Ranking the FCS Conferences in 2021

[DFW HOYA]

Following up from the 2020 thread:

Tier I (multi-bid)
1. MVFC
2. Big Sky
3. CAA
4. WAC/AQ7
----------
Tier II (maybe an at-large)
5. Southern
6. Southland
7. Ivy
8. Big South
9. Ohio Valley
----------
Tier III (no at-large)
10. SWAC
11. NEC
12. Patriot
13. MEAC
14. Pioneer

[atthewbon]

I guess I should move what I said in the other thread over here. (I didn't realize it was 2020).
How I'd personally rank them:
1. MVFC
2. Big Sky
3. CAA
4. AQ7 or whatever they are calling it this year
5. Southland
6. Ivy (kinda hard to rank them because they don't play enough ooc)
7. SOCON
8. OVC
9. Big South
10. SWAC
11. NEC
12. Patriot
13. MEAC
14. Pioneer

5-9 are all pretty close and 10-13 are also fairly close.

I still think this year that there is a pretty big gap between the "power 3" (MVFC, Big Sky, and CAA) and everyone else. Especially in terms of depth of teams. I think the CAA is slipping a bit but is still overall much closer to the MVFC and Big Sky than it is to the AQ7 or anything below.

[NY Crusader 2010]

I guess I should move what I said in the other thread over here. (I didn't realize it was 2020).
How I'd personally rank them:
1. MVFC
2. Big Sky
3. CAA
4. AQ7 or whatever they are calling it this year
5. Southland
6. Ivy (kinda hard to rank them because they don't play enough ooc)
7. SOCON
8. OVC
9. Big South
10. SWAC
11. NEC
12. Patriot
13. MEAC
14. Pioneer

5-9 are all pretty close and 10-13 are also fairly close.

I still think this year that there is a pretty big gap between the "power 3" (MVFC, Big Sky, and CAA) and everyone else. Especially in terms of depth of teams. I think the CAA is slipping a bit but is still overall much closer to the MVFC and Big Sky than it is to the AQ7 or anything below.




I don't know if people realize this but the Ivies play 3 non-conference games, just like almost everyone else. And because they very rarely play DII, NAIA or FBS, they actually net probably play more OOC games directly against FCS than teams in other leagues.

EARLY IN THE SEASON, it's more difficult to rank the Ivies because they start 2 weeks behind (3 if it's a 12-game year for us normal people when Ivy stays at 10 games). I'll give you that. But by mid-October, you have a pretty good read.

[atthewbon]

I don't know if people realize this but the Ivies play 3 non-conference games, just like almost everyone else. And because they very rarely play DII, NAIA or FBS, they actually net probably play more OOC games directly against FCS than teams in other leagues.

EARLY IN THE SEASON, it's more difficult to rank the Ivies because they start 2 weeks behind (3 if it's a 12-game year for us normal people when Ivy stays at 10 games). I'll give you that. But by mid-October, you have a pretty good read.

I stand corrected. I didn't realize they played that many ooc games (from some reason I thought each team only played one or two). After just taking a quick look at their schedule almost all of their games seem to be against other teams in the North East which still makes it hard to compare them to other conferences. I wish they would play in the fcs playoffs so they could play against everyone, I think if they did they could do pretty well.

[NY Crusader 2010]

I stand corrected. I didn't realize they played that many ooc games (from some reason I thought each team only played one or two). After just taking a quick look at their schedule almost all of their games seem to be against other teams in the North East which still makes it hard to compare them to other conferences. I wish they would play in the fcs playoffs so they could play against everyone, I think if they did they could do pretty well.

Ivies play less overall games than everyone. 10 game season, no bye week, 3 OOC + 7 conference games. Obviously no playoffs.

Don't think we'll see them join the playoff party anytime soon which is a shame. Our trip to Brookings last year was one of the coolest college football experiences I've ever had. You haven't LIVED until you've been to an FCS football game in Montana or the Dakotas, that's a fact.

[caribbeanhen]

I stand corrected. I didn't realize they played that many ooc games (from some reason I thought each team only played one or two). After just taking a quick look at their schedule almost all of their games seem to be against other teams in the North East which still makes it hard to compare them to other conferences. I wish they would play in the fcs playoffs so they could play against everyone, I think if they did they could do pretty well.


I totally agree it would be nice to see them play a more diverse OOC schedule

Princeton At Monmouth this Saturday

Dartmouth at New Hampshire the following Saturday is about as good as it gets for Ivy OOC match ups

Harvard probably beats everybody in Big Sky minus E Wash and Montana

[taper]

Not all FCS are equal. The Ivy's strength of schedule is absolute crap. Until you start traveling further than an hour away you'll never know what the FCS actually is.

[ElCid]

Well just for kicks and grins, here is what Massey has currently. And while it may not be perfect, it is at least objective.



Team
Record
Tms
Rat
Pwr
Off
Def
HFA
SoS
SSF
EW
EL



Correlation
630

1000
999
962
971
22
823
975
NaN
NaN



Missouri Valley (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/85697)
20-110.645
11
16.15
143.76
147.52
122.72
2.29
137.53
141.27
0.00
0.00



Big Sky (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/10668)
18-190.486
13
25.47
236.37
344.70
218.16
2.27
237.26
236.66
0.00
0.00



Colonial (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/11246)
16-140.533
12
35.14
333.08
641.94
317.63
2.28
433.90
333.09
0.00
0.00



AQ7 (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/360739)
15-100.600
7
45.08
532.02
542.65
415.85
2.26
929.24
728.63
0.00
0.00



Southland (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/14112)
6-120.333
6
54.94
432.30
245.55
913.23
2.27
334.06
432.96
0.00
0.00



Southern (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/14064)
12-120.500
9
64.84
630.35
442.66
714.17
2.28
730.71
531.18
0.00
0.00



Atlantic Sun (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/10443)
8-120.400
5
74.80
729.62
741.31
614.79
2.25
533.33
629.34
0.00
0.00



Western Athletic (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/14576)
11-100.524
6
84.64
927.55
840.60
813.43
2.26
1126.66
927.26
0.00
0.00



Ivy League (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/12206)
10-60.625
8
94.58
828.38
1039.40
515.46
2.28
1720.31
1125.36
0.00
0.00



OH Valley (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/13193)
7-170.292
7
104.30
1024.57
1138.31
1012.74
2.29
631.45
827.83
0.00
0.00



Big South (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/10672)
12-170.414
9
114.29
1124.22
939.69
1211.01
2.28
1028.11
1026.32
0.00
0.00



Patriot League (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/13333)
7-200.259
7
123.82
1218.84
1633.22
1112.11
2.22
830.39
1224.76
0.00
0.00



SWAC West (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/14269)
8-100.444
6
133.72
1317.93
1236.05
148.36
2.30
1424.16
1321.44
0.00
0.00



Southwestern AC (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/14163)
13-180.419
12
143.63
1416.84
1335.12
158.20
2.30
1523.42
1419.92
0.00
0.00



SWAC East (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/14267)
7-100.412
6
153.53
1515.75
1434.20
168.03
2.30
1622.68
1618.40
0.00
0.00



Northeast (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/13046)
10-180.357
8
163.38
1614.59
1732.17
138.91
2.26
1225.77
1519.00
0.00
0.00



Mid-Eastern AC (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/12545)
9-190.321
6
173.21
1712.98
1533.52
175.95
2.23
1324.88
1717.16
0.00
0.00



Pioneer (https://masseyratings.com/cf2021/13408)
11-180.379
11
182.60
186.21
1830.80
181.90
2.30
1813.36
189.11
0.00
0.00

[ElCid]

And here is what Sagarin has currently this week. It doesn't list SOS or Estimated Final SOS like Massey does. I left the FBS conferences in for situational awareness. Again, not perfect, but an objective listing based on their algorithm. Not a lot of separation when looking at #2-#7 (21-26 below) considering conferences as a whole, "top to bottom."


CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS WIN50%
18 MVC (AA)= 58.79 59.06 ( 18) 11 58.93 ( 18)
19 CONF USA-W (A) = 58.28 58.98 ( 19) 7 58.77 ( 19)
20 SUN BELT-W (A) = 57.20 58.03 ( 20) 5 57.65 ( 20)
21 BIG SKY (AA)= 50.25 50.72 ( 21) 13 50.47 ( 21)
22 COLONIAL (AA)= 47.61 48.50 ( 22) 12 48.03 ( 22)
23 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 47.15 46.47 ( 25) 6 46.82 ( 24)
24 SOUTHERN (AA)= 47.00 46.63 ( 24) 9 46.80 ( 25)
25 AQ7 (AA)= 46.77 47.08 ( 23) 9 46.86 ( 23)
26 IVY LEAGUE (AA)= 46.27 46.23 ( 26) 8 46.22 ( 26)
27 BIG SOUTH (AA)= 43.63 43.48 ( 27) 9 43.50 ( 27)
28 OHIO VALLEY (AA)= 40.67 40.77 ( 28) 7 40.73 ( 28)
29 SWAC-WEST (AA)= 36.30 35.92 ( 29) 6 36.02 ( 29)
30 SWAC-EAST (AA)= 35.25 34.99 ( 31) 6 35.06 ( 30)
31 NORTHEAST (AA)= 34.76 34.66 ( 32) 8 34.61 ( 32)
32 PATRIOT (AA)= 34.68 35.14 ( 30) 7 34.96 ( 31)
33 MID-EASTERN (AA)= 31.67 32.24 ( 33) 6 32.07 ( 33)
34 PIONEER (AA)= 26.83 26.38 ( 34) 11 26.48 ( 34)

[Redbird 4th & short]

Big Sky has too many teams, and I think that brings down their average. The upper half is much closer to MVFC (excl NDSU) than they are to Colonial. And JMU has been carrying Colonial the last 5 years. Just look at quarter final and semi-final appearances in playoffs over the last 5 years for Big Sky.

As for this year, looks like more of the same as of this early point ... MVFC and Big Sky will get the most bids, and should have the most teams in final 16 and 8. We'll see about semis.

[caribbeanhen]

Not all FCS are equal. The Ivy's strength of schedule is absolute crap. Until you start traveling further than an hour away you'll never know what the FCS actually is.

traveling an hour has something to do with strength of schedule?

[WestCoastAggie]

I think Sagarin is more accurate than Massey. But, I love the Massey composite as it measures all of these computer polls and human rankings.

[caribbeanhen]

I think Sagarin is more accurate than Massey. But, I love the Massey composite as it measures all of these computer polls and human rankings.

I like the composite index as well, I take it that the AGS poll is the only poll with humans that are “just fans’ doing the voting?

[atthewbon]

I like the composite index as well, I take it that the AGS poll is the only poll with humans that are “just fans’ doing the voting?

I think there is an FCS Reddit poll (voted on by fans) that’s part of the Massey Composite.

[ElCid]

I think Sagarin is more accurate than Massey. But, I love the Massey composite as it measures all of these computer polls and human rankings.

Actually I think the composite is garbage. Have you seen some of the polls that it incorporates? I mean, obviously the AGS poll is the most accurate component, but a couple others are so jacked as to be laughable. One of them has Duquesne as #8. That's not to knock them because they are ok, but not #8 for sure. That was an extreme example, but some are so simple in the algorithm used or skewed for various inappropriate reasons that it warps the overall ranking. I find the actual Massey or Sagarin to be much more accurate, but even those have flaws. I really wish Massey would vet his composite inputs a little more strictly.

[caribbeanhen]

I think there is an FCS Reddit poll (voted on by fans) that’s part of the Massey Composite.

https://poll.redditcfb.com/fcs/

I didn’t know that, poll looks similar to AGS poll

Probably lots of overlap on voters ?

[caribbeanhen]

Actually I think the composite is garbage. Have you seen some of the polls that it incorporates? I mean, obviously the AGS poll is the most accurate component, but a couple others are so jacked as to be laughable. One of them has Duquesne as #8. That's not to knock them because they are ok, but not #8 for sure. That was an extreme example, but some are so simple in the algorithm used or skewed for various inappropriate reasons that it warps the overall ranking. I find the actual Massey or Sagarin to be much more accurate, but even those have flaws. I really wish Massey would vet his composite inputs a little more strictly.

