GPI and At Large Selections History since 2000

[KAUMASS]

Here is the history since 2000 with eligible at large selections in the GPI.

The GPI has correctly picked: The committee took:
2000-8/8 of the at large participants.
2001-7/8-took Western Kentucky(19)(8-3) over Northwestern St(12)(8-3)
2002-7/8-took Northwestern St(16)(9-3) over Wofford(12)(9-3)
2003-7/8-took Bethune-Cookman(48)(9-2) over Lehigh(22)(8-3)
2004-7/8-took Lehigh(17)(9-2) over Cal Poly(12)(9-2)
2005-7/8-took Lafayette(41)(8-3) over Youngstown(12)(8-3)
2006-5/8-took Coastal Carolina(20)(9-2),Montana St(22)(7-4) and E. Illinois(26)(8-4) over Portland St(10)(7-4), San Diego(13)(10-0) and Wofford(19)(7-4).

Notes:

Since 2000, Montana St. is the only team to win a game that was ranked lower than a team in the GPI not taken as an at large participant(2006)

There was no committe bias as I looked up the members for those years, except maybe for regionalization.

Looks like there were some make up games given as well, Northwestern taken in 2002(make up for 2001 ). Lehigh in 2004(make up for 2003).

Teams owed in the future??: Portland St,(2006) Youngstown St(2005), Wofford(2002).
San Diego? Not sure with strengh of schedule, but they were ranked 13 in the GPI. Arguable either way.

Some I agree with, some I don't. Some higher ranked teams that did not ge in might have dropped their last two games while another may have won 7-8 in a row.(I didn't want to research, this took me long enough)

I thought you guys might like this info as it is interesting to see with regards to the upcoming at large playoff selections.

[Franks Tanks]

Here is the history since 2000 with eligible at large selections in the GPI.

The GPI has correctly picked: The committee took:
2000-8/8 of the at large participants.
2001-7/8-took Western Kentucky(19)(8-3) over Northwestern St(12)(8-3)
2002-7/8-took Northwestern St(16)(9-3) over Wofford(12)(9-3)
2003-7/8-took Bethune-Cookman(48)(9-2) over Lehigh(22)(8-3)
2004-7/8-took Lehigh(17)(9-2) over Cal Poly(12)(9-2)
2005-7/8-took Lafayette(41)(8-3) over Youngstown(12)(8-3)
2006-5/8-took Coastal Carolina(20)(9-2),Montana St(22)(7-4) and E. Illinois(26)(8-4) over Portland St(10)(7-4), San Diego(13)(10-0) and Wofford(19)(7-4).

Notes:

Since 2000, Montana St. is the only team to win a game that was ranked lower than a team in the GPI not taken as an at large participant(2006)

There was no committe bias as I looked up the members for those years, except maybe for regionalization.

Looks like there were some make up games given as well, Northwestern taken in 2002(make up for 2001 ). Lehigh in 2004(make up for 2003).

Teams owed in the future??: Portland St,(2006) Youngstown St(2005), Wofford(2002).
San Diego? Not sure with strengh of schedule, but they were ranked 13 in the GPI. Arguable either way.

Some I agree with, some I don't. Some higher ranked teams that did not ge in might have dropped their last two games while another may have won 7-8 in a row.(I didn't want to research, this took me long enough)

I thought you guys might like this info as it is interesting to see with regards to the upcoming at large playoff selections.


I was very surpised that Lafayette got in the playoffs in 2005. We played App very tough that year in the 1st round, but wow still pretty crazy that they passed over Y-town out of the Gateway that year.

[Syntax Error]

Interesting:
http://www.i-aa.org/articles/artfiles/82343_confrank.txt

2006
Final GPI Playoff Indicator
Rank, Team, (Total)

At-Large:
6. James Madison (5.44)
7. New Hampshire (7.67)
8. Illinois St (10.11)
9. S Illinois (11.44)

10. Portland St (12.78) <---Not selected
11. Furman (14.00)
12. Northern Iowa (14.89) <---Not selected
13. San Diego (15.22) <---Not selected

Bubble:
19. Wofford (19.89)
20. Coastal Carolina (20.11) <---Selected
22. Montana St (20.89) <---Selected
26. E Illinois (24.78) <---Selected

Auto-Qualifiers:
1. Massachusetts (2.00)
3. Appalachian St (2.56)
4. Montana (3.78)
5. Youngstown St (4.89)
21. Hampton (20.78)
24. TN Martin (22.44)
34. McNeese St (31.33)
49. Lafayette (41.67)

Analysis:
* For the first time the GPI missed more than one at-large selection, missing three. The Committee selected two different four loss teams (Eastern Illinois and Montana State) than what the GPI indicated (Portland State and Northern Iowa) and Coastal Carolina instead of San Diego.
* For the first time the major polls out-performed the GPI (GPI missed three and the major polls missed two). All three missed only Montana State. Both AGS and CSN indicated Northern Iowa and SNW indicated San Diego.

