PDA

View Full Version : 7 DI wins & 4 losses


URMite
November 11th, 2007, 11:59 AM
Who can be in this group with a win? who with a loss?

I think with a number of 3 loss schools having tough games this weekend (GSU/Hofstra/Colgate), the above list should be looked at.

I think it includes UNH & Nova with wins and JMU with a loss from the CAA. Who else is on this list?
FCS Preview
November 11th, 2007, 12:19 PM
Who can be in this group with a win? who with a loss?

I think with a number of 3 loss schools having tough games this weekend (GSU/Hofstra/Colgate), the above list should be looked at.

I think it includes UNH & Nova with wins and JMU with a loss from the CAA. Who else is on this list?

GSU has three losses, but only six D-I wins. They are out at (7-4).
Hofstra and Colgate already have 7 D-I wins, but will be out of the playoffs at (7-4).
Dane96
November 11th, 2007, 12:21 PM
Just for clarity sakes (and I think we are a LONG SHOT), Albany does not have four losses (as a poster indicated).

If we beat CCSU, we would finish at 8-3 with:

21 pt loss at Montana
14 pt loss to Hofstra
2 pt loss at Colgate (season opener).

Not sure where that fourth loss was supposed to have come from.

Crappy thing: that 'Gate loss really stings. With the way things have broke this year...and the schedule Albany plays...a 9-2 Albany team would have had a card in the discussion.
URMite
November 11th, 2007, 01:55 PM
GSU has three losses, but only six D-I wins. They are out at (7-4).
Hofstra and Colgate already have 7 D-I wins, but will be out of the playoffs at (7-4).

Actually I was looking at the fact that if those 3 lose, they reduce the number of 3 loss teams by enough that we may want to know who the 4 loss teams (with 7DI wins) could be.
gophoenix
November 11th, 2007, 02:43 PM
Actually I was looking at the fact that if those 3 lose, they reduce the number of 3 loss teams by enough that we may want to know who the 4 loss teams (with 7DI wins) could be.

7 DI wins isn't a rule for an at large bid. It is a general recommendation and assumption.
URMite
November 11th, 2007, 04:41 PM
7 DI wins isn't a rule for an at large bid. It is a general recommendation and assumption.

There is no rule that an at-large has to have won a single game. The committee is free to take an 0-11 if they decided to.

Has a team with < 7DI wins been an at-large in the past?
aust42
November 11th, 2007, 04:58 PM
There will be no 7-4 teams making the playoffs this year.
rcny46
November 11th, 2007, 09:44 PM
There will be no 7-4 teams making the playoffs this year.


Probably,but I think the chance for a 7-4 team's inclusion is a possibility.
JohnStOnge
November 11th, 2007, 09:54 PM
There is no rule that an at-large has to have won a single game. The committee is free to take an 0-11 if they decided to.

Has a team with < 7DI wins been an at-large in the past?

Yes. Idaho was selected as an at large after a compliling a 6-4 regular season record in 1995. Don't know if there are others but I remember that one.

Of course that was before the 7-win "recommendation" or whatever it is.