Massey has won a few pick em games though

The one I remember as a kid was Dunkel

[ElCid]

Massey has won a few pick em games though

The one I remember as a kid was Dunkel

Which Massey? The composite or the actual?

I was just pursuing more anomalies and one has Mercer at 3; SHSU at 27; two have NDSU at 11; one has ETSU at 3 while another at 47!; one had Harvard at 2. The list goes on.

[atthewbon]

https://poll.redditcfb.com/fcs/

I didn’t know that, poll looks similar to AGS poll

Probably lots of overlap on voters ?

I’m not really sure. I voted in it last spring before I began to start voting in the AGS poll. The community on the fcs Reddit isn’t quite as big as AGS I think they have like 25-30 voters and some only rank the top 10. Overall I think the poll is pretty good and I think they release each voters ballot which is interesting

[Reign of Terrier]

So, maybe this is a hot take, but I think the Socon is a little more balanced than the Big South, OVC, Southland, and those other second tier teams (and so, I think we're better, even though the best team in that conference has been better than us in the last few years).

We don't have an elite team like the CAA/AQ7/Big Sky/MVFC, but what makes the socon different from the non-tier-one conferences is that bottom tier teams would be probably be mid-tier in those conferences. The Socon bottom tier isn't good or great, but the big south and OVC are just awful at the bottom.

And I think the Ivys just need to be put in their own category. I know they are technically division one FCS, but they're much like the Pioneer/Patriot/NEC in that their scholarship constraints are weird (I don't think they have scholarships?), but because these Ivys have endowments the size of third world countries' economies, unlike other schools at this level, they have like 90-100 players of similar quality as opposed to 63 scholarships and 40something walk ons. It's a different dynamic. And they only play each other or a select few OOC games.

If I were an AGS voter, that would be my reason not to rank them: they don't play much FCS and their scholarship dynamics are different. Maybe they are good football teams, but the limited sample is really what does it for me. It's much like the SWAC in that way (how often has the SWAC played OOC against FCS that wasn't an HBCU? Same with Ivys and other strong academic institutions).

[taper]

traveling an hour has something to do with strength of schedule?

When you only play the same small group of nearby not good teams it does.

[caribbeanhen]

Which Massey? The composite or the actual?

I was just pursuing more anomalies and one has Mercer at 3; SHSU at 27; two have NDSU at 11; one has ETSU at 3 while another at 47!; one had Harvard at 2. The list goes on.

Yep, I have noticed some of the anomalies, be interesting to see what X y factor causes them

[caribbeanhen]

When you only play the same small group of nearby not good teams it does.

Well the Ivies are very top heavy for sure but you could make a case for the top 3 to 4 teams being in top 25

the bad Ivy teams are real bad

[atthewbon]

I don’t think that’s a hot take. The SOCON seems the most balanced of those to me. The Southland is kinda hard to get a gauge on bc they only have 6 teams. And like you said the Ivy is unique and also hard to get a good gauge on.

[Reign of Terrier]

Not all FCS are equal. The Ivy's strength of schedule is absolute crap. Until you start traveling further than an hour away you'll never know what the FCS actually is.

On one hand, you're right. If there's one FCS conference that can afford travel costs, it's the Ivys.

On another, lots of folks need to understand that limited travel budget is actually a big deal. It's totally normal to not schedule cross country football games at this level. Those are expensive and not very profitable at this level!

[ElCid]

Yep, I have noticed some of the anomalies, be interesting to see what X y factor causes them

I did link in to some a couple years ago. Some are literally just W/L. Some are just Joey making up an alghorithim in his basement based on what ever he came up with and not very realistic. Some are even conference biased. This was just me trying to figure it out since they don't all describe their methods. Again I find the actual massey to be not bad most of the time. It's hard to determine when someone just played above or below themselves and not on average so no computer will account for this, so you just to take this into account. I will say, as an example of its accuracy, it had The Citadel beating VMI last week, which surprised me. I should have heeded it.

[Reign of Terrier]

algorithms are inherently less predictive for football than other sports because of the chaotic nature of the game and the limited dataset you're going to get from it. It's even worse for FCS where the opportunities for cross pollination between teams is even more limited.

[caribbeanhen]

algorithms are inherently less predictive for football than other sports because of the chaotic nature of the game and the limited dataset you're going to get from it. It's even worse for FCS where the opportunities for cross pollination between teams is even more limited.

when are you going to try one?

[ElCid]

algorithms are inherently less predictive for football than other sports because of the chaotic nature of the game and the limited dataset you're going to get from it. It's even worse for FCS where the opportunities for cross pollination between teams is even more limited.

That's true, but what I find interesting is how accurate Massey can be for some teams/conferences and not for others. I've seen it nail margins and even actual scores, multiple times, for some teams, which was just weird. Others, it kind of wonders. This may actually have to do with the consistency of some teams which happens to match the algorithm. It obviously gets a bit more accurate as the season progresses. And I know of no computer program that takes weather, injuries, suspensions, bad officiating, or any other factor into account. So there is obviously an upper limit to its accuracy when it then becomes, in most cases, just luck.

[DFW HOYA]

On one hand, you're right. If there's one FCS conference that can afford travel costs, it's the Ivys.

That's not true, at least not in the way you suggest.

Here are two conferences with roughly the same TV deal and enrollments. Which can afford it more by their 2019 average attendance?

Conference A:
Team 1: 4,021
Team 2: 4,311
Team 3: 4,397
Team 4: 7,767
Team 5: 8,525
Team 6: 8,802
Team 7: 9,344
Team 8: 9,406
Average: 7,071


Conference B:
Team 1: 3,789
Team 2: 4,295
Team 3: 5,376
Team 4: 5,596
Team 5: 7,225
Team 6: 8,427
Team 7: 10,812
Team 8: 12,133
Average: 7,202


Not much difference--about 150 more a game between the two. What, $1500 a game? Conference A is the Southern Conference, which has FBS guarantee game options. Conference B is the Ivy League, which does not.

Yes, the Ivy League have larger endowments but these are generally restricted by the donor base--law school, medical school, faculty, etc. You can't tell Harvard Law that their endowment money is buying a trip for 100 players and coaches to Eastern Washington.

If the Ivies want to travel (and in fact, they don't), it will need to be built into the budget and, frankly, that they relent on a 10 game schedule.

[MSUBobcat]

On one hand, you're right. If there's one FCS conference that can afford travel costs, it's the Ivys.

On another, lots of folks need to understand that limited travel budget is actually a big deal. It's totally normal to not schedule cross country football games at this level. Those are expensive and not very profitable at this level!

Doesn't the home team pay the visiting team varying sums of money if it's not a home and home? MSU paid Drake and San Diego $275,000 (https://www.montanasports.com/sports/big-sky-conference/montana-state-bobcats/a-look-at-montana-state-footballs-2021-guarantee-games) each, which should more than cover travel costs. In fact, we were only paid $425k from Wyoming, so we had a net loss of $125k from our OOC payouts (more than offset by 2 large home crowds, I'm sure).

So unless this is not common practice for the home team to pay a visiting OOC team, this "travel budget" argument doesn't hold water when it comes to scheduling cross-country trips to the Big Sky/MVFC, or even CAA teams in the NE for southern teams. You may not get them to come to you, but there is no reason they couldn't go on the road to boost their OOC when they're paying you to come.

[caribbeanhen]

That's true, but what I find interesting is how accurate Massey can be for some teams/conferences and not for others. I've seen it nail margins and even actual scores, multiple times, for some teams, which was just weird. Others, it kind of wonders. This may actually have to do with the consistency of some teams which happens to match the algorithm. It obviously gets a bit more accurate as the season progresses. And I know of no computer program that takes weather, injuries, suspensions, bad officiating, or any other factor into account. So there is obviously an upper limit to its accuracy when it then becomes, in most cases, just luck.

Princeton beats lowly Columbia 24-7 but jumps 16 teams on Massey

Dartmouth beats Penn 31-7 and jumps 28 places

[ElCid]

Princeton beats lowly Columbia 24-7 but jumps 16 teams on Massey

Dartmouth beats Penn 31-7 and jumps 28 places

Yup. I think this is a specific issue with the Ivies. This was only game three for them and they were still heavily into preseason ranking bias and if it was off that will make for larger movement. Plus, at a glance and I will try to be clear in this explanation, Dartmouth stomps Penn, who had stomped Bucknell a couple weeks ago, and Bucknell just played a little above themselves and handily beat Cornell this week. So all those things combined to give Dartmouth a nice rise. With a little less connection, the Ivies go up and down more easily at this point. It will settle down in a week or two.

What was also interesting is that JSU dropped 24 spots after getting stomped by KSU, AND with FSU finally winning a game. Can you imagine how far they would have dropped had FSU lost again?

[katss07]

The CAA is closer to the SoCon and Southland than it is the Big Sky and MVFC? Seems about right.

[clenz]

Well the Ivies are very top heavy for sure but you could make a case for the top 3 to 4 teams being in top 25

the bad Ivy teams are real bad
But we will never know because their presidents and ADs will never let it happen.

As far as the "they play 3 OOC games so we *should* know side of that debate, while that is true the quality of their OOC tends to make it impossible to truly know where they stand





Opponent
-
Results
-
Massey


URI
-
L
-
23


VMI
-
L
-
54


Lafayette
-
L
-
76


Bryant
-
L
-
88


Bucknell
-
L
-
102


Holy Cross
-
W
-
44


Holy Cross
-
W
-
44


Sacred Heart
-
W
-
101


Bucknell
-
W
-
102


G'town
-
W
-
106


G'town
-
W
-
107


Lehigh
-
W
-
115


Lehigh
-
W
-
115


Marist
-
W
-
122


Valpo
-
W
-
126


Stetson
-
W
-
128


UNH
-

-
34


Monmouth
-

-
41


Uconn
-

-
42


Lafayette
-

-
76


Colgate
-

-
86


Colgate
-

-
86


Lehigh
-

-
115


CCSU
-

-
121



-

-












I used massey because I just did. I'm not partial to any computer at this point.

You see the Ivy has twice beat Holy Cross. That's the stand out win. Holy Cross, who lost to Merrimack. Other than they don't have a single win in the top 100 FCS programs. They have lost all 4 games to top 100 FCS programs not named Holy Cross. Those rankings are out of 128 teams

The average ranking of their wins is 100, which is SIGNIFICANTLY boosted by HC on their twice. If we throw out duplicate wins it drops to 106. Dump to outliers - two highest and two lowest - it drops to 110

The Ivy doesn't really play anyone of national value so it's impossible to know where they stack up in the big picture. Sure they won 75% of their OOC games but they are game that any legitimate top 50ish team wins a bare minimum of 75% against.

I can go pull all time OOC opponents, or go back at least a few years, but we are going to see the same insular set of teams. It's why I've had a hard time believing Ivy computer rankings. Their scheduling protects all of the Ivy schools. By keeping it to the same group of schools across the board, multiple games against the same teams, etc. the computer has no idea what to do with them and then when two or three teams are clearly better than the rest of the conference they get massive boosts for beating the rest of the conference.

[caribbeanhen]

But we will never know because their presidents and ADs will never let it happen.

As far as the "they play 3 OOC games so we *should* know side of that debate, while that is true the quality of their OOC tends to make it impossible to truly know where they stand





Opponent
-
Results
-
Massey


URI
-
L
-
23


VMI
-
L
-
54


Lafayette
-
L
-
76


Bryant
-
L
-
88


Bucknell
-
L
-
102


Holy Cross
-
W
-
44


Holy Cross
-
W
-
44


Sacred Heart
-
W
-
101


Bucknell
-
W
-
102


G'town
-
W
-
106


G'town
-
W
-
107


Lehigh
-
W
-
115


Lehigh
-
W
-
115


Marist
-
W
-
122


Valpo
-
W
-
126


Stetson
-
W
-
128


UNH
-

-
34


Monmouth
-

-
41


Uconn
-

-
42


Lafayette
-

-
76


Colgate
-

-
86


Colgate
-

-
86


Lehigh
-

-
115


CCSU
-

-
121



-

-












I used massey because I just did. I'm not partial to any computer at this point.