[DetroitFlyer]

It sure looks like most years, 7/8 at large bids are well predicted. For the 16th and final spot, the committee seems to like a surprise pick or at least a bit of an unexpected pick.

I still say that the last spot will be a surprise this year. I for one will not be surprised to see Dayton travel to UNI for the first round....

[danefan]

So you're saying there's a chance? xthumbsupx xsmiley_wix
http://www.moviepublicity.com/image_assets/dumbdumber_02.jpg

[KAUMASS]

Interesting:
http://www.i-aa.org/articles/artfiles/82343_confrank.txt

2006
Final GPI Playoff Indicator
Rank, Team, (Total)

At-Large:
6. James Madison (5.44)
7. New Hampshire (7.67)
8. Illinois St (10.11)
9. S Illinois (11.44)

10. Portland St (12.78) <---Not selected
11. Furman (14.00)
12. Northern Iowa (14.89) <---Not selected
13. San Diego (15.22) <---Not selected

Bubble:
19. Wofford (19.89)
20. Coastal Carolina (20.11) <---Selected
22. Montana St (20.89) <---Selected
26. E Illinois (24.78) <---Selected

Auto-Qualifiers:
1. Massachusetts (2.00)
3. Appalachian St (2.56)
4. Montana (3.78)
5. Youngstown St (4.89)
21. Hampton (20.78)
24. TN Martin (22.44)
34. McNeese St (31.33)
49. Lafayette (41.67)

Analysis:
* For the first time the GPI missed more than one at-large selection, missing three. The Committee selected two different four loss teams (Eastern Illinois and Montana State) than what the GPI indicated (Portland State and Northern Iowa) and Coastal Carolina instead of San Diego.
* For the first time the major polls out-performed the GPI (GPI missed three and the major polls missed two). All three missed only Montana State. Both AGS and CSN indicated Northern Iowa and SNW indicated San Diego.

Northern Iowa was not eligible as they were 7-4 with a Div. 2 win.

[KAUMASS]

So you're saying there's a chance? xthumbsupx xsmiley_wix
http://www.moviepublicity.com/image_assets/dumbdumber_02.jpg

Yes, and the picture made me laugh..Aren't you going to eat your cheeseburger? snicker, snicker, snicker.

The snowball scene to the face from point blank range was a classic as well in that movie..come to think of it, the whole movie is a classic.

[Syntax Error]

GPI today
AQ
1. Northern Iowa (1.13)
3. McNeese St (4.25)
6. Richmond (5.88) <---them or UMASS likely
9. Montana (8.63)
22. Delaware St (22.00)
12. Wofford (11.38)
15. E Kentucky (17.88)
27T. Fordham (26.13)

AT-LARGE
4. Appalachian St (4.63)
5. S Illinois (5.25)
7. Massachusetts (7.38)
8. Delaware (8.13)
10. James Madison (10.88)
14. Ga Southern (15.50) must win
16. New Hampshire (18.25) must win
21. E Washington (21.63) must win
[17. Hofstra (18.75) plays UMass/19T. Villanova (19.88) plays Delaware <--- projected to not win]

Who are the bubble teams?

[danefan]

Who are the bubble teams?

34. Dayton
38. Colgate
40. Eastern Illinois
42. Albany

[KAUMASS]

GPI today
AQ
1. Northern Iowa (1.13)
3. McNeese St (4.25)
6. Richmond (5.88) <---them or UMASS likely
9. Montana (8.63)
22. Delaware St (22.00)
12. Wofford (11.38)
15. E Kentucky (17.88)
27T. Fordham (26.13)

AT-LARGE
4. Appalachian St (4.63)
5. S Illinois (5.25)
7. Massachusetts (7.38)
8. Delaware (8.13)
10. James Madison (10.88)
14. Ga Southern (15.50) must win
16. New Hampshire (18.25) must win
21. E Washington (21.63) must win
[17. Hofstra (18.75) plays UMass/19T. Villanova (19.88) plays Delaware <--- projected to not win]

Who are the bubble teams?

