Playoff Expansion Part N (for 2023)

[bonarae]

Infinite topic on finite resources... xcoffeex

https://herosports.com/fcs-football-playoffs-expansion-bzbz/

[ElCid]

Infinite topic on finite resources... xcoffeex

https://herosports.com/fcs-football-playoffs-expansion-bzbz/

Way too early to even discuss it. There might be one or two less auto bids in the coming couple years. Stupid idea. Anybody want a spot? Win your damn conference.

[nodak651]

Especially with the teams that will be moving to fbs. Hate rule changes and this is no exception.

[Ridge1982]

Way too early to even discuss it. There might be one or two less auto bids in the coming couple years. Stupid idea. Anybody want a spot? Win your damn conference.
This. I don’t want FCS to become the NHL and MLB.

[Ridge1982]

Although I like the idea of rotating venues for the championship game.

[Professor Chaos]

Way too early to even discuss it. There might be one or two less auto bids in the coming couple years. Stupid idea. Anybody want a spot? Win your damn conference.
Yeah, and the notion that the Big Sky and MVFC will be losing at large bids with the new autobids is also shortsighted. All these 6 team (or less) conferences like the Southland, OVC, Big South, ASUN will almost always be putting one team into the field whereas before the teams in those conferences used to put in at least one at-large. There's only around 100 playoff eligible FCS schools after you take out the Ivy League and the SWAC/MEAC teams that have scheduling obligations after Thanksgiving. 28 or 32 playoff teams seems like overkill. Half the Big Sky and MVFC would probably be in the playoffs every year with those numbers.

EDIT: Of course if the Big South/ASUN and OVC/Southland would just consolidate it would make things a lot simpler for everyone.

[caribbeanhen]

if they go to 32
Two Auto bids for CAA when it splits North and south

MVFC will have an auto out game, loser out everyone else gets playoff spot

[ElCid]

This. I don’t want FCS to become the NHL and MLB.

"They" do this to every sport and it ruins it. If you want a third or a half of all teams in the playoffs then cut the season down to 10 or 9 games. I mean why play it if that's the case. Hopefully sanity will prevail. Not good for players. Fans don't like it. The only ones pushing it or those with ulterior, including financial, interests.

[ElCid]

Although I like the idea of rotating venues for the championship game.

I don't know. There are good arguments on both sides of rotating and a stable, name recognizable venue. As it is, in basically the center, east/west'wise, it's not bad. This mostly neutralizes any time issue. That far south takes out most weather issues as well...usually.

[Professor]

I just think every team should have to play each round. No one should get a bye

[lionsrking2]

32 makes sense to me

[FUBeAR]

FUBeAR had an epiphany today (on a 6+ mile walk) about how FCS Playoffs should be structured going forward. May develop this hazy, filmy ethereal epiphany into a full-blown ‘manifesto’ and post here in the future or may not…we’ll see.

Keyword = Regionalization
Subtitle = Stop hatin’…time to embrace it even more bigly!
Bonus Hint = The F in FCS stands for Final Four!

[KnightoftheRedFlash]

There are too many teams as it stands now.

[Bisonator]

The PO field should be contracted not enlarged. 16 is the better number, get rid of the auto bids and seed the field.

[NDB]

What's the point of college sports?
What's the point of playoffs?

How does expanding the field serve the purpose?

I really don't know.

Students get enough competition in the regular season. The playoffs serve to meet the required competitive nature of sport.

You compete for a playoff spot.
If you make the playoffs you compete for a championship.

The playoffs are a money loser.

24 teams already make it. Whats the lowest seed to really make a splash? It's not the best team in a crap league. Even with autobids, it's not the last team in today.

I like the current set up as it gives NDSU a buy. But 16 with autobids makes sense. Otherwise 8 or 12.

Sure as hell not 32.

[walliver]

I really like a 16 team field, but could tolerate 20 teams. Every effort should be made to avoid Thanksgiving weekend games. These games are poorly attended and compete directly with P5 Rivalry weekend. Fans at the big schools can make Thanksgiving plans around the "big game". FCS fans will, in many cases, have made Thanksgiving plans well before selection Sunday. I would keep auto-bids, but require conferences to have at least 8 members. There should be regional seeding and real regionalization so that fans can afford to attend away games.

Currently, the FCS playoffs, like most NCAA events, is subsidized by March Madness. If the P5 have a hissy fit and leave, that resource will go away. The current TV coverage is part of a package from the NCAA for most championships. Since this package is being split up, it is not clear what type of coverage we will have in the future (hopefully not FLO-sports). The playoffs will need to become self-supporting, likely by butts in seats.

I would rather give everybody an extra regular season game than expand the playoffs.

[ysubigred]

I'd like to see 16 teams no auto bids.. set a criteria to select the best 16 teams even "IF" several are from the same conference and let em play all seated (1-16).. Championship game in Louisville KY, Lynn Family Stadium this is the center of the 1FCS universe for travel..

Get the games back on network TV FOX, CBS, NBC, ABC.. no bye week after the semi-final that way the championship game will be done before the 1BCS toilet bowl season starts full swing!!

Let the conferences award the conference champ the participation trophy!!

xtwocentsx

[Professor Chaos]

I really like a 16 team field, but could tolerate 20 teams. Every effort should be made to avoid Thanksgiving weekend games. These games are poorly attended and compete directly with P5 Rivalry weekend. Fans at the big schools can make Thanksgiving plans around the "big game". FCS fans will, in many cases, have made Thanksgiving plans well before selection Sunday. I would keep auto-bids, but require conferences to have at least 8 members. There should be regional seeding and real regionalization so that fans can afford to attend away games.

Currently, the FCS playoffs, like most NCAA events, is subsidized by March Madness. If the P5 have a hissy fit and leave, that resource will go away. The current TV coverage is part of a package from the NCAA for most championships. Since this package is being split up, it is not clear what type of coverage we will have in the future (hopefully not FLO-sports). The playoffs will need to become self-supporting, likely by butts in seats.

I would rather give everybody an extra regular season game than expand the playoffs.
The NCAA championships TV package is being split up? I think that's great news honestly. The FCS playoff draw pretty good viewership numbers.... at least the ones I've followed that include NDSU. Last year's quarterfinal between NDSU and ETSU was just barely edged out by the Heisman presentation as the most watched programming on ESPN the Saturday it was on. The semifinal vs JMU was the most watched programming on ESPN2 that Friday and the natty vs Montana St was the most watched ESPN2 programming that Saturday and doubled up the viewership numbers for Sportscenter and college basketball that were on ESPN at the same time.

I think bidding out TV rights for the FCS playoffs individually only helps it. There's umpteen god forsaken bowl games that draw peanuts for crowds that are alive and thriving because of their TV contract. I think the FCS playoffs could find a good chunk of change from a media partner and start making money each year even which would hopefully lead to less regionalization of the bracket and more of a true tournament. The FCS playoffs lose money typically but those figures don't include any kind of TV money since it's currently lumped in with the entire NCAA championships TV package that ESPN has (which does get the NCAA around $40M annually I believe).

[KnightoftheRedFlash]

Go back to 16.
Keep the autobids. (The one advantage that the FCS can boast over FBS)

Perfection. The 7-4 CAA team that is left out wasn't winning the title anyway.

[POD Knows]

Go back to 16.
Keep the autobids. (The one advantage that the FCS can boast over FBS)

Perfection. The 7-4 CAA team that is left out wasn't winning the title anyway.
No but a 3rd or 4th place team in the BSC or MVFC would have a punchers chance. There are autobids that have no chance of winning a Natty.

[caribbeanhen]

No but a 3rd or 4th place team in the BSC or MVFC would have a punchers chance. There are autobids that have no chance of winning a Natty.

punchers chance? Reminds me of the time Ali got whipped in Puerto Rico




Iris Chacón tried to save Ali. She jumped into the ring, and gave him a pep talk.
https://40.media.tumblr.com/45f11cfcbb8e4a94f6c6c4f813369c9c/tumblr_nurdks2ID51qednhoo1_500.jpgBut many people don’t know that Ali was knocked out twice in Puerto Rico, by a relatively unknown fighter. Here is the video and photographic evidence…
https://i0.wp.com/remezcla.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016-06-06-1024x520.jpgIt all happened in 1976, when Ali visited the island for a championship fight. But what Ali didn’t count on, was a Puerto Rican champ named José Miguel Agrelot.

[ElCid]

No but a 3rd or 4th place team in the BSC or MVFC would have a punchers chance. There are autobids that have no chance of winning a Natty.

But each conf, based on the those with sufficient teams, deserves a chance. Again, if anyone wants a chance, win your damn conf. And rules aren't made for eras, but for the long haul. Conf excellence does come and go...even if it seems like it hasn't lately.

[OhioHen]

Go back to 16.
Keep the autobids. (The one advantage that the FCS can boast over FBS)

Perfection. The 7-4 CAA team that is left out wasn't winning the title anyway.
The difficulty comes in the NCAA requirement that there be at least as many at-large bids as auto-bids. That requirement started when the power conferences wanted to take even more from the cash cow of March Madness and the NCAA buckled under. That's why the tournament expanded to 64 and beyond. Other sports were added later.

[MR. CHICKEN]

Go back to 16.
Keep the autobids. (The one advantage that the FCS can boast over FBS)

Perfection. The 7-4 CAA team that is left out wasn't winning the title anyway.

.......TROUBLE IS.....7-4 CAA.....MIGHT.....COOD BEAT DUH......NEC AUTO.....SO THEN MAYBE......WE SHOODN'T....ALLOW...ALL..... DUH AUTO-BIDS.......BRAWK!

[Professor Chaos]

.......TROUBLE IS.....7-4 CAA.....MIGHT.....COOD BEAT DUH......NEC AUTO.....SO THEN MAYBE......WE SHOODN'T....ALLOW...ALL..... DUH AUTO-BIDS.......BRAWK!
There's some truth to that. You could also argue a 7-4 CAA team has already proven they're not up to snuff with the top teams in their conference whereas the NEC champ (usually) can only prove that in the playoffs.

I'm a fan of autobids. One of the best things about this subdivision is any team from an autobid conference can only have its national titles hopes dashed on the field and not in a committee boardroom.

[POD Knows]

But each conf, based on the those with sufficient teams, deserves a chance. Again, if anyone wants a chance, win your damn conf. And rules aren't made for eras, but for the long haul. Conf excellence does come and go...even if it seems like it hasn't lately.
I am actually OK with the 24 team set up now. I am opposed to any expansion and opposed to something that would allow autobids to stay in place 100% and potentially eliminate a team that might be in a top 10 or 15 poll position.

[MR. CHICKEN]

There's some truth to that. You could also argue a 7-4 CAA team has already proven they're not up to snuff with the top teams in their conference whereas the NEC champ (usually) can only prove that in the playoffs.

I'm a fan of autobids. One of the best things about this subdivision is any team from an autobid conference can only have its national titles hopes dashed on the field and not in a committee boardroom.

.....BUT UH 6-5 NORFFERN IOWA CAN......xchinscratchx......A 6-5....WILL NEVER......WEAR DUH CROWN.....xsmhx.....AWK!

ps....NOT SAYIN' 7-4 BELONGS.....POINT IS......NEC CHAMP DOESN'T EITHER.....AWK!

[ElCid]

The difficulty comes in the NCAA requirement that there be at least as many at-large bids as auto-bids. That requirement started when the power conferences wanted to take even more from the cash cow of March Madness and the NCAA buckled under. That's why the tournament expanded to 64 and beyond. Other sports were added later.

Any rule made, can be changed, even for one sport or subdivision.

[NDSU1980]

So how many 6-5 teams are going to be included in order to fill the field? (besides UNI) I've always felt 24 was too many and if your team can't make the playoffs with 24 spots you aren't deserving.

[ysubigred]

So how many 6-5 teams are going to be included in order to fill the field? (besides UNI) I've always felt 24 was too many and if your team can't make the playoffs with 24 spots you aren't deserving.This ^ also Puni could make the playoffs losing 10 games for some reason [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[MR. CHICKEN]

So how many 6-5 teams are going to be included in order to fill the field? (besides UNI) I've always felt 24 was too many and if your team can't make the playoffs with 24 spots you aren't deserving.


........UMMM....DUH ONES WHOM HAVE WON DEY'RE AUTO BID.....WHIFF 6-5..OR 5-6 RECORDS.....BAWK!

.......NOT DAT HARD TA DO....IN BIG SOUFF/PATRIOT............AWK!

[ST_Lawson]

.....BUT UH 6-5 NORFFERN IOWA CAN......xchinscratchx......A 6-5....WILL NEVER......WEAR DUH CROWN.....xsmhx.....AWK!

ps....NOT SAYIN' 7-4 BELONGS.....POINT IS......NEC CHAMP DOESN'T EITHER.....AWK!