You see the Ivy has twice beat Holy Cross. That's the stand out win. Holy Cross, who lost to Merrimack. Other than they don't have a single win in the top 100 FCS programs. They have lost all 4 games to top 100 FCS programs not named Holy Cross. Those rankings are out of 128 teams

The average ranking of their wins is 100, which is SIGNIFICANTLY boosted by HC on their twice. If we throw out duplicate wins it drops to 106. Dump to outliers - two highest and two lowest - it drops to 110

The Ivy doesn't really play anyone of national value so it's impossible to know where they stack up in the big picture. Sure they won 75% of their OOC games but they are game that any legitimate top 50ish team wins a bare minimum of 75% against.

I can go pull all time OOC opponents, or go back at least a few years, but we are going to see the same insular set of teams. It's why I've had a hard time believing Ivy computer rankings. Their scheduling protects all of the Ivy schools. By keeping it to the same group of schools across the board, multiple games against the same teams, etc. the computer has no idea what to do with them and then when two or three teams are clearly better than the rest of the conference they get massive boosts for beating the rest of the conference.

good stuff Clenz

The upcoming Princeton at Monmouth and Dartmouth vs UNH is as good as it gets for Ivy OOC games

Harvard should schedule N Iowa or Delaware ASAP

[OhioHen]

The CAA is closer to the SoCon and Southland than it is the Big Sky and MVFC? Seems about right.

What is shown by many people as:

MVFC
Big Sky
.
CAA
.
SoCon
Southland

would be better expressed as (note the size of the gap):
MVFC
Big Sky
.
.
.
CAA
.
SoCon
Southland

[Sitting Bull]

JMU won AT Weber. Aren’t they Big Sky?

[Sitting Bull]

Sagarin updated

18 MISSOURI VALLEY (AA)= 58.79 59.06 ( 18) 11 58.93 ( 18)
19 CONF USA-WEST (A) = 58.28 58.98 ( 19) 7 58.77 ( 19)
20 SUN BELT-WEST (A) = 57.20 58.03 ( 20) 5 57.65 ( 20)
21 BIG SKY (AA)= 50.25 50.72 ( 21) 13 50.47 ( 21)
22 COLONIAL (AA)= 47.61 48.50 ( 22) 12 48.03 ( 22)
23 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 47.15 46.47 ( 25) 6 46.82 ( 24)
24 SOUTHERN (AA)= 47.00 46.63 ( 24) 9 46.80 ( 25)
25 AQ7 (AA)= 46.77 47.08 ( 23) 9 46.86 ( 23)
26 IVY LEAGUE (AA)= 46.27 46.23 ( 26) 8 46.22 ( 26)
27 BIG SOUTH (AA)= 43.63 43.48 ( 27) 9 43.50 ( 27)
28 OHIO VALLEY (AA)= 40.67 40.77 ( 28) 7 40.73 ( 28)
29 SWAC-WEST (AA)= 36.30 35.92 ( 29) 6 36.02 ( 29)
30 SWAC-EAST (AA)= 35.25 34.99 ( 31) 6 35.06 ( 30)
31 NORTHEAST (AA)= 34.76 34.66 ( 32) 8 34.61 ( 32)
32 PATRIOT (AA)= 34.68 35.14 ( 30) 7 34.96 ( 31)
33 MID-EASTERN (AA)= 31.67 32.24 ( 33) 6 32.07 ( 33)
34 PIONEER (AA)= 26.83 26.38 ( 34) 11 26.48 ( 34)
35 ___UNRATED___ (__)= -91.00 -91.00 ( 35) 1 -91.00 ( 35)

[Daytripper]

This is a very interesting debate about conference strength...but the ultimate question is..."which team is holding the trophy?" xsmiley_wix

https://theanalyst.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/sam-houston-trophy.jpg

[Sader87]

But we will never know because their presidents and ADs will never let it happen.

As far as the "they play 3 OOC games so we *should* know side of that debate, while that is true the quality of their OOC tends to make it impossible to truly know where they stand





Opponent
-
Results
-
Massey


URI
-
L
-
23


VMI
-
L
-
54


Lafayette
-
L
-
76


Bryant
-
L
-
88


Bucknell
-
L
-
102


Holy Cross
-
W
-
44


Holy Cross
-
W
-
44


Sacred Heart
-
W
-
101


Bucknell
-
W
-
102


G'town
-
W
-
106


G'town
-
W
-
107


Lehigh
-
W
-
115


Lehigh
-
W
-
115


Marist
-
W
-
122


Valpo
-
W
-
126


Stetson
-
W
-
128


UNH
-

-
34


Monmouth
-

-
41


Uconn
-

-
42


Lafayette
-

-
76


Colgate
-

-
86


Colgate
-

-
86


Lehigh
-

-
115


CCSU
-

-
121



-

-












I used massey because I just did. I'm not partial to any computer at this point.

You see the Ivy has twice beat Holy Cross. That's the stand out win. Holy Cross, who lost to Merrimack. Other than they don't have a single win in the top 100 FCS programs. They have lost all 4 games to top 100 FCS programs not named Holy Cross. Those rankings are out of 128 teams

The average ranking of their wins is 100, which is SIGNIFICANTLY boosted by HC on their twice. If we throw out duplicate wins it drops to 106. Dump to outliers - two highest and two lowest - it drops to 110

The Ivy doesn't really play anyone of national value so it's impossible to know where they stack up in the big picture. Sure they won 75% of their OOC games but they are game that any legitimate top 50ish team wins a bare minimum of 75% against.

I can go pull all time OOC opponents, or go back at least a few years, but we are going to see the same insular set of teams. It's why I've had a hard time believing Ivy computer rankings. Their scheduling protects all of the Ivy schools. By keeping it to the same group of schools across the board, multiple games against the same teams, etc. the computer has no idea what to do with them and then when two or three teams are clearly better than the rest of the conference they get massive boosts for beating the rest of the conference.

Holy Cross won at Yale this year, lost last week to Harvard at Fitton.

[DFW HOYA]

Holy Cross won at Yale this year, lost last week to Harvard at Fitton.

Suggested for discussion: how would the Patriot League fare if it ended all competition with the Ivy League?

[clenz]

good stuff Clenz

The upcoming Princeton at Monmouth and Dartmouth vs UNH is as good as it gets for Ivy OOC games

Harvard should schedule N Iowa or Delaware ASAP
I'm not claiming the Ivy needs to travel to the MVFC or Big Sky. I'm stating there is a reason it truly is hard to rank them and know where they actually sit in the world of the FCS. The way they schedule is great for messing with computers. I'm not claiming they do that intentionally through some back door meetings with a mandate, it's just the reality of it. College basketball is a great example of it, and why power conferences went to 20 games a few years back and leagues like the Valley will now to go 20 games.

You limit the amount of outside data in that can mess with your rankings. The outside data, as long as it's a small enough sample (relative to the sport) and is heavily taken as a W for power rankings, will help once you get into your round robin set up because at that point you're creating this self sustaining spiral. It happens with all conferences, to an extent, but when the Ivy does it with such a small number of teams the spiral is tighter. The effect is amplified even more when you have a small conference so the circle is even smaller. To back my proof up - the Ivy is only 8 teams so with only 3 OOC games there are only 24 extra data points to add from a W/L side or power side. Now, on top of that of those 24 games 13 of them are against the same 6 teams. Not only that those 6 teams aren't great so they will all result in big wins for the Ivy. So what that does in the computer's mind is "Wow, that league is so much better than these other teams who are also connected to other conferences and teams and their MOV over those teams is good so they have to be stronger than those other teams. Then those Ivy teams start playing each other and the top of the Ivy crushes the bottom of the Ivy so the computer goes "Those tope teams are out of this world in strength" and jacks them up ni their rankings.

Look at other conferences and you might see some overlap in opponents it's not over 50% of the OOC games are against the same opponents. The potential for your SoS and power rankings to be impacted by games 3 or 4 spots down the connection tree is high. Team A beats Team B who beats Team C who beats Team D who beat Team E who beat Team B and C. All of a sudden the computer starts going "These teams are tough to separate" and starts to shrink the top and bottom of that group into a smaller dispersion. Compared to where you have only 3 potential teams in that line up and the circle of potential screw ups doesn't exist so it just strengthens as it closes in on itself.


I also understand the Valley, Big Sky, CAA, SoCon, etc. have different goals with football than the Ivy or even PL and NEC. The "power" conferences use OOC games as tests and attempting to show how strong they are come playoff time so they can go "We beat Team 2 from League A, team 1 from League B, and while League C is clearly the best league we took their Team 3 to the wire" in an attempt to gain seeding and poll spots.

The Ivy doesn't give a **** about that. They use their OOC as a branch of regional superiority and student recruiting tactics. Those conferences aren't looking to Iowa, Missouri, California, Texas, etc. for students. Students in those states are already going to look at an Ivy school because they know about the school. In those leagues it's more about flexing your power over each other who share, relatively, common standards and student recruiting.

Harvard would gain nothing by playing in Cedar Falls in general. They gain some respect if they win but it would be fairly easy to write it off as a one off and it would do nothing for student recruiting. They go to Cedar Falls and get crushed and it still does nothing for student recruitment, there are no student athletes in the area that are going to be swayed by that, and it would destroy the mystique of what the Ivy is in terms of quality. It's all risk, zero reward.

So I get the reason they play the way they do. I am simply stating by doing it that way, and then refusing to participate int he playoffs, it makes it impossible to have any real data set on how to rank them in terms of the FCS.

[DFW HOYA]

The Ivy doesn't give a **** about that. They use their OOC as a branch of regional superiority and student recruiting tactics. Those conferences aren't looking to Iowa, Missouri, California, Texas, etc. for students. Students in those states are already going to look at an Ivy school because they know about the school. In those leagues it's more about flexing your power over each other who share, relatively, common standards and student recruiting.

Harvard would gain nothing by playing in Cedar Falls in general. They gain some respect if they win but it would be fairly easy to write it off as a one off and it would do nothing for student recruiting. They go to Cedar Falls and get crushed and it still does nothing for student recruitment, there are no student athletes in the area that are going to be swayed by that, and it would destroy the mystique of what the Ivy is in terms of quality. It's all risk, zero reward.

So I get the reason they play the way they do. I am simply stating by doing it that way, and then refusing to participate in the playoffs, it makes it impossible to have any real data set on how to rank them in terms of the FCS.

Football has 0.01% to do with Harvard's overall student recruitment. It's not a balanced argument.

Yet, if the Harvard basketball team or track team or tennis team were sent to Cedar Falls as part of an NCAA tournament, they gladly go. Football is the only Ivy NCAA sport that does not participate in NCAA post-season activities. A fair question remains, why not?

[Sader87]

Ultimately, let's face it....we're all playing FCS football for a reason. With rare exceptions, most schools are playing regionalized schedules (particularly against like-wise FCS schools). It's a great level and has largely not succumbed to the extravagances of the FBS-level.

We largely play other schools we've been playing for about 100 years or more in many instances. There really isn't any need for Holy Cross to play Missouri St or for Harvard to play Sam Houston St. in the regular season. Why? To improve our stength of schedule etc?

The Ivies not playing in the playoffs can be seen as annoying....I get it. But in the grand scheme of things, it really isn't that big of a deal. The FCS playoffs are very flawed for a variety of reasons...they really aren't that big of a deal ultimately. One man's opinion.

[kalm]

Ultimately, let's face it....we're all playing FCS football for a reason. With rare exceptions, most schools are playing regionalized schedules (particularly against like-wise FCS schools). It's a great level and has largely not succumbed to the extravagances of the FBS-level.

We largely play other schools we've been playing for about 100 years or more in many instances. There really isn't any need for Holy Cross to play Missouri St or for Harvard to play Sam Houston St. in the regular season. Why? To improve our stength of schedule etc?

The Ivies not playing in the playoffs can be seen as annoying....I get it. But in the grand scheme of things, it really isn't that big of a deal. The FCS playoffs are very flawed for a variety of reasons...they really aren't that big of a deal ultimately. One man's opinion.

Define “regionalized”.

[ElCid]

Define “regionalized”.

Yeah that means different things to different people, but means nothing to the Big Sky or a chunk of the MVFC.

