Autobid Bias

[AlphaSigMD]

Does ANY 11-0 team from ANY autobid conference automatically deserve a seed in the playoffs regardless of schedule strength/weakness?

My take:
Obviously, this is a very loaded question. Because if you agree that any "weaker" autobid conferences (and we don't need to name names, because people know which ones they are) 11-0 champion deserve a seed, even if they play a softball schedule, then why not make a similar argument for an 11-0 NEC/PFL team that play a softball conference schedule but try to make up for it with a more difficult out of conference schedule.

Obviously, there is no current NEC or PFL team that has these credentials, but if there was, I am sure there would virtually no talk about them having a seed, and much much more talk about "are they gonna make the playoffs at all."

The only non-AQ teams that have the history and street cred to get a seed I believe do not fall into either the NEC or the PFL, and are listed as follows.
1. Cal Poly/UC Davis
2. Coastal Carolina

If either of these teams finished at 11-0, with atleast 10 teams in Divison 1 play, I think they would have a shot at a seed. Maybe I left one or two out, but obviously missing from this list is USD, Dayton, Drake and Albany.

Ok, admittedly, I'm from obviously from ASU, so I probably have no business posting about a topic that will probably get the Pioneer and NEC all up in arms...but I was interested in what you think. xthumbsupx xpeacex

[appfan2008]

I dont think anything should or would be set in stone... there are some cases where an undefeated team from pfl/nec should not get in and some cases where an undefeated team from an autobid conference should not get a seed... it is just based on who they played ooc and how other teams finish the year

[appstate38]

I have a better question for the teams from those conferences and for that matter the NCAA. What do those teams/conferences need to do to get themselves into the discussion that would net their respective conferences an AQ bid for the playoffs?

[McNeese_beat]

Does ANY 11-0 team from ANY autobid conference automatically deserve a seed in the playoffs regardless of schedule strength/weakness?

My take:
Obviously, this is a very loaded question. Because if you agree that any "weaker" autobid conferences (and we don't need to name names, because people know which ones they are) 11-0 champion deserve a seed, even if they play a softball schedule, then why not make a similar argument for an 11-0 NEC/PFL team that play a softball conference schedule but try to make up for it with a more difficult out of conference schedule.

Obviously, there is no current NEC or PFL team that has these credentials, but if there was, I am sure there would virtually no talk about them having a seed, and much much more talk about "are they gonna make the playoffs at all."

The only non-AQ teams that have the history and street cred to get a seed I believe do not fall into either the NEC or the PFL, and are listed as follows.
1. Cal Poly/UC Davis
2. Coastal Carolina

If either of these teams finished at 11-0, with atleast 10 teams in Divison 1 play, I think they would have a shot at a seed. Maybe I left one or two out, but obviously missing from this list is USD, Dayton, Drake and Albany.

Ok, admittedly, I'm from obviously from ASU, so I probably have no business posting about a topic that will probably get the Pioneer and NEC all up in arms...but I was interested in what you think. xthumbsupx xpeacex

If you are in a limited scholarship conference that doesn't get an autobid, you have to schedule tough out of conference the way our friends at Albany did with Colgate, Fordham, Hofstra and Montana. The next step is to win more than one out of four of those games...

Now, having said that, let me suggest that not all conferences are as strong or weak as people think. The Big Sky would have a lot of 8-3 teams right now if they could load up their non-conference schedules with teams from the NEC, the Patriot, the MAAC, etc. You don't see many CAA teams have to go to Arizona and App in back-to-back weeks like Northern Arizona did. Replace those with Lafayette and Cornell, then replace your D-II game with Marist, and all of a sudden you have a good shot at 8-3 with all the games technically being D-I. And we'd be sitting here wondering if the Big Sky would be getting three or four of those teams in the playoffs...

Don't get me wrong. I do realize that the Patriots would win some games against the Big Sky. I'm just saying the Sky would fare much better against those conferences than against their normal out-of-conference rivals from the Great West, the SLC and the FBS.

[Eyes of Old Main]

I think the major determining factor would be what the situation in the power conferences that particular year. If the CAA, SoCon, Gateway, etc. had seasons with no undefeated teams, then possibly. If undefeated or 1 loss teams exist from conferences with harder schedules, then no.

[URMite]

I have a couple of different questions.

What is the list of nonAQ conference teams that have received a top 4 seed?

Has an undefeated AQ conference team ever not been a top 4 seed?

[DSUHornet]

i think it has to be considered. my opinion is obviously biased because i play in the MEAC of all conferences but with respect to the other unpopular conferences i think it should be considered. also, the ooc games should be the main measure of strength/weakness of schedule because it can sometimes be out of a team's control. for example this year, we got a mandate to play 9 MEAC games which left our schedule with only 2 ooc games.

[GannonFan]

Going undefeated gives you a good chance of getting a seed, and obviously if a school from one of the power conferences does so it's virtually a lock to get a seed. Going undefeated in any conference, even the weak ones, is still tough to do. There certainly is a bias, and it's certainly well deserved.