If I remember correctly, WIU was the first team to make the playoffs as an at-large with a 6-5 record (I think a couple of 6-5 teams had won their conference to get in that way before), and that was in 2015, after it had expanded to 24 in 2013. A 16-team field would never see an at-large 6-5 team get in and probably even a 7-4 would be rare...they'd have to have an impressive resume and be from one of the top few conferences. For reference, our 2015 team won at Pioneer League champ Dayton in the first round, then went to play at ILSU for the second time that season.

[NDSU1980]

If I remember correctly, WIU was the first team to make the playoffs as an at-large with a 6-5 record (I think a couple of 6-5 teams had won their conference to get in that way before), and that was in 2015, after it had expanded to 24 in 2013. A 16-team field would never see an at-large 6-5 team get in and probably even a 7-4 would be rare...they'd have to have an impressive resume and be from one of the top few conferences. For reference, our 2015 team won at Pioneer League champ Dayton in the first round, then went to play at ILSU for the second time that season.
I remember when WIU got in with a 6-5 record. I think everyone from 7-4 UND also remembers that year as UND didn't get a spot.

[FUBeAR]

I remember when WIU got in with a 6-5 record. I think everyone from 7-4 UND also remembers that year as UND didn't get a spot.
Yes … and fans of the SoCon’s 7-4 2015 Western Carolina, a Team that hasn’t been to the playoffs since playing in the National Championship Game in 1983, painfully remember that one-in-a-series-of-continuous-SoCon-slights quite well also.

For further reference, that 6-5 WIU Team, one of 4 At-Large bids from the MVFC, did win a home game over a non-scholarship Dayton Team, then lost by 3 scores to another MVFC At-large Team, who lost the following week by multiple scores to a CAA Team, who then got rolled the following week in the semi-finals.

Pretty sure that 7-4 WCU Team, if selected as the 2nd At-large SoCon bid that season, could have easily beaten non-scholarship Dayton in Cullowhee, and then lost to Chattanooga or The Citadel (the AQ and sole At-large SoCon Playoff Teams & WCU’s only 2015 FCS losses - they also lost to Tennessee & Texas A&M) equally as impressively as WIU lost to their MVFC mate.

Oh well…as we SoCon Fans now say…SSDY

[ST_Lawson]

For further reference, that 6-5 WIU Team, one of 4 At-Large bids from the MVFC, did win a home game over a non-scholarship Dayton Team, then lost by 3 scores to another MVFC At-large Team, who lost the following week by multiple scores to a CAA Team, who then got rolled the following week in the semi-finals.

The game was at Dayton, just fyi. WIU hasn't had a home playoff game since "the incident (https://www.theintelligencer.com/news/article/NCAA-Bans-1-Suspends-13-in-Playoff-Fight-10480270.php)" against Western Kentucky in 2002.

[FUBeAR]

The game was at Dayton, just fyi. WIU hasn't had a home playoff game since "the incident (https://www.theintelligencer.com/news/article/NCAA-Bans-1-Suspends-13-in-Playoff-Fight-10480270.php)" against Western Kentucky in 2002.
Showed WIU on the bottom & Dayton the top on the bracket viewed to refresh memory. Usually indicates home team when scores are shone, but not always. Apologies for the error. Pretty sure WCU coulda beat non-scholarship Dayton in Dayton as well.

[ST_Lawson]

Showed WIU on the bottom & Dayton the top on the bracket viewed to refresh memory. Usually indicates home team when scores are shone, but not always. Apologies for the error. Pretty sure WCU coulda beat non-scholarship Dayton in Dayton as well.

Understood...and yes, WCU probably would have ended up doing the same thing WIU did...win at Dayton, lose at Illinois State.

I think it was just a situation where WIU had just beaten the #5 team the day before selection Sunday, plus WCU had played a non-D1 team, so their DI record was 6-4.

[SDFS]

Understood...and yes, WCU probably would have ended up doing the same thing WIU did...win at Dayton, lose at Illinois State.

I think it was just a situation where WIU had just beaten the #5 team the day before selection Sunday, plus WCU had played a non-D1 team, so their DI record was 6-4.

Was that the game that it took SDSU 24 hours to get to Macomb and the game was delayed an 1 1/2 because SDSU was suck in traffic. Basically, SDSU had to get off the bus and play.

[FUBeAR]

plus WCU had played a non-D1 team, so their DI record was 6-4.
Plus?

6-4 (0.600) vs. 6-5 (0.545) … same number of D1 wins with WCU having a better winning % in D1 games and in FCS games (WCU = 6-2 (0.750) vs. WIU = 6-4 (0.600)).

FUBeAR doesn’t doubt that the Selection Committee, as you do, (somehow) saw/see 6-4 vs. 6-5 as part of the justification for selecting an MVFC Team over a SoCon Team. The fact that it should indicate the opposite response is, apparently, irrelevant.

[Hammerhead]

Why should football be different from every other tournament that has an autobid from each conference? I would be OK if there were no autobids for non-scholarship conferences or forcing teams to offer a minimum number of scholarships if they want to play division I football.



The PO field should be contracted not enlarged. 16 is the better number, get rid of the auto bids and seed the field.

[walliver]

Why should football be different from every other tournament that has an autobid from each conference? I would be OK if there were no autobids for non-scholarship conferences or forcing teams to offer a minimum number of scholarships if they want to play division I football.

The reason football could be different is that in most sports, you can play a game and turn around and play another a day of two later. In basketball, most conference tournaments are played on consecutive days. March Madness is played with two games every weekend. March Madness goes from 68 teams to a champion in essentially three weekends (plus a few days for the play-in teams). If the NCAA added another weekend, they could probably let any team that wants to participate play in March Madness (256 teams).

Personally I would want to keep the auto-bids, but would require conferences have at least 8 teams to earn one.

[Bisonator]

Does anyone think the MVFC, CAA or BSC winner wouldn't make the tourney field of 16 if there were no autobids? WTF is the purpose of giving a non-scholly conference or a 6 team conference an auto bid?? If you have a good enough resume you deserve a shot not just because you beat a few **** teams and won a **** conference!

[Professor Chaos]

Does anyone think the MVFC, CAA or BSC winner wouldn't make the tourney field of 16 if there were no autobids? WTF is the purpose of giving a non-scholly conference or a 6 team conference an auto bid?? If you have a good enough resume you deserve a shot not just because you beat a few **** teams and won a **** conference!
Do you really think a 5th/6th place MVFC or Big Sky team has much better of a chance to win a title than the NEC or Patriot League winner? Autobids allow teams to control their own destiny. No committee can give or deny a team their playoff spot if they take care of their own business... they either seize it or lose it on the field. Kind of sounds like the concept behind the playoffs... autobids are the regular season version of that.

[Professor Chaos]

Personally I would want to keep the auto-bids, but would require conferences have at least 8 teams to earn one.I'd agree with this... way too many leagues hanging on by a thread right now by clinging to the 6 members for an autobid requirement. Would be ideal if the ASUN and Big South consolidated along with the SLC and OVC. Then we're back to 10 autos again.

[WestCoastAggie]

Does anyone think the MVFC, CAA or BSC winner wouldn't make the tourney field of 16 if there were no autobids? WTF is the purpose of giving a non-scholly conference or a 6 team conference an auto bid?? If you have a good enough resume you deserve a shot not just because you beat a few **** teams and won a **** conference!

This is the same mentality those in control of the Power-5 conferences have and they want to take away Basketball AutoBids.

[Bisonator]

Do you really think a 5th/6th place MVFC or Big Sky team has much better of a chance to win a title than the NEC or Patriot League winner? Autobids allow teams to control their own destiny. No committee can give or deny a team their playoff spot if they take care of their own business... they either seize it or lose it on the field. Kind of sounds like the concept behind the playoffs... autobids are the regular season version of that.
No the fact is none of them have a chance and shouldn't! Teams control their own destiny by playing a challenging schedule and winning. A 16 team field is plenty big enough to give the deserving teams a shot the championship. When's the last time a NEC or PL team won it anyway?

[Bisonator]

This is the same mentality those in control of the Power-5 conferences have and they want to take away Basketball AutoBids.
BB sucks and it's hard to compare the 2 sports. Upsets happen way more in BB then FB. You can have a couple stud BB players take a team really far. But again how often does a non P5 win the NCAA tourney?

[Professor Chaos]

No the fact is none of them have a chance and shouldn't! Teams control their own destiny by playing a challenging schedule and winning. A 16 team field is plenty big enough to give the deserving teams a shot the championship. When's the last time a NEC or PL team won it anyway?
Never... furthermore no team seeded below #4 has won it since the field expanded to 24 in 2013. Pretty much anyone outside of the top 8, and you could even argue the top 4, is just filler. For the top 8 the playoffs are the same format with a 24 team field as it is with an 16 team field except that the top 8 can get a bye instead of playing on the Thanksgiving weekend wasteland.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Do you really think a 5th/6th place MVFC or Big Sky team has much better of a chance to win a title than the NEC or Patriot League winner? Autobids allow teams to control their own destiny. No committee can give or deny a team their playoff spot if they take care of their own business... they either seize it or lose it on the field. Kind of sounds like the concept behind the playoffs... autobids are the regular season version of that.

I believe the PL Champ most years has as good of a shot to win the title as the second or third place MVFC team or second place Big Sky team. The problem with the PL is not their best teams its the fact the rest of the "heap" year in and year out has become terrible the last decade. The PL programs also need to invest in hosting games. Playing Colgate in Hamilton in December is hell. Holy Cross and Lehigh can also have a legit homefield advantage. Maybe Villanova at Holy Cross turns the tide just enough for HC to advance? Those were two evenly matched teams on the Main Line....

The PL is the ultimate "enigma" conference in FCS. One could argue the Ivy but at least the PL participates in the playoffs. They have the money, the facilities for the most part and respectable support. However, the leadership is generally inept. These are schools with significant historical success and still carry "some" brand recognition in the Northeast. Delaware has been falling into this "trap" in the CAA in recent years....

[clenz]

I believe the PL Champ most years has as good of a shot to win the title as the second or third place MVFC team or second place Big Sky team.

No they don’t. Just stop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

No they don’t. Just stop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely! The second place MVFC even is nothing more than a Bison pawn anyway. The top PL team has proven capable of being that in the playoffs against the Bison. Otherwise, historically speaking, the PL has done reasonably well against the MVFC/Gateway teams. Need to get those MVFC teams East in the playoffs....

[caribbeanhen]

Absolutely! The second place MVFC even is nothing more than a Bison pawn anyway. The top PL team has proven capable of being that in the playoffs against the Bison. Otherwise, historically speaking, the PL has done reasonably well against the MVFC/Gateway teams. Need to get those MVFC teams East in the playoffs....

Bison are Paul McCartney

MVFC are Wings

its the same old song and
same old song and dance my friend

[ysubigred]

Absolutely! The second place MVFC even is nothing more than a Bison pawn anyway. The top PL team has proven capable of being that in the playoffs against the Bison. Otherwise, historically speaking, the PL has done reasonably well against the MVFC/Gateway teams. Need to get those MVFC teams East in the playoffs....Sadly the 11th place MVFC team would throttle the PL champ lately....

Until the rest of 1 FCS gets to the Golden Buffalo's standards deal with it..

That why all you weak conferences fans want auto bids.. 75 % of the playoffs would come out of 3 conferences trying to play big boy football xtwocentsx

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Sadly the 11th place MVFC team would throttle the PL champ lately....

Until the rest of 1 FCS gets to the Golden Buffalo's standards deal with it..

That why all you weak conferences fans want auto bids.. 75 % of the playoffs would come out of 3 conferences trying to play big boy football xtwocentsx

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Recently? 2021 fall Holy Cross would absolutely have everyone in the MVFC a outside of NDSU and maybe SDSU a game, or maybe win. They went toe-to-toe with a damn good 'Nova team. SDSU didn't have their game won against 'Nova until midway through the 4th. They trailed at half. 2020 spring Holy Cross hung in pretty well with runner-up SDSU all things considered. 2018 Colgate was a Top 10 team.

The issue with the PL is not the playoff representative. Generally, these are legit Top 20 fringe Top 10 team. The issue is the rest of the league sucks so it's hard to keep momentum going through conference season. Even equity built up in the OOC tends to erode by Thanksgiving. Hitting the road against CAA or MVFC is a brutal task. Two of the PL's absolute best teams in the last decade or so had their dreams die in the Fargo Dome.

The Crusaders imo are a Top 10 team heading into this season....