A school in the SE is surrounded with lots of schools, a huge number, and doesn't have to travel very far in time or money. Same with the NE. Same with the Ohio Valley area. Same with the Louisiana/Texas area. The upper plains and the entire west has, well, nobody except their own conf and it's longer travel and more costly.

Looking at it from our perspective, we actually went on an FBS binge where we played a team from every FBS conf including the Big 10 and PAC12. But the travel was obviously worth the cost. Not so sure it would be worth us to fly out to say Portland or Sacramento. It is even fairly easy to bus up to the NE. We had a HH with Princeton a dozen years ago. But it is real easy, and cheap, to play someone who is three or four hours up the interstate like Presbyterian, who we have played dozens of times, than to fly to the upper Midwest/Plains, Texas or the far west.

[MSUBobcat]

Yeah that means different things to different people, but means nothing to the Big Sky or a chunk of the MVFC.

A school in the SE is surrounded with lots of schools, a huge number, and doesn't have to travel very far in time or money. Same with the NE. Same with the Ohio Valley area. Same with the Louisiana/Texas area. The upper plains and the entire west has, well, nobody except their own conf and it's longer travel and more costly.

Looking at it from our perspective, we actually went on an FBS binge where we played a team from every FBS conf including the Big 10 and PAC12. But the travel was obviously worth the cost. Not so sure it would be worth us to fly out to say Portland or Sacramento. It is even fairly easy to bus up to the NE. We had a HH with Princeton a dozen years ago. But it is real easy, and cheap, to play someone who is three or four hours up the interstate like Presbyterian, who we have played dozens of times, than to fly to the upper Midwest/Plains, Texas or the far west.

I'm still not understanding this argument. I asked this earlier in the thread and no one contradicted it: Is it not common practice for the home team to pay a visiting OOC opponent varying amounts of money if there is not a home-and-home agreement? My understanding is that it is. Montana State paid both Drake and San Diego (Pioneer "non-scholly" teams) $275k. That had to be a fairly significant boost to the athletic department coffers, even after paying travel costs. Portland State or Sac State may not pay as much, but that's what negotiations are for. If they can't offer enough to make it worthwhile, don't schedule them. But to flat out say there's just no way a team from the South or East can schedule against the Big Sky or MVFC makes no sense if the home team is paying for your trip. It may not be the economic boon that a game against the PAC-12 pays, but there's a much better chance to come home with a W, particularly one that boosts your SOS.

[MR. CHICKEN]

.....LOTTAH NEC SKOOLS....WERE D-II/LESS......BACK IN DUH DAY........YOU-DEE......OOC.........PLAYED YOUNGSTOWN/W. ILLINOIS/MCNEESE STATE/FURMAN/DUH CITADEL.....
.....ANYBODAH WILLIN'...DEN DEY UPPED TA I-AA.....AN' DEY'RE UP AN' DOWN I-95......DON'T THINK WE'RE THUMPIN' OUR CHESTS.......FO' WHIPPIN' ST. FRANCIS/WAGNER.......PATRIOT MARSHMALLOWS..........AS CLENZ SUGGESTS....OOC'S WERE USUALLAH PLAYED EARLY........TA PREPARE FO' CONFERENC PLAY..........BRAWK!

[DFW HOYA]

We largely play other schools we've been playing for about 100 years or more in many instances. There really isn't any need for Holy Cross to play Missouri St or for Harvard to play Sam Houston St. in the regular season. Why? To improve our stength of schedule etc?

The Ivies not playing in the playoffs can be seen as annoying....I get it. But in the grand scheme of things, it really isn't that big of a deal. The FCS playoffs are very flawed for a variety of reasons...they really aren't that big of a deal ultimately. One man's opinion.

To Holy Cross, maybe. I'm sure there are Crusaders fans who would be content if it never played a game outside New England, much less playing chaff like Georgetown and Bucknell. But most FCS schools don't get that luxury, which is why Sam Houston plays Dixie State and Stetson plays San Diego. In 2000, Georgetown played exactly two schools it plays now; as late as 1995, none of them.

[ElCid]

I'm still not understanding this argument. I asked this earlier in the thread and no one contradicted it: Is it not common practice for the home team to pay a visiting OOC opponent varying amounts of money if there is not a home-and-home agreement? My understanding is that it is. Montana State paid both Drake and San Diego (Pioneer "non-scholly" teams) $275k. That had to be a fairly significant boost to the athletic department coffers, even after paying travel costs. Portland State or Sac State may not pay as much, but that's what negotiations are for. If they can't offer enough to make it worthwhile, don't schedule them. But to flat out say there's just no way a team from the South or East can schedule against the Big Sky or MVFC makes no sense if the home team is paying for your trip. It may not be the economic boon that a game against the PAC-12 pays, but there's a much better chance to come home with a W, particularly one that boosts your SOS.

Then let me spell it out as I see it. We wouldn't do anything other than a HH. We never have with an FCS. In which case a west team would not pay travel. And in that situation it really wouldn't pay. Maybe if we could find one willing to fly to us as well. Also we almost always have 6 home games. Very occasionally 5. So we aren't going to give up a home game just to "trave" for free. And we wouldn't give up a big money bonus from say Alabama or Clemson, or GATech to travel to a west FCS. Other teams might view it differently.

[MSUBobcat]

Then let me spell it out as I see it. We wouldn't do anything other than a HH. We never have with an FCS. In which case a west team would not pay travel. And in that situation it really wouldn't pay. Maybe if we could find one willing to fly to us as well. Also we almost always have 6 home games. Very occasionally 5. So we aren't going to give up a home game just to "trave" for free. And we wouldn't give up a big money bonus from say Alabama or Clemson, or GATech to travel to a west FCS. Other teams might view it differently.

I agree that cross country H-H are much less likely due to paying your own way, but it's also a school-specific decision to only agree to home-and-home and nothing to do with "travel costs". To be fair, Citadel is in a better position than many schools, consistently ranking in the top 25, or even top 20, in attendance. This makes you similar to MSU in that regard. We also are going to play 6 home games much more often than not, just like all schools that put butts in seats. We haven't had less than 6 home games as far back as our website has records (2005) and even had 7 in 2014. That still makes the "travel costs" not really the reason you don't go west. The real reason is not wanting to give up a financially beneficial home game for a payday game equal or less than what the home game would bring. It becomes a less relevant reason to not come west for a team like Wofford (Reign is who I originally questioned), who averaged 4,311 in 2019 in a 13k capacity stadium. Or more so for a poorly-attended team from a conference that claims to be slighted, like the Big South. Monmouth benefited financially going to Montana in 2019, probably didn't hurt their name recognition and boosted their SOS (though they did not win).

As a CPA, it's all dollars to me. If you sell lots of tickets, you don't have to go on the road. This is beneficial to the team in home field advantage, to the school in ticket, concession and merchandise sales, and to the locality. For example, we paid Drake $275k, but MSU probably made well over $500k, a net gain of $225k, very conservatively. Would we come to Citadel for a guaranteed $225k? Absolutely not. For $300k? Still probably no. For the lost opportunity cost (even after paying the visitor's fee) of not having a home game, the only way it makes financial sense for MSU is to take a guaranteed game against an FBS that pays $350k or more. And this doesn't even factor in the benefit of a home game that hopefully ends in a W, or the fact that local businesses (many who are boosters) clamor for that extra business that comes with a home game.

Long winded response, but the nuts and bolts are TRAVEL COSTS to go west are not a reason for not scheduling the games. The LOST OPPORTUNITY COSTS (some financial, some subjective) outweighing the net gain from the guarantee are the reason. My point is, there's a quite a few HAVES in the Big Sky and MVFC that could bring out the HAVE NOTS, as well as a lot of HAVES in the East/South that could bring out the HAVE NOTS from the west. No reason MSU can't play a Gardner-Webb instead of San Diego or why Delaware couldn't play a Portland State. Travel cost doesn't matter.

[ElCid]

I agree that cross country H-H are much less likely due to paying your own way, but it's also a school-specific decision to only agree to home-and-home and nothing to do with "travel costs". To be fair, Citadel is in a better position than many schools, consistently ranking in the top 25, or even top 20, in attendance. This makes you similar to MSU in that regard. We also are going to play 6 home games much more often than not, just like all schools that put butts in seats. We haven't had less than 6 home games as far back as our website has records (2005) and even had 7 in 2014. That still makes the "travel costs" not really the reason you don't go west. The real reason is not wanting to give up a financially beneficial home game for a payday game equal or less than what the home game would bring. It becomes a less relevant reason to not come west for a team like Wofford (Reign is who I originally questioned), who averaged 4,311 in 2019 in a 13k capacity stadium. Or more so for a poorly-attended team from a conference that claims to be slighted, like the Big South. Monmouth benefited financially going to Montana in 2019, probably didn't hurt their name recognition and boosted their SOS (though they did not win).

As a CPA, it's all dollars to me. If you sell lots of tickets, you don't have to go on the road. This is beneficial to the team in home field advantage, to the school in ticket, concession and merchandise sales, and to the locality. For example, we paid Drake $275k, but MSU probably made well over $500k, a net gain of $225k, very conservatively. Would we come to Citadel for a guaranteed $225k? Absolutely not. For $300k? Still probably no. For the lost opportunity cost (even after paying the visitor's fee) of not having a home game, the only way it makes financial sense for MSU is to take a guaranteed game against an FBS that pays $350k or more. And this doesn't even factor in the benefit of a home game that hopefully ends in a W, or the fact that local businesses (many who are boosters) clamor for that extra business that comes with a home game.

Long winded response, but the nuts and bolts are TRAVEL COSTS to go west are not a reason for not scheduling the games. The LOST OPPORTUNITY COSTS (some financial, some subjective) outweighing the net gain from the guarantee are the reason. My point is, there's a quite a few HAVES in the Big Sky and MVFC that could bring out the HAVE NOTS, as well as a lot of HAVES in the East/South that could bring out the HAVE NOTS from the west. No reason MSU can't play a Gardner-Webb instead of San Diego or why Delaware couldn't play a Portland State. Travel cost doesn't matter.

I agree with everything you said. Don't know why some schools with marginal attendance don't do it. I couldn't remember how many 5 home game seasons we've had, but it was more than I thought. 3 in last 11 years. But I think it was 2 scheduled with a hurricane relocate that made it three. But we really don't like it. I'm pretty sure all our private boxes and club level have been sold out for years. That's a lot of money for each game. And we are probably losing money with the visitors side closed for so long and then demolished. Still waiting to rebuild it. Ugh.

[clenz]

I agree with everything you said. Don't know why some schools with marginal attendance don't do it. I couldn't remember how many 5 home game seasons we've had, but it was more than I thought. 3 in last 11 years. But I think it was 2 scheduled with a hurricane relocate that made it three. But we really don't like it. I'm pretty sure all our private boxes and club level have been sold out for years. That's a lot of money for each game. And we are probably losing money with the visitors side closed for so long and then demolished. Still waiting to rebuild it. Ugh.
UNI refuses to go to 6 home games for some reason.

FBS and 2 home and homes alternating home away. Playing 2 OOC games at home is illegal according to our AD it seems.

[MSUBobcat]

UNI refuses to go to 6 home games for some reason.

FBS and 2 home and homes alternating home away. Playing 2 OOC games at home is illegal according to our AD it seems.

Well that's just silly. xdrunkyx Especially looking at some of the opponents. Sac State this year, SUU in 2017... those don't sound like big payday games and one would think a home game would bring in more revenue. The home-and-homes against EWU and UM are exciting matchups, so I'd be okay with my school losing a 6th home game for something like that in a H-H. Our Big Sky/MVFC challenge H-H worked out so we didn't even lose the 6th home game. We had WIU in 2019, which was a 12 game season so we still got our payday FBS and 2 OOC home games. In 2018 for our return trip to SDSU, we didn't schedule an FBS game so we still had 2 home OOC. With what a home game is bringing in these days (16.5k was the low of the last 5 seasons we've played, to over 19k average in 2015), I'm glad we've moved away from even scheduling an FBS beatdown. If we're going to schedule one, I prefer us to have at least an outside shot at winning, like this year @ WYO (I still think we got jobbed on that weak ass block in the back that cost us a punt returned for TD that would have put us up 14-3 with just over 4 minutes left in the 3rd).