Based upon prior committe selections, as they throw a wild card in there every once and a while, I would say Colgate, E. Illinois, Cal Poly and possibly Albany of the teams not mentioned above.

[Ronin]

Here is the history since 2000 with eligible at large selections in the GPI.

The GPI has correctly picked: The committee took:
2000-8/8 of the at large participants.
2001-7/8-took Western Kentucky(19)(8-3) over Northwestern St(12)(8-3)
2002-7/8-took Northwestern St(16)(9-3) over Wofford(12)(9-3)
2003-7/8-took Bethune-Cookman(48)(9-2) over Lehigh(22)(8-3)
2004-7/8-took Lehigh(17)(9-2) over Cal Poly(12)(9-2)
2005-7/8-took Lafayette(41)(8-3) over Youngstown(12)(8-3)
2006-5/8-took Coastal Carolina(20)(9-2),Montana St(22)(7-4) and E. Illinois(26)(8-4) over Portland St(10)(7-4), San Diego(13)(10-0) and Wofford(19)(7-4).

Notes:

Since 2000, Montana St. is the only team to win a game that was ranked lower than a team in the GPI not taken as an at large participant(2006)

There was no committe bias as I looked up the members for those years, except maybe for regionalization.

Looks like there were some make up games given as well, Northwestern taken in 2002(make up for 2001 ). Lehigh in 2004(make up for 2003).

Teams owed in the future??: Portland St,(2006) Youngstown St(2005), Wofford(2002).
San Diego? Not sure with strengh of schedule, but they were ranked 13 in the GPI. Arguable either way.

Some I agree with, some I don't. Some higher ranked teams that did not ge in might have dropped their last two games while another may have won 7-8 in a row.(I didn't want to research, this took me long enough)

I thought you guys might like this info as it is interesting to see with regards to the upcoming at large playoff selections.

What happened in 2006?

The committee was very consistent up until that point.

[BDKJMU]

I posted this 4 days ago under the
"Highest Rated Eligible I-AA GPI 01'-06' TO Not Get An At Large Bid"
but its already back on page 10:


Just to prove I have too much time on my hands I went to I-AA.org and looked at all the final season GPIs as far back as they are listed for the last week of the season (had 00' but not one for the last week, so was 01'-05'. 06' was on CSN) and compared them to the playoff brackets (1978-05' are on I-AA.org). The highest ranked eligible team each year to not get a bid:

01'- #4 Villanova. (8-2) Everyone else in the top 17 (outside 2 Ivies) got a bid. Nova only had 10 games (as did a lot of other teams due to to 9-11, but Nova had a loss to a D-II (& no I-A on schedule) . How they got to be ranked #4 in the GPI is a mystery to me.

02'- #12 Wofford got left out for #16 Northwestern St. GPI was correct on all other teams.

03'- #13 Idaho State (was 8-4)

04'- #12 Cal Poly. (#14 Villanova at 6-5 was ineligible). Everyone else eligible in the top 18 got in.

05'-#12 YSU

06'- #10 Portland State (were 7-4)

I think 01' you can throw out since some teams had 10 and some had 11 games. 02'-06' the GPI has been pretty much on. History points to everyone in the top 10-11 who is eligible getting in & #12 being about/around the cutoff. 05' YSU was the worst shafting. #41 8-3 Lafayeet getting at at large over #12 8-3 YSU. Don't think anything else was remotely close. But YSU 05' had a Div II and no I-A on the schedule., so only 7 Div 1 wins. xcoffeex

[WMTribe90]

If Hofstra beats UMass (GPI #7) they likely move up into the #10 to #13 range. Only one team ranked higher than 12 in the GPI has been excluded since 2002 and that was Portland in 2006. Their GPI was slightly inflated as I recall...the result of playing two or three IA games that season. My point, IF Hofstra wins, history indicates the committee would be unlikely to exclude a CAA team with 8 DI wins and a GPI of at least 13, which would put the Pride well in front of their bubble competition.

34. Dayton
38. Colgate
40. Eastern Illinois
42. Albany

I think too many people assume UMass will handle Hofstra, but UMass lost to URI and struggled against WM before waking up last week against UNH.

[danefan]

If Hofstra beats UMass (GPI #7) they likely move up into the #10 to #13 range. Only one team ranked higher than 12 in the GPI has been excluded since 2002 and that was Portland in 2006. Their GPI was slightly inflated as I recall...the result of playing two or three IA games that season. My point, IF Hofstra wins, history indicates the committee would be unlikely to exclude a CAA team with 8 DI wins and a GPI of at least 13, which would put the Pride well in front of their bubble competition.