[ysubigred]

Recently? 2020 fall Holy Cross would absolutely have gave most everyone in the MVFC a outside of NDSU and maybe SDSU a game, or maybe win. They went toe-to-toe with a damn good 'Nova team. SDSU didn't put the have their game won against 'Nova until midway through the 4th. They trailed at half. 2020 spring Holy Cross hung in pretty well with runner-up SDSU all things considered. 2018 Colgate was a Top 10 team.

The issue with the PL is not the playoff representative. Generally, these are legit Top 20 fringe Top 10 team. The issue is the rest of the league sucks so it's hard to keep momentum going through conference season. Even equity built up in the OOC tends to erode by Thanksgiving. Hitting the road against CAA or MVFC is a brutal task. Two of the PL's absolute best teams in the last decade or so had their dreams die in the Fargo Dome.

The Crusaders imo are a Top 10 team heading into this season....We'll see... PL schedule compared to the MVFC schedule is night and day.. imagine playing all these teams year in year out.. 2020 and a Nova team might of been good for 9th place in the Valley

Good luck..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

We'll see... PL schedule compared to the MVFC schedule is night and day.. imagine playing all these teams year in year out..

Good luck..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

PL teams generally play quality OOC schedules which helps considerably. If the league would regain some depth (there was a time when 3 PL teams in the Top 25 was not an anomaly) then seeds and such would be much easier to obtain.

I am interested to see Holy Cross's ceiling this year. They definitely have a shot at a seed like Colgate in 2018. They could make a run so long as they avoid the Fargo Dome...

I am amazed you were able to decipher my last post. That was a 4th grade level writing.....lol. Also 2021 fall Villanova who finished in the Top 10...

[ysubigred]

PL teams generally play quality OOC schedules which helps considerably. If the league would regain some depth (there was a time when 3 PL teams in the Top 25 was not an anomaly) then seeds and such would be much easier to obtain.

I am interested to see Holy Cross's ceiling this year. They definitely have a shot at a seed like Colgate in 2018. They could make a run so long as they avoid the Fargo Dome...

I am amazed you were able to decipher my last post. That was a 4th grade level writing.....lolI'm surprised you're talking **** coming from a loser conference..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

I'm surprised you're talking **** coming from a loser conference..

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Relax, you have a lot of anger night....

A conference does not make a team. The auto-bid from the PL is credible participant based on clear evidence. The PL being awful thankfully does not mean the PL rep is....

[ysubigred]

Relax, you have a lot of anger night....

A conference does not make a team. The auto-bid from the PL is credible participant based on clear evidence. The PL being awful thankfully does not mean the PL rep is....[emoji15] anger? Hard not to offend top scholars like you..I think relaxation maybe in your best interests.. sorry auto-bids need to go let the big boys play for the trophy..



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

[emoji15] anger? Hard not to offend top scholars like you..I think relaxation maybe in your best interests.. sorry auto-bids need to go let the big boys play for the trophy..



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Even if you remove the auto-bids bids and reduce the field back to 16 the PL would have a playoff rep 7 out of 10 years. The MVFC, CAA, BSC would not have a monopoly on the field past their 3rd place team. The SoCon, WAC, Southland OVC, PL or any combination of teams from those conferences would still be getting at large bids in such a playoff format.

[ysubigred]

Even if you remove the auto-bids bids and reduce the field back to 16 the PL would have a playoff rep 7 out of 10 years. The MVFC, CAA, BSC would not have a monopoly on the field past their 3rd place team. The SoCon, WAC, Southland OVC, PL or any combination of teams from those conferences would still be getting at large bids in such a playoff format.Listen, I have much respect for the PL's top teams of the past, there was some great Lehigh teams for sure. 21 Holly Cross lost to Merrimack? Didn't even know that was a football team? But HC ended up in the field of 24... I was rooting for them over Nova for sure [emoji106]

"IF" the PL is worthy and the criteria is right I'd be the first to bitch if they were left out of a non auto bid playoff 16 team field.

I hope it doesn't come off conceded but almost every game played in the MVFC is a playoff game in terms of schedule strength. CAA and BSC are getting deeper also..

It's beyond our control but the 24 team field with auto bids are kinda dumb, just extend the playoffs two extra weeks into the BCS toilet bowl season xtwocentsx

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[clenz]

The PL is the same league that has their champion finish under .500 multiple times right?

No ****ing chance they are just as likely to win the title as any non-NDSU team in the Valley. YSU, ISUr, SDSU have all been in the title game the last decade. SDSU has something like 5 trips to the semis.

It's just...**** no.

[CHIP72]

I haven't read any posts in the thread except the first one, but the only "expansion" that is needed IMO is for the Ivy League to make its teams eligible for the playoff. (The SWAC and MEAC have legitimate rea$on$ for not sending their champions to the playoff, but non-champions can still participate in the playoffs and the MEAC may be in the process of being torn apart anyway.)

IMO, 24 teams is the right number of playoff teams, not too few, not too many, and it would become an even more ideal number with Ivy League participation.

[WestCoastAggie]

BB sucks and it's hard to compare the 2 sports. Upsets happen way more in BB then FB. You can have a couple stud BB players take a team really far. But again how often does a non P5 win the NCAA tourney?

The larger point is that Automatic Qualifiers instill equity into the system. Without it, There would be a model in place where the postseason would be reserved for a few conferences and could further lead to splintering of the system.

[DFW HOYA]

The PL is the same league that has their champion finish under .500 multiple times right?


It's been in a steady decline for a decade, maybe more. Bucknell and Georgetown are routinely among the bottom 20 in the subdivision. Outside of Holy Cross and maybe Fordham, the league continues to backpedal.

[OhioHen]

The larger point is that Automatic Qualifiers instill equity into the system. Without it, There would be a model in place where the postseason would be reserved for a few conferences and could further lead to splintering of the system.
See Alabama, another SEC team, B1G champion, one other team (usually Clemson)

[KnightoftheRedFlash]

This is the same mentality those in control of the Power-5 conferences have and they want to take away Basketball AutoBids.

Interesting, isn't it?

Folks here complain about how P5 fans cast their noses down upon FCS teams but then they turn around and do it to fellow FCS teams. The fact that every conference has an auto-bid is what makes the FCS playoffs and the NCAAT great. It sure beats whatever the CFP is.

[caribbeanhen]

The larger point is that Automatic Qualifiers instill equity into the system. Without it, There would be a model in place where the postseason would be reserved for a few conferences and could further lead to splintering of the system.

The FCS system is theathered together like a lone trans Atlantic sailor trying to save his boat from sinking

A very wide disparity between the level of football

[WestCoastAggie]

The FCS system is theathered together like a lone trans Atlantic sailor trying to save his boat from sinking

A very wide disparity between the level of football

There are wide disparities in just about all sports between various schools and conferences, which make sense as D1 athletic budgets span from around $6 million to well north of $150 million. However, the Auto-Bid is a reward for teams in these sports, FCS Football included.

[Hammerhead]

There are wide disparities in just about all sports between various schools and conferences, which make sense as D1 athletic budgets span from around $6 million to well north of $150 million. However, the Auto-Bid is a reward for teams in these sports, FCS Football included.

^^^ This. Some of the men's bball conference championships are in D-I arenas that look like your typical high school stadium. Sure there are some football stadiums in Texas that are nicer than most FCS stadiums, but those are the exceptions and not the norm.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

It's been in a steady decline for a decade, maybe more. Bucknell and Georgetown are routinely among the bottom 20 in the subdivision. Outside of Holy Cross and maybe Fordham, the league continues to backpedal.

Colgate finished second in the league despite suffering a late 2021 coaching change due to scandal. Colgate will be a factor in 2022.

IMO, Lehigh and Fordham have talent but staffs who can not get enough out of it. Even so, both will likely fight for a winning PL record in 2022. Holy Cross is going to be damn good. This one of those PL teams that comes along every 3-5 years that is Top 10 good and a "contender" to reach Frisco with the "right draw".

[Mike296]

You could say the same for us this year too. We lost our coach before last year and our best talent and had a down year but we’re looking to be much improved this year. Top 10 would be a stretch for us but maybe 12-15 territory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DFW HOYA]

Colgate finished second in the league despite suffering a late 2021 coaching change due to scandal. Colgate will be a factor in 2022.

IMO, Lehigh and Fordham have talent but staffs who can not get enough out of it. Even so, both will likely fight for a winning PL record in 2022. Holy Cross is going to be damn good. This one of those PL teams that comes along every 3-5 years that is Top 10 good and a "contender" to reach Frisco with the "right draw".

Colgate may be a factor but certainly not beyond the PL. The league is bottom heavy right now and are increasingly less competitive. Bucknell and Georgetown could have really bad seasons in 2022, and that's saying something.

[caribbeanhen]

There are wide disparities in just about all sports between various schools and conferences, which make sense as D1 athletic budgets span from around $6 million to well north of $150 million. However, the Auto-Bid is a reward for teams in these sports, FCS Football included.

Let them continue to have an auto bid in a Division that is more suited to their level of play, but I guess the Romans didn’t give up the Saturday slaughters at the Colosseum very kindly but at some point somebody stood up and said enough is enough

[POD Knows]

Colgate may be a factor but certainly not beyond the PL. The league is bottom heavy right now and are increasingly less competitive. Bucknell and Georgetown could have really bad seasons in 2022, and that's saying something.
Colgate made the quarters in 2018 and got fed to Fargo. They were a decent team that year.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

Colgate made the quarters in 2018 and got fed to Fargo. They were a decent team that year.

Colgate Finished #8 in the Final 2018 AGS Top 25....

The #45 team is "decent". The #8 team is "excellent" to "elite"....

[Lehigh'98]

Colgate Finished #8 in the Final 2018 AGS Top 25....

The #45 team is "decent". The #8 team is "excellent" to "elite"....

The PL of late 90’s to roughly 2013 is gone and not coming back anytime soon. The top teams in those eras were better than the top teams now. The light keeps getting dimmer these days. It’s all self imposed though. Could turnaround with leadership, but probably won’t.

[SDFS]

Colgate Finished #8 in the Final 2018 AGS Top 25....

The #45 team is "decent". The #8 team is "excellent" to "elite"....

Colgate had one reasonable win that year and it was in the playoffs - beating a JMU team that 9-4 on the season. The next best win was against a 4-7 New Hampshire team. Based on the score versus NDSU. Colgate would be a middle of the road MVFC team. Not sure I would say "Elite". I would say a "Nice" team with a condescending MVFC pad on the head and a now go run along back to the kids table for lunch. xdrunkyx - cheers it's the off season.

[JacksFan40]

Why do we need expansion? There’s only about 3-4 teams who are legitimate title contenders most seasons. We don’t need more blowouts in the early rounds.

[NDSU1980]

Why do we need expansion? There’s only about 3-4 teams who are legitimate title contenders most seasons. We don’t need more blowouts in the early rounds.

I agree entirely with you on this. I'd say the rationale is that certain teams only judge their success by making the playoffs and those same teams don't make it all the time, so add more teams. And then some teams judge their success by winning a first round game, so they want more weak teams added so they (hopefully) get paired up with a team they can defeat.

To some teams nothing says success like not only making the playoffs but beating another 7-4 team on Thanksgiving weekend. So what if you get your ass handed to you when you play a seeded team the following week.

[wapiti]

What if the playoff committee offered an at-large to the winner of the Ivy league?

Then it is not the league deciding to not go, but the school instead? Would any of the Ivy league schools accept an invite?

I was just thinking off the cuff when this thought hit me. I doubt any of the schools would have the backbone to stand up to the league.

[FUBeAR]

Apologize if this is posted elsewhere or commonly available, but FUBeAR has been thinking about his FCS Playoff Revision (Renaissance may be more accurately descriptive) originally contemplated in an earlier post in this thread (#12) … and realized he didn’t know which Conferences / Conference Alliances (or whatever) have Auto-Bids in 2022. Do we know? Guessing it’s the following …

1. ASUN
2. Big Sky
3. Big South
4. CAA
5. MVFC
6. NEC
7. OVC
8. Patriot
9. PFL
10. SoCon
11. Southland
12. WAC

…and, of course, the Ivy, MEAC, and SWAC Champions will forego/decline the Autobids that would be available to them, if desired.

Is this correct…12 AutoBids & 12 At-Large for 2022?

If not, which ones on FUBeAR’s list above shouldn’t be there and/or are there any that should be there, but aren’t?

[Sycamore62]

I dont think football tournaments should include byes. I think the sport is too difficult on your body to allow teams to skip a week while another has to play.

