EXTREMELY Early Playoff Hypothetical

[colgate13]

Having just lost to CCSU, I noticed they play Rhode Island next week. IF (a long season ahead, I know but), IF they win against URI and run their conference table and take out Marist and St. Peters OOC... could they have a legit reason to get a mid-major at large bid? That would be an 11-0 record with two wins vs. teams from playoff conferences.

Isn't that exactly what we've all said a mid-major needs to do?

[OL FU]

Having just lost to CCSU, I noticed they play Rhode Island next week. IF (a long season ahead, I know but), IF they win against URI and run their conference table and take out Marist and St. Peters OOC... could they have a legit reason to get a mid-major at large bid? That would be an 11-0 record with two wins vs. teams from playoff conferences.

Isn't that exactly what we've all said a mid-major needs to do?

Should they at least have to beat a good team from a playoff conference :D

Sorry 13 but I had to say it. :(

[GannonFan]

Well, URI is picked again to finish either last or next to last in the A10 and Colgate, well, God only knows if they're any good this year. Winning against those teams will certainly be tempered if both end up being awful this year. It's one thing to be teams from playoff conferences (heck, everyone beats Elon!) it's something better to beat teams that have a few wins to their names from those conferences. Too early to tell but I would be doubtful of them making it.

[ChickenMan]

An 11-0 CCSU with their best wins over URI and Colgate vs the likes of W&M... UD... UNI... WKU... EWU... all at 8-3...??? I don't think CCSU would get... or deserve a bid under those circumstances.

[aceinthehole]

I'm glad you started this and not me :) , but in my opinion but only 2 teams from the NEC could get at-large playoff CONSIDERATION, but only in these very limited circumstances:

CCSU (11-0) - would include wins @ Colgate and vs. URI, plus 8-0 in the NEC including vs. Monmouth and vs. Albany for the conference championship.

Albany (9-2 or better) - would have to include at least 2 OOC Wins (vs. Hofstra, @ UMass, @ Maine, @ Fordham) and an 8-0 NEC record for the conference championship.

Both case are very unlikely, and would also depend on the resume of those from playoff conferences. Even with these records the NEC teams would most likely be left out. So its still a pipe dream for now, but this brings me to a question I was having...

I think its unfair (and stupid) to try to compare the NEC with the A-10. The A-10/CAA is the strongest IAA conf. in the country and routinely plays competatively against IA squads. As the CCSU game and to a lesser degree Monmouth/LU game this week show the NEC top-3 is inching closer to the PL, but overall the NEC still has a way to go.

My question is much more realistic - how does the NEC compare with the Big South? Wouldn't the NEC be just a worthy of an auto-bid if the Big South got one?

[89Hen]

Isn't that exactly what we've all said a mid-major needs to do?
Yes and no. Colgate could finish middle of the pack in the PL and URI could finish in the cellar of the A10. IF Colgate were 1, 2 or 3 in the PL AND IF URI ended up in the middle of the A10, I'd agree.

[colgate13]

Very true everyone. It all depends on Colgate's and URI's final record (along with CCSU going undefeated of course). But say both Colgate and URI finish with winning records (be it 6-5 or whatever you choose), I think they would have a strong case. Maybe not in place of a 3rd A-10 team or fourth even, but a second PL if it's not close in league standings? A third Big Sky/Gateway/SoCon? I think just maybe. Short of knowing ahead of time which A-10/PL school they should beat, how else can a mid-major get that all important chance of proving something on the field?

[GannonFan]

Short of knowing ahead of time which A-10/PL school they should beat, how else can a mid-major get that all important chance of proving something on the field?

First of all, everyone knew that URI wouldn't be good this year, or next year, or the year after that. No one knew or knows about Colgate right now. But this is where some history, I know people will hate this, comes into play. If you show year on year that you will play teams from the big conferences, and not always just the Elon's or the URI's, you will get more consideration than a team that just does it once - a history of playing and beating good competition will help tilt the scales in a mid-major's favor come playoff selection time, assuming they go undefeated in their own conference.