34. Dayton
38. Colgate
40. Eastern Illinois
42. Albany

I think too many people assume UMass will handle Hofstra, but UMass lost to URI and struggled against WM before waking up last week against UNH.

I agree. If Hofstra wins, their in, no matter that it may put 5 CAA teams in.

Another bubble may be:
46. Alabama A&M

[KAUMASS]

I posted this 4 days ago under the
"Highest Rated Eligible I-AA GPI 01'-06' TO Not Get An At Large Bid"
but its already back on page 10:

You are right on about Villanova in 2001 and Idaho St in 2003. I've been looking at too many stats today. I can't see how a #4 and #13 eligible team can sit home.

[Syntax Error]

You are right on about Villanova in 2001 and Idaho St in 2003. I've been looking at too many stats today. I can't see how a #4 and #13 eligible team can sit home.I asked a question on that thread that wasn't answered. Wasn't Villanova in 2001 an A10 quad champ but lost to a D-II and the other three were taken? Or am I mixing things up?

[danefan]

I asked a question on that thread that wasn't answered. Wasn't Villanova in 2001 an A10 quad champ but lost to a D-II and the other three were taken? Or am I mixing things up?

Nope you're spot on. 'Nova lost to New Haven that year and the four way tie was between Hofstra, W&M, and Maine, all of which who went (Hofstra got the AQ). Maine was the only team to win their first round game against McNeese.

[UMass922]

Northern Iowa was not eligible as they were 7-4 with a Div. 2 win.


Northern Iowa was eligible, actually. They didn't have a D-II win--though they did have a D-II loss (to North Dakota).

[KAUMASS]

Nope you're spot on. 'Nova lost to New Haven that year and the four way tie was between Hofstra, W&M, and Maine, all of which who went (Hofstra got the AQ). Maine was the only team to win their first round game against McNeese.


Ouch...looks like D2 losses are a no-no with the committee even if your ranked 4th in the GPI..

[IaaScribe]

Whether you all want to believe it or not, 30. Liberty is in this mix, or so the school's athletics department and coaching staff has been informed by those on the committee. They need a lot of help Saturday, but they're being considered.

[UMass922]

Ouch...looks like D2 losses are a no-no with the committee even if your ranked 4th in the GPI..

Montana State got in last year with a D-II loss. But I guess at some point you have to take somebody to fill out the field (and the Bobcats did beat Portland State head-to-head).

[UMass922]

Whether you all want to believe it or not, 30. Liberty is in this mix, or so the school's athletics department and coaching staff has been informed by those on the committee. They need a lot of help Saturday, but they're being considered.

How on earth can the committee be considering Liberty? They only have four wins that "count" so far (two of their wins are over sub-FCS teams, and I believe the win over exploratory Presbyterian doesn't count, either).

[IaaScribe]

No idea. I had been told that the seven-win guideline was simply that, a guideline, not a hard and fast rule. It came as a bit of a shock to me, too. I'd be interested to go back and look at the at-large teams in the last six years or so and see how many of them got in without seven DI wins. Don't know if there's any precedent there. I'm just sharing what I know, that's all.

[Syntax Error]

No idea. I had been told that the seven-win guideline was simply that, a guideline, not a hard and fast rule. It came as a bit of a shock to me, too. I'd be interested to go back and look at the at-large teams in the last six years or so and see how many of them got in without seven DI wins. Don't know if there's any precedent there. I'm just sharing what I know, that's all.The seven win guideline started last year. Before it was a four loss guideline. Liberty has got to have literally a snowball's chance and for the FLAMES, that's not so good. xlolx

[skinny_uncle]

No idea. I had been told that the seven-win guideline was simply that, a guideline, not a hard and fast rule. It came as a bit of a shock to me, too. I'd be interested to go back and look at the at-large teams in the last six years or so and see how many of them got in without seven DI wins. Don't know if there's any precedent there. I'm just sharing what I know, that's all.
It seems to me there are too many teams who have the required 7 wins to be considering anyone who does not.

[IaaScribe]

Precisely why I was surprised to find they were under consideration.

[nevadagriz]

umass922 bobcats did not beat the grizzlies last year. Small correctionxwhistlex

[SuperJon]

The reason Liberty would have a shot would be because (assuming a win Saturday) they ran the table in the Big South and, while the Big South has no auto-bid and is regarded as a bad conference, it is still ahead of two conferences with an auto-bid. Add to that the fact that Liberty has won every game so far by an average of 20 points or so, is the 2nd highest offense in the country, and all of that, and that's where you can make a case.