[WestCoastAggie]

Apologize if this is posted elsewhere or commonly available, but FUBeAR has been thinking about his FCS Playoff Revision (Renaissance may be more accurately descriptive) originally contemplated in an earlier post in this thread (#12) … and realized he didn’t know which Conferences / Conference Alliances (or whatever) have Auto-Bids in 2022. Do we know? Guessing it’s the following …

1. ASUN
2. Big Sky
3. Big South
4. CAA
5. MVFC
6. NEC
7. OVC
8. Patriot
9. PFL
10. SoCon
11. Southland
12. WAC

…and, of course, the Ivy, MEAC, and SWAC Champions will forego/decline the Autobids that would be available to them, if desired.

Is this correct…12 AutoBids & 12 At-Large for 2022?

If not, which ones on FUBeAR’s list above shouldn’t be there and/or are there any that should be there, but aren’t?

Correct. We're going to 11 Auto Bids in 2023.

[bonarae]

I dont think football tournaments should include byes. I think the sport is too difficult on your body to allow teams to skip a week while another has to play.

One of the reasons why the Ivies refuse to play football playoffs. xsmhx

[DFW HOYA]

One of the reasons why the Ivies refuse to play football playoffs. xsmhx

The biggest reason remains the primacy of the Harvard-Yale game.

[Hammerhead]

Is it fair that one team has to travel while the other team plays in their home stadium? The bye is just one reward for teams that have the best regular seasons.


I dont think football tournaments should include byes. I think the sport is too difficult on your body to allow teams to skip a week while another has to play.

[FUBeAR]

Is it fair that one team has to travel while the other team plays in their home stadium? The bye is just one reward for teams that have the best regular seasons.
The bye is just one of the 3 massive rewards for Teams who have good regular seasons and are believed by the pundits, who influence the Playoff Selection Committee, to be one of the top 8 FCS Teams in the US.

1) Bye
2) Home Game or GameS for 1-4
3) Good chances of playing a much lesser Team due to 1st round regionalization

The current structure of the FCS Playoffs all but ensures we will never have an interesting upstart advance past the 2nd round, “make a run,” like Saint Peters did in March Madness this year. Even if we get that 1st round upset, as 9 or 10 win (a “best regular season”) San Diego pulled in 2016 & 2017, knocking off highly-touted Big Sky opponents in round 1, they then face the ‘triple-stacked deck’ in Round 2…and really have no chance of pulling off a 2nd upset. Perhaps if they had faced an SHSU or a Southern Utah Team coming off a tough 1st round game, we could have had our own Cinderella Story…instead of facing a well-rested NDSU Team where playoff dreams go to die.

Sycamore62 is exactly right…

…the sport is too difficult on your body to allow teams to skip a week while another has to play.

Whether the Playoffs should be 16 or 32 Teams is debatable, but the byes need to go bye-bye.

[ElCid]

Is it fair that one team has to travel while the other team plays in their home stadium? The bye is just one reward for teams that have the best regular seasons.

Eh, I know football is a different animal than other sports, but a bye and home field advantage for the perceived "best" teams just means they have even more huge advantages. Can't really do anything about home field except for the championship (and it was hilarious that some teams actually had home field advantage for those games in the past). It is what it is, but I could easily support doing away with at least byes if it became an a possibility. Why give a team a reward at all? Those season games are over and done and we are trying to find the best team. Just trying to look at it in an unbiased manner. No need to give the perceived better teams even more advantage.

[NDSU1980]

Eh, I know football is a different animal than other sports, but a bye and home field advantage for the perceived "best" teams just means they have even more huge advantages. Can't really do anything about home field except for the championship (and it was hilarious that some teams actually had home field advantage for those games in the past). It is what it is, but I could easily support doing away with at least byes if it became an a possibility. Why give a team a reward at all? Those season games are over and done and we are trying to find the best team. Just trying to look at it in an unbiased manner. No need to give the perceived better teams even more advantage.
Well to make it fair we should cut back the number of playoff teams to 16, otherwise it's not fair that some people have to play the really good teams like NDSU and some have to play the also rans that probably shouldn't have gotten in but did because the committee had 28 or 32 spots to fill.

If you want to eliminate the byes, then do so by cutting the field back to 16.

[ElCid]

Well to make it fair we should cut back the number of playoff teams to 16, otherwise it's not fair that some people have to play the really good teams like NDSU and some have to play the also rans that probably shouldn't have gotten in but did because the committee had 28 or 32 spots to fill.

If you want to eliminate the byes, then do so by cutting the field back to 16.

Done! Who do we tell to implement?

[OhioHen]

I think the sport is too difficult on your body to allow teams to skip a week while another has to play.
Taking this one step further - no team that played the previous week should play a team coming off a bye week during the regular season. Maybe not as big a deal in college ball where so many teams are involved, but the NFL could certainly avoid this scenario. There are always an even number of teams off in a given week so those teams could all play each other the following week.

[OhioHen]

If you want to eliminate the byes, then do so by cutting the field back to 16.
Then we will need to remove several auto-bids to maintain the standard of at-large bids being greater than or equal to the number of auto-bids.

I propose the elimination of auto-bids for the MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, and SoCon (since their champions will surely make the field without the auto-bid).

And take it one step further - the 8 auto-bid teams are the seeded teams for home-field advantage.

[MR. CHICKEN]

.....TA ADDRESS BYES.........IS IT FAIR...TA HAVE UH BYE...IN WEEK 2.....OR....WEEK 10.....????........AH PROPOSE.....HALF YER CONFERENCE HAS UH BYE.....WEEK 5........OTHERAH HALF....WEEK 6......THAT FAR INTA SKED....YER NON-CONFERENCE GAMES SHOOD BE OVERAH....OR....IMPOSE UH RULE....NON-CONF.....SHOOD BE YER FIRST 3 GAMES......WHICH AT ONE TIME....DUH CAA DID.......AWK!

[Bisonator]

Well hell if it's all about trying to get a cinderella to the dance let's just ban the best teams from the PO's and make them all cinderella's. We can even give every team a participation trophy while we're at it!

[ElCid]

Then we will need to remove several auto-bids to maintain the standard of at-large bids being greater than or equal to the number of auto-bids.

I propose the elimination of auto-bids for the MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, and SoCon (since their champions will surely make the field without the auto-bid).

And take it one step further - the 8 auto-bid teams are the seeded teams for home-field advantage.

I love it.

[FUBeAR]

Then we will need to remove several auto-bids to maintain the standard of at-large bids being greater than or equal to the number of auto-bids.

I propose the elimination of auto-bids for the MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, and SoCon (since their champions will surely make the field without the auto-bid).

And take it one step further - the 8 auto-bid teams are the seeded teams for home-field advantage.

I love it.FUBeAR also loves it. That OhioHen is surely a world-class thinker and problem-solver!

[ElCid]

Well hell if it's all about trying to get a cinderella to the dance let's just ban the best teams from the PO's and make them all cinderella's. We can even give every team a participation trophy while we're at it!

It's not about getting any cinderella there but just keeping things as even as possible in the process. Right now the process gives additional advantages.

[NDSU1980]

It's not about getting any cinderella there but just keeping things as even as possible in the process. Right now the process gives additional advantages.
You guys are starting to sound exactly like the people that killed off D2 in the 80's. How long until you want to cut the scholarships back to 36? Rather than improve so you can compete with the best all you want to do is take the easy route and hamstring them.

[Professor Chaos]

I dont think football tournaments should include byes. I think the sport is too difficult on your body to allow teams to skip a week while another has to play.
Do the Green Bay Packers know about this rule???

[OhioHen]

FUBeAR also loves it. That OhioHen is surely a world-class thinker and problem-solver!
xoutofrepx

[FUBeAR]

You guys are starting to sound exactly like the people that killed off D2 in the 80's. How long until you want to cut the scholarships back to 36? Rather than improve so you can compete with the best all you want to do is take the easy route and hamstring them.
Ideal FCS Playoff structure as designed by NDSU fans…

GAME1
MVFC #1*
vs. (Fargo, ND)
MVFC #3*_____________GAME3_______________CHAMPIONSHIP GAME
______________________Winner of GAME1 _______Winner of GAME3
GAME2_________________vs. (Fargo, ND)________vs. (Fargo, ND)
MVFC #2*______________Winner of GAME2_______NDSU
vs. (Fargo, ND)
Big Sky #1

*Not including NDSU

[Sycamore62]

Is it fair that one team has to travel while the other team plays in their home stadium? The bye is just one reward for teams that have the best regular seasons.

If more people gave a ****, these games would be held at large neutral venues to hold the extra people. but playing a home game isnt the advantage having a week off in week 13 of a football season is.

[Hammerhead]

Basketball and the BCS playoffs are the only college tournaments I can think of where there are lots of fans at early round tournament games. Even getting 10,000 NDSU fans to travel to early round playoff game would be unlikely if it was at a neutral site somewhere like St. Louis or Indianapolis.



If more people gave a ****, these games would be held at large neutral venues to hold the extra people. but playing a home game isnt the advantage having a week off in week 13 of a football season is.

[atthewbon]

It's not about getting any cinderella there but just keeping things as even as possible in the process. Right now the process gives additional advantages.

I'm obviously biased but I don't mind teams having an additional advantage (byes) as it rewards teams for doing well in the regular season. While yes the last few spots for byes are often controversial it's just how sports work. SDSU didn't get a bye last year and made it to the Semi's. They gassed out at the end (plus Montana st was just the better team) but the spring season probably had a lot to do with that.

In my view the ideal would be to either have a 24, 28 (with 4 byes), or 32 team bracket and seed teams 1-32 (avoiding rematches in the first round like I think they do for cbb). I feel like 16 teams with 11 or 12 (or however many outbids there are) is just not enough because of the lack of parity between the conferences. I understand the argument with getting rid of byes (I personally don't mind them) but if we are going to do it 32 would be better than 16 imo.

[POD Knows]

It's not about getting any cinderella there but just keeping things as even as possible in the process. Right now the process gives additional EARNED advantages and that is not fair.FYP

[FUBeAR]

It's not about getting any cinderella there but just keeping things as even as possible in the process. Right now the process gives additional BELIEVED, SUBJECTIVELY, TO BE earned advantages.

FYP
FYF

[caribbeanhen]

Now that JMU is gone, why even have a playoff.

Just declare the Bison the champs and let everybody else play for second place

who will step up ?

[FUBeAR]

Now that JMU is gone, why even have a playoff.

Just declare the Bison the champs and let everybody else play for second place

who will step up ?
This “Declared Champion” plan will get a lot of traction with NDSU fans, except for that “everybody else” part.

Maybe just the top 6 MVFC Teams, other than NDSU, in an 8 Team bracket with 2 Big Sky Teams and all games played in Fargo is just the right “Playing for 2nd” playoff structure in the minds of these bizuns peeps.

[OhioHen]

This plan will get a lot of traction in Fargo, except for the “everybody else” part.

Maybe just the top 5 MVFC Teams, other than NDSU, in an 8 Team bracket with 3 Big Sky Teams is just the right mix.
4 non-Bison MVFC, 3 Big Sky, play-in winner between SoCon and CAA champs.

[ElCid]

You guys are starting to sound exactly like the people that killed off D2 in the 80's. How long until you want to cut the scholarships back to 36? Rather than improve so you can compete with the best all you want to do is take the easy route and hamstring them.

No, scholarships are just fine as is. Nobody mentioned scholarships at all. Just byes.

[ElCid]

I'm obviously biased but I don't mind teams having an additional advantage (byes) as it rewards teams for doing well in the regular season. While yes the last few spots for byes are often controversial it's just how sports work. SDSU didn't get a bye last year and made it to the Semi's. They gassed out at the end (plus Montana st was just the better team) but the spring season probably had a lot to do with that.

In my view the ideal would be to either have a 24, 28 (with 4 byes), or 32 team bracket and seed teams 1-32 (avoiding rematches in the first round like I think they do for cbb). I feel like 16 teams with 11 or 12 (or however many outbids there are) is just not enough because of the lack of parity between the conferences. I understand the argument with getting rid of byes (I personally don't mind them) but if we are going to do it 32 would be better than 16 imo.

But that's the issue. Why give anyone an additional reward which gives them an additional advantage? The regular season is over. It's a playoff to see who is best. Why is it so necessary? Because of tradition? Maintaining as neutral a process as possible is a good idea. Can't mess with venues too much as that is a sacred cow. But you can consider byes without much issue.

[FUBeAR]

4 non-Bison MVFC, 3 Big Sky, play-in winner between SoCon and CAA champs.
FUBeAR edited his and then saw yours…which is better.

FUBeAR thinks the bizuns faithful might approve the SoCon/CAA Play-in game plan (assuming all games are played in Fargo (part of my edit)) as this would bring 2 more fan bases to the Mecca of College Football. But it’s probably going to take going with a 5 non-NDSU MVFC and 2 Big Sky Teams mix to get that past the Green & Gold Ribbon FCS Runner-Up Playoff Panel.