[TheValleyRaider]

First of all, everyone knew that URI wouldn't be good this year, or next year, or the year after that. No one knew or knows about Colgate right now. But this is where some history, I know people will hate this, comes into play. If you show year on year that you will play teams from the big conferences, and not always just the Elon's or the URI's, you will get more consideration than a team that just does it once - a history of playing and beating good competition will help tilt the scales in a mid-major's favor come playoff selection time, assuming they go undefeated in their own conference.

But there's also a flip side to that, which is that if you beat a decent team from a playoff conference, suddenly you'll find it harder and harder to get those teams on your schedule. Sort of leaves these mid-majors in some kind of purgatory, in that sense. I certainly think an 11-0 CCSU team should be considered, but part of that will be contingent on Colgate and URI having success this year, as well as OOC success from Monmouth and Albany. A lot of things need to fall into place, but getting consideration is not an impossible task.

[mainejeff]

Only way I see them getting in is if the committee runs out of "legit" 8-3 teams.

[Tribe4SF]

If we approach that possibility, all we'll need to do is look at CCSU's GPI standing to know if they even have a prayer. My guess is that they would need some other NEC teams to pull some upsets to bolster their strength of schedule.

[Tod]

An 11-0 CCSU with their best wins over URI and Colgate vs the likes of W&M... UD... UNI... WKU... EWU... all at 8-3...??? I don't think CCSU would get... or deserve a bid under those circumstances.

What if all of them from here on out are absolute arse-whoopin's? Hey, if we're being hypothetical, let's cover the possibilities.

[Doo Cane 4 ever]

Good thread and worth talking about.
Have you considered the possibilities of a 10-0 season for Duquesne ?? I know, I know - I'm living in la la land but just suppose Duquesne win their 5 remaining OCC games against Fordham, Penn, Georgetown, St. Francis, & Columbia. I realize the 4 MAAC games don't mean diddley squat but with Robert Morris already beaten and a lot of us Duquesne fans feeling good about the rest of the season, I wonder if a 10-0 season would at least mean that some people would just consider the possibility of a play-off place. :nod:

[89Hen]

Fordham, Penn, Georgetown, St. Francis, & Columbia... I wonder if a 10-0 season would at least mean that some people would just consider the possibility of a play-off place. :nod:
I don't think so. It's already been done by Robert Morris and I don't think they got more than on the very long list of possible at-large teams.

[colgate13]

What makes CCSU's potential case better than Duquesne's is the A-10 win. IF they were to win next weekend...

which leads me to a valid question: Has an A-10 team ever lost to a mid-major?

[Eagle22]

Reminds me of the discussion in 1996 about whether or not Dayton deserved a playoff bid after they finished their season at 11-0. They would have been a sacrificial lamb for the Herd the way the playoffs were seeded back then.

They didn't make the playoffs.

If CCSU finishes out undefeated and Colgate turns out to be a factor in the Patriot League, I'd think CCSU would warrant a look ... but considering strength of schedule it would be difficult, IMO, to take a team like CCSU over a 8-3 team from the A-10/SoCon/BigSky/Southland/Gateway.

[FlyBoy8]

Personally, I would only give CCSU a look if they completely destroyed all their conference opponents. Just winning their games alone wouldn't do it for me. Honestly, I don't think winning big every game would do it for me either, but I would be willing to give them consideration.

[Doo Cane 4 ever]

What needs to happen is that a mid major champion is crowned after a series of play off games between the winners of the NEC, MAAC and Pioneer (North and South). This winner should then automatically go into the play offs. I've seen this idea thrown around on other message boards (Don Hansen) and most people like the idea. However, I'm sure most of those people are fans of mid major programs that are tired of being ignored.

[UAalum72]

Not gonna happen, the MAAC with only five teams can't be part of a playoff system (though they could take a team as an 'independent') and MM playoff has been rejected by the NCAA.