Some of us were starting to feel pretty good about having a shot, and then the GPI came out. A 45 point win over VMI dropped us in the GPI when we thought we might pick up a spot or two.

Presbyterian is in their exploratory year, however, the Big South basically forced us to play them. We really had no choice in the matter. I think while technically not a Div I win, that win will be looked at favorably.

I highly doubt we get in, I'm just trying to show you the case that was and can be made. While Liberty had some losses early, they're one of the hottest teams in the country right now going 5-1 over the past six games with the one loss being by one-point in the last two minutes at FBS Toledo. Had we pulled out that or the W&M game (lost by about an inch) I think we'd be in. Since we didn't, I don't see it.

Two teams I feel Liberty has a better case than: Norfolk St and Albany. None of us have good cases, but I think ours is better than those two.

[Syntax Error]

Precisely why I was surprised to find they were under consideration.someone's blowing smoke at them......

hmmmmm, think it might be Warren Koegel of Coastal Carolina University and Hank Small of Charleston Southern University? Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw. (No conference is better represented in the selection committee process than the Big South)

[Syntax Error]

The reason Liberty would have a shot would be because (assuming a win Saturday) they ran the table in the Big South and, while the Big South has no auto-bid and is regarded as a bad conference, it is still ahead of two conferences with an auto-bid. Add to that the fact that Liberty has won every game so far by an average of 20 points or so, is the 2nd highest offense in the country, and all of that, and that's where you can make a case.

Some of us were starting to feel pretty good about having a shot, and then the GPI came out. A 45 point win over VMI dropped us in the GPI when we thought we might pick up a spot or two.

Presbyterian is in their exploratory year, however, the Big South basically forced us to play them. We really had no choice in the matter. I think while technically not a Div I win, that win will be looked at favorably.

I highly doubt we get in, I'm just trying to show you the case that was and can be made. While Liberty had some losses early, they're one of the hottest teams in the country right now going 5-1 over the past six games with the one loss being by one-point in the last two minutes at FBS Toledo. Had we pulled out that or the W&M game (lost by about an inch) I think we'd be in. Since we didn't, I don't see it.

Two teams I feel Liberty has a better case than: Norfolk St and Albany. None of us have good cases, but I think ours is better than those two.Dominic Bolden sounded good on WAVES! xnodx

[TheValleyRaider]

What happened in 2006?

The committee was very consistent up until that point.

2006 was an interesting year. Coastal Carolina wasn't a surprise at all, given their past efforts and strong OOC scheduling. The Chants did what they needed to overcome a weaker Big South schedule. After that, you had a bunch of 4 loss teams. EIU had 8 wins, that helps (I believe the 4th loss was at Hawaii). San Diego, it appears, had no shot due to their weak schedule and committment to play UC-Davis during the first week of the playoffs. Apparently the Committee felt the Big Sky was strong enough to warrent the extra bid over the SoCon, and since Montana State beat Portland State head to head, the Bobcats were in over the Vikings and Wofford.

Crazy year xrotatehx

Also, remember the GPI is not the committee's tool, but rather an amalgamation of rankings that attempts to predict the at-larges. The committee has their own set of rankings that remain secret from the rest of us.

[SuperJon]

Dominic Bolden sounded good on WAVES! xnodx

Was he interviewed? I didn't even know. Funny thing is, teams kick to Bolden because they're scared of our other kick return (who's top 5 in punt returns in the country).

[KAUMASS]

2006 was an interesting year. Coastal Carolina wasn't a surprise at all, given their past efforts and strong OOC scheduling. The Chants did what they needed to overcome a weaker Big South schedule. After that, you had a bunch of 4 loss teams. EIU had 8 wins, that helps (I believe the 4th loss was at Hawaii). San Diego, it appears, had no shot due to their weak schedule and committment to play UC-Davis during the first week of the playoffs. Apparently the Committee felt the Big Sky was strong enough to warrent the extra bid over the SoCon, and since Montana State beat Portland State head to head, the Bobcats were in over the Vikings and Wofford.

Crazy year xrotatehx

Also, remember the GPI is not the committee's tool, but rather an amalgamation of rankings that attempts to predict the at-larges. The committee has their own set of rankings that remain secret from the rest of us.

2006 was a bit nutty for the GPI and filling out the at larges', but this year will be crazier than last if JMU, Georgia Southern, E. Washington, E. Illinois, and Colgate lose this weekend and Villanova, New Hampshire, Hofstra, Cal Poly, & Liberty win. (There are a few more long shots out there as well.)

