or Nicholls, they are banged up pretty bad and their QB looked terrible against a really, really bad USD D.

Also, did you guys hear anything about the bid process, how did Nicholls get the bid, what were the circumstances.

are those things FOIA-able?

[F'N Hawks]

Rumor is UND lost the bid by about $5,000. So I am guessing they bid around 90K. Which, IMO, is too low. Go 6 figures minimum.

[PantherRob82]

Not sure what UNI is bitching about. Get the Pioneer champ at home and then get the weakest seed in the group after that.

I'm not in the group complaining, but, we have a lot of guys coming back from injury so an extra week off and then playing at home would have been nice. Add in getting funneled to another team in our conference who we just played a week ago.

I'm not sure the Pioneer champ is the reward it once was.

[F'N Hawks]

I'm not in the group complaining, but, we have a lot of guys coming back from injury so an extra week off and then playing at home would have been nice. Add in getting funneled to another team in our conference who we just played a week ago.

I'm not sure the Pioneer champ is the reward it once was.

Neither is the MVFC Champion. But, if UND becomes a regular in the playoffs this is our new reality. The main benefactors will be SDSU and UNI - they should be UND's biggest fans. xthumbsupx

[clenz]

Not sure what UNI is bitching about. Get the Pioneer champ at home and then get the weakest seed in the group after that.
The issue is this

1. SDSU finished 4th...freaking 4th...in the Valley. UNI finished second - OUTRIGHT. Alone. All by themselves. Not through tie break or anything else. All alone in second. If SDSU beats USD then zero issues. None. It would be a 2 way tie for second and SDSU wins the tie break...they'd also be 9-3 on the season. In stead they finished with the same record as UNI and with a worse conference record.

Think about that for a second. Let it sink in. SDSU got Illinois State, UNI, and North Dakota State AT HOME this year and played an OOC of Drake, Long Island and Southern Utah. Meanwhile UNI played AT NDSU, AT ISUr, AT SDSU and AT #3 Weber State. If UNI and SDSU switch Weber State and Long Island (I know we can't) SDSU likely is sitting at 7-5 and UNI for 100% at 9-3. I've said it to Thumper many times before. Literally the only difference between UNI and SDSU in the regular season (and thus playoff seeding and ability to make a run) is OOC scheduling. They do it right and UNI does it wrong. That needs to change. SDSU plays Drake, Duquesne, Long Island, Merrimack, APBSU, etc. and UNI is forced to play @ Montana, @ EWU, @ Weber State, @ SUU (in the year they were actually good), @ Cal Poly when they were good, etc.

2. SDSU lost, on the final day of the regular season, to USD. USD had 4 wins going into that game. USD lost to otherwise winless on the season Western Illinois. The final thing the committee saw from SDSU was losing to 4 win South Dakota. A team the #7 team in the country should beat by at least 2 scores - ESPECIALLY WHEN A TOP 3 OR 4 SEED IS ON THE LINE. You'd think they had EVERYTHING to play for. Meanwhile UNI pulls out a 31 point win over a team that beat USD.

3. "Style" points were mentioned. Apparently UNI's 3 score win over Illinois State on the road (who SDSU lost too AT HOME) isn't style points. Apparently beating South Dakota by 15 is worth less style points than LOSING to South Dakota.

4. It's been mentioned they look at "how you're playing" to end the season. SDSU lost 3 of 5. UNI won 4 of 5. The one UNI loss, I grant, was too SDSU in what clearly was a significant performance outlier for both teams. If H2H is all that matters when why keep track of conference standings and actually have a body of work? Why have conferences at all if conference standings don't matter? Get rid of conferences and just go to an 11 game schedule and force every team to schedule 11 random games every year with at least 4 on the road.

5 and 6. I'll combine these two points I've seen the argument that "SDSU got the benefit for the doubt due to injuries", and this ties into #4

Where's UNIs' benefit of the doubt with injuries? UNI went into that SDSU game missing our top 3 running backs. Missing our top 3 WR. Missing 5 of our top 7 receiving targets in general. Missing an All American tight end. Missing our second tight end. Missing our third tight end. Went into that game with an OL and LB at TE. Not only that - the OL that was playing TE got ****ing hurt as well and we've had to move ANOTHER OL to TE.

The was a series of plays that involved UNI's skill guys being this
-rFreshman QB
-rFreshman RB - getting his first action of the season because RB 1-3 out injured and RB 4 (also a true freshman) was out with a ding for a while
-true Freshman WR seeing his first career action...and two nights before was on the court with the UNI basketball team (https://unipanthers.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster/logan-wolf/5226)
-rSophomore in his second game at WR...he'd been a safety since the day he stepped on campus and was in his 2nd game at WR
rJr WR that has 4 career catches and has been a special teams player his whole career
-rSophomore LB lined up at TE...a kid who hasn't played TE since his JR year of HS was lined up at TE

Where is UNI's "injury credit" and when does it get applied?

Why does the bye matter even if we got a PFL team and the "weakest" seed?

Because UNI is just decimated with injuries and having a week to rest for the first time since Sept 14th would have been a MASSIVE help. Because that PFL team isn't a "normal" PFL team. They haven't lost a PFL game in like 5 years and have lost just 2 PFL games in like 8. It's a PFL team that has beaten multiple Big Sky teams and scared the living **** out of others (including this season).

Because we then have to play on the road the week after (if beating San Diego) AT that weakest seed, in their stadium, for the second time 3 weeks.

At this point, it doesn't matter but it's just the dumbest **** I've ever heard

[DeltaDevil662]

Don't mind me.

Just over here looking for the MEAC playoff lovers who wanna stomach how SCSU got snubbed by beating Wofford and played in a better conference over Kennesaw State whose best OOC win was Alabama State and had a NAIA school on their schedule

[kalm]

The issue is this

1. SDSU finished 4th...freaking 4th...in the Valley. UNI finished second - OUTRIGHT. Alone. All by themselves. Not through tie break or anything else. All alone in second. If SDSU beats USD then zero issues. None. It would be a 2 way tie for second and SDSU wins the tie break...they'd also be 9-3 on the season. In stead they finished with the same record as UNI and with a worse conference record.