As for comparing the NEC to the Big South, last year's final Sagarin rates the NEC closer to the SWAC, Big South, and MEAC (and almost the OVC) above them than to the Pioneer below them. The A-10 is way ahead, the next 8 conferences are pretty close, then a dropoff to the OVC.
10 ATLANTIC 10 (AA)= 65.74
13 GREAT WEST (AA)= 56.73
14 BIG SKY (AA)= 55.90
16 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 55.53
17 IVY LEAGUE (AA)= 54.93
18 SOUTHERN (AA)= 52.40
19 PATRIOT LEAGUE (AA)= 52.00
20 GATEWAY (AA)= 51.30
21 I-AA INDEPENDENTS (AA)= 46.44
22 OHIO VALLEY (AA)= 43.77
23 MID-EASTERN (AA)= 41.90
24 BIG SOUTH (AA)= 41.73
25 SOUTHWESTERN (AA)= 38.70
26 NORTHEAST (AA)= 35.26
27 PIONEER (AA)= 27.25
28 METRO ATLANTIC (AA)= 22.77

[aceinthehole]

Not gonna happen, the MAAC with only five teams can't be part of a playoff system (though they could take a team as an 'independent') and MM playoff has been rejected by the NCAA.


As for comparing the NEC to the Big South, last year's final Sagarin rates the NEC closer to the Great West, SWAC, Big South, and MEAC (and almost the OVC) above them than to the Pioneer below them. The A-10 is way ahead, the next 8 conferences are pretty close, then a dropoff to the OVC.
10 ATLANTIC 10 (AA)= 65.74
13 GREAT WEST (AA)= 56.73
14 BIG SKY (AA)= 55.90
16 SOUTHLAND (AA)= 55.53
17 IVY LEAGUE (AA)= 54.93
18 SOUTHERN (AA)= 52.40
19 PATRIOT LEAGUE (AA)= 52.00
20 GATEWAY (AA)= 51.30
21 I-AA INDEPENDENTS (AA)= 46.44
22 OHIO VALLEY (AA)= 43.77
23 MID-EASTERN (AA)= 41.90
24 BIG SOUTH (AA)= 41.73
25 SOUTHWESTERN (AA)= 38.70
26 NORTHEAST (AA)= 35.26
27 PIONEER (AA)= 27.25
28 METRO ATLANTIC (AA)= 22.77


Thanks, this is my point! Yes, I hope CCSU beats URI and takes the NEC championship, but that is a tall order and I'm not holding my breath. ANd if they do the unlikely, I'm not expecting an at-large bid.

But...

Why can't the playoffs expand to 8 more teams (4 more at-large) and offer an auto-bid to the Big South, SWAC, and NEC? This is not unreasonable and would not differ from the process for other NCAA sports.

If a NCAA men's basketball a team with a losing record and a 250+ RPI can get a ticket to the big dance, why can't a conference champion from the NEC get its auto bid in football? What is the realtive difference between the ACC and the MEAC in basketball and the A-10 and NEC in football?

And please we are not talking about the MAAC or the Pioneer right now, just the NEC (with the Big South, etc.). If the NEC can get an auto-bid for every other sport, including W Volleyball and Softball, where they have little chance to win a NCAA game against a Pac-10 school in the first round, why is I-AA football any different?

I understand the A-10 is the strongest conference out here, but how does it hurt adding 1 auto bid for the NEC and a few others (in an expanded field)? I have yet to read a truly thoughfull answer from the the view of what is best for the sport. Instead we get everyone's opionion regarding their team's chances at winning the national championship. I'd just like to hear a real discussion of the merits of fairness in football compared to all NCAA sports.

[OL FU]

Thanks, this is my point! Yes, I hope CCSU beats URI and takes the NEC championship, but that is a tall order and I'm not holding my breath. ANd if they do the unlikely, I'm not expecting an at-large bid.

But...

Why can't the playoffs expand to 8 more teams (4 more at-large) and offer an auto-bid to the Big South, SWAC, and NEC? This is not unreasonable and would not differ from the process for other NCAA sports.

If a NCAA men's basketball a team with a losing record and a 250+ RPI can get a ticket to the big dance, why can't a conference champion from the NEC get its auto bid in football? What is the realtive difference between the ACC and the MEAC in basketball and the A-10 and NEC in football?

And please we are not talking about the MAAC or the Pioneer right now, just the NEC (with the Big South, etc.). If the NEC can get an auto-bid for every other sport, including W Volleyball and Softball, where they have little chance to win a NCAA game against a Pac-10 school in the first round, why is I-AA football any different?