[Syntax Error]

Was he interviewed? I didn't even know. Funny thing is, teams kick to Bolden because they're scared of our other kick return (who's top 5 in punt returns in the country).He's on first.

11/13/2007 CSN WAVES

Listen to the national Division I Football Championship Subdivision talk show CSN WAVES every Tuesday at 8 p.m. Central time at CollegeSportingNews.com. Host Ralph Wallace and guests lend an earful and insight into the NCAA's top football championship tier. Featured are Eastern Washington University quarterback Matt Nichols, Prairie View A&M University linebacker Zach East, Liberty University's Dominic Bolden, American Press McNeese State columnist Gary Laney, Any Given Saturday member D1B, North Dakota State Head Coach Craig Bohl and QB Steve Walker, and South Dakota State Head Coach John Stiegelmeier and RB Cory Koenig. Please tune in live every week to hear the full show or listen to the archive. As usual, no ads!

http://media.libsyn.com/media/iaawaves/20071113final.mp3

[HensRock]

What happened in 2006?

The committee was very consistent up until that point.


Didn't the GPI tweek their formula somwhere around 2004/2005?
I remember posting at the time that it was a bad idea. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

[igo4uni]

Northern Iowa was eligible, actually. They didn't have a D-II win--though they did have a D-II loss (to North Dakota).

xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx

[Syntax Error]

they're scared of our other kick return (who's top 5 in punt returns in the country).NCAA STATS

Single Game High Kickoff Return
12 Dominic Bolden, Liberty VMI 10-NOV-07 3 198 1 WR JR

Season High Kickoff Return
4 Dominic Bolden, Liberty WR JR 10 20 645 1 32.25 2.00

Single Game High Punt Return
17 Wynton Jackson, Liberty Shippensburg 08-SEP-07 3 88 1 WR SR

Single Game High Punt Return
10 Wynton Jackson, Liberty WR SR 9 17 227 2 13.35 1.89

[igo4uni]

He's on first.

11/13/2007 CSN WAVES

Listen to the national Division I Football Championship Subdivision talk show CSN WAVES every Tuesday at 8 p.m. Central time at CollegeSportingNews.com. Host Ralph Wallace and guests lend an earful and insight into the NCAA's top football championship tier. Featured are Eastern Washington University quarterback Matt Nichols, Prairie View A&M University linebacker Zach East, Liberty University's Dominic Bolden, American Press McNeese State columnist Gary Laney, Any Given Saturday member D1B, North Dakota State Head Coach Craig Bohl and QB Steve Walker, and South Dakota State Head Coach John Stiegelmeier and RB Cory Koenig. Please tune in live every week to hear the full show or listen to the archive. As usual, no ads!

http://media.libsyn.com/media/iaawaves/20071113final.mp3

Best guest of the Century!!!!xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx xcoolx :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Syntax Error]

Didn't the GPI tweek their formula somwhere around 2004/2005?
I remember posting at the time that it was a bad idea. If it ain't broke, why fix it?2003 they stopped using Sagarin-only SOS.
2004 Added AGS Poll and stopped quartile.
2007 Used one less computer.

The strength of schedule thing makes sense since each computer system already has SOS built in. Same for the quartile. The one less computer must be a factor of the polls getting better in FCS.

[EIUsuperfan]

2006 was an interesting year. Coastal Carolina wasn't a surprise at all, given their past efforts and strong OOC scheduling. The Chants did what they needed to overcome a weaker Big South schedule. After that, you had a bunch of 4 loss teams. EIU had 8 wins, that helps (I believe the 4th loss was at Hawaii). San Diego, it appears, had no shot due to their weak schedule and committment to play UC-Davis during the first week of the playoffs. Apparently the Committee felt the Big Sky was strong enough to warrent the extra bid over the SoCon, and since Montana State beat Portland State head to head, the Bobcats were in over the Vikings and Wofford.

Crazy year xrotatehx

Also, remember the GPI is not the committee's tool, but rather an amalgamation of rankings that attempts to predict the at-larges. The committee has their own set of rankings that remain secret from the rest of us.

EIU had 7 wins and lost to University of Illinois and University of Hawaii (2 of 4 , 2 FCS loses to UT-Martin and Illinois State) So I believe that was a big reason why we received an at-large last season. This year, who knows? I'm not getting my hopes up!

But last year was an interesting year and this year could be the same!