[Professor Chaos]

FUBeAR edited his and then saw yours…which is better.

FUBeAR thinks the bizuns faithful might approve the SoCon/CAA Play-in game plan (assuming all games are played in Fargo (part of my edit)) as this would bring 2 more fan bases to the Mecca of College Football. But it’s probably going to take going with a 5 non-NDSU MVFC and 2 Big Sky Teams mix to get that past the Green & Gold Ribbon FCS Runner-Up Playoff Panel.
I think most Bison fans would agree that the current format works well for us. xthumbsupx

[FUBeAR]

I think most Bison fans would agree that the current format works well for us. xthumbsupxYes…the Lions felt the Roman Playoff format worked well for them also. The Christians…not so much.

https://i.imgflip.com/6b4kpy.jpg

[caribbeanhen]

FUBeAR edited his and then saw yours…which is better.

FUBeAR thinks the bizuns faithful might approve the SoCon/CAA Play-in game plan (assuming all games are played in Fargo (part of my edit)) as this would bring 2 more fan bases to the Mecca of College Football. But it’s probably going to take going with a 5 non-NDSU MVFC and 2 Big Sky Teams mix to get that past the Green & Gold Ribbon FCS Runner-Up Playoff Panel.

Seriously though who is ready to step up?

nobody

[POD Knows]

Seriously though who is ready to step up?

nobody
Exactly. So we need to remove rewards for in season performance and ranking in order to balance the field. It is unfair to be successful during the season, that success should not be rewarded. Somebody correct me in case I am missing the point here.

[ElCid]

Exactly. So we need to remove rewards for in season performance and ranking in order to balance the field. It is unfair to be successful during the season, that success should not be rewarded. Somebody correct me in case I am missing the point here.

You are missing the point that I was trying to make. I guess I've always viewed it two separate campaigns. Having a good season gets you there. I'm trying to come up with a better analogy, but giving an extra reward in the playoffs for season performance is like saying since I have a 4.0 coming into a final exam, I don't have as many questions to answer on the final exam as those who have a 3.0. Everyone should have the same number of questions regardless. If a team really is that good, then playing one more game shouldn't affect the ultimate outcome. Just like the 4.0 student shouldn't have any issues on the final. Right?

And the issue is the subjectivity of deciding those who get the byes. Comparing unlike schedules with little or no connections can easily tilt the scales. At least for the bottom four seeds and the top non-seeds. Sure, some cases are easy. But a 10-1 team vs a 9-2 or 8-3 team might be simply be a lucky combination of incorrect perceptions of a team's opponents (we've seen that a lot), other unrecognized factors affecting outcomes, and scheduling. Especially for teams who don't play all the teams in their conf. Not to pick on them, but how much hype was UC Davis getting right up to the last two weeks last season. They we're an illusion. Giving a reward for such factors doesn't achieve a level playing field "in the playoffs." Sure, it can work in the other direction as well, like a team's path was much harder than perceived, but why not simply eliminate those variables?

[MR. CHICKEN]

...VARIABLE #1.......DOME ADVANTAGE.......VISITORS....ASTRONOMICAL PENALTY COUNTS......NUFFIN' LIKE UH 25 YARD GAIN...REDUCED TA UH PUNT.....'CAUSE UH SILENT COUNT...WENT AWRY.......BAWK!

[POD Knows]

...VARIABLE #1.......DOME ADVANTAGE.......VISITORS....ASTRONOMICAL PENALTY COUNTS......NUFFIN' LIKE UH 25 YARD GAIN...REDUCED TA UH PUNT.....'CAUSE UH SILENT COUNT...WENT AWRY.......BAWK!
Win more games in the regular season and get a higher seed. We are not going to apologize for success.

[POD Knows]

You are missing the point that I was trying to make. I guess I've always viewed it two separate campaigns. Having a good season gets you there. I'm trying to come up with a better analogy, but giving an extra reward in the playoffs for season performance is like saying since I have a 4.0 coming into a final exam, I don't have as many questions to answer on the final exam as those who have a 3.0. Everyone should have the same number of questions regardless. If a team really is that good, then playing one more game shouldn't affect the ultimate outcome. Just like the 4.0 student shouldn't have any issues on the final. Right?

And the issue is the subjectivity of deciding those who get the byes. Comparing unlike schedules with little or no connections can easily tilt the scales. At least for the bottom four seeds and the top non-seeds. Sure, some cases are easy. But a 10-1 team vs a 9-2 or 8-3 team might be simply be a lucky combination of incorrect perceptions of a team's opponents (we've seen that a lot), other unrecognized factors affecting outcomes, and scheduling. Especially for teams who don't play all the teams in their conf. Not to pick on them, but how much hype was UC Davis getting right up to the last two weeks last season. They we're an illusion. Giving a reward for such factors doesn't achieve a level playing field "in the playoffs." Sure, it can work in the other direction as well, like a team's path was much harder than perceived, but why not simply eliminate those variables?
The better teams earn and deserve advantages in the playoffs. The higher seeds deserve the home field. As to byes, reduce the field to 16 and all play the same number of games. Seed all 16.

[ElCid]

Win more games in the regular season and get a higher seed. We are not going to apologize for success.

And you shouldn't. My point just a general concept one about a level path to the championship and not directed to any team or conf. I'm not sure if you would have had the same success if you had zero byes, but maybe.

[atthewbon]

You are missing the point that I was trying to make. I guess I've always viewed it two separate campaigns. Having a good season gets you there. I'm trying to come up with a better analogy, but giving an extra reward in the playoffs for season performance is like saying since I have a 4.0 coming into a final exam, I don't have as many questions to answer on the final exam as those who have a 3.0. Everyone should have the same number of questions regardless. If a team really is that good, then playing one more game shouldn't affect the ultimate outcome. Just like the 4.0 student shouldn't have any issues on the final. Right?

And the issue is the subjectivity of deciding those who get the byes. Comparing unlike schedules with little or no connections can easily tilt the scales. At least for the bottom four seeds and the top non-seeds. Sure, some cases are easy. But a 10-1 team vs a 9-2 or 8-3 team might be simply be a lucky combination of incorrect perceptions of a team's opponents (we've seen that a lot), other unrecognized factors affecting outcomes, and scheduling. Especially for teams who don't play all the teams in their conf. Not to pick on them, but how much hype was UC Davis getting right up to the last two weeks last season. They we're an illusion. Giving a reward for such factors doesn't achieve a level playing field "in the playoffs." Sure, it can work in the other direction as well, like a team's path was much harder than perceived, but why not simply eliminate those variables?

Student's with an A already do have an advantage on the final exam in that they don't have to do as well to get an A as their final grade as a student with a B before the exam. I think there should be incentive for teams to keep doing well in the regular season, otherwise an undefeated team like NDSU would just sit their best players in their final game to rest them because there would be no point in trying to win the game because there is no incentive.

I don't think there have to be byes but I don't think rewarding teams with byes and/or home field advantage in the playoffs is a bad thing. Yea the final few byes are often controversial and subjective but that's just part of sports and hasn't necessarily stopped teams without byes from making long runs (think Youngstown 2016).

[MR. CHICKEN]

Win more games in the regular season and get a higher seed. We are not going to apologize for success.


....DIDN'T SAY YA'S...DIDN'T EARN IT.......JES' POINTIN' OUT......'NOTHERAH VARIABLE.....LIKE BYES......BAWK!

[caribbeanhen]

Again, what team at the FCS level is ready to challenge the Bison?

None

I have complained about their unfair Dome field advantage as much as anyone on this site, but their is no Dome in Frisco

I have also said they are a top 25 FBS team almost every year and don’t belong in FCS

come up with any format they will still win it

[NDSU1980]

You are missing the point that I was trying to make. I guess I've always viewed it two separate campaigns. Having a good season gets you there. I'm trying to come up with a better analogy, but giving an extra reward in the playoffs for season performance is like saying since I have a 4.0 coming into a final exam, I don't have as many questions to answer on the final exam as those who have a 3.0. Everyone should have the same number of questions regardless. If a team really is that good, then playing one more game shouldn't affect the ultimate outcome. Just like the 4.0 student shouldn't have any issues on the final. Right?

And the issue is the subjectivity of deciding those who get the byes. Comparing unlike schedules with little or no connections can easily tilt the scales. At least for the bottom four seeds and the top non-seeds. Sure, some cases are easy. But a 10-1 team vs a 9-2 or 8-3 team might be simply be a lucky combination of incorrect perceptions of a team's opponents (we've seen that a lot), other unrecognized factors affecting outcomes, and scheduling. Especially for teams who don't play all the teams in their conf. Not to pick on them, but how much hype was UC Davis getting right up to the last two weeks last season. They we're an illusion. Giving a reward for such factors doesn't achieve a level playing field "in the playoffs." Sure, it can work in the other direction as well, like a team's path was much harder than perceived, but why not simply eliminate those variables?

But remember that the Bison also play up to 4 more games every year than what much of the field plays. We are still playing the second week of January and many teams are done the week before Thanksgiving. As a result the team looks like a walking triage unit some years and so banged up they have a limited spring practice. I wonder if some players fully recover by fall camp.

As I said, we're playing way more games already so I don't see anything unfair about a bye. And you are welcome to earn that bye as well, just step up rather than trying to tear down the successful teams.

Your argument really does remind me of the D2 days of the 80's. If you can't win you change the rules.

As to your statement that the byes are subjective, well by increasing the playoff field you are eliminating 4 byes, making the section even more subjective IMO.

[MR. CHICKEN]

....YOUSE COOD ARGUE....PLAYIN' TIL JANUARY......OWNLAH ADDS TA EXPERIENCE....FO' UNDERCLASS MATES.....WHICH KEELER...USED TA MENTION ON HIS SHOW.......IN NEW-ARK.......BRAWK!

[Professor Chaos]

And you shouldn't. My point just a general concept one about a level path to the championship and not directed to any team or conf. I'm not sure if you would have had the same success if you had zero byes, but maybe.
It's like that in pretty much any postseason in any sport. Teams with the better regular season get homefield advantage in the NFL, get more homes games in a series in MLB, the NBA, the NHL, get to play lower seeds in pretty much any NCAA championship event or tennis or in Olympic team sports moving from group play to knockout stage. You would really devalue the regular season for upper echelon teams in the MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, etc if you took away the incentive to shoot for a high seed.

[FUBeAR]

It's like that in pretty much any postseason in any sport. Teams with the better regular season get homefield advantage in the NFL, get more homes games in a series in MLB, the NBA, the NHL, get to play lower seeds in pretty much any NCAA championship event or tennis or in Olympic team sports moving from group play to knockout stage. You would really devalue the regular season for upper echelon teams in the MVFC, Big Sky, CAA, etc if you took away the incentive to shoot for a high seed.
BS - without the bye, there’s still 2 significant advantages to having a strong regular season record - home field advantage(s) and playing lower seeded Teams.

The more subjective the ‘award,’ the less for which it should count….

Winning the AQ bid into the playoffs, in all but the most extreme tiebreaker scenarios, is completely objective, so that counts the most - win & you are in.

Seeding is more subjective than not. The NFL doesn’t have subjective seeding. They have a long list of tie-breakers to determine their playoff hierarchy and they also have parity via the draft. I’m assuming the other pro leagues are similar, so using their systems as a guidepost is disingenuous. There are no byes in March Madness…just a few play-in games…which are weird in FUBeAR ‘s opinion.

Seeding for bracketing is all that is done in most cases.

Seeding for bracketing, and on a limited basis, home field advantage makes sense in FCS.
Seeding for Byes + Home Field + Bracketing advantage does not.

It’s a triple stacked deck and it’s not right…unless you happen to be a Christian-eating FCS Lion benefiting from the triple stacked deck…then you believe it’s exceedingly fair, that all other structures are ‘soft,’ etc., and you will defend the status quo ad infinitum. We get it.

[Professor Chaos]

BS - without the bye, there’s still 2 significant advantages to having a strong regular season record - home field advantage(s) and playing lower seeded Teams.

The more subjective the ‘award,’ the less for which it should count….

Winning the AQ bid into the playoffs, in all but the most extreme tiebreaker scenarios, is completely objective, so that counts the most - win & you are in.

Seeding is more subjective than not. The NFL doesn’t have subjective seeding. They have a long list of tie-breakers to determine their playoff hierarchy and they also have parity via the draft. I’m assuming the other pro leagues are similar, so using their systems as a guidepost is disingenuous. There are no byes in March Madness…just a few play-in games…which are weird in FUBeAR ‘s opinion.

Seeding for bracketing is all that is done in most cases.

Seeding for bracketing, and on a limited basis, home field advantage makes sense in FCS.
Seeding for Byes + Home Field + Bracketing advantage does not.