Think about that for a second. Let it sink in. SDSU got Illinois State, UNI, and North Dakota State AT HOME this year and played an OOC of Drake, Long Island and Southern Utah. Meanwhile UNI played AT NDSU, AT ISUr, AT SDSU and AT #3 Weber State. If UNI and SDSU switch Weber State and Long Island (I know we can't) SDSU likely is sitting at 7-5 and UNI for 100% at 9-3. I've said it to Thumper many times before. Literally the only difference between UNI and SDSU in the regular season (and thus playoff seeding and ability to make a run) is OOC scheduling. They do it right and UNI does it wrong. That needs to change. SDSU plays Drake, Duquesne, Long Island, Merrimack, APBSU, etc. and UNI is forced to play @ Montana, @ EWU, @ Weber State, @ SUU (in the year they were actually good), @ Cal Poly when they were good, etc.

2. SDSU lost, on the final day of the regular season, to USD. USD had 4 wins going into that game. USD lost to otherwise winless on the season Western Illinois. The final thing the committee saw from SDSU was losing to 4 win South Dakota. A team the #7 team in the country should beat by at least 2 scores - ESPECIALLY WHEN A TOP 3 OR 4 SEED IS ON THE LINE. You'd think they had EVERYTHING to play for. Meanwhile UNI pulls out a 31 point win over a team that beat USD.

3. "Style" points were mentioned. Apparently UNI's 3 score win over Illinois State on the road (who SDSU lost too AT HOME) isn't style points. Apparently beating South Dakota by 15 is worth less style points than LOSING to South Dakota.

4. It's been mentioned they look at "how you're playing" to end the season. SDSU lost 3 of 5. UNI won 4 of 5. The one UNI loss, I grant, was too SDSU in what clearly was a significant performance outlier for both teams. If H2H is all that matters when why keep track of conference standings and actually have a body of work? Why have conferences at all if conference standings don't matter? Get rid of conferences and just go to an 11 game schedule and force every team to schedule 11 random games every year with at least 4 on the road.

5 and 6. I'll combine these two points I've seen the argument that "SDSU got the benefit for the doubt due to injuries", and this ties into #4

Where's UNIs' benefit of the doubt with injuries? UNI went into that SDSU game missing our top 3 running backs. Missing our top 3 WR. Missing 5 of our top 7 receiving targets in general. Missing an All American tight end. Missing our second tight end. Missing our third tight end. Went into that game with an OL and LB at TE. Not only that - the OL that was playing TE got ****ing hurt as well and we've had to move ANOTHER OL to TE.

The was a series of plays that involved UNI's skill guys being this
-rFreshman QB
-rFreshman RB - getting his first action of the season because RB 1-3 out injured and RB 4 (also a true freshman) was out with a ding for a while
-true Freshman WR seeing his first career action...and two nights before was on the court with the UNI basketball team (https://unipanthers.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster/logan-wolf/5226)
-rSophomore in his second game at WR...he'd been a safety since the day he stepped on campus and was in his 2nd game at WR
rJr WR that has 4 career catches and has been a special teams player his whole career
-rSophomore LB lined up at TE...a kid who hasn't played TE since his JR year of HS was lined up at TE

Where is UNI's "injury credit" and when does it get applied?

Why does the bye matter even if we got a PFL team and the "weakest" seed?

Because UNI is just decimated with injuries and having a week to rest for the first time since Sept 14th would have been a MASSIVE help. Because that PFL team isn't a "normal" PFL team. They haven't lost a PFL game in like 5 years and have lost just 2 PFL games in like 8. It's a PFL team that has beaten multiple Big Sky teams and scared the living **** out of others (including this season).

Because we then have to play on the road the week after (if beating San Diego) AT that weakest seed, in their stadium, for the second time 3 weeks.

At this point, it doesn't matter but it's just the dumbest **** I've ever heard

More evidence that going and playing a challenging schedule does not get rewarded like it should.

[F'N Hawks]

The issue is this

1. SDSU finished 4th...freaking 4th...in the Valley. UNI finished second - OUTRIGHT. Alone. All by themselves. Not through tie break or anything else. All alone in second. If SDSU beats USD then zero issues. None. It would be a 2 way tie for second and SDSU wins the tie break...they'd also be 9-3 on the season. In stead they finished with the same record as UNI and with a worse conference record.

Think about that for a second. Let it sink in. SDSU got Illinois State, UNI, and North Dakota State AT HOME this year and played an OOC of Drake, Long Island and Southern Utah. Meanwhile UNI played AT NDSU, AT ISUr, AT SDSU and AT #3 Weber State. If UNI and SDSU switch Weber State and Long Island (I know we can't) SDSU likely is sitting at 7-5 and UNI for 100% at 9-3. I've said it to Thumper many times before. Literally the only difference between UNI and SDSU in the regular season (and thus playoff seeding and ability to make a run) is OOC scheduling. They do it right and UNI does it wrong. That needs to change. SDSU plays Drake, Duquesne, Long Island, Merrimack, APBSU, etc. and UNI is forced to play @ Montana, @ EWU, @ Weber State, @ SUU (in the year they were actually good), @ Cal Poly when they were good, etc.

2. SDSU lost, on the final day of the regular season, to USD. USD had 4 wins going into that game. USD lost to otherwise winless on the season Western Illinois. The final thing the committee saw from SDSU was losing to 4 win South Dakota. A team the #7 team in the country should beat by at least 2 scores - ESPECIALLY WHEN A TOP 3 OR 4 SEED IS ON THE LINE. You'd think they had EVERYTHING to play for. Meanwhile UNI pulls out a 31 point win over a team that beat USD.

3. "Style" points were mentioned. Apparently UNI's 3 score win over Illinois State on the road (who SDSU lost too AT HOME) isn't style points. Apparently beating South Dakota by 15 is worth less style points than LOSING to South Dakota.

4. It's been mentioned they look at "how you're playing" to end the season. SDSU lost 3 of 5. UNI won 4 of 5. The one UNI loss, I grant, was too SDSU in what clearly was a significant performance outlier for both teams. If H2H is all that matters when why keep track of conference standings and actually have a body of work? Why have conferences at all if conference standings don't matter? Get rid of conferences and just go to an 11 game schedule and force every team to schedule 11 random games every year with at least 4 on the road.

5 and 6. I'll combine these two points I've seen the argument that "SDSU got the benefit for the doubt due to injuries", and this ties into #4

Where's UNIs' benefit of the doubt with injuries? UNI went into that SDSU game missing our top 3 running backs. Missing our top 3 WR. Missing 5 of our top 7 receiving targets in general. Missing an All American tight end. Missing our second tight end. Missing our third tight end. Went into that game with an OL and LB at TE. Not only that - the OL that was playing TE got ****ing hurt as well and we've had to move ANOTHER OL to TE.