[Syntax Error]

I have a better question for the teams from those conferences and for that matter the NCAA. What do those teams/conferences need to do to get themselves into the discussion that would net their respective conferences an AQ bid for the playoffs?All About the D-I Football Championship
http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=82975
Automatic Qualification Criteria/Process

The Division I Football Championship Committee will annually make the determination of which eligible conference will recieve automatic qualification. The following criteria are used when determining which conferences shall receive annual automatic qualification for the NCAA Division I Football Championship:

1. Nonconference records;
2. Strength of nonconference opponents;
3. Recent postseason history; and
4. Competition against Football Bowl Subdivision opponents.

[danefan]

I have a better question for the teams from those conferences and for that matter the NCAA. What do those teams/conferences need to do to get themselves into the discussion that would net their respective conferences an AQ bid for the playoffs?

You have to do exactly what the NEC has done, apply. There is only one conference right now that is eligible for an AQ that has applied and been rejected....you got it right.....the NEC.

The only way the NEC gets an AQ is when the NCAA tourney expands to 18 teams in 2008 or 2009. The NCAA rubber stamps the AQ's every year to the current 8 conferences and that is NEVER going to change. That's why expansion is going to happen.

[appstate38]

All About the D-I Football Championship
http://www.collegesportingnews.com/article.asp?articleid=82975

Thanks for the info

[james_lawfirm]

Does ANY 11-0 team from ANY autobid conference automatically deserve a seed in the playoffs regardless of schedule strength/weakness?

My take:
Obviously, this is a very loaded question. Because if you agree that any "weaker" autobid conferences (and we don't need to name names, because people know which ones they are) 11-0 champion deserve a seed, even if they play a softball schedule, then why not make a similar argument for an 11-0 NEC/PFL team that play a softball conference schedule but try to make up for it with a more difficult out of conference schedule.

Obviously, there is no current NEC or PFL team that has these credentials, but if there was, I am sure there would virtually no talk about them having a seed, and much much more talk about "are they gonna make the playoffs at all."

The only non-AQ teams that have the history and street cred to get a seed I believe do not fall into either the NEC or the PFL, and are listed as follows.
1. Cal Poly/UC Davis
2. Coastal Carolina

If either of these teams finished at 11-0, with atleast 10 teams in Divison 1 play, I think they would have a shot at a seed. Maybe I left one or two out, but obviously missing from this list is USD, Dayton, Drake and Albany.

Ok, admittedly, I'm from obviously from ASU, so I probably have no business posting about a topic that will probably get the Pioneer and NEC all up in arms...but I was interested in what you think. xthumbsupx xpeacex


Good question. My answer: He!! NO! The last time the playoff committee gave a seed to an 11-0 team with a WEAK SOS there was a hasty first round exit. The committee was embarrassed b/c it looked like they knew not what they were doing. I refer to Hampton in 2005. In comparison, in 2006, the four seeds did not lose except to each other. I believe the committee will remember its earlier gaff and have no wish to repeat it.

Thus, I predict Montana does not get a seed, even if it beats MSU.

[GannonFan]

Good question. My answer: He!! NO! The last time the playoff committee gave a seed to an 11-0 team with a WEAK SOS there was a hasty first round exit. The committee was embarrassed b/c it looked like they knew not what they were doing. I refer to Hampton in 2005. In comparison, in 2006, the four seeds did not lose except to each other. I believe the committee will remember its earlier gaff and have no wish to repeat it.

Thus, I predict Montana does not get a seed, even if it beats MSU.

Okay - this is the point where you back away from the keyboard, lie down, and try not to post again until you feel better. If you have medication for this, you may want to take it now. Oh, and call the therapist.

(pssst - if Montana is undefeated, there is no chance on this Earth that they don't get a seed.)

[AZGrizFan]

If you are in a limited scholarship conference that doesn't get an autobid, you have to schedule tough out of conference the way our friends at Albany did with Colgate, Fordham, Hofstra and Montana. The next step is to win more than one out of four of those games...

Now, having said that, let me suggest that not all conferences are as strong or weak as people think. The Big Sky would have a lot of 8-3 teams right now if they could load up their non-conference schedules with teams from the NEC, the Patriot, the MAAC, etc. You don't see many CAA teams have to go to Arizona and App in back-to-back weeks like Northern Arizona did. Replace those with Lafayette and Cornell, then replace your D-II game with Marist, and all of a sudden you have a good shot at 8-3 with all the games technically being D-I. And we'd be sitting here wondering if the Big Sky would be getting three or four of those teams in the playoffs...

Don't get me wrong. I do realize that the Patriots would win some games against the Big Sky. I'm just saying the Sky would fare much better against those conferences than against their normal out-of-conference rivals from the Great West, the SLC and the FBS.

What he said. xthumbsupx

[AZGrizFan]

Good question. My answer: He!! NO! The last time the playoff committee gave a seed to an 11-0 team with a WEAK SOS there was a hasty first round exit. The committee was embarrassed b/c it looked like they knew not what they were doing. I refer to Hampton in 2005. In comparison, in 2006, the four seeds did not lose except to each other. I believe the committee will remember its earlier gaff and have no wish to repeat it.