[UMass922]

umass922 bobcats did not beat the grizzlies last year. Small correctionxwhistlex

My bad. I must have been remembering a different recent year. Was it 2005?

(I've fixed the error in my original comment.)

[UMass922]

xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx xbawlingx

It's a meaningless consolation, but for what it's worth, I think you guys should have gotten in ahead of MSU. UNI had a much stronger slate of quality wins than either MSU or PSU did.

[grizband]

My bad. I must have been remembering a different recent year. Was it 2005?

(I've fixed the error in my original comment.)
Montana State beat the Griz in 2005, but did not make the playoffs. Two big factors in the Cats being selected in 2006 were their win over an FBS school (Colorado), and their win over Portland State, who was above them in the GPI.

[BDKJMU]

Ouch...looks like D2 losses are a no-no with the committee even if your ranked 4th in the GPI..

Montana State got in at 7-4 with a Div II loss last season. But that D 2 loss was to one of the top teams in Div II, 11-0 regular season Chadron State (I think they went out in the Div II playoff quarterfinals. Could have beaten 1/2 the I-AA scholarship teams. And Montana State played 2 Div I, including beating Big 12 Colorodo.

[terrierbob]

I am convinced that the only way we'll ever get into the playoffs is an autobid. Probably provides a bit of motivation.


Woof.

[URMite]

NCAA STATS

Single Game High Kickoff Return
12 Dominic Bolden, Liberty VMI 10-NOV-07 3 198 1 WR JR

Season High Kickoff Return
4 Dominic Bolden, Liberty WR JR 10 20 645 1 32.25 2.00

Single Game High Punt Return
17 Wynton Jackson, Liberty Shippensburg 08-SEP-07 3 88 1 WR SR

Single Game High Punt Return
10 Wynton Jackson, Liberty WR SR 9 17 227 2 13.35 1.89

Don't want to hijack a thread but is that Single game high avg?

Justin Rodgers had 200+ yd games before he was injured. Has been good but not spectacular since returning.

[Poly Pigskin]

2006 was a bit nutty for the GPI and filling out the at larges', but this year will be crazier than last if JMU, Georgia Southern, E. Washington, E. Illinois, and Colgate lose this weekend and Villanova, New Hampshire, Hofstra, Cal Poly, & Liberty win. (There are a few more long shots out there as well.)

You can toss out Cal Poly from that mix, we only have 5 DI wins right now.

It's too bad the playoffs can't be expanded to 24 this season, because I think this is the one year where there might be that many deserving teams. All of the teams you listed above could be competitive with the best in the country, win or lose this weekend.

[CamelCityAppFan]

It's too bad the playoffs can't be expanded to 24 this season, because I think this is the one year where there might be that many deserving teams. All of the teams you listed above could be competitive with the best in the country, win or lose this weekend.

You can't expand the playoffs to 24 teams without giving byes in a round, -- and I think that's a dog that just won't hunt.

To expand you would really have to go to 32 teams and still have "legitimate" bracket. If you go that deep, you have a lot of 6-5 teams getting pounded by the 9-2s and above in the first round. All it does is add a week that probably produces the same approximate 16 team bracket for the next week. There will be some shake-ups at the bottom of the bracket, sure. But all it really does is create is a scrimmage game for the teams at the top of the bracket.

It stinks to the 18th or 20th team deep at the end of the season and miss the playoffs. That's where ASU seemed to be when I was in school.

[89Hen]

* For the first time the major polls out-performed the GPI (GPI missed three and the major polls missed two). All three missed only Montana State. Both AGS and CSN indicated Northern Iowa and SNW indicated San Diego.
For full disclosure, how many times has the GPI out-performed the AGS Poll?

[89Hen]

I asked a question on that thread that wasn't answered. Wasn't Villanova in 2001 an A10 quad champ but lost to a D-II and the other three were taken? Or am I mixing things up?
I thought I answered, maybe it was another thread. Nova did lose to DII New Haven that year and the three other co-champs all went.

[89Hen]

It's too bad the playoffs can't be expanded to 24 this season, because I think this is the one year where there might be that many deserving teams.
Really? I'm thinking there aren't even 16 that are honestly worthy. xeyebrowx

[SuperJon]

I don't think we deserve to get in, but if by some act of God we did, I think we could cause some problems with the way we're playing. Our loss to Elon seemed to wake us up and we've played great since. Only problem is we didn't play great in Week 3.

[gsugt1]

[QUOTE=SuperJon;741735]I don't think we deserve to get in, but if by some act of God we did, I think we could cause some problems with the way we're playing. [QUOTE]


Why not ? If we win this weekend we would have beaten a 1a school, App and Wofford on the road in the last month. We are deserving than most other 8-3 schools.