I understand the A-10 is the strongest conference out here, but how does it hurt adding 1 auto bid for the NEC and a few others (in an expanded field)? I have yet to read a truly thoughfull answer from the the view of what is best for the sport. Instead we get everyone's opionion regarding their team's chances at winning the national championship. I'd just like to hear a real discussion of the merits of fairness in football compared to all NCAA sports.

I only have one argument against expansion. It takes three weeks for 64 teams to complete the basketball tournament. While I love the playoffs, fives weeks are a little much. Maybe not a good reason, but 16, 17 maybe 18 weeks of football is a stretch. So if you have only 16 teams, try to get the best 16. Obviously, that does not address your question on fairness.

[89Hen]

What is the realtive difference between the ACC and the MEAC in basketball and the A-10 and NEC in football?
Bolded is the big difference IMO.

[fufanatic]

I think that it is a good idea to let a NEC team in if they have had a magical year like a 11-0 or 10-0, but I don't know anything about mid major football so can somebody answer this question. Wouldn't this mid major just get absolutely destroyed by whoever their first round opponent is? It just seems like such a difference between a Deleware or a Montana who put huge bucks into their football program and a mid major who doesnt give scholarships.

[UAalum72]

Wouldn't this mid major just get absolutely destroyed by whoever their first round opponent is?
In a 1 vs. 16 matchup, yes. In a 9 vs. 24 of a 24-team playoff with 8 first-round byes, maybe not so much.


It just seems like such a difference between a Deleware or a Montana who put huge bucks into their football program and a mid major who doesnt give scholarships.
Yes, but I-AA decides it on the field, not by battling fundraisers.

[89Hen]

I-AA decides it on the field, not by battling fundraisers.
What?! I want my check back. :p

[aceinthehole]

I think that it is a good idea to let a NEC team in if they have had a magical year like a 11-0 or 10-0, but I don't know anything about mid major football so can somebody answer this question. Wouldn't this mid major just get absolutely destroyed by whoever their first round opponent is? It just seems like such a difference between a Deleware or a Montana who put huge bucks into their football program and a mid major who doesnt give scholarships.

Both of those questions are not the point. Not all teams WITHIN playoff conferences have the same resources, but they are eligible for the auto-bid even if they put a lot less into their FB program (e.g. Georgetown). There are always the haves and have-nots. If fact the argument for a NEC FB auto-bid based on the regular season champion, not just some 300+ RPI hoops squad that gets lucky in their conf. tourney and wins 3 games in March, is a much better idea. Let's leave terms like "scholarships" "grant-in-aid" and "mid-major" out of this discussion and focus on the point of an expanded playoff with more access, period. This is not a budgetary exercise of "playoff worthyness."

Using measurements like the GPI or Sargin, you can make the argument that the relative competativeness of the NEC is getting much closer to some playoff conferences. So why are some conferences being left out of FB playoffs?

Its not often, if ever, I agreee w/ an Albany fan, but I think many here are underestimating the competievness of an NEC champion seeded #24 vs. the # 9 team. This is good for I-AA football!

I would also note, that many of the smaller programs have already dropped football (St. Johns, Fairfield, Siena, Boston U) and a few others are not far away (Iona, St.Peters) therefore the talent pool in the existing programs has become even stronger. If top tier teams like Delaware, Montanta, and GA Southern, truly like IAA and have no dreams of IA, why not help establish a more competative and intersting IAA scene?

I still haven't heard a strong justification for leaving them without a bid to play for? I mean what do you really want from NEC teams - would dropping FB programs all togeather be better for I-AA football?

[OL FU]

Now I am going to show my ignorance. Does the NEC give scholarshps, equivalencies or whatever? Is the only requirement for a conference to get an autobid 6 teams or do the schools in the conference have to provide scholarshps? Some one teach me.

[colgate13]

Now I am going to show my ignorance. Does the NEC give scholarshps, equivalencies or whatever? Is the only requirement for a conference to get an autobid 6 teams or do the schools in the conference have to provide scholarshps? Some one teach me.