The was a series of plays that involved UNI's skill guys being this
-rFreshman QB
-rFreshman RB - getting his first action of the season because RB 1-3 out injured and RB 4 (also a true freshman) was out with a ding for a while
-true Freshman WR seeing his first career action...and two nights before was on the court with the UNI basketball team (https://unipanthers.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster/logan-wolf/5226)
-rSophomore in his second game at WR...he'd been a safety since the day he stepped on campus and was in his 2nd game at WR
rJr WR that has 4 career catches and has been a special teams player his whole career
-rSophomore LB lined up at TE...a kid who hasn't played TE since his JR year of HS was lined up at TE

Where is UNI's "injury credit" and when does it get applied?

Why does the bye matter even if we got a PFL team and the "weakest" seed?

Because UNI is just decimated with injuries and having a week to rest for the first time since Sept 14th would have been a MASSIVE help. Because that PFL team isn't a "normal" PFL team. They haven't lost a PFL game in like 5 years and have lost just 2 PFL games in like 8. It's a PFL team that has beaten multiple Big Sky teams and scared the living **** out of others (including this season).

Because we then have to play on the road the week after (if beating San Diego) AT that weakest seed, in their stadium, for the second time 3 weeks.

At this point, it doesn't matter but it's just the dumbest **** I've ever heard


SDSU just kicked the ever living **** out of UNI by 31 with a true freshman QB (who isn't very good) a week ago and you both have the same record. What do you think they are going to do?

Also, UNI lost to the best four teams on their schedule. Sounds like the committee looked at things like that.

[Professor]

Don't mind me.

Just over here looking for the MEAC playoff lovers who wanna stomach how SCSU got snubbed by beating Wofford and played in a better conference over Kennesaw State whose best OOC win was Alabama State and had a NAIA school on their schedule

There is no need to ask questions you already know the answer too

[clenz]

Just so we're clear the committee uses the Coaches Poll and the SRS....

UNI doesn't get a top 8 seed but were
6th in the coaches poll
6th in the STATS poll
6th in the AGS poll
8th in the SRS
2nd outright in the MVC


SDSU was
12th in the coaches poll
10th in the STATS poll
9th in the AGS poll
7th in the SRS
4th in the MVFC

and got a seed

[Bisonator]

What's more important an FBS loss or a lower division win?

[Sycamore62]

What's more important an FBS loss or a lower division win?

Lower division win kept us out last year....so they say

[ValleyChamp]

What's more important an FBS loss or a lower division win?

You tell me, objectively watching football, what is more impressive: A triple OT loss to a top 25 ranked Big 12 team, or a walkover game against non scholarship Drake or a D2 school? Come on.

[Schism55]

Just so we're clear the committee uses the Coaches Poll and the SRS....

UNI doesn't get a top 8 seed but were
6th in the coaches poll
6th in the STATS poll
6th in the AGS poll
8th in the SRS
2nd outright in the MVC


SDSU was
12th in the coaches poll
10th in the STATS poll
9th in the AGS poll
7th in the SRS
4th in the MVFC

and got a seed
About as succinct as you can get. UNI got jobbed, sadly.

[clenz]

You tell me, objectively watching football, what is more impressive: A triple OT loss to a top 25 ranked Big 12 team, or a walkover game against non scholarship Drake or a D2 school? Come on.
Hey now...

Long Island is actually D1 this year.

They merged two schools to make one, and since one of them was already D1 they got to make their football program D1 and by-pass the move up steps that schools like UNA are going through.

I mean...sure they went 0-10 in the NEC and got averaged 9 points per game on the season...but they are D1

Both had a top 25 FBS loss cancel that out
Both beat SUU throw that out
It comes down to
Idaho State/Drake - both won those games so toss that out...

so it really comes down to
at Weber State/v Long Island.......

What trash UNI is for losing that one on the road.

[Professor Chaos]

Hey now...

Long Island is actually D1 this year.

They merged two schools to make one, and since one of them was already D1 they got to make their football program D1 and by-pass the move up steps that schools like UNA are going through.

I mean...sure they went 0-10 in the NEC and got averaged 9 points per game on the season...but they are D1

Both had a top 25 FBS loss cancel that out
Both beat SUU through that out
It comes down to
Idaho State/Drake - both won those games so toss that out...

so it really comes down to
at Weber State/v Long Island.......

What trash UNI is for losing that one on the road.
SDSU also played SIU on the MVFC conference schedule whereas UNI played WIU instead.

[MacThor]

Why do the playoffs start on Thanksgiving Weekend?
The Selection Committee doesn't schedule the playoffs.

[ValleyChamp]

SDSU also played SIU on the MVFC conference schedule whereas UNI played WIU instead.

And UNI also played SDSU, NDSU, Illinois State, & Weber State ALL on the road.

[smallcollegefbfan]

How would the committee do that? That is the NCAA bylaws, and the committee has to follow those, they don't have some choice in the matter.

Remove it and go back to seeding the teams. There was once a great time when the committee would seed 1-16. I miss those days and the size of that field. I feel 24 is watered down and I miss the days where someone from the east coast could be sent to Montana. I get why they did it to save money and include everyone but more than 16 teams is way too much and not seeding the teams is just not as fun.

[Professor Chaos]

And UNI also played SDSU, NDSU, Illinois State, & Weber State ALL on the road.
That's a good point. SDSU was pretty fortuitous to have the other 4 best MVFC teams all at home (NDSU, UNI, ISUr, and SIU) and the 4 games they had against the bottom half of the conference all on the road.


Remove it and go back to seeding the teams. There was once a great time when the committee would seed 1-16. I miss those days and the size of that field. I feel 24 is watered down and I miss the days where someone from the east coast could be sent to Montana. I get why they did it to save money and include everyone but more than 16 teams is way too much and not seeding the teams is just not as fun.
They seeded 1-16? When? I only remember them seeding the top 4 in 16 team fields but I didn't follow FCS/1AA until the early 2000s.

[F'N Hawks]

Why is everyone ignoring the 38-7 beatdown that happened two weeks ago? That is a monster part of the equation when comparing two 8-4 teams.

[ValleyChamp]

Why is everyone ignoring the 38-7 beatdown that happened two weeks ago? That is a monster part of the equation when comparing two 8-4 teams.

Why are you ignoring the fact SDSU lost to an awful football team 2 days ago and finished in 4th place in the league?