It’s a triple stacked deck and it’s not right…unless you happen to be a Christian-eating FCS Lion benefiting from the triple stacked deck…then you believe it’s exceedingly fair, that all other structures are ‘soft,’ etc., and you will defend the status quo ad infinitum. We get it.
Well, there is no advantage to getting a top seed vs a lower seed in the current format of the FCS playoffs until you hit the quarterfinals since the bottom 16 are all pooled together (and only placed in the bracket by regionalization). At that point, if you are holding the position that having a bye is some monstrous advantage, is not an advantage if you're facing another seeded team which is what happens the majority of the time in the quarters. You're also insinuating that the subjective seeding process is flawed so aren't you refuting your own argument that being seeded highly makes your path easier by facing lower seeds??? This entire argument against byes seems like a word salad to try to obfuscate the fact that the top 8 seeds are, for the most part, just better than the bottom 16. So, like every other postseason tournament in the wide wide world of sports (copyright Slim Pickens), those top 8 are afforded advantages based on their regular season accomplishments.

As to whether those advantages are too much is where things really get subjective and it's just going to be based on the playoff format in the end anyway. I believe every FCS conference that wants one should have an autobid. That means we need to have at least a 24 team playoff field right now. If you think we should expand that to 32 so there's no byes I think that's way too many teams considering the fact that we only have around 100 teams that are even playoff eligible. If you think we should take away autobids and reduce the field to 16 I think that's unfair to the conferences that want to send their champion to the playoff and can't.

24 teams is the right size given the current landscape of the FCS IMO. If the autobids are trimmed to 10 make it 20... if it's trimmed to 8 then I'd be fine with 16 as well. That's just my xtwocentsx.

[FUBeAR]

Well, there is no advantage to getting a top seed vs a lower seed in the current format of the FCS playoffs until you hit the quarterfinals since the bottom 16 are all pooled together (and only placed in the bracket by regionalization). At that point, if you are holding the position that having a bye is some monstrous advantage, is not an advantage if you're facing another seeded team which is what happens the majority of the time in the quarters. You're also insinuating that the subjective seeding process is flawed so aren't you refuting your own argument that being seeded highly makes your path easier by facing lower seeds??? This entire argument against byes seems like a word salad to try to obfuscate the fact that the top 8 seeds are, for the most part, just better than the bottom 16. So, like every other postseason tournament in the wide wide world of sports (copyright Slim Pickens), those top 8 are afforded advantages based on their regular season accomplishments.

As to whether those advantages are too much is where things really get subjective and it's just going to be based on the playoff format in the end anyway. I believe every FCS conference that wants one should have an autobid. That means we need to have at least a 24 team playoff field right now. If you think we should expand that to 32 so there's no byes I think that's way too many teams considering the fact that we only have around 100 teams that are even playoff eligible. If you think we should take away autobids and reduce the field to 16 I think that's unfair to the conferences that want to send their champion to the playoff and can't.

24 teams is the right size given the current landscape of the FCS IMO. If the autobids are trimmed to 10 make it 20... if it's trimmed to 8 then I'd be fine with 16 as well. That's just my xtwocentsx.
Speaking of word salads…you’re usually much better than this. You’re using your premise to justify your conclusion. You (all…or the much preferred y’all) keep talking about seeding being based on “regular season accomplishments” and ignoring the subjectivity of that process.

Example - ETSU was 10-1 in 2021 and the only Team in FCS to beat an SEC Team in the past 6 seasons…and their only loss was to an FCS Team that had dang near knocked off another SEC Team…yet ETSU barely was in the conversation for a seed until some games in other parts of the country broke in the direction that eked out a #7 seed for them.

Meanwhile, NDSU, also 10-1, also with an FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #2 slot.
Meanwhile, JMU, also 10-1, also with an FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #3 slot.
Meanwhile, SacSt, 9-2, also with an FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #4 slot.
Meanwhile JMU, 9-2, also with a BAD FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #5 slot.
Meanwhile, Montana, 9-2, with 2 FCS losses, and an OK FBS win over a BAD Team in the worst P5 conference is #6.

There is nothing OBJECTIVELY better about those 5 Teams’ “Regular Season Accomplishments” than those of ETSU. And this extends below the 8 that are blessed with a triple stack, the 4 that get a quad stack, and the 2 that get quintuply blessed.

16 Teams with no byes works…unless we care about increasing fan interest in and the ‘health’ of FCS Football below the Top 16 Teams.

If we do care about those things, then we need to go to 32 Teams with no byes, 4 fully regionalized 8 Team brackets (lower costs / better attendance) & a unique Final Four structure that will enhance fan experience and optimize revenue potential.

The soon-to-be-released (maybe) FUBeAR FCS Playoff plan fixes everything!

[atthewbon]

Thought I'd compile some data with conference playoff record and number of byes received. This is rough data (did it quickly by hand so may not be 100% accurate) over the last 6 years (and obviously no byes in 2020).

MVFC: 41-22 (0.65)
9 byes

CAA: 26-19 (0.58)
6 byes

Big Sky: 20-22 (0.48)
13 byes

SOCON: 10-12 (0.45)
3 byes

I'm not really sure what to make of this data but it sure seems the big sky gets more byes than they should given their playoff success. Though it is worth noting that byes will hurt overall playoff record given there is no chance to win a round one game vs. a lesser opponent.

[ElCid]

Thought I'd compile some data with conference playoff record and number of byes received. This is rough data (did it quickly by hand so may not be 100% accurate) over the last 6 years (and obviously no byes in 2020).

MVFC: 41-22 (0.65)
9 byes

CAA: 26-19 (0.58)
6 byes

Big Sky: 20-22 (0.48)
13 byes

SOCON: 10-12 (0.45)
3 byes

I'm not really sure what to make of this data but it sure seems the big sky gets more byes than they should given their playoff success. Though it is worth noting that byes will hurt overall playoff record given there is no chance to win a round one game vs. a lesser opponent.

I've heard this line of thinking many times here. Not sure you are doing it, but I always get a kick out of people bringing up past seasons as a justification for determining current season playoff determination. Every year, every conf, every team is different, so this has very little value. Sure, looking back and seeing the history is ok and good, as an analytical exercise, but using it as justification for ongoing decisions is not good. And I've heard use that as justification for playoff determination.

[atthewbon]

I've heard this line of thinking many times here. Not sure you are doing it, but I always get a kick out of people bringing up past seasons as a justification for determining current season playoff determination. Every year, every conf, every team is different, so this has very little value. Sure, looking back and seeing the history is ok and good, as an analytical exercise, but using it as justification for ongoing decisions is not good. And I've heard use that as justification for playoff determination.

I mainly did this bc I was interested in the byes but in terms of using recent conference success IMO you kind of have to at least in football. There just aren’t enough games especially non conference games each year to differentiate how good conferences are. Everyone knows damn well that going undefeated in the MVFC is more impressive than doing so in the Big South and we know this because of recent historical playoff success. I’m not saying it should play a super significant role but to not look at it would be foolish imo. You could say 2021 NDSU and ETSU had nearly identical resumes (both 10–1 with 1 fcs loss) but it surprised absolutely no one when NDSU beat them by 24 in the playoffs. And I feel that it was totally fair for NDSU to be the 2 seed and ETSU to be the 7 because although it may look like they have similar resumes NDSU clearly played a tougher schedule and was clearly the better team.

[FUBeAR]

I mainly did this bc I was interested in the byes but in terms of using recent conference success IMO you kind of have to at least in football. There just aren’t enough games especially non conference games each year to differentiate how good conferences are. Everyone knows damn well that going undefeated in the MVFC is more impressive than doing so in the Big South and we know this because of recent historical playoff success. I’m not saying it should play a super significant role but to not look at it would be foolish imo. You could say 2021 NDSU and ETSU had nearly identical resumes (both 10–1 with 1 fcs loss) but it surprised absolutely no one when NDSU beat them by 24 in the playoffs. And I feel that it was totally fair for NDSU to be the 2 seed and ETSU to be the 7 because although it may look like they have similar resumes NDSU clearly played a tougher schedule and was clearly the better team.
Are we sure?

Let’s say ETSU gets a 2nd round match-up vs. a 7-4 Team that had lost 3 of their last 4 regular season FCS games…as NDSU did.

And, let’s say NDSU gets a 2nd round match-up vs. an 11-1 Team on a 10 game winning streak whose only loss was to a P5 Team…as ETSU did.

Now, after that prior match-up disparity, let’s send the bizuns into the the thin mountain air high in the Smokies with a loud & proud large ETSU band & a very hostile student section behind their bench…occasionally spilling on to the field (they do) for their quarterfinal matchup. You know the actual score was only 6-0 NDSU’s way just before halftime. Are we sure that game plays out the same way if the 2nd round match-ups & seeds were reversed? If you say “yes,” you are lying - no one can be sure of that. You can only, subjectively, BELIEVE it. You cannot KNOW it.

National seeding, given localized (for the most part) FCS schedules, is too subjective and byes are too much of an advantage to reward such a subjective attribution. Regionalized seeding, while still mostly subjective, would be more ‘defensible’ than the circular logic justifications that are used now.

[ElCid]

I mainly did this bc I was interested in the byes but in terms of using recent conference success IMO you kind of have to at least in football. There just aren’t enough games especially non conference games each year to differentiate how good conferences are. Everyone knows damn well that going undefeated in the MVFC is more impressive than doing so in the Big South and we know this because of recent historical playoff success. I’m not saying it should play a super significant role but to not look at it would be foolish imo. You could say 2021 NDSU and ETSU had nearly identical resumes (both 10–1 with 1 fcs loss) but it surprised absolutely no one when NDSU beat them by 24 in the playoffs. And I feel that it was totally fair for NDSU to be the 2 seed and ETSU to be the 7 because although it may look like they have similar resumes NDSU clearly played a tougher schedule and was clearly the better team.

I wasn't terribly upset at their #7. I thought they earned a bit higher. Talking about NDSU is a bit strange in that you have the dome as part of the equation. It's a perfect vehicle for success. Had they been playing many of their playoff games over the years elsewhere, the result would surely have been different. Maybe not terribly so, but I suspect it would not be as good. But then the circular logic answer is, but they earned it. Kind of like a perpetual motion machine.

My entire issue with byes is that I view the entire thing as separate from the regular season. I get those that don't. But if you view the playoffs as a totally separate issue, using the season as a reason to give an additional advantage does look silly. Each team should stand in the playoffs on as equal a footing as possible.

[Professor Chaos]

Speaking of word salads…you’re usually much better than this. You’re using your premise to justify your conclusion. You (all…or the much preferred y’all) keep talking about seeding being based on “regular season accomplishments” and ignoring the subjectivity of that process.

Example - ETSU was 10-1 in 2021 and the only Team in FCS to beat an SEC Team in the past 6 seasons…and their only loss was to an FCS Team that had dang near knocked off another SEC Team…yet ETSU barely was in the conversation for a seed until some games in other parts of the country broke in the direction that eked out a #7 seed for them.

Meanwhile, NDSU, also 10-1, also with an FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #2 slot.
Meanwhile, JMU, also 10-1, also with an FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #3 slot.
Meanwhile, SacSt, 9-2, also with an FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #4 slot.
Meanwhile JMU, 9-2, also with a BAD FCS loss, no FBS wins (much less over an SEC opponent) eases into the #5 slot.
Meanwhile, Montana, 9-2, with 2 FCS losses, and an OK FBS win over a BAD Team in the worst P5 conference is #6.

There is nothing OBJECTIVELY better about those 5 Teams’ “Regular Season Accomplishments” than those of ETSU. And this extends below the 8 that are blessed with a triple stack, the 4 that get a quad stack, and the 2 that get quintuply blessed.

16 Teams with no byes works…unless we care about increasing fan interest in and the ‘health’ of FCS Football below the Top 16 Teams.

If we do care about those things, then we need to go to 32 Teams with no byes, 4 fully regionalized 8 Team brackets (lower costs / better attendance) & a unique Final Four structure that will enhance fan experience and optimize revenue potential.

The soon-to-be-released (maybe) FUBeAR FCS Playoff plan fixes everything!
Ranking teams subjectively is not nearly as hard or proven as inaccurate as you make it out to be. It's not perfect but it's the best option for seeding teams nationwide when there's not enough intersectionality to get into tie breaker rules like the NFL has (not to mention a much wider disparity in strength of schedule). It's certainly better than having a computer formula rank the teams (which you can argue is also subjective) and it's better than placing the teams randomly or though some off the field measure like geography.

Btw your subjectivity is showing comparing ETSU's FBS win with Montana's. Washington was a much better team than Vanderbilt last season yet you dub Montana's win over UW an "OK FBS win" and ETSU's win over Vanderbilt as "the only FCS team to beat an SEC team in the past 6 season".