[NY Crusader 2010]

I'm not claiming the Ivy needs to travel to the MVFC or Big Sky. I'm stating there is a reason it truly is hard to rank them and know where they actually sit in the world of the FCS. The way they schedule is great for messing with computers. I'm not claiming they do that intentionally through some back door meetings with a mandate, it's just the reality of it. College basketball is a great example of it, and why power conferences went to 20 games a few years back and leagues like the Valley will now to go 20 games.

You limit the amount of outside data in that can mess with your rankings. The outside data, as long as it's a small enough sample (relative to the sport) and is heavily taken as a W for power rankings, will help once you get into your round robin set up because at that point you're creating this self sustaining spiral. It happens with all conferences, to an extent, but when the Ivy does it with such a small number of teams the spiral is tighter. The effect is amplified even more when you have a small conference so the circle is even smaller. To back my proof up - the Ivy is only 8 teams so with only 3 OOC games there are only 24 extra data points to add from a W/L side or power side. Now, on top of that of those 24 games 13 of them are against the same 6 teams. Not only that those 6 teams aren't great so they will all result in big wins for the Ivy. So what that does in the computer's mind is "Wow, that league is so much better than these other teams who are also connected to other conferences and teams and their MOV over those teams is good so they have to be stronger than those other teams. Then those Ivy teams start playing each other and the top of the Ivy crushes the bottom of the Ivy so the computer goes "Those tope teams are out of this world in strength" and jacks them up ni their rankings.

Look at other conferences and you might see some overlap in opponents it's not over 50% of the OOC games are against the same opponents. The potential for your SoS and power rankings to be impacted by games 3 or 4 spots down the connection tree is high. Team A beats Team B who beats Team C who beats Team D who beat Team E who beat Team B and C. All of a sudden the computer starts going "These teams are tough to separate" and starts to shrink the top and bottom of that group into a smaller dispersion. Compared to where you have only 3 potential teams in that line up and the circle of potential screw ups doesn't exist so it just strengthens as it closes in on itself.


I also understand the Valley, Big Sky, CAA, SoCon, etc. have different goals with football than the Ivy or even PL and NEC. The "power" conferences use OOC games as tests and attempting to show how strong they are come playoff time so they can go "We beat Team 2 from League A, team 1 from League B, and while League C is clearly the best league we took their Team 3 to the wire" in an attempt to gain seeding and poll spots.

The Ivy doesn't give a **** about that. They use their OOC as a branch of regional superiority and student recruiting tactics. Those conferences aren't looking to Iowa, Missouri, California, Texas, etc. for students. Students in those states are already going to look at an Ivy school because they know about the school. In those leagues it's more about flexing your power over each other who share, relatively, common standards and student recruiting.

Harvard would gain nothing by playing in Cedar Falls in general. They gain some respect if they win but it would be fairly easy to write it off as a one off and it would do nothing for student recruiting. They go to Cedar Falls and get crushed and it still does nothing for student recruitment, there are no student athletes in the area that are going to be swayed by that, and it would destroy the mystique of what the Ivy is in terms of quality. It's all risk, zero reward.

So I get the reason they play the way they do. I am simply stating by doing it that way, and then refusing to participate int he playoffs, it makes it impossible to have any real data set on how to rank them in terms of the FCS.

Maybe they just play OOC games against schools their alum somewhat care about? Perhaps it's not as complex as you're making it out to be. They don't play FBS, they don't play DII so who do they play? Other FCS teams in their region, most of whom they have long-standing series with.

The one thing that I would point out is that the Ivies DO occasionally branch out from the New England/Mid-Atlantic region. But when they do they schedule absolute garbage.

Harvard-San Diego => USD is no joke but why not UC Davis or Sac State? The UC system has some academic clout, doesn't it?
Dartmouth-Valpo => Just why?
Princeton-Stetson => time for another series against The Citadel now that the Tigers are actually very good? How about Delaware or W&M?

Can Columbia start playing Fordham or other local NY teams with a pulse (Stony Brook, Albany) now that they're competitive again? Dare I say Army?

Villanova and Penn should play each other every year instead of each independently beating up on Bucknell all the time.

Maybe the Ivies will go woke and start a scheduling agreement with the SWAC or MEAC. And you know what? FCS football would be better for it so I'd be all in, with or without the politics.

[caribbeanhen]

Maybe they just play OOC games against schools their alum somewhat care about? Perhaps it's not as complex as you're making it out to be. They don't play FBS, they don't play DII so who do they play? Other FCS teams in their region, most of whom they have long-standing series with.

The one thing that I would point out is that the Ivies DO occasionally branch out from the New England/Mid-Atlantic region. But when they do they schedule absolute garbage.

Harvard-San Diego => USD is no joke but why not UC Davis or Sac State? The UC system has some academic clout, doesn't it?
Dartmouth-Valpo => Just why?
Princeton-Stetson => time for another series against The Citadel now that the Tigers are actually very good? How about Delaware or W&M?

Can Columbia start playing Fordham or other local NY teams with a pulse (Stony Brook, Albany) now that they're competitive again? Dare I say Army?

Villanova and Penn should play each other every year instead of each independently beating up on Bucknell all the time.

Maybe the Ivies will go woke and start a scheduling agreement with the SWAC or MEAC. And you know what? FCS football would be better for it so I'd be all in, with or without the politics.


I really like the way you’re thinking, The problem with the way we think is there’s just not enough of us to move the needle.

[Reign of Terrier]

That's not true, at least not in the way you suggest.

Here are two conferences with roughly the same TV deal and enrollments. Which can afford it more by their 2019 average attendance?

Conference A:
Team 1: 4,021
Team 2: 4,311
Team 3: 4,397
Team 4: 7,767
Team 5: 8,525
Team 6: 8,802
Team 7: 9,344
Team 8: 9,406
Average: 7,071


Conference B:
Team 1: 3,789
Team 2: 4,295
Team 3: 5,376
Team 4: 5,596
Team 5: 7,225
Team 6: 8,427
Team 7: 10,812
Team 8: 12,133
Average: 7,202


Not much difference--about 150 more a game between the two. What, $1500 a game? Conference A is the Southern Conference, which has FBS guarantee game options. Conference B is the Ivy League, which does not.

Yes, the Ivy League have larger endowments but these are generally restricted by the donor base--law school, medical school, faculty, etc. You can't tell Harvard Law that their endowment money is buying a trip for 100 players and coaches to Eastern Washington.

If the Ivies want to travel (and in fact, they don't), it will need to be built into the budget and, frankly, that they relent on a 10 game schedule.

None of these stats are relevant. One Ivy league school probably has an endowment the equivalent of the entire socon combined (or close to it). They also almost certainly have more billionaires combined.

Athletics are run on alumni enthusiasm and money. Ivys have the most of anyone in the FCS, that's just a blunt fact. If they wanted to find a way to be nationally competitive, they could do it.

My statement is true: they can afford the cost. But they don't want to.




Doesn't the home team pay the visiting team varying sums of money if it's not a home and home? MSU paid Drake and San Diego $275,000 (https://www.montanasports.com/sports/big-sky-conference/montana-state-bobcats/a-look-at-montana-state-footballs-2021-guarantee-games) each, which should more than cover travel costs. In fact, we were only paid $425k from Wyoming, so we had a net loss of $125k from our OOC payouts (more than offset by 2 large home crowds, I'm sure).

So unless this is not common practice for the home team to pay a visiting OOC team, this "travel budget" argument doesn't hold water when it comes to scheduling cross-country trips to the Big Sky/MVFC, or even CAA teams in the NE for southern teams. You may not get them to come to you, but there is no reason they couldn't go on the road to boost their OOC when they're paying you to come.


Define “regionalized”.

I'm going to just bundle all of these together with the conversation about money and regionalization: If you're playing division one football and west of the Mississippi, unless you're in Texas, chances are you'll *have* to fly, as a matter of budgeting for all games. It's an economies of scale thing. The schools you've listed are west of the Mississippi and already normally fly for all of their games. They're also poineer league teams and don't have to pay for scholarships, if I'm not mistaken.

If Wofford of Furman is doing a home and home with Montana or any of these MVFC/Big Sky teams, we basically have to pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars we do not have.

But if you're an eastern FCS team, with small revenue from the box office (or a private school for that matter), it makes very little sense financially.

From what I can remember, EWU is probably the exception in that they have a smaller budget relative to other FCS schools, so insert whatever commentary as you will.

[DFW HOYA]

None of these stats are relevant. One Ivy league school probably has an endowment the equivalent of the entire socon combined (or close to it). They also almost certainly have more billionaires combined.


Can they do better? Of course. But endowment isn't the discussion.

[Reign of Terrier]

I
I also understand the Valley, Big Sky, CAA, SoCon, etc. have different goals with football than the Ivy or even PL and NEC. The "power" conferences use OOC games as tests and attempting to show how strong they are come playoff time so they can go "We beat Team 2 from League A, team 1 from League B, and while League C is clearly the best league we took their Team 3 to the wire" in an attempt to gain seeding and poll spots.



Even then, I think there are gradients within the power conferences based on variables like program interest, state vs private, and east/west of the Mississippi. If you're, say Northern Colorado, to play a full division one schedule, you have to fly. If you're Tennessee Tech, not so much.

If you're an athletic director who has to balance a budget and pitch to stakeholders about games that will likely lose a lot of money, it's got to be a pretty darn good pitch. There's a reason why teams like Jacksonville State and JMU do trips to EWU and Weber, etc but not times like Wofford or Furman or UT Martin (just picking a random state school with no strong tradition).

Some programs have the enthusiasm and the box office, others have one and not the other. Some have neither. Also, these games are often scheduled years in advance and kind of a gamble (KSU beating Wofford and JSU looks a lot better in 2019, when these games were scheduled - or before? - than they do this year in 2021). The value you pitch (that it will help in playoff positioning, may not parse through). So if you're an AD the ask gets a little higher unless you know the loss won't be huge financially. As a side note, it's worth mentioning that the socon, in basketball, now contracts with some company intent on boosting its computer rankings, but there's no concerted effort to do so in football, where there's more of a chance to find success and win a championship. That tells me that money is likely a big decision for not trying harder in football (even though obviously the basketball ROI is crazy higher, regardless of championship, with the NCAA tourney)


As a side note, it is also 100% possible the reason wofford doesn't schedule harder is because our AD is a cheapskate. Because he is (I have heard lots of funny stories), but that's another convo lol

- - - Updated - - -


Can they do better? Of course. But endowment isn't the discussion.

On the raw factual claim that you're rebutting (The Ivy league is rich and can afford expensive things), that is the discussion. And I'm correct.

[Reign of Terrier]

I
Long winded response, but the nuts and bolts are TRAVEL COSTS to go west are not a reason for not scheduling the games. The LOST OPPORTUNITY COSTS (some financial, some subjective) outweighing the net gain from the guarantee are the reason. My point is, there's a quite a few HAVES in the Big Sky and MVFC that could bring out the HAVE NOTS, as well as a lot of HAVES in the East/South that could bring out the HAVE NOTS from the west. No reason MSU can't play a Gardner-Webb instead of San Diego or why Delaware couldn't play a Portland State. Travel cost doesn't matter.

This is clearly written by someone from a big state school that flies everywhere. Wofford probably flies an average of one game ever 2-3 years. If you take out FBS games, it's probably worse (top of my head, Wofford's flown to Wyoming, Fargo, Youngstown, Idaho, Baylor, Northern Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin, South Florida, Montana, Air Force, and maybe West Virginia and maybe Maryland*in the last 20 years* none of those were FCS OOC, though I think we may have traveled to Lehigh/Colgate in the last 90s/2001). I got curious a couple years ago and looked at the distribution of OOC games, and the overwhelming majority were done with teams in neighboring states. If you take out teams that fly everywhere, it's something like 90%+ of games.

I was surprised earlier this year when SHSU played UNA, because it was the first game in like over a decade that they played out of Southland conference footprint that wasn't in the playoffs, FBS, or sponsored by ESPN.