[PantherRob82]

Why ignore that it was a rivalry game on the road?

Each side has plenty of arguments based on their perspective.

Do I see the argument for UNI getting a seed? Yes
Do I understand why they didn't? Yes

[neverobeyed]

Why do you just use the final coaches poll and fill out the bracket without really looking at teams?

But the FCS Coaches Poll does not come out until the day AFTER seeds and selections, right?

[uni88]

Why ignore that it was a rivalry game on the road?

Each side has plenty of arguments based on their perspective.

Do I see the argument for UNI getting a seed? Yes
Do I understand why they didn't? Yes

This!

[F'N Hawks]

Why are you ignoring the fact SDSU lost to an awful football team 2 days ago and finished in 4th place in the league?

It was 38-7. Why would UNI get a seed over them when it quite obviously came down to head-to-head? They have justification for making their decision.

[Reign of Terrier]

They seeded 1-16? When? I only remember them seeding the top 4 in 16 team fields but I didn't follow FCS/1AA until the early 2000s.

Yeah it was in the 90s, I think.

[smallcollegefbfan]

That's a good point. SDSU was pretty fortuitous to have the other 4 best MVFC teams all at home (NDSU, UNI, ISUr, and SIU) and the 4 games they had against the bottom half of the conference all on the road.


They seeded 1-16? When? I only remember them seeding the top 4 in 16 team fields but I didn't follow FCS/1AA until the early 2000s.

Yes. I think 1999 or 2000 was the last year they did it. It was a good time. Teams did not have to bid for home games. You got a home game based on your seed and a seed based on body of work. You could also be on the road in round one and be at home in round two if there was an upset. The highest seeded team got the home game and it made for a good story line when the #13 seed perhaps makes it all the way to the semis or something. I really wish they would drop the field down and go back to the seeds. The first weekend of playoff games almost feels like the play in weekend.

Imagine the arguments and battle for that #16 seed. People are going to complain no matter how many teams we let in. If we let in 32 then 33-35 are going to complain. If 64 teams got in then 65-68 would complain. Knowing it was only 16 teams also put more pressure to make the regular season truly count but also made it so the competition in round one was even harder than it is now.

[Professor Chaos]

Yes. I think 1999 or 2000 was the last year they did it. It was a good time. Teams did not have to bid for home games. You got a home game based on your seed and a seed based on body of work. You could also be on the road in round one and be at home in round two if there was an upset. The highest seeded team got the home game and it made for a good story line when the #13 seed perhaps makes it all the way to the semis or something. I really wish they would drop the field down and go back to the seeds. The first weekend of playoff games almost feels like the play in weekend.

Imagine the arguments and battle for that #16 seed. People are going to complain no matter how many teams we let in. If we let in 32 then 33-35 are going to complain. If 64 teams got in then 65-68 would complain. Knowing it was only 16 teams also put more pressure to make the regular season truly count but also made it so the competition in round one was even harder than it is now.
Interesting, based on the season Wikipedia pages from 1995-2000 they seeded all 16 teams.

If they did do that I would be in favor of going back down to 16 teams. But compared to the 4 seed 16 team format they had from 2001-2009 I much prefer the current format.

[kalm]

Yes. I think 1999 or 2000 was the last year they did it. It was a good time. Teams did not have to bid for home games. You got a home game based on your seed and a seed based on body of work. You could also be on the road in round one and be at home in round two if there was an upset. The highest seeded team got the home game and it made for a good story line when the #13 seed perhaps makes it all the way to the semis or something. I really wish they would drop the field down and go back to the seeds. The first weekend of playoff games almost feels like the play in weekend.

Imagine the arguments and battle for that #16 seed. People are going to complain no matter how many teams we let in. If we let in 32 then 33-35 are going to complain. If 64 teams got in then 65-68 would complain. Knowing it was only 16 teams also put more pressure to make the regular season truly count but also made it so the competition in round one was even harder than it is now.

Who cares if there are still complaints? More FCS football is better.

[Reign of Terrier]

I think if the whole field was seeded, it would make things easier for future picks. We would eventually have a good idea about what resumes fit where, kind of like how good midmajors get seeded 12, or something like that.

[Professor Chaos]

I'll pitch my preferred playoff format like I do yearly. Keep it at 24 teams (10 autos and 14 at-larges), seed the top 8 like they do now, but then pool the bottom 16 into seed lines a la the NCAA basketball tournament. So the top 8 would be the #1 and #2 seeds and after that it could've been the following this year.

3 seeds
UNI
Villanova
Wofford
SEMO

4 seeds
Illinois St
Austin Peay
CCSU
Monmouth

5 seeds
Furman
UND
Nicholls
Albany

6 seeds
SLU
Kennesaw St
San Diego
Holy Cross

Then you start regionalizing by pairing together each 3 seed with a 6 seed and bracket each 3/6 matchup regionally to the #5-#8 seeds. Similarly you regionally pair each 4 seed with a 5 seed and then bracket each 4/5 matchup regionally to the #1-#4 seeds.

This year's bracket could've looked something like this:

(5)UND/(4)Illinois St to #1 NDSU
(6)SLU/(3)SEMO to #8 UCA
(6)Kennesaw St/(3)Wofford to #5 Montana St
(5)Furman/(4)Austin Peay to #4 Sac St
(5)Albany/(4)CCSU to #3 Weber St
(6)Holy Cross/(3)Villanova to #6 Montana
(6)San Diego/(3)UNI to #7 SDSU
(5)Nicholls/(4)Monmouth to #2 JMU


First round bus trips
My format: 4
Current format: 5

Potential second round bus trips
My format: 4 (none guaranteed)
Current format: 4 (none guaranteed)


If they really wanted to bid out the home team for the first round games they could but it would be better if the 3 and 4 seeds all hosted. So this year you'd be adding one flight to build a more balanced bracket that's more fair to the seeded teams in terms of the likely strength of their 2nd round opponent and more fair for the unseeded teams who are rewarded for being a "good" unseeded team. One more flight to operate it more like a true tournament rather than an 8 team tournament with 8 regional pods.

[walliver]

The FCS playoffs lose money. Unless the NCAA can find some way to make a profit, the entire field will not be seeded.

I prefer the old 16 team 4 seed format, but accept that it isn't coming back. The NEC, Pioneer and Big South aren't giving up their bids.

I would be fine with going back to the 20-team field. That way, there were only 4 very poorly attended games on Thanksgiving weekend, and 12 teams got first round byes.