Are we sure?

Let’s say ETSU gets a 2nd round match-up vs. a 7-4 Team that had lost 3 of their last 4 regular season FCS games…as NDSU did.

And, let’s say NDSU gets a 2nd round match-up vs. an 11-1 Team on a 10 game winning streak whose only loss was to a P5 Team…as ETSU did.

Now, after that prior match-up disparity, let’s send the bizuns into the the thin mountain air high in the Smokies with a loud & proud large ETSU band & a very hostile student section behind their bench…occasionally spilling on to the field (they do) for their quarterfinal matchup. You know the actual score was only 6-0 NDSU’s way just before halftime. Are we sure that game plays out the same way if the 2nd round match-ups & seeds were reversed? If you say “yes,” you are lying - no one can be sure of that. You can only, subjectively, BELIEVE it. You cannot KNOW it.

National seeding, given localized (for the most part) FCS schedules, is too subjective and byes are too much of an advantage to reward such a subjective attribution. Regionalized seeding, while still mostly subjective, would be more ‘defensible’ than the circular logic justifications that are used now.
If you really think the 2nd round opponent and placement in the bracket is enough to explain a 28-3 margin you've got yourself so twisted up it's going to take you a really long time to straighten things out.

[POD Knows]

I wasn't terribly upset at their #7. I thought they earned a bit higher. Talking about NDSU is a bit strange in that you have the dome as part of the equation. It's a perfect vehicle for success. Had they been playing many of their playoff games over the years elsewhere, the result would surely have been different. Maybe not terribly so, but I suspect it would not be as good. But then the circular logic answer is, but they earned it. Kind of like a perpetual motion machine.

My entire issue with byes is that I view the entire thing as separate from the regular season. I get those that don't. But if you view the playoffs as a totally separate issue, using the season as a reason to give an additional advantage does look silly. Each team should stand in the playoffs on as equal a footing as possible.
No they shouldn’t. The playoffs are a continuation of the regular season as a whole and the top regular season teams deserve and earn an advantage in the the post season.
also. If NDSU did not have a dome and played outside, the advantage would be even bigger.

[atthewbon]

I wasn't terribly upset at their #7. I thought they earned a bit higher. Talking about NDSU is a bit strange in that you have the dome as part of the equation. It's a perfect vehicle for success. Had they been playing many of their playoff games over the years elsewhere, the result would surely have been different. Maybe not terribly so, but I suspect it would not be as good. But then the circular logic answer is, but they earned it. Kind of like a perpetual motion machine.

My entire issue with byes is that I view the entire thing as separate from the regular season. I get those that don't. But if you view the playoffs as a totally separate issue, using the season as a reason to give an additional advantage does look silly. Each team should stand in the playoffs on as equal a footing as possible.

I guess that's where we disagree I see the playoffs as the extension of the season to find the champion as apposed to a totally separate thing from the regular season. Again I don't necessarily think byes are necessary but to get rid of them you'd either have to go to 16 or 32. 32 seems like too much for many people and imo 16 doesn't work if we have 11 or 12 autobids (many of which are just frankly not even close to being one of the top 16 teams). I think the current playoff system right now is pretty good (I'd personally like them to seed every team and ditch regionalization but I understand why the $$$ prevents that). The byes don't bother me much because I see it as a reward for regular season success, and while the committee isn't perfect in general I think they do a pretty good job at giving out those byes. As the data I shared shows I think they favor the Big Sky a little too much, largely due to their division structure (I wish the committee would take this more into account when seeding teams).

One solution could be to do something like the fbs is going to do. Have an 8, 12, or 16 team playoff but not every conference gets an autobid (just the top 4 or 6). I personally wouldn't hate this in a 12 or 16 team format. Though I think I prefer every conference getting an autobid and for that I feel as if 24 is the right number given the current landscape of the fcs.

[FUBeAR]

Ranking teams subjectively is not nearly as hard as you make it out to be. It's not perfect but it's the best option for seeding teams nationwide when there's not enough intersectionality to get into tie breaker rules like the NFL has (not to mention a much wider disparity in strength of schedule). It's certainly better than having a computer formula rank the teams (which you can argue is also subjective) and it's better than placing the teams randomly or though some off the field measure like geography.

Btw... your subjectivity is showing comparing ETSU's FBS win with Montana's. Washington was a much better team than Vanderbilt last season yet you dub Montana's win over UW an "OK FBS win" and ETSU's win over Vanderbilt as "the only FCS team to beat an SEC team in the past 6 season".
OK - so you say - FUBeAR disagrees with several of the premises you espouse here as if they are ‘settled science.’ No doubt the current structure has served NDSU well & NDSU has fielded fine Football Teams capable of leveraging that structure to the maximum. If FUBeAR was a bizuns fan, he would have a hard time seeing any reason why anything should change and he would, not being objective, also make compelling arguments to maintain the status quo.

Anyway…to a few of your points…

…so don’t seed Teams nationwide and seeding, regardless of national or regional, should not include a bye. It’s too much of an advantage in FCS Football’s playoff system.

…FUBeAR never claimed to be non-subjective. As an ursine human, he is afflicted with at least the same level of lack of objectivity as the average bizuns fan. Vandy was 2-10 playing in the SEC & UW was 4-8 playing in the PAC12…and you are certain of your CLAIM that “Washington was a much better team than Vanderbilt last season.” Poppycock. You don’t know that. You are only speculating.

[ElCid]

No they shouldn’t. The playoffs are a continuation of the regular season as a whole and the top regular season teams deserve and earn an advantage in the the post season.
also. If NDSU did not have a dome and played outside, the advantage would be even bigger.

And that's the difference. I don't view it simply as a continuation, but a separate issue.

[ElCid]

I guess that's where we disagree I see the playoffs as the extension of the season to find the champion as apposed to a totally separate thing from the regular season. Again I don't necessarily think byes are necessary but to get rid of them you'd either have to go to 16 or 32. 32 seems like too much for many people and imo 16 doesn't work if we have 11 or 12 autobids (many of which are just frankly not even close to being one of the top 16 teams). I think the current playoff system right now is pretty good (I'd personally like them to seed every team and ditch regionalization but I understand why the $$$ prevents that). The byes don't bother me much because I see it as a reward for regular season success, and while the committee isn't perfect in general I think they do a pretty good job at giving out those byes. As the data I shared shows I think they favor the Big Sky a little too much, largely due to their division structure (I wish the committee would take this more into account when seeding teams).

One solution could be to do something like the fbs is going to do. Have an 8, 12, or 16 team playoff but not every conference gets an autobid (just the top 4 or 6). I personally wouldn't hate this in a 12 or 16 team format. Though I think I prefer every conference getting an autobid and for that I feel as if 24 is the right number given the current landscape of the fcs.

32 is ridiculous. I could seriously accept 16 with all autobids intact with the rest at large. If, as a few are saying, the playoffs are an extension of the season, that should be sufficient. If you can't even win your conf, then having 3-5 at larges from any conf is an exercise in futility anyway. 10-12 autobids, who knows anymore, and flush it out with at larges. No byes. Start week after Thanksgiving weekend. And I don't care about at large rules in regard to numbers. Rules can be changed.

[FUBeAR]

No they shouldn’t. The playoffs are a continuation of the regular season as a whole and the top regular season teams deserve and earn an advantage in the the post season.
also. If NDSU did not have a dome and played outside, the advantage would be even bigger.
Define “top regular season teams” using 100% objective criteria and explain, using that objective criteria why a 10-1 MVFC Team with an FCS loss and no FBS wins is deserving of a #2 seed (which includes a Bye, a likely favorable 2nd round matchup, and only home games thru the semis) and a 10-1 Big South Team, whose only loss is to an FBS P5 is completely unworthy of deserving any seeding and earns no advantages.

[FUBeAR]

32 is ridiculous. I could seriously accept 16 with all autobids intact with the rest at large. If, as a few are saying, the playoffs are an extension of the season, that should be sufficient. If you can't even win your conf, then having 3-5 at larges from any conf is an exercise in futility anyway. 10-12 autobids, who knows anymore, and flush it out with at larges. No byes. Start week after Thanksgiving weekend. And I don't care about at large rules in regard to numbers. Rules can be changed.FUBeAR hears you and gets that line of thinking, but after long thought and observation, FUBeAR has reversed his thinking and thinks the ‘health’ of FCS Football & more than a few individual programs would be improved by expanding to 32 … 4 Regions (NE, SE, MW, and West) with seeded 8 Team brackets in each region…and also start the week AFTER T’Giving (no games on T’Giving Saturday…everyone gets a week to heal up)…with a unique “Final Four” component.

Call it FUBeAR’s “FCS Winter Wackiness”

[POD Knows]

Define “top regular season teams” using 100% objective criteria and explain, using that objective criteria why a 10-1 MVFC Team with an FCS loss and no FBS wins is deserving of a #2 seed (which includes a Bye, a likely favorable 2nd round matchup, and only home games thru the semis) and a 10-1 Big South Team, whose only loss is to an FBS P5 is completely unworthy of deserving any seeding and earns no advantages.
Because the Big South sucks, their conference schedule sucks and their 10-1 record is a delusional when trying to compare it to a 10-1 team out of the MVFC and that was shown in Fargo when the game occurred. You can use the rating systems for the conferences, SOS and other means to determine seeding, which is what they do and, in most cases, the two best teams are in the Natty, which is the goal of the FCS post SEASON.

[FUBeAR]

Because the Big South sucks, their conference schedule sucks and their 10-1 record is a delusional when trying to compare it to a 10-1 team out of the MVFC and that was shown in Fargo when the game occurred. You can use the rating systems for the conferences, SOS and other means to determine seeding, which is what they do and, in most cases, the two best teams are in the Natty, which is the goal of the FCS post SEASON.LOL - 1) “they suck” is generally not considered the most objective of analytical characterizations
2) that Team didn’t play in Fargo
3) All the ratings systems & SOS rely on historical data, thus using circular logic, essentially leading to a self-fulfilling prophesy

4a) Defining the sole goal of the post-season as getting the 2 best Teams “in the Natty” is certainly a reasonable definition which can reasonably be accomplished, subjectively, by using those ‘systems’ (and their circular logic) to subjectively select the top 2 Teams and have a 1 game Championship…or maybe 4 and have a 3 game tourney. That surely works using the ‘systems’ in place and accomplishes the goal you have described. No need for 8, 16, or 20 or 24 Teams to be involved…right?

4b) FUBeAR has come to think that the goal of the post season is to do as you have described AND, AND, AND to increase the visibility/profile of FCS Football, enhance fan interest, aspire to (and reach, ultimately) profitability for participating Teams AND their Conference-mates, and enhance the ‘health’ of more FCS programs than the current structure enables.

If you don’t buy into 4b), then, yeah, you should be arguing for an FBS-style 4 Team Playoff at the most, but if you do…then you should be thinking…how do we make the FCS Playoffs more March Madness-like?

“Winter Wackiness”…it’s gonna blanket the NATION!

[POD Knows]

LOL - 1) “they suck” is generally not considered the most objective of analytical characterizations
2) that Team didn’t play in Fargo
3) All the ratings systems & SOS rely on historical data, thus using circular logic, essentially leading to a self-fulfilling prophesy

4a) Defining the sole goal of the post-season as getting the 2 best Teams “in the Natty” is certainly a reasonable definition which can reasonably be accomplished, subjectively, by using those ‘systems’ (and their circular logic) to subjectively select the top 2 Teams and have a 1 game Championship…or maybe 4 and have a 3 game tourney. That surely works using the ‘systems’ in place and accomplishes the goal you have described. No need for 8, 16, or 20 or 24 Teams to be involved…right?

4b) FUBeAR has come to think that the goal of the post season is to do as you have described AND, AND, AND to increase the visibility/profile of FCS Football, enhance fan interest, aspire to (and reach, ultimately) profitability for participating Teams AND their Conference-mates, and enhance the ‘health’ of more FCS programs than the current structure enables.

If you don’t buy into 4b), then, yeah, you should be arguing for an FBS-style 4 Team Playoff at the most, but if you do…then you should be thinking…how do we make the FCS Playoffs more March Madness-like?

“Winter Wackiness”…it’s gonna blanket the NATION!
Yea. I referenced the ETSU NDSU game here because it was part of the conversation and being undefeated in the Big South still does not impress me all that much. Sorry.

I don’t think the standing of the FCS is going to improve by adding teams to an already pretty watered down “bracket”. If the Ivy’s and the HBCUs were full participants here then maybe. Thirty two teams is a lot.

[NDSU1980]

Yea. I referenced the ETSU NDSU game here because it was part of the conversation and being undefeated in the Big South still does not impress me all that much. Sorry.