You have to remember (and this is a shocker for lots of people!) that the purpose of athletic departments at the FCS level isn't to win championships or make lots of money, it's to provide an educational opportunity to student athletes (wild, right?).

I am only like 70% certain of this, but there's a reason why most of the biggest OOC games outside of the west in the FCS that required national travel were week zero games or ESPN promoted events.

If you're at JMU or JSU (and have a huge box office and a culture that aspires for national titles), it's not a big pitch for ADs to go to stakeholders and say "let's play a game against Weber or EWU." On the financial side, you won't lose as much.

But for less successful state schools (think about whoever is left in the OVC) or smaller budget schools that *lose money every year anyway* (Wofford, Furman, etc), that's a very big pitch. Because scheduling at this level is pretty uncertain. I'll gladly be corrected by a Big Sky or MVFC fan with more encyclopedic knowledge on this than me, but I'm remembering a lot of them being a wash in terms of providing a signature win to put them higher in the playoffs or into the playoffs when they were a bubble team.

If you're one of these programs you're basically going to lose money for marginal subjective benefit. It doesn't make financial sense.

And everyone saying "you should regularly schedule cross country flights to boost rankings" should understand that...even Big Sky teams don't do that? In the past, they've sooner scheduled D2 teams or even played an extra conference opponent as a non-conference team before they dialed up Wofford. Heck, Montana State brought in Kennesaw State a few years ago. I'm skeptical they'll do the home-in-home, and no one seems to be lining up to play KSU in the FCS anymore, now that they're a known commodity https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/kennesaw-state/

The fact is, only select state schools that have AD/stakeholder buy-in and fan enthusiasm will schedule big cross country games that may never be shown on ESPN. And there's a pattern of behavior in their scheduling that implies they view their FCS scheduling similar to how FBS teams do: they have a tough conference schedule and so scheduling more than one tough OOC isn't good.

Circling back to the thread, this means folks like KSU, who try their best to schedule tough (and Wofford and furman, relatively speaking, who schedule "power" conference opponents like Elon or tough individual programs like NC A&T and KSU, who are local and within their budget) keep being told to either "be more perfect" (winning isn't good enough, apparently!) but also "schedule tougher, but no actually, schedule only the teams I think are tough even if those teams have neither the capacity or will to schedule you"

It's just this crazy logic that's obviously crazy.

[katss07]

This is clearly written by someone from a big state school that flies everywhere. Wofford probably flies an average of one game ever 2-3 years. If you take out FBS games, it's probably worse (top of my head, Wofford's flown to Wyoming, Fargo, Youngstown, Idaho, Baylor, Northern Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin, South Florida, Montana, Air Force, and maybe West Virginia and maybe Maryland*in the last 20 years* none of those were FCS OOC, though I think we may have traveled to Lehigh/Colgate in the last 90s/2001). I got curious a couple years ago and looked at the distribution of OOC games, and the overwhelming majority were done with teams in neighboring states. If you take out teams that fly everywhere, it's something like 90%+ of games.

I was surprised earlier this year when SHSU played UNA, because it was the first game in like over a decade that they played out of Southland conference footprint that wasn't in the playoffs, FBS, or sponsored by ESPN.

You have to remember (and this is a shocker for lots of people!) that the purpose of athletic departments at the FCS level isn't to win championships or make lots of money, it's to provide an educational opportunity to student athletes (wild, right?).

I am only like 70% certain of this, but there's a reason why most of the biggest OOC games outside of the west in the FCS that required national travel were week zero games or ESPN promoted events.

If you're at JMU or JSU (and have a huge box office and a culture that aspires for national titles), it's not a big pitch for ADs to go to stakeholders and say "let's play a game against Weber or EWU." On the financial side, you won't lose as much.

But for less successful state schools (think about whoever is left in the OVC) or smaller budget schools that *lose money every year anyway* (Wofford, Furman, etc), that's a very big pitch. Because scheduling at this level is pretty uncertain. I'll gladly be corrected by a Big Sky or MVFC fan with more encyclopedic knowledge on this than me, but I'm remembering a lot of them being a wash in terms of providing a signature win to put them higher in the playoffs or into the playoffs when they were a bubble team.

If you're one of these programs you're basically going to lose money for marginal subjective benefit. It doesn't make financial sense.

And everyone saying "you should regularly schedule cross country flights to boost rankings" should understand that...even Big Sky teams don't do that? In the past, they've sooner scheduled D2 teams or even played an extra conference opponent as a non-conference team before they dialed up Wofford. Heck, Montana State brought in Kennesaw State a few years ago. I'm skeptical they'll do the home-in-home, and no one seems to be lining up to play KSU in the FCS anymore, now that they're a known commodity https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/kennesaw-state/

The fact is, only select state schools that have AD/stakeholder buy-in and fan enthusiasm will schedule big cross country games that may never be shown on ESPN. And there's a pattern of behavior in their scheduling that implies they view their FCS scheduling similar to how FBS teams do: they have a tough conference schedule and so scheduling more than one tough OOC isn't good.

Circling back to the thread, this means folks like KSU, who try their best to schedule tough (and Wofford and furman, relatively speaking, who schedule "power" conference opponents like Elon or tough individual programs like NC A&T and KSU, who are local and within their budget) keep being told to either "be more perfect" (winning isn't good enough, apparently!) but also "schedule tougher, but no actually, schedule only the teams I think are tough even if those teams have neither the capacity or will to schedule you"

It's just this crazy logic that's obviously crazy.
Sam went to North Dakota in 2019. Also went to EWU in 2013 which was part of a h&h.

They’ll do a h&h with both Sacramento State and Youngstown within these next few years.

[caribbeanhen]

Sam went to North Dakota in 2019. Also went to EWU in 2013 which was part of a h&h.

They’ll do a h&h with both Sacramento State and Youngstown within these next few years.

Delaware Sam Houston home and home would be great, but why Sacramento State?

[MSUBobcat]

This is clearly written by someone from a big state school that flies everywhere. Wofford probably flies an average of one game ever 2-3 years.

Somehow you missed the very first sentence, then deleted it when you "quoted" me, but I said cross country home-and-homes are unlikely due to travel costs unless between two HAVES teams. I'm talking about talking an FCS OOC "money game". I've also said that if you fill your stadium, a la Citadel, this probably doesn't pique your interest because you want an FBS payday and 2 home games. But if you're getting small crowds at home, going cross country is no big deal from a travel cost standpoint. Wofford may not think $275k isn't in their best interest to come west, but I don't imagine they netted much more going to Elon that they would have coming to Bozeman. I know travel costs aren't preventing travel out west because we've brought SEMO, Norfolk, Wagner, Kennesaw, Bryant and ETSU since just 2015 (Drake also a flight but not east of Mississippi River). Clearly travel costs aren't much deterrent. But keep scheduling away games at your Gardner-Webbs and Tennessee Techs and..... Presbyterian College TWICE?? If that's what moves the needle for the fanbase, have at it. But don't claim travel costs are preventing teams from going west for a one-off.

[clenz]

Well that's just silly. xdrunkyx Especially looking at some of the opponents. Sac State this year, SUU in 2017... those don't sound like big payday games and one would think a home game would bring in more revenue. The home-and-homes against EWU and UM are exciting matchups, so I'd be okay with my school losing a 6th home game for something like that in a H-H. Our Big Sky/MVFC challenge H-H worked out so we didn't even lose the 6th home game. We had WIU in 2019, which was a 12 game season so we still got our payday FBS and 2 OOC home games. In 2018 for our return trip to SDSU, we didn't schedule an FBS game so we still had 2 home OOC. With what a home game is bringing in these days (16.5k was the low of the last 5 seasons we've played, to over 19k average in 2015), I'm glad we've moved away from even scheduling an FBS beatdown. If we're going to schedule one, I prefer us to have at least an outside shot at winning, like this year @ WYO (I still think we got jobbed on that weak ass block in the back that cost us a punt returned for TD that would have put us up 14-3 with just over 4 minutes left in the 3rd).
Oh trust me, the fans of the program are pretty well pissed off past the point of caring anymore. At this point it's gone from anger/frustration to simply a meme anytime anyone talks about scheduling.

There is zero value to UNI to play at SSU, Weber, Sac, Cal Poly, etc. but when your AD is too ****ing cheap to book a buy game because somehow he thinks paying for the team to fly to the west coast once a year because of how the H/H are staggered you lose all hope. He books H/H beacuse it makes his job easy. Rather than negotiate on bringing someone in he just goes "If you play here we will play there" and it cuts his work in half for scheduling. I can think of just 2 buy games UNI has done since 2010 - Central State in 2012 (which was supposed to be Savannah State but they backed out stupid last minute so we paid a D2 from Ohio to bus 12 hours to Cedar Falls) and Hampton in 2018

Going back to 10 (I pick 10 beacuse we had a new AD start in 09 and then he was replaced in 16) and that's when we saw a shift in scheduling

10: 5 home games - @Iowa State, vs SFA as part 1 of H/H, @ USD as part 2 of H/H - part 1 was the year before
11: 5 home games @ Iowa State, @ SFA as part 2 of a H/H, vs SUU as part 1 of a H/H
12: 5 game games - @ Wisconsin, @ Iowa, vs Central State - D2 buy game
13: 6 home games: @ Iowa State, buy game vs McNeese, buy game vs Drake, vs @ as part 1 of a H/H. 12 game season. The only time we've splashed for a home schedule because it was a 12 game season
14: 6 home games @ Iowa @ Hawaii, vs UNC as part 2 of a H/H, buy game vs Tenn Tech
15: 5 home games @ Iowa State, v EWU as part 1 of a H/H, @ Cal Poly as part 1 of a H/H
16: 5 home games: @ Iowa State, vs Montana as part 1 of a H/H, @ EWU as part 2 of a H/H
17: 5 home games: @ Iowa State, v Cal Poly as part 2 of a H/H, @ SUU as part 1 of a H/H
18: 5 home games: @ Iowa, @ Montana, buy game vs Hampton (which only happened because he couldn't find another BSC to start a H/H with)
19: 6 home games: @ Iowa State, v SUU as part 2 of a H/H, v Idaho State as part 1 of a H/H, @ Weber State as part 1 of a H/H
21: 5 home games: @ Iowa State, @ Sac State as part 1 of a H/H , vs St Thomas as part 1 of a H/H

Looking forward next year is the first year we have 6 home games in like 8 years and just the third or fourth time in the last 15

22: 6 home games @ Air Force, Sac State, Dixie State

EVen then Dixie State is part of a H/H....as is St Thomas from this year. Though I don't mind UST being a H/H given it's only 3 hours so fans can go and it's right in the middle of our recruiting ground in MSP.

2023 is back to 5 home games - @ Iowa STATE, Weber State as part 2 of a H/H, @ Idaho State as part 2 of a H/H
2024 so far we have @ St Thomas as part 2 of a H/H
2025 so far we have @ Dixie State as part 2 of a H/H
20206 so far we have @ Iowa State
2028 so far we have @ Iowa State

2024, 2025, 2027 we will be forced into an FBS game. Probably Iowa, Wisconsin, Kansas State, Nebraska, etc. Why? Because it's a bus trip and they'll pay 600k+. We have played Iowa or Iowa State every year since something like 2005 with the exception of 2008 (BYU). In 2012 abd 2014 we played Iowa, plus a second FBS (Wisconsin and Hawaii.) At this point everyone in the state of Iowa is sick of UNI/ISU and UNI/UI. The only person that isn't isn't is our AD because it's a 700k+ pay day. Not that he uses that money to bring teams in, just that it's a pay day.

So that is 4 6 home game years between 2010 and 2028 and 3 of the 4 are 12 games seasons (because lord knows we aren't geetting 6 home games in the next 8 unless there is a 12 game schedule in there).

It doesn't make sense for a program like UNI to be going to Poly, Sac, SUU, Idaho State, etc. It just doesn't. We don't recruit there. Flying a travel squad of 58, plus coaches, staff, trainers, admin, and all the equipment to those places can't be cheaper than a buy game once you put ticket sales, advertising revenue, consessions, parking, etc. into the buy game.