[Nodak78]

Do all visiting team get their own tent? asking for a Nicholls friend.xeyebrowx

[ST_Lawson]

Interesting, based on the season Wikipedia pages from 1995-2000 they seeded all 16 teams.

Sounds about right. And outside of 2002 when we were the #2 team, we haven't hosted a playoff game since.

[Redbird 4th & short]

I'll pitch my preferred playoff format like I do yearly. Keep it at 24 teams (10 autos and 14 at-larges), seed the top 8 like they do now, but then pool the bottom 16 into seed lines a la the NCAA basketball tournament. So the top 8 would be the #1 and #2 seeds and after that it could've been the following this year.

3 seeds
UNI
Villanova
Wofford
SEMO

4 seeds
Illinois St
Austin Peay
CCSU
Monmouth

5 seeds
Furman
UND
Nicholls
Albany

6 seeds
SLU
Kennesaw St
San Diego
Holy Cross

Then you start regionalizing by pairing together each 3 seed with a 6 seed and bracket each 3/6 matchup regionally to the #5-#8 seeds. Similarly you regionally pair each 4 seed with a 5 seed and then bracket each 4/5 matchup regionally to the #1-#4 seeds.

This year's bracket could've looked something like this:

(5)UND/(4)Illinois St to #1 NDSU
(6)SLU/(3)SEMO to #8 UCA
(6)Kennesaw St/(3)Wofford to #5 Montana St
(5)Furman/(4)Austin Peay to #4 Sac St
(5)Albany/(4)CCSU to #3 Weber St
(6)Holy Cross/(3)Villanova to #6 Montana
(6)San Diego/(3)UNI to #7 SDSU
(5)Nicholls/(4)Monmouth to #2 JMU


First round bus trips
My format: 4
Current format: 5

Potential second round bus trips
My format: 4 (none guaranteed)
Current format: 4 (none guaranteed)


If they really wanted to bid out the home team for the first round games they could but it would be better if the 3 and 4 seeds all hosted. So this year you'd be adding one flight to build a more balanced bracket that's more fair to the seeded teams in terms of the likely strength of their 2nd round opponent and more fair for the unseeded teams who are rewarded for being a "good" unseeded team. One more flight to operate it more like a true tournament rather than an 8 team tournament with 8 regional pods.
So if our choices are playing a) SEMO into UCA or b) UND into NDSU ... ummmm ... so hard to decide ... lemme flip a coin ... oh sh-t!!!! 2 out of 3 ...... dang it .... 3 out of 5 ... oh hell, screw it, I'll take current option A .. thanks anyway.

[JayJ79]

Don't mind me.

Just over here looking for the MEAC playoff lovers who wanna stomach how SCSU got snubbed by beating Wofford and played in a better conference over Kennesaw State whose best OOC win was Alabama State and had a NAIA school on their schedule

why should the playoffs take MEAC teams when the MEAC doesn't want to send their champion to the playoffs?

[JayJ79]

And UNI also played SDSU, NDSU, Illinois State, & Weber State ALL on the road.

does UNI's performance at SDSU, NDSU, and Weber State really qualify as "playing" them?

[clenz]

does UNI's performance at SDSU, NDSU, and Weber State really qualify as "playing" them?As much as SDSUs against USD.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Herder]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.

[cx500d]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.
Could be, but the playoffs will answer the question rather than postulating

[kalm]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.

The CAA’s OOC schedules would suggest no.

[Catbooster]

Today's Tootell and Nuanez radio show had Greg Seitz (committee chairman) on for an interview in the second hour today (Monday). They asked about 4 Big Sky seeds (and how they weighed the head to heads), how they treat lower division games and FBS games, SDSU vs UNI for seeding, UCA/Nichols/SLU for seed. First 10 minutes or so of the second hour (first hour was all about the Cat/Griz game).

I think the show is available on most common podcast platforms.

[ElCid]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.

I don't care for comparisons of strength, but as a concept, yes, you absolutely nailed it. These bigger conferences do get inflated a little because they do not play every other team in conf, especially all the hard ones. In Conference, they can get credit for drubbing a team who might have played another strong team tough, but they dont actually have to play that other strong team themselves. Happens in all the big conf. Again, only to a degree. And this is not saying that any of these teams are bad or not worthy, but they "may" be inflated in some cases. We will see shortly how much or if at all, in this year's case.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.


Yes.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.
Yes, maybe, and not as much .. the biggest beneficiary of scheduling in Big Sky going I to season was EWU ... i think they played one or none of last years playoff teams this year. Maine was similar in that they didn't have to play 3 of the other top 5 from last years playoffs in CAA. But they were only CAA team to show up for playoffs.

It is definitely a factor during regular season ... I would love to be able to skip playing a couple of the toughest MVFC teams every year. Our usual 6-5 would easily improve to 7-4 or 8-3.

But Big Sky seems more legit in 2019 than CAA in 2018 ... and I ripped their 6 selection before they crapped the bed.

[nodak651]

A bigger conference may allow for more teams to have good records, but it doesn't mean that they are bad teams. It would make sense that a conference with more teams would also have more good teams. Including UND, the big sky has 5 playoff teams out of 14 schools who played big sky schedules, so 35% of the teams made the playoffs. In the MVFC, 4 teams made the playoffs this year out of 10, which is 40% of the teams making the playoffs, and that is with SIU potentially being snubbed. The Big Sky this year was also pretty deep, with the worst 3 teams ranked in the 60's per massey, while the MVFC had two teams ranked in the 90's. Half of each conference was ranked 20 or better, per massey.

I'd say the bigger conference did not help the Big Sky this year, because the depth was just as good, and a smaller % of conference teams get into the playoffs, even with 5 bids this year. The unbalanced schedule can also hurt teams, as teams like UC Davis, who is probably good enough to compete respectably in the playoffs, can draw an extremely difficult schedule. They played 5 seeded teams this year and 7 playoff teams, and they missed most of the Big Sky bottom dwellers.

[ST_Lawson]

It is definitely a factor during regular season ... I would love to be able to skip playing a couple of the toughest MVFC teams every year. Our usual 6-5 would easily improve to 7-4 or 8-3.