I will do my best ;). The NEC is Patriot League like but to a less degree in the number of scholarship equivalences. Aid is need based grants and last I heard they had a 30 scholarship equivalency limit to their need based aid. To compare that to PL schools, we're mostly in the 50s for scholarship equivalencies. Georgetown claims to be less but I haven't seen that in print. Not doubting it since they were making a transistion to the PL, but I wonder if they are more funded now than 4 years ago.

As for the autobid, I think it's just 6 teams to be considered. Isn't it done by the I-AA playoff committtee to decide who gets autobids?

[UAalum72]

A conference needs six members, possibly with longevity requirements, to have a vote as a conference on I-AA issues, or to be eligible for post-season play. Members of those with fewer than six are effectively 'independents' for playoff purposes.


The eight strongest conferences (excluding those who voluntarily exempt themselves), as chosen by a committee, receive automatic bids. There's no actual requirement of any number of equivalencies, but obviously those with fewer than the maximum are at a disadvantage.

[UAalum72]

Last two year's GPI:
14. (out of 16) Northeast Conference
74. Central Conn
75. Monmouth NJ
95. Albany NY
96. Robert Morris
97. Sacred Ht
100. Wagner
102. Stony Brook
110. St Francis PA

14. (out of 15) Northeast Conference
85. Albany
88. Monmouth
100. Stony Brook
101. Robert Morris
106. Wagner
107. Sacred Heart
114. Central Conn
120. St Francis

So actually the NEC is staying about the same. Only the PFL and MAAC are lower depending on the year. 16 team playoff, no NEC team in the top 70. What exactly is being proposed here?
By the same standards, how much more deserving is the MEAC of an auto-bid? or the OVC? Not that anyone's asking to take one away from them, but if the playoffs expand...?

[OL FU]

The MEAC gave William & Mary (?) a run in the first round last year and JSU gave Furman a run last week.

Realizing this may not be what you want to hear, I have a difficult time expanding the playoffs so that autobids can be extended to a conference that more than likely gets blown out 19 out of 20 first round games whether they are playing the 9th seed or the first seed.

I base the blow out scenario on others opinion I have heard on this board. I will honestly admit that my knowledge of the NEC doesn't qualify me to make that statement. But assuming they are correct, I don't think expanding the playoffs for that sole purpose would be justified.

[UAalum72]

The playoffs won't be expanding to give the NEC an autobid. They'll be expanding to give the Great West an autobid, the question is how much they expand, and for who - unless the GWC gets its bid by taking one away from the MEAC or OVC.

Has any conference ever lost an existing autobid on the merits of its competitiveness?

[89Hen]

Has any conference ever lost an existing autobid on the merits of its competitiveness?
I don't think anyone has, and I'd have trouble with it if they did in the future. As bad as the OVC has performed in the last several years, I think they can and will be more competitive in the future.

[colgate13]

The playoffs won't be expanding to give the NEC an autobid. They'll be expanding to give the Great West an autobid, the question is how much they expand, and for who - unless the GWC gets its bid by taking one away from the MEAC or OVC.

Has any conference ever lost an existing autobid on the merits of its competitiveness?

The GWFC might have troubles staying together in the end. It's not a foregone conclusion they'll be around long enough to warrant an autobid.

[89Hen]

The GWFC might have troubles staying together in the end. It's not a foregone conclusion they'll be around long enough to warrant an autobid.
Agreed, the BSC will raid them. Kinda shame though IMO. Not all the teams will find a good home. I know it won't happen, but if the BSC raided the GWFC I think I'd like to see NDSU and SDSU go to the Gateway and the BSC take the other four.

[OL FU]

The playoffs won't be expanding to give the NEC an autobid. They'll be expanding to give the Great West an autobid, the question is how much they expand, and for who - unless the GWC gets its bid by taking one away from the MEAC or OVC.

Has any conference ever lost an existing autobid on the merits of its competitiveness?

If the number of autobids grow by one or two, I would still favor keeping 16 teams in the playoffs. Maybe if the playoffs reached 12 autobids, the number of teams should be increased.