Not only that by only playing 5 home games every year you are hurting the program. It's harder for fans to go to the games and be a part of it. Draw new fans in. You can charge for another game, you get concession for another game. You can charge advertising for another game. People are going to be more willing to donate to you if you are willing to give them things to go to at home.

BUT that's not as easy as going "Do you two want to do a H/H and alternate who is at home so we can all have a home game both years?"

[katss07]

Delaware Sam Houston home and home would be great, but why Sacramento State?
Hell yeah the Keeler Bowl would be great.

Not sure why Sacramento State… probably just wanted a Big Sky school and Sac had an open date.

[Reign of Terrier]

Somehow you missed the very first sentence, then deleted it when you "quoted" me, but I said cross country home-and-homes are unlikely due to travel costs unless between two HAVES teams. I'm talking about talking an FCS OOC "money game". I've also said that if you fill your stadium, a la Citadel, this probably doesn't pique your interest because you want an FBS payday and 2 home games. But if you're getting small crowds at home, going cross country is no big deal from a travel cost standpoint. Wofford may not think $275k isn't in their best interest to come west, but I don't imagine they netted much more going to Elon that they would have coming to Bozeman. I know travel costs aren't preventing travel out west because we've brought SEMO, Norfolk, Wagner, Kennesaw, Bryant and ETSU since just 2015 (Drake also a flight but not east of Mississippi River). Clearly travel costs aren't much deterrent. But keep scheduling away games at your Gardner-Webbs and Tennessee Techs and..... Presbyterian College TWICE?? If that's what moves the needle for the fanbase, have at it. But don't claim travel costs are preventing teams from going west for a one-off.

There is quite literally no such thing as an FCS money game for 95% of the FCS.

Every team you have listed here has some things in common: they are either state school or at the time of scheduling, pretty weak. Imagine going to a random team thousands of miles away and saying "hey I have a proposition for you, how about we play you and you give us $300k, also we'll likely beat you!" Yeah no, that's not a good financial decision at all if you're the hosting AD.

Because if you're, say, Montana State, yes, it makes sense to pay $275k a piece for a couple of easy wins, but as soon as it becomes normative to bring in decent teams that can beat you and it becomes more 50-50, the financial incentives look less good.

Small schools lose money on football, full stop. College football is a nonprofit enterprise, after all. AD's are trying to break even or minimize the losses. This expectation that we have to schedule tough teams at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars or what have you to appease random people on the internet (FCS Football is not nearly as popular as you think it is!) demonstrates the bubble you live in.

[kalm]

There is quite literally no such thing as an FCS money game for 95% of the FCS.

Every team you have listed here has some things in common: they are either state school or at the time of scheduling, pretty weak. Imagine going to a random team thousands of miles away and saying "hey I have a proposition for you, how about we play you and you give us $300k, also we'll likely beat you!" Yeah no, that's not a good financial decision at all if you're the hosting AD.

Because if you're, say, Montana State, yes, it makes sense to pay $275k a piece for a couple of easy wins, but as soon as it becomes normative to bring in decent teams that can beat you and it becomes more 50-50, the financial incentives look less good.

Small schools lose money on football, full stop. College football is a nonprofit enterprise, after all. AD's are trying to break even or minimize the losses. This expectation that we have to schedule tough teams at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars or what have you to appease random people on the internet (FCS Football is not nearly as popular as you think it is!) demonstrates the bubble you live in.

The only issue I really have is over playoff considerations between teams with stronger schedules and teams with similar records that choose to schedule weak and/or have lower schedule strength due to playing in a weaker conference.

[Reign of Terrier]

The only issue I really have is over playoff considerations between teams with stronger schedules and teams with similar records that choose to schedule weak and/or have lower schedule strength due to playing in a weaker conference.

This isn't college basketball. Games are scheduled years in advance with money (specifically: not losing it) being the primary motivator for most of those games. The idea of "schedule harder OOC" is something somewhat invented by FCS poasters in the last 5 years or so to justify absolutely absurd 6-5 teams getting in.

[kalm]

This isn't college basketball. Games are scheduled years in advance with money (specifically: not losing it) being the primary motivator for most of those games. The idea of "schedule harder OOC" is something somewhat invented by FCS poasters in the last 5 years or so to justify absolutely absurd 6-5 teams getting in.

Well I’ve been pointing it out much longer than that and insular/regional scheduling has gone on for decades. Schools can schedule who they want. They should get rewarded in polls and playoff consideration based on resume. You’re describing the why…which is known.

[caribbeanhen]

I totally agree it would be nice to see them play a more diverse OOC schedule

Princeton At Monmouth this Saturday

Dartmouth at New Hampshire the following Saturday is about as good as it gets for Ivy OOC match ups

Harvard probably beats everybody in Big Sky minus E Wash and Montana

Princeton beats Monmouth

Dartmouth gets a chance vs New Hampshire next Saturday

[NY Crusader 2010]

Princeton beats Monmouth

Dartmouth gets a chance vs New Hampshire next Saturday

Neither Monmouth or UNH are that good, at least relative to some of their more recent teams. That being said, Yale also gives the Ivy the chance for a very rare FBS scalp this week as well. I think Yale will be very slightly favored against Northern Connecticut State in Storrs -- I'll say Eli -1.5. But I'm going to go out on a limb and predict a UCONN win in OT. Last chance for the Huskies to get a W this year in all likelihood.

[Reign of Terrier]

Well I’ve been pointing it out much longer than that and insular/regional scheduling has gone on for decades. Schools can schedule who they want. They should get rewarded in polls and playoff consideration based on resume. You’re describing the why…which is known.

I would agree if playoff seeding was for all 24 teams and home field advantage wasn't so pivotal and predictive of teams advancing in the playoffs.

[MSUBobcat]

There is quite literally no such thing as an FCS money game for 95% of the FCS.

Every team you have listed here has some things in common: they are either state school or at the time of scheduling, pretty weak. Imagine going to a random team thousands of miles away and saying "hey I have a proposition for you, how about we play you and you give us $300k, also we'll likely beat you!" Yeah no, that's not a good financial decision at all if you're the hosting AD.

Because if you're, say, Montana State, yes, it makes sense to pay $275k a piece for a couple of easy wins, but as soon as it becomes normative to bring in decent teams that can beat you and it becomes more 50-50, the financial incentives look less good.

Small schools lose money on football, full stop. College football is a nonprofit enterprise, after all. AD's are trying to break even or minimize the losses. This expectation that we have to schedule tough teams at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars or what have you to appease random people on the internet (FCS Football is not nearly as popular as you think it is!) demonstrates the bubble you live in.

Still have yet to provide a single shred of evidence that travel costs are preventing cross country travel. Cross pollination, I believe you called it but may have been someone else, makes it easier to rank conferences. There are teams that don't schedule many OOC FCS away games (like us, as it's been at least 16 years since we had less than 6 regular season home games). But you can't tell me, with the weak-ass OOC away games Wofford has been accepting, that it wouldn't be pretty close to a wash financially taking a game at Montana State vs. bussing to Presbyterian. Did they even pay your gas? Or was it scheduled more for the easy W?

There's a group of HAVES that can afford to pay teams to come cross country. There's a group of HAVE NOTS that need to take those games to help supplement their budget (sounds like Wofford, as a "small schools lose money on football, full stop" may be in this group but think they're in the next bucket). In between, there are teams that for a variety of reasons (taking a likely L and damaging playoff aspirations isn't worth $100k net in the coffers, they make more or similar amounts by playing at home, whatever the case may be) are not in either bucket. But no one in the history of ever has said, "We have an offer to go to Fargo for $275k, but it's going to cost us $200k to travel there, so........ NOPE!" C'mon man. From a financial standpoint, if you're making more to go than it costs to go... the travel costs CAN'T be the reason to decline. Something else is the reason.

Yes, MSU has a bit more flexibility to bring in what should be easier wins with their larger budget. But we also don't NEED to schedule a tough OOC because the Big Sky conference schedule will usually provide opportunities to play multiple ranked teams, so I wouldn't hold my breath for it to become normative to bring in 50-50 games. Once in a while, possibly. Normal? Schools in our position don't really need to do that often.

The irony of stating "AD's are trying to break even or minimize losses" while also saying travel costs that are outweighed by the revenue being brought in by said travel (positive net cash inflow) is why the game can't happen is palpable. xrotatehx

Edit: I should clarify: If a school offers less than it would cost to travel (negative net cash flow), then yes.... travel costs may be the reason that prevents that game from happening. Portland State probably won't be bringing anyone from the NEC, Socon, CAA, etc. out west anytime soon.

[Reign of Terrier]

Still have yet to provide a single shred of evidence that travel costs are preventing cross country travel. Cross pollination, I believe you called it but may have been someone else, makes it easier to rank conferences. There are teams that don't schedule many OOC FCS away games (like us, as it's been at least 16 years since we had less than 6 regular season home games). But you can't tell me, with the weak-ass OOC away games Wofford has been accepting, that it wouldn't be pretty close to a wash financially taking a game at Montana State vs. bussing to Presbyterian. Did they even pay your gas? Or was it scheduled more for the easy W?

There's a group of HAVES that can afford to pay teams to come cross country. There's a group of HAVE NOTS that need to take those games to help supplement their budget (sounds like Wofford, as a "small schools lose money on football, full stop" may be in this group but think they're in the next bucket). In between, there are teams that for a variety of reasons (taking a likely L and damaging playoff aspirations isn't worth $100k net in the coffers, they make more or similar amounts by playing at home, whatever the case may be) are not in either bucket. But no one in the history of ever has said, "We have an offer to go to Fargo for $275k, but it's going to cost us $200k to travel there, so........ NOPE!" C'mon man. From a financial standpoint, if you're making more to go than it costs to go... the travel costs CAN'T be the reason to decline. Something else is the reason.

Yes, MSU has a bit more flexibility to bring in what should be easier wins with their larger budget. But we also don't NEED to schedule a tough OOC because the Big Sky conference schedule will usually provide opportunities to play multiple ranked teams, so I wouldn't hold my breath for it to become normative to bring in 50-50 games. Once in a while, possibly. Normal? Schools in our position don't really need to do that often.

The irony of stating "AD's are trying to break even or minimize losses" while also saying travel costs that are outweighed by the revenue being brought in by said travel (positive net cash inflow) is why the game can't happen is palpable. xrotatehx

Edit: I should clarify: If a school offers less than it would cost to travel (negative net cash flow), then yes.... travel costs may be the reason that prevents that game from happening. Portland State probably won't be bringing anyone from the NEC, Socon, CAA, etc. out west anytime soon.

My "shred of evidence" is the fact that cross country traveling for regular season games is exceedingly rare (and always has been) at this level for the regular season. The only teams that schedule OOC games that require flying are the ones that are doing so anyway, no matter who they play. I'm not going to go over-the-top with an effort post researching every dimension of this, it's just so normative that it goes without saying.

You have to have a "very online football brain" to think that these games are scheduled (or have ever been scheduled) without money (specifically, not losing it) in mind. Take your PC example for instance: the reason why we went to Presbyterian is because it's 30 minutes away via bus. No hotel necessary, and it makes it easier to negotiate a two-for-one (which also saves us money). This is pretty entry level stuff, I don't know why it needs to be explained.

Meanwhile, your argument is weird: since the money programs out west hold the power of the purse here, for some reason it's the less financially lucrative programs that are at fault for not getting paid to play there? Whenever these big OOC games happen, it's usually because the money ADs reach out to the not-money ones, or the ones that will put a good financial product.

We don't see what happens behind the scenes with negotiations and scheduling, but there's a financial and program incentive for these money programs to not schedule these teams. Why would they? You already said they play in the toughest conferences and don't need extra hard games. Why spend money to hurt your playoff chances? They already pretty much don't.

For every Weber a team like JMU plays, they also play a Norfolk State or a Moorhead that they pile drive by 50. Coaches like at least one OOC garbage game to get a development experience out of the way. I don't see how this would change just because a half dozen more eastern teams express a desire to play. There are only so many "have" teams in this subdivision and they'll only probably play one a year. So these "have not" teams can be assured a quality OOC game once every, like, 4 years or so? Great?

This proposal is so radically out of step with how college athletics administration is conducted at this level that it's clearly just the product of too-online-FCS-brain.