Thus, I predict Montana does not get a seed, even if it beats MSU.

See, MD, THIS is where you lose all credibility. To imply that the BSC is no better than the MEAC is ridiculous. At any level. Read McNeese_Beat's post.....that explains it much better than your slanted, homeristic reasoning. xpeacex

[griz_fan_in_SanDiego]

If Montana goes undefeated and does not get a seed I will tatoo a bobcat on my a$$...moral of the story there is no way that happens lol

[james_lawfirm]

See, MD, THIS is where you lose all credibility. To imply that the BSC is no better than the MEAC is ridiculous. At any level. Read McNeese_Beat's post.....that explains it much better than your slanted, homeristic reasoning. xpeacex


Slanted, homeristic reasoning? Who, me? I readily admit it.

I made no comparisons between the conferences. I was comparing an 11-0 Hampton in 2005 to Montana this year. I further stated that the committee got burned in '05 awarding seeds to an undefeated, but low-SOS team. I have heard on AGS that Montana has a low-SOS this year, a fact that many other slanted, homeristic Montana fans seem to be in complete DENIAL about. Montana's low-SOS is also reflected in the GPI and the Sagarin ratings, two ratings systems that those same Montana fans seem to want to forget, or at least ignore.

My point was that the playoff committee is unlikely to forget Hampton in '05, and so I surmise that Montana's seeding is in jeopardy this year.

I meant no offense, just callin' em like I see 'em, and would personally like nothing more than to see Montana in Boone sometime the first full week of December.

[gophoenix]

You have to do exactly what the NEC has done, apply. There is only one conference right now that is eligible for an AQ that has applied and been rejected....you got it right.....the NEC.

The only way the NEC gets an AQ is when the NCAA tourney expands to 18 teams in 2008 or 2009. The NCAA rubber stamps the AQ's every year to the current 8 conferences and that is NEVER going to change. That's why expansion is going to happen.

They weren't rejected, the request wasn't acted on. There is a big difference.

My question has always been, are automatic bids set in stone or are they given to the strongest 8 conferences at the end of the year. Basically, being that they are set in stone because the Pioneer and NEC haven't stepped up to contest another league's strength yet.

Or are the automatic bids set in stone. I was always under the impression that because the NCAA limited the number of automatic bids to 1/2 the playing field by the rules that the 1/2 that received automatic bids just always happened to come from the same conferences every year.

And because of that, the only thing the NCAA hasn't done is to expand the playoffs thus giving another automatic and another at large to stay in the same rules guidelines that they have today.

[james_lawfirm]

Okay - this is the point where you back away from the keyboard, lie down, and try not to post again until you feel better. If you have medication for this, you may want to take it now. Oh, and call the therapist.

(pssst - if Montana is undefeated, there is no chance on this Earth that they don't get a seed.)


So, if someone dares criticize the great Griz nation then it is an illness? Interesting.

If Montana gets a seed and makes a first round exit, y'all buy me a beer next time you're in Boone. One thing is for sure, if that happens, you can throw all criteria EXCEPT for SOS and a teams record out the window next year. I remain convinced the committee will weigh SOS more than you seem to think. We'll see.

[appmountaineer]

You have to do exactly what the NEC has done, apply. There is only one conference right now that is eligible for an AQ that has applied and been rejected....you got it right.....the NEC.

The only way the NEC gets an AQ is when the NCAA tourney expands to 18 teams in 2008 or 2009. The NCAA rubber stamps the AQ's every year to the current 8 conferences and that is NEVER going to change. That's why expansion is going to happen.

Will expansion really happen that soon though?

[griz_fan_in_SanDiego]

So, if someone dares criticize the great Griz nation then it is an illness? Interesting.

If Montana gets a seed and makes a first round exit, y'all buy me a beer next time you're in Boone. One thing is for sure, if that happens, you can throw all criteria EXCEPT for SOS and a teams record out the window next year. I remain convinced the committee will weigh SOS more than you seem to think. We'll see.

I don't think it means you have an illness I think it just means you're a typical non-griz AGS poster xlolx xthumbsupx :D xpeacex

[james_lawfirm]

I don't think it means you have an illness I think it just means you're a typical non-griz AGS poster xlolx xthumbsupx :D xpeacex


Fair enough. I was just replying to GannonFan who suggested I lie down, chill, take a pill, and see a therapist. I may need to do all these things, but not because of my postings regarding Montana's seeding outlook.

[appfan2008]

Okay - this is the point where you back away from the keyboard, lie down, and try not to post again until you feel better. If you have medication for this, you may want to take it now. Oh, and call the therapist.

(pssst - if Montana is undefeated, there is no chance on this Earth that they don't get a seed.)

I would go one step further and say if they are undefeated... there is no way they are not a top 2 seed... the ncaa knows where the money is and that is playoff games in missoula!

[james_lawfirm]

I would go one step further and say if they are undefeated... there is no way they are not a top 2 seed... the ncaa knows where the money is and that is playoff games in missoula!

Maybe. But if that's all the committee considers, it will be Montana #1 & ASU #2 seeds. I just think there is more to it than that. We'll see.