I don’t think the standing of the FCS is going to improve by adding teams to an already pretty watered down “bracket”. If the Ivy’s and the HBCUs were full participants here then maybe. Thirty two teams is a lot.
Just look how hard it is to come up with 25 deserving teams for the AGS poll a lot of the time. After 20 it's almost like picking names out of the hat. I can't imagine how bad the playoffs are going to get when it's expanded to 28 and heaven help us should it ever increase to 32.

[POD Knows]

Just look how hard it is to come up with 25 deserving teams for the AGS poll a lot of the time. After 20 it's almost like picking names out of the hat. I can't imagine how bad the playoffs are going to get when it's expanded to 28 and heaven help us should it ever increase to 32.
Agree.

[FUBeAR]

Yea. I referenced the ETSU NDSU game here because it was part of the conversation and being undefeated in the Big South still does not impress me all that much. Sorry.

I don’t think the standing of the FCS is going to improve by adding teams to an already pretty watered down “bracket”. If the Ivy’s and the HBCUs were full participants here then maybe. Thirty two teams is a lot.8 more Teams…2 more Teams per region. 8 more FCS Teams whose Fans ‘think’ for a couple or 3 weeks that Old Home U. has a shot at the National title. How is that a bad thing? The only downside is for Teams that get a bye in the current structure…you know, typically the Teams whose Fans have their heels deeply dug in on this thread. Ain’t no Dixie State nor Merrimack Fans worrying ‘bout ‘watered down.’ They wanna know when their Team is gonna be like Saint Peters and ‘make a run’ during FCS Winter Wackiness.

And maybe that T’Giving week off before WinWack starts gets more HBCU’s in the 32 Team mix.

And…since we’re gonna do a Final Four week in Orlando (there’s a reason for that)…maybe we find some way to marry up the Champ Game with the Celebration Bowl. Now we got 6 sets of FCS fans in town. That starts to get some leverage and make for a fun bowl-like WinWack Week!

Yep - we bring 4 Semi-Finalist Teams into Orlando for about a week. Tuesday semis and turn around (just like those G5 Teams do) and have the Championship Game on Saturday. Fans/Families have a couple of weeks to book their Winter Vacation…plenty of non-Football activity for kids of all ages in the Area.

Lots more creative stuff can be dreamed up & added to this framework…such as working w/celebration bowl, etc.

Y’all looking at this thru your green & gold tinted lenses. It’s hard to see that change is definitely needed & if you don’t see the need for open-minded changes to drive success more broadly for the subdivision, then all ideas will seem stupid to you …and all of your compatriots wearing those same lenses.

[POD Knows]

8 more Teams…2 more Teams per region. 8 more FCS Teams whose Fans ‘think’ for a couple or 3 weeks that Old Home U. has a shot at the National title. How is that a bad thing? The only downside is for Teams that get a bye in the current structure…you know, typically the Teams whose Fans have their heels deeply dug in on this thread. Ain’t no Dixie State nor Merrimack Fans worrying ‘bout ‘watered down.’ They wanna know when their Team is gonna be like Saint Peters and ‘make a run’ during FCS Winter Wackiness.

And maybe that T’Giving week off before WinWack starts gets more HBCU’s in the 32 Team mix.

And…since we’re gonna do a Final Four week in Orlando (there’s a reason for that)…maybe we find some way to marry up the Champ Game with the Celebration Bowl. Now we got 6 sets of FCS fans in town. That starts to get some leverage and make for a fun bowl-like WinWack Week!

Yep - we bring 4 Semi-Finalist Teams into Orlando for about a week. Tuesday semis and turn around (just like those G5 Teams do) and have the Championship Game on Saturday. Fans/Families have a couple of weeks to book their Winter Vacation…plenty of non-Football activity for kids of all ages in the Area.

Lots more creative stuff can be dreamed up & added to this framework…such as working w/celebration bowl, etc.

Y’all looking at this thru your green & gold tinted lenses. It’s hard to see that change is definitely needed & if you don’t see the need for open-minded changes to drive success more broadly for the subdivision, then all ideas will seem stupid to you …and all of your compatriots wearing those same lenses.
I don't agree that adding more also rans to the tourney helps the subdivision. If anything, these games with ****ty attendance and no interest drags the division down. Sorry, I am not sold on expanding the field.

[walliver]

Everybody should get a first round bye (in other words, nobody plays on Thanksgiving weekend). 16 teams should be enough. All "auto-bids" would be conditional (winning record against D-1, ranked in top 50 by some measure, etc).

Unfortunately, for many fans, making the playoffs has become a goal in itself - much like March Madness. Does a 4th or 5th place team from any conference really have a chance to win it all? Or is it really just a participation trophy?

[ElCid]

Everybody should get a first round bye (in other words, nobody plays on Thanksgiving weekend). 16 teams should be enough. All "auto-bids" would be conditional (winning record against D-1, ranked in top 50 by some measure, etc).

Unfortunately, for many fans, making the playoffs has become a goal in itself - much like March Madness. Does a 4th or 5th place team from any conference really have a chance to win it all? Or is it really just a participation trophy?

Exactly. If the playoffs are an extension of the season, like many here espouse, then coming in 3rd or greater in your conf shouldn't get you in the playoffs since you've already shown your not capable of even winning your conf. 16 is sufficient. I'm hesitant at the .500 qualifier for a conf champ, but could probably live with it.

[KPSUL]

Exactly. If the playoffs are an extension of the season, like many here espouse, then coming in 3rd or greater in your conf shouldn't get you in the playoffs since you've already shown your not capable of even winning your conf. 16 is sufficient. I'm hesitant at the .500 qualifier for a conf champ, but could probably live with it.

This argument is seriously flawed, it doesn't consider two critical factors: The significant disparity between both size and quality of FCS Conferences. If upwards of 12 auto-bids are to be awarded, than unfortunately 16 slots, 4 being at-large, is not enough. Winning your conference when there are 8, 7 or even 6 teams in conference can give you a clear picture of which team deserves the auto-bid since you are playing everyone else in your conference. However, in larger conferences you may see schedules where the top 3 or 4 teams don't even play one another. This was definitely an issue in the Big Sky this past season when one of the co-champions coasted to the auto-bid and then proved to be maybe the 4th or 5th best conference team in the playoffs. This problem has increased due to the recent proliferation of 6 and 7 team conferences, many of which are comprised largely of the least competitive FCS teams.

To solve this problem the minimum number of teams required for a conference to get an auto-bid should be higher, 8 would be a nice round number. That way you could keep the size of the playoff field smaller. It might also stop most of the conference hopping that has occurred recently, and cause the demise of one or two start-up conferences we never needed anyway.

[Bisonator]

This argument is seriously flawed, it doesn't consider two critical factors: The significant disparity between both size and quality of FCS Conferences. If upwards of 12 auto-bids are to be awarded, than unfortunately 16 slots, 4 being at-large, is not enough. Winning your conference when there are 8, 7 or even 6 teams in conference can give you a clear picture of which team deserves the auto-bid since you are playing everyone else in your conference. However, in larger conferences you may see schedules where the top 3 or 4 teams don't even play one another. This was definitely an issue in the Big Sky this past season when one of the co-champions coasted to the auto-bid and then proved to be maybe the 4th or 5th best conference team in the playoffs. This problem has increased due to the recent proliferation of 6 and 7 team conferences, many of which are comprised largely of the least competitive FCS teams.

To solve this problem the minimum number of teams required for a conference to get an auto-bid should be higher, 8 would be a nice round number. That way you could keep the size of the playoff field smaller. It might also stop most of the conference hopping that has occurred recently, and cause the demise of one or two start-up conferences we never needed anyway.
This man gets it. xnodx

[ElCid]

This argument is seriously flawed, it doesn't consider two critical factors: The significant disparity between both size and quality of FCS Conferences. If upwards of 12 auto-bids are to be awarded, than unfortunately 16 slots, 4 being at-large, is not enough. Winning your conference when there are 8, 7 or even 6 teams in conference can give you a clear picture of which team deserves the auto-bid since you are playing everyone else in your conference. However, in larger conferences you may see schedules where the top 3 or 4 teams don't even play one another. This was definitely an issue in the Big Sky this past season when one of the co-champions coasted to the auto-bid and then proved to be maybe the 4th or 5th best conference team in the playoffs. This problem has increased due to the recent proliferation of 6 and 7 team conferences, many of which are comprised largely of the least competitive FCS teams.

To solve this problem the minimum number of teams required for a conference to get an auto-bid should be higher, 8 would be a nice round number. That way you could keep the size of the playoff field smaller. It might also stop most of the conference hopping that has occurred recently, and cause the demise of one or two start-up conferences we never needed anyway.

That is an issue. Maybe we should have a maximum number per conf as well. But whether or not a team plays every other team is ultimately irrelevant unless confs are not choosing their champs correctly. That another conf decided to have too many teams is not important to the other confs. And ultimately there is still one conf champ no matter how each conf decided it. And the number three or four team in the big confs probably are not legit contenders. I could get the number two team, many times, being a legit contender whether they play their conf champ or not. Just depends.

[Hammerhead]

ETSU was lucky to get a seed in the 2021 playoffs considering there were 6 playoff teams with higher Sagarin ratings at the end of the regular season that did not get a seed.

[ElCid]

ETSU was lucky to get a seed in the 2021 playoffs considering there were 6 playoff teams with higher Sagarin ratings at the end of the regular season that did not get a seed.

Only if you believe Sagarin or Massey are accurate enough to determine them. They are not infallible and only as good as their algorithm. Plus confs are not usually connected enough to compare to a sufficient degree for such things. Their resume was easily good enough for a seed

[KPSUL]

That is an issue. Maybe we should have a maximum number per conf as well. But whether or not a team plays every other team is ultimately irrelevant unless confs are not choosing their champs correctly. That another conf decided to have too many teams is not important to the other confs. And ultimately there is still one conf champ no matter how each conf decided it. And the number three or four team in the big confs probably are not legit contenders. I could get the number two team, many times, being a legit contender whether they play their conf champ or not. Just depends.

I don't think that is necessary or beneficial when a selection committee is trying to select the best teams to fill at-large bids. The permissive measure of auto-bids broadens the playoff field enough, we don't need a restrictive measure like capping the number of teams from any one conference - that would only dilute the quality of the field further. Making the playoff field 16, and increasing the required number of teams for a conference to get an auto-bid to 8 is the optimal solution IMHO.

[FUBeAR]

Only if you believe Sagarin or Massey are accurate enough to determine them. They are not infallible and only as good as their algorithm. Plus confs are not usually connected enough to compare to a sufficient degree for such things. Their resume was easily good enough for a seed
Correct. ETSU’s resume was as good as, if not better than, the #2 seed.

[NDSU1980]

Correct. ETSU’s resume was as good as, if not better than, the #2 seed.
Well for some reason ETSU seemed to have a problem though when they played the #2 seed.

[Professor Chaos]

Well for some reason ETSU seemed to have a problem though when they played the #2 seed.
You didn't know the Fargodome homefield advantage is worth 4 TDs??? It's common knowledge.... xrolleyesx

[KPSUL]

You didn't know the Fargodome homefield advantage is worth 4 TDs??? It's common knowledge.... xrolleyesx

Is that all? I thought that it had risen to 5 TDs and a Safety.

[Professor Chaos]

Is that all? I thought that it had risen to 5 TDs and a Safety.
Well we only put about 12k in there for playoff games (other than the semis) now so maybe that's why.... I guess we can hope that inflation hits the Fargodome home field advantage too???

[Professor Chaos]

The WAC and ASUN announced a league partnership starting in 2023 similar to the Big South and OVC so that should bring autobids back down to 10 for the 2023 season:

ASUN/WAC
Big Sky
Big South/OVC
CAA
MVFC
NEC
Patriot
Pioneer
SOCON
Southland

Hopefully this takes any momentum that there is away from the idea of playoff expansion.

[atthewbon]

The WAC and ASUN announced a league partnership starting in 2023 similar to the Big South and OVC so that should bring autobids back down to 10 for the 2023 season:

ASUN/WAC
Big Sky
Big South/OVC
CAA
MVFC
NEC
Patriot
Pioneer
SOCON
Southland

Hopefully this takes any momentum that there is away from the idea of playoff expansion.

I think it might be starting this year. So we may be down to 11 auto bids this year.

[ElCid]

I think I got all the inputs people made on the various threads and made the appropriate changes on this map, but I could sure use some other eyes to back me up. Take a look and comment as necessary.

Especially look at Conf auto bid window and Notes section.

I made it big to see easier...but may have made it too big. Sorry.

I'm tryign to make big enough to see but not too big and that is posing issues. JUst have to see how it looks after I post.

May have to send to Ursus to link as he did before.

32451