Looks like you'll get your wish next year. Not the toughest (that's still likely to be NDSU), but you add USD back to your schedule while dropping YSU and SDSU. I realize USD somehow crushed YSU this year (which I don't understand, considering we beat USD, and us and ILSU both got beat pretty soundly by YSU).
According to Massey's current ranking, you're dropping the #7 and #37 teams to add the #36 team, which isn't a bad trade-off, I'd say.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Looks like you'll get your wish next year. Not the toughest (that's still likely to be NDSU), but you add USD back to your schedule while dropping YSU and SDSU. I realize USD somehow crushed YSU this year (which I don't understand, considering we beat USD, and us and ILSU both got beat pretty soundly by YSU).
According to Massey's current ranking, you're dropping the #7 and #37 teams to add the #36 team, which isn't a bad trade-off, I'd say.
oh right .. we're officially adding UND and going to 11 teams ... ugh, not my idea !! I wished we stayed at 9 teams and play everyone once .. done, no scheduling confusion

[ST_Lawson]

oh right .. we're officially adding UND and going to 11 teams ... ugh, not my idea !! I wished we stayed at 9 teams and play everyone once .. done, no scheduling confusion

I agree, I like having everyone able to play everyone else. I do have to admit, it's going to give us a bit of help next year, as we don't play NDSU. I don't know yet who the second team we don't play is, but it'll be either Indiana State, Missouri State, or Northern Iowa.

[kalm]

I don't care for comparisons of strength, but as a concept, yes, you absolutely nailed it. These bigger conferences do get inflated a little because they do not play every other team in conf, especially all the hard ones. In Conference, they can get credit for drubbing a team who might have played another strong team tough, but they dont actually have to play that other strong team themselves. Happens in all the big conf. Again, only to a degree. And this is not saying that any of these teams are bad or not worthy, but they "may" be inflated in some cases. We will see shortly how much or if at all, in this year's case.

And smaller conferences can also take advantage during weak seasons where the only quality wins are insular. Aka known as a “competitive” conference.

[JSUSoutherner]

I would like to ask committee chair, Greg Seitz, one question:

”When are you firing Grass?”

This is still a real question I have.

[cx500d]

This is still a real question I have.
I figgered we wouldn't see you around here until next August....

[clenz]

I figgered we wouldn't see you around here until next August....
Meh

He's been pretty damn busy actually living and doing things outside of this place.

[JSUSoutherner]

Meh

He's been pretty damn busy actually living and doing things outside of this place.

This.


I've been lurking.

[Herder]

To the Committee: The BSC has 4 highly ranked teams, 4 seeds. Do you think the lack of a dominant team in the BSC has caused the committee to be duped by the value of that conference? Does this situation remind you of the CAA in 2018 with 6 teams in and no dominant team in that conf?

[Reign of Terrier]

Do you think the lack of a dominant team and lack of a full round robin schedule in the Big Sky Conference could be artificially elevating the status of that conference with 4 teams with high seeds. Does that make the BSC similar to the CAA in 2018? We all know how that Went in 2018.

Anyone who follows my posts on here knows I probably agree with this. But let me clarify. We humans like to use zero-sum thinking and we don't like ambiguity in interpreting relative performance. So, for instance, if the CAA goes 0-6 in the playoffs (random number on the top of my head) against the MVFC but loses all of those games by an average of less than a touchdown, the easy way of looking at it is saying that the CAA is worse and the MVFC is better. It would be a correct interpretation, but it wouldn't be wise to think the MVFC was head-and-shoulders above the CAA, especially if 5/6 teams lose by 1, and one team got blown out.

Football is a game of matchups. In many games, only like 20 of 140 or so plays will make the difference (that's less than 20%). What's more, a single elimination tournament is great at telling you who the best team in the country is, but it's terrible at telling you the second best team is. You can find multiple examples of this in the last decade, but the one that comes to mind for me, because it involves teams I follow is 2012. Both Wofford and Georgia Southern only lost to NDSU by a touchdown in Fargo, while Sam Houston State lost by about 4 scores in Frisco. Again, that's over-simplifying how those games went down, but I don't think Sam Houston was the second best team over GSU that year.

In the Big Sky's case, on one hand they've earned the hype by going 4-0 in the first round of the playoffs last year. On another, half of those teams are not in the field. The Big Sky definitely plays some of the tougher schedules and they've beaten multiple OOC playoff teams this year (SEMO, Monmouth, UNI). But I don't think they're head and shoulders better, which unfortunately seeding carries that connotation.

Are they great teams? Definitely. Are they top 15 teams? Yes. Are they teams 3-6? I personally think there are a couple red flags with that, with multiple losing games by blowout fashion in November. Maybe I'm a homer, but I think if the socon takes care of business this week, both Wofford and Furman match up well against Sac State and Weber to beat them, especially given the lack of playoff experience of the former.

I would almost guarantee you that at least one of the Big Sky seeds will lose in their first game. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it and give credit where it's due.



Meh

He's been pretty damn busy actually living and doing things outside of this place.

There is something thoroughly liberating about one's team sucking. Freeing up mental space, etc. I highly recommend it once every few years.

[JSUSoutherner]

Anyone who follows my posts on here knows I probably agree with this. But let me clarify. We humans like to use zero-sum thinking and we don't like ambiguity in interpreting relative performance. So, for instance, if the CAA goes 0-6 in the playoffs (random number on the top of my head) against the MVFC but loses all of those games by an average of less than a touchdown, the easy way of looking at it is saying that the CAA is worse and the MVFC is better. It would be a correct interpretation, but it wouldn't be wise to think the MVFC was head-and-shoulders above the CAA, especially if 5/6 teams lose by 1, and one team got blown out.

Football is a game of matchups. In many games, only like 20 of 140 or so plays will make the difference (that's less than 20%). What's more, a single elimination tournament is great at telling you who the best team in the country is, but it's terrible at telling you the second best team is. You can find multiple examples of this in the last decade, but the one that comes to mind for me, because it involves teams I follow is 2012. Both Wofford and Georgia Southern only lost to NDSU by a touchdown in Fargo, while Sam Houston State lost by about 4 scores in Frisco. Again, that's over-simplifying how those games went down, but I don't think Sam Houston was the second best team over GSU that year.

In the Big Sky's case, on one hand they've earned the hype by going 4-0 in the first round of the playoffs last year. On another, half of those teams are not in the field. The Big Sky definitely plays some of the tougher schedules and they've beaten multiple OOC playoff teams this year (SEMO, Monmouth, UNI). But I don't think they're head and shoulders better, which unfortunately seeding carries that connotation.