We aren't college basketball, we aren't FBS. Most FCS schools need one "money game" from FBS and so they only have two OOC to work with. Some would prefer at least one of those to be a home game. Compare that to FBS where they have *4* OOC games. The FBS can be creative and have these lucrative and interesting matchups because of their box office, but for most FCS teams, they'll be lucky to get 6 home games (which, when you're not making lots of money or at an elite level of play, is what most programs want, more than anything - to see their team in person). So if you assume that you want one of those games to be winnable or one that you can use to develop players like a scrimmage, that leaves one remaining to be "quality." And there just aren't that many big money programs in FCS anymore to balance out the have nots.

Lots of programs are just trying to balance their budget and the few that aren't have a minimal tolerance for tough OOC games (outside of one a year), and a radical reshuffling of this equilibrium is just wrongheaded.

[caribbeanhen]

Neither Monmouth or UNH are that good, at least relative to some of their more recent teams. That being said, Yale also gives the Ivy the chance for a very rare FBS scalp this week as well. I think Yale will be very slightly favored against Northern Connecticut State in Storrs -- I'll say Eli -1.5. But I'm going to go out on a limb and predict a UCONN win in OT. Last chance for the Huskies to get a W this year in all likelihood.

If Holy Cross Beats UConn, Yale should beat them as well

We have found out that Monmouth is not that good but they were ranked fairly high coming off last season’s playoff and the curb stomping they put on Kennesaw State

[Reign of Terrier]

As a side note: I want to reiterate that my ****ting upon the CAA this week has been exposed as a possible ice cold take. Obviously, there's lots of time for them to screw this up, but hats of to Nova for beating the Dukes.

[Panther88]

I will be slightly shocked if an at-large bid doesn't originate in the SWAC this fall season. The upper tier is beginning to take shape and October will provide the shake-out and necessary distance.

[Professor]

Prepared to be shocked. No team has a resume. SWAC is 7-7 against FCS competition.

The 7 wins

SCSU 2x
TNSU 2x
NCCU
NW st.
Houston Baptist

[Panther88]

Prepared to be shocked. No team has a resume. SWAC is 7-7 against FCS competition.

The 7 wins

SCSU 2x
TNSU 2x
NCCU
NW st.
Houston Baptist

Not a horrific "shock" but more so an expected "historical" shock, substantiating why we chose our non-playoff path and focus on The SCG and The CB. You are right though.... a 3-8 MVC squad should receive the at-large lol. After all, they are much, much worthy in front of their 1100 playoff fans.

[caribbeanhen]

Not a horrific "shock" but more so an expected "historical" shock, substantiating why we chose our non-playoff path and focus on The SCG and The CB. You are right though.... a 3-8 MVC squad should receive the at-large lol. After all, they are much, much worthy in front of their 1100 playoff fans.

I would like too see Jackson State play the worst Valley team... Just for the fun of it

Yes, let’s see a SWAC team in the playoffs

[Reign of Terrier]

I'm the one being the apologist for non-"big 3" teams and even I won't argue for an at-large SWAC team lol

[Panther88]

I would like too see Jackson State play the worst Valley team... Just for the fun of it

Yes, let’s see a SWAC team in the playoffs

That's good stuff, caribby.

After "losstober," we'll see what's what in the SWAC E/W divisions. May have to point folk like "rained" of terrier to youtube so he can do his own SWAC research. lol Jackson St didn't get the nod for having the most talented fcs squad by accident. They have a LOT of talent in all positions.

[OhioHen]

I will be slightly shocked if an at-large bid doesn't originate in the SWAC this fall season. The upper tier is beginning to take shape and October will provide the shake-out and necessary distance.
Unfortunately for the SWAC, the games on Thanksgiving weekend combined with the conference championship game means that to be eligible for an at-large a team must:
1) NOT be playing on Thanksgiving weekend (so long Grambling and Southern every year plus Alabama State, MVSU, and PVAMU this season),
2) Be guaranteed to NOT win their division and qualify for the conference championship game, AND
3) Have a good enough resume to catch the eyes of the selection committee members.

The only team not playing Thanksgiving weekend with less than two overall losses at this time is Jackson State and they lead the East.

[Reign of Terrier]

That's good stuff, caribby.

After "losstober," we'll see what's what in the SWAC E/W divisions. May have to point folk like "rained" of terrier to youtube so he can do his own SWAC research. lol Jackson St didn't get the nod for having the most talented fcs squad by accident. They have a LOT of talent in all positions.

If they make it in and make some noise, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. There's reason to think the HBCUs in general have turned a corner, but I need more data points OOC (especially out of the SWAC) before I can say that.

[DFW HOYA]

There's reason to think the HBCUs in general have turned a corner, but I need more data points OOC (especially out of the SWAC) before I can say that.

A little difficult for me to see the argument that the MEAC has turned the corner on anything.

[Reign of Terrier]

A little difficult for me to see the argument that the MEAC has turned the corner on anything.

They had a good year in 2019, completely wiped out by the pandemic...and some of those good teams jumping ship to other conferences.

[Panther88]

If they make it in and make some noise, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. There's reason to think the HBCUs in general have turned a corner, but I need more data points OOC (especially out of the SWAC) before I can say that.

Certainly substantiated. The OOC performance is decently troublesome but, again, I think the end of October will have a dramatic shake-out on the upper echelon of both divisions.

[Panther88]

Unfortunately for the SWAC, the games on Thanksgiving weekend combined with the conference championship game means that to be eligible for an at-large a team must:
1) NOT be playing on Thanksgiving weekend (so long Grambling and Southern every year plus Alabama State, MVSU, and PVAMU this season),
2) Be guaranteed to NOT win their division and qualify for the conference championship game, AND
3) Have a good enough resume to catch the eyes of the selection committee members.

The only team not playing Thanksgiving weekend with less than two overall losses at this time is Jackson State and they lead the East.

Hella' research. Literally slipped me that we're playing that w/e. smh Historically, we would not.

[OhioHen]

Hella' research. Literally slipped me that we're playing that w/e. smh Historically, we would not.
I was surprised to see another SWAC matchup that weekend as well. I believe Alabama State-Tuskegee is historically on that weekend, so not as surprised there.

[Professor]

Unfortunately for the SWAC, the games on Thanksgiving weekend combined with the conference championship game means that to be eligible for an at-large a team must:
1) NOT be playing on Thanksgiving weekend (so long Grambling and Southern every year plus Alabama State, MVSU, and PVAMU this season),
2) Be guaranteed to NOT win their division and qualify for the conference championship game, AND
3) Have a good enough resume to catch the eyes of the selection committee members.

The only team not playing Thanksgiving weekend with less than two overall losses at this time is Jackson State and they lead the East.

I have said the same in the past. Those 3 dynamics aren't gonna line up but 1 in a 1,000 times

[caribbeanhen]

That's good stuff, caribby.

After "losstober," we'll see what's what in the SWAC E/W divisions. May have to point folk like "rained" of terrier to youtube so he can do his own SWAC research. lol Jackson St didn't get the nod for having the most talented fcs squad by accident. They have a LOT of talent in all positions.

Losstober

lol

[caribbeanhen]

good stuff Clenz

The upcoming Princeton at Monmouth and Dartmouth vs UNH is as good as it gets for Ivy OOC games

Harvard should schedule N Iowa or Delaware ASAP

The Ivies made a strong point vs AGS darlins New Hampshire and Monmouth

sad part is the fun is over for the OOC games

[UNHWildcat18]

It's a joke that the Ivy's don't participate in playoffs, their presidents are morons

[Sonic98]

I have said the same in the past. Those 3 dynamics aren't gonna line up but 1 in a 1,000 times

It all depends on what teams are contractually required to do. The only teams that are absolutely 100% not able to go are the two Bayou Classic teams. If a team from the SWAC were to say win multiple Celebration Bowls, as NCAT previously did, the only question that remains if they want to go to playoffs is if they are legally obligated or if they can forfeit their spot in the SWAC Title Game. JSU is currently in the top 20 in the poll that is used for playoff seeding. If in 2 years they're able the team is able to do the same thing, coupled with maybe 2 tough non-conference games in the regular season, it only comes down to what the rules are for foregoing the SCG

[Sonic98]

That's not true, at least not in the way you suggest.

Here are two conferences with roughly the same TV deal and enrollments. Which can afford it more by their 2019 average attendance?

Conference A:
Team 1: 4,021
Team 2: 4,311
Team 3: 4,397
Team 4: 7,767
Team 5: 8,525
Team 6: 8,802
Team 7: 9,344
Team 8: 9,406
Average: 7,071


Conference B:
Team 1: 3,789
Team 2: 4,295
Team 3: 5,376
Team 4: 5,596
Team 5: 7,225
Team 6: 8,427
Team 7: 10,812
Team 8: 12,133
Average: 7,202


Not much difference--about 150 more a game between the two. What, $1500 a game? Conference A is the Southern Conference, which has FBS guarantee game options. Conference B is the Ivy League, which does not.

Yes, the Ivy League have larger endowments but these are generally restricted by the donor base--law school, medical school, faculty, etc. You can't tell Harvard Law that their endowment money is buying a trip for 100 players and coaches to Eastern Washington.

If the Ivies want to travel (and in fact, they don't), it will need to be built into the budget and, frankly, that they relent on a 10 game schedule.

I'm sure they can find donors who want to donate to football, bands, and anything associated with a game on Saturday.

[Sonic98]

Ultimately, let's face it....we're all playing FCS football for a reason. With rare exceptions, most schools are playing regionalized schedules (particularly against like-wise FCS schools). It's a great level and has largely not succumbed to the extravagances of the FBS-level.

We largely play other schools we've been playing for about 100 years or more in many instances. There really isn't any need for Holy Cross to play Missouri St or for Harvard to play Sam Houston St. in the regular season. Why? To improve our stength of schedule etc?

The Ivies not playing in the playoffs can be seen as annoying....I get it. But in the grand scheme of things, it really isn't that big of a deal. The FCS playoffs are very flawed for a variety of reasons...they really aren't that big of a deal ultimately. One man's opinion.

So, why can't we start trying to do something about the flaws?

[DFW HOYA]

The Ivies made a strong point vs AGS darlins New Hampshire and Monmouth

sad part is the fun is over for the OOC games


With the exception of Dartmouth-UNH and may be a game or two others, the Ivies do not care about non-conference games, and that includes playoffs. They just don't. If they could play a season strictly within the conference (like the NESCAC), a plurality of their presidents would probably go along with the idea.

[Sonic98]

That's good stuff, caribby.

After "losstober," we'll see what's what in the SWAC E/W divisions. May have to point folk like "rained" of terrier to youtube so he can do his own SWAC research. lol Jackson St didn't get the nod for having the most talented fcs squad by accident. They have a LOT of talent in all positions.

Many might take is as a joke, but the only thing this team is missing to make it on par with top 25 or playoff-caliber teams is an OL and depth at the DL, RB, and CB positions. Coach Prime did 3 years worth of recruiting in one off-season. If he can bring in another top 60 class and develop the guys that are already on the team, it won't be one of your same old SWAC Teams

[Daytripper]

Many might take is as a joke, but the only thing this team is missing to make it on par with top 25 or playoff-caliber teams is an OL and depth at the DL, RB, and CB positions. Coach Prime did 3 years worth of recruiting in one off-season. If he can bring in another top 60 class and develop the guys that are already on the team, it won't be one of your same old SWAC Teams

Sure wish he could prove it in the playoffs.

[smilo]

If you asked me blindly, I really would have thought the Big Sky was solidly number 2. I was stunned to see that they are fifth in average SP+. The bottom 5 teams simply rate out at worse than every team in the Colonial and all but Brown in the Ivy.

Love BSC football, but this was a helpful sanity check. I knew CP had fallen off from the program we once knew, but they seem to continue trending in the wrong direction. The Idaho's are much more dreadful than I anticipated. Simply removing Southern Utah alone will get them into a tie for third. Not much has changed in a decade! It's still the haves and the have nots.

I do feel that several years ago, the haves definitely inexplicably dropped more games to the have nots, especially with playoff births on the line. Hopefully that won't be in question this season with a gap of this size.