Are they great teams? Definitely. Are they top 15 teams? Yes. Are they teams 3-6? I personally think there are a couple red flags with that, with multiple losing games by blowout fashion in November. Maybe I'm a homer, but I think if the socon takes care of business this week, both Wofford and Furman match up well against Sac State and Weber to beat them, especially given the lack of playoff experience of the former.

I would almost guarantee you that at least one of the Big Sky seeds will lose in their first game. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it and give credit where it's due.




There is something thoroughly liberating about one's team sucking. Freeing up mental space, etc. I highly recommend it once every few years.

Not sure "freed up mental space" describes my past couple months.

[kalm]

Anyone who follows my posts on here knows I probably agree with this. But let me clarify. We humans like to use zero-sum thinking and we don't like ambiguity in interpreting relative performance. So, for instance, if the CAA goes 0-6 in the playoffs (random number on the top of my head) against the MVFC but loses all of those games by an average of less than a touchdown, the easy way of looking at it is saying that the CAA is worse and the MVFC is better. It would be a correct interpretation, but it wouldn't be wise to think the MVFC was head-and-shoulders above the CAA, especially if 5/6 teams lose by 1, and one team got blown out.

Football is a game of matchups. In many games, only like 20 of 140 or so plays will make the difference (that's less than 20%). What's more, a single elimination tournament is great at telling you who the best team in the country is, but it's terrible at telling you the second best team is. You can find multiple examples of this in the last decade, but the one that comes to mind for me, because it involves teams I follow is 2012. Both Wofford and Georgia Southern only lost to NDSU by a touchdown in Fargo, while Sam Houston State lost by about 4 scores in Frisco. Again, that's over-simplifying how those games went down, but I don't think Sam Houston was the second best team over GSU that year.

In the Big Sky's case, on one hand they've earned the hype by going 4-0 in the first round of the playoffs last year. On another, half of those teams are not in the field. The Big Sky definitely plays some of the tougher schedules and they've beaten multiple OOC playoff teams this year (SEMO, Monmouth, UNI). But I don't think they're head and shoulders better, which unfortunately seeding carries that connotation.

Are they great teams? Definitely. Are they top 15 teams? Yes. Are they teams 3-6? I personally think there are a couple red flags with that, with multiple losing games by blowout fashion in November. Maybe I'm a homer, but I think if the socon takes care of business this week, both Wofford and Furman match up well against Sac State and Weber to beat them, especially given the lack of playoff experience of the former.

I would almost guarantee you that at least one of the Big Sky seeds will lose in their first game. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it and give credit where it's due.




There is something thoroughly liberating about one's team sucking. Freeing up mental space, etc. I highly recommend it once every few years.

Nobody thinks the BSCis head and shoulders better...strawman denied.

You and herder are hanging your hats on conference affiliation, size, and convenient history, both of which are low metrics compared to quality wins, SoS, and OOC SoS and wins. The latter are what gave the BSC 4 seeds.

[Redbird 4th & short]

Nobody thinks the BSCis head and shoulders better...strawman denied.

You and herder are hanging your hats on conference affiliation, size, and convenient history, both of which are low metrics compared to quality wins, SoS, and OOC SoS and wins. The latter are what gave the BSC 4 seeds.
this year, given how MVFC and the rest of field played, the Big Sky deserved 4 seeds. The top 8 bubble was much weaker than usual this year ... Big Sky stepped up, others did not. We'll see how they do in playoffs, but last year they performed well in regular season and lived up to expectations in playoffs. Got to give them their due this year.

While top 8 seemed weaker this year, the entire field still seems stronger. Much better resumes for top 24 bubble teams this year. And committee didn't make an glaring mistakes. SIU arguably deserved a bid, but there were none of the usual stupid bids in front of them ... all were fairly debatable. So IMO, the committee gets an A this year after getting a C- last year.

Now that doesnt mean there won't be upsets or bad conference performances that make their picks look questionable in hindsight .... but as of this moment, they handled the top 8 seed and top 24 bubbles very reasonably this year.

[Reign of Terrier]

Nobody thinks the BSCis head and shoulders better...strawman denied.

You and herder are hanging your hats on conference affiliation, size, and convenient history, both of which are low metrics compared to quality wins, SoS, and OOC SoS and wins. The latter are what gave the BSC 4 seeds.I'll believe this isn't a straw man when I hear FCS media not sharpie the entire top 8 (which includes those 4 Big Sky teams) into the quarters or leave Furman on the last four in.

It's one thing to say that the Big Sky deserved their seeds bc of OOC and SOS, but it's quite another to predict outcomes in such a manner. Which is happening. It's not a straw man.

There are just as many questionable and lopsided losses among those big sky teams as there are in the rest of the field.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I'll believe this isn't a straw man when I hear FCS media not sharpie the entire top 8 (which includes those 4 Big Sky teams) into the quarters or leave Furman on the last four in.

It's one thing to say that the Big Sky deserved their seeds bc of OOC and SOS, but it's quite another to predict outcomes in such a manner. Which is happening. It's not a straw man.

There are just as many questionable and lopsided losses among those big sky teams as there are in the rest of the field.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Let me go back and look.........

Yep...still a straw man. We weren’t discussing how the media views it or predicts.

And your last statement is laughable. The worst loss out of that group was to a playoff team in UND. You can make the argument for lopsided but it’s pretty damn weak as well. There are countless examples of teams getting g blown out in the regular season and making deep runs.

[Reign of Terrier]

Let me go back and look.........

Yep...still a straw man. We weren’t discussing how the media views it or predicts.

And your last statement is laughable. The worst loss out of that group was to a playoff team in UND. You can make the argument for lopsided but it’s pretty damn weak as well. There are countless examples of teams getting g blown out in the regular season and making deep runs.

The original question was broad, without excluding any group. I mean, it's a question for the committee thread, but it's a fair question for all of us, as I think it's weird to ask the committee even hypothetically if the teams they've chosen to be seeded will (basically) choke like the teams they chose last year from a conference to choke.

So no, there is no "we were talking about something different, this is a straw man." I interpreted a broad question in a certain way and provided my answer. Ergo: no straw man. There's pretty demonstrable proof that people view the Big Sky as head and shoulders above their competition, based on the way they're being covered in the media (with the exception of a great radio show out of Missoula, with two great cohosts and an excellent Socon reporter, if I do say so myself).

Montana lost to Montana State in the last game of the year by the same margin as UCA lost to SELA. UCA is seen as a wounded, perhaps the weakest seed. Everyone kind of agrees on that. But Montana is still expected (again, by many of the FCS media) to take care of business. Why?

[putter]

How would the committee do that? That is the NCAA bylaws, and the committee has to follow those, they don't have some choice in the matter.

So you are telling me the committee cant meet with the NCAA about doing this right? They could use the same formula the Committee for March Madness does and seed the full 24. You will still get some games that will be bus rides just due to geography but it may avoid the same matchups every year. The NCAA has the money to do this, they choose not to.

[clenz]

My question is how is travel determined for departure and return.

I see every road team playing tomorrow has landed within the last hour or two

Except Sam Diego. Who flew into Waterloo Cedar Falls Thursday afternoon.

Why, given the cost containment the NCAA wants does Sam Diego get am extra day?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Hammerhead]

Was there snow forecast for Iowa today? If so, maybe they wanted to beat the weather.


My question is how is travel determined for departure and return.

I see every road team playing tomorrow has landed within the last hour or two

Except Sam Diego. Who flew into Waterloo Cedar Falls Thursday afternoon.

Why, given the cost containment the NCAA wants does Sam Diego get am extra day?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Redbird 4th & short]

The original question was broad, without excluding any group. I mean, it's a question for the committee thread, but it's a fair question for all of us, as I think it's weird to ask the committee even hypothetically if the teams they've chosen to be seeded will (basically) choke like the teams they chose last year from a conference to choke.

So no, there is no "we were talking about something different, this is a straw man." I interpreted a broad question in a certain way and provided my answer. Ergo: no straw man. There's pretty demonstrable proof that people view the Big Sky as head and shoulders above their competition, based on the way they're being covered in the media (with the exception of a great radio show out of Missoula, with two great cohosts and an excellent Socon reporter, if I do say so myself).

Montana lost to Montana State in the last game of the year by the same margin as UCA lost to SELA. UCA is seen as a wounded, perhaps the weakest seed. Everyone kind of agrees on that. But Montana is still expected (again, by many of the FCS media) to take care of business. Why?

So who SPECIFICALLY do you claim should be seeded ahead of the Big Sky teams

3. Montana is 9-3 against the #2 SOS
4. Sacramento is 9-3 against the #3 SOS
5. Weber St is 9-3 against the #4 SOS
6. Montana St is 9-3 against the #17 SOS

Massey Composite of 41 polls has them as exact same #3-6.

Who specifically and then make your specific case. Nothing else.

[clenz]

Was there snow forecast for Iowa today? If so, maybe they wanted to beat the weather.For Northwest Iowa, Minnesota and SD

Not a single forecast of any snow in their flight path

Also it's a chartered flight. Find a pilot that isn't a pussy and is willing to fly through theb upper Midwest is snow

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[clenz]

This was the forecast for today

... UND flew out today. Landed less than 24 hours before their gamehttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191130/d2b13a2445f37f049ea2987dcb67815f.jpg

[clenz]

And I just looked

The flight UND had to take to New Orleans was actually longer than USD to Waterloo. Flight time wasn't an impact

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[POD Knows]

And I just looked

The flight UND had to take to New Orleans was actually longer than USD to Waterloo. Flight time wasn't an impact

Sent from my Pixel 3 using TapatalkWhat, do you think this gives San Diego some kind of advantage, maybe they are picking up the tab for the extra night or something.

[skinny_uncle]

Does thumping an FBS still count as a "good win"?

[JayJ79]

Does thumping an FBS still count as a "good win"?
just because they are FBS doesn't make them an automatic "good win".

For instance, if the FBS team you thumped is ranked 230 out of all 256 D1 football teams (FBS and FCS), I'd say the answer is no.

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Does thumping an FBS still count as a "good win"?


UMass would not finish in the top half of the Valley this year.

"Good win"...?....not a chance.

[Houndawg]

For Northwest Iowa, Minnesota and SD

Not a single forecast of any snow in their flight path

Also it's a chartered flight. Find a pilot that isn't a pussy and is willing to fly through theb upper Midwest is snow

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Most of them are dead

[JayJ79]

Most of them are dead
oh c'mon. flying in Iowa winter weather is a piece of cake. just ask Buddy Holly

[JSUSoutherner]

Most of them are dead

Correct.

There are old pilots and there are bold pilots.

But there aren't many old, bold pilots.

[TribeNomad1]

This was the forecast for today

... UND flew out today. Landed less than 24 hours before their gamehttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191130/d2b13a2445f37f049ea2987dcb67815f.jpg

Classic. I was putting lights out yesterday under our cloudy day in the forties. I listen to a great radio station out of Rapid City (KSKY) and heard the weather report. No freak out, just a calm reading of the situation. Anything near that here and alarms would be sounding, alerts every five minutes, and general anxiety.

[Professor Chaos]

Classic. I was putting lights out yesterday under our cloudy day in the forties. I listen to a great radio station out of Rapid City (KSKY) and heard the weather report. No freak out, just a calm reading of the situation. Anything near that here and alarms would be sounding, alerts every five minutes, and general anxiety.
You mean like this guy from Baltimore???


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sW8o6cAL4k

[TribeNomad1]

You mean like this guy from Baltimore???


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sW8o6cAL4k

One of many......

[ursus arctos horribilis]

So you are telling me the committee cant meet with the NCAA about doing this right? They could use the same formula the Committee for March Madness does and seed the full 24. You will still get some games that will be bus rides just due to geography but it may avoid the same matchups every year. The NCAA has the money to do this, they choose not to.

March Madness, you're kidding right? That tournament and I think Ice Hockey are the only D1 tournaments that actually make money. The FCS Playoffs lose money like every other D1 tournament.

So, knowing this I think it would be clear that maybe the bball tourney gets a little bit more attention because that draws in so much money that it allows the NCAA a bedrock of cash to support the other tourneys.

I also think it would be clear that it might be something that could or has been asked for by many but why on earth would the selection committee that is tasked with a specific job to do in short order have this responsibility when it's members are AD's that could (as a larger group) probably have more clout than the small 10 member committee that is asked to get together and accomplish one specific task.

So I am telling you that they could meet with the NCAA and ask with hat in hand but what leverage would they possibly have to do so? None, until the FCS starts carrying it's weight in ratings etc. then I think a lot of us ought to be happy that we have a pretty decent tournament with some flaws that are absolutely not major.

It's pretty hard to bitch about being screwed on the dinner tab when you are basically picking up the tip.