[IaaScribe]

Not to run smack or anything, but how the heck did GSU lose to freaking Chatty?

[kardplayer]

One question - how can the GPI be considered a predictor when the polls are taken AFTER the selections?

I'm sure some pollsters move teams up based on them getting in the playoffs.

Realistically, you should have to look at the week before's GPI to look for predictabilty. But those don't take into account the final weekend's games.

Thoughts?

[SuperJon]

I don't think we deserve to get in, but if by some act of God we did, I think we could cause some problems with the way we're playing.


Why not ? If we win this weekend we would have beaten a 1a school, App and Wofford on the road in the last month. We are deserving than most other 8-3 schools.

I was talking Liberty, not GSU.

[danefan]

One question - how can the GPI be considered a predictor when the polls are taken AFTER the selections?

I'm sure some pollsters move teams up based on them getting in the playoffs.

Realistically, you should have to look at the week before's GPI to look for predictabilty. But those don't take into account the final weekend's games.

Thoughts?

I think you're absolutely right.

And I'm sure A LOT of pollsters move teams up that are selected for the playoffs.

[HensRock]

Agreed.
The GPI is a postdictor, not a predictor.

[McNeese_beat]

Precisely why I was surprised to find they were under consideration.

Maybe they will be considered enough to be ruled out...as opposed to, say, 7-win Sam Houston (assuming 7 wins) whose name probably won't even come up because they aren't a conference champion.

And I would guess that's precisely why the committee will bother to address Liberty...they are a conference champion...

[SuperJon]

A conference champion in a conference with a higher ranking than two other conferences with an AQ.

[TheValleyRaider]

A conference champion in a conference with a higher ranking than two other conferences with an AQ.

It's an interesting idea, Liberty in the postseason. There's even precedent for a Big South team getting in, with Coastal last year.

My first instinct as far as the quote saying Liberty will be considered is that the Big South reps on the Committee will put the Flames onto their list of teams for the Committee to look at. The Committee will then be forced to "consider" Liberty, even if that consideration consists of: "Liberty? Umm, no"

Really, as has been mentioned here before, the Flames would have 6 D-I wins even with a victory this Saturday. The 7 wins thing may be a guideline, but the Flames had to do much more to get themselves included in serious conversation xpeacex xtwocentsx

[CSN-info]

Agreed.
The GPI is a postdictor, not a predictor.The Gridiron Power Index (GPI), the hybrid ranking for FCS is a top index indicator of at-large playoff selection. It doesn't try to predict who the committee will select. It is retrodictive. It requires results to produce a ranking.

[james_lawfirm]

The Gridiron Power Index (GPI), the hybrid ranking for FCS is a top index indicator of at-large playoff selection. It doesn't try to predict who the committee will select. It is retrodictive. It requires results to produce a ranking.


Retrodictive? Is that a word?

[danefan]

Retrodictive? Is that a word?

No. Retrodictive would mean that you predict something that happened before you predicted it......

Following that logic...the GPI is good at predicting the playoff field, but only after the playoff field is announced and only after the data that is input into the GPI formula is influenced by the playoff field that the GPI is trying to predict.xrotatehx xrotatehx Hahaha.

I'd say maybe the GPI is unprophetic if anything.xthumbsupx

[GannonFan]

No and they are trying to say that the GPI is good at predicting something that already happened.

I'd say maybe the GPI is unprophetic if anything.xthumbsupx

Which is odd that the GPI isn't perfect, considering that it can already see what happened. xrolleyesx

[danefan]

I always do that....edit my post after someone else already quoted it. sorry.

[SuperJon]

It's an interesting idea, Liberty in the postseason. There's even precedent for a Big South team getting in, with Coastal last year.

My first instinct as far as the quote saying Liberty will be considered is that the Big South reps on the Committee will put the Flames onto their list of teams for the Committee to look at. The Committee will then be forced to "consider" Liberty, even if that consideration consists of: "Liberty? Umm, no"

Really, as has been mentioned here before, the Flames would have 6 D-I wins even with a victory this Saturday. The 7 wins thing may be a guideline, but the Flames had to do much more to get themselves included in serious conversation xpeacex xtwocentsx

I agree with you completely. I'm just showing what case can be made for us. It's also a great story (1-10 to 8-3 and playoffs in two years) but that doesn't mean much.

[Poly Pigskin]

Really? I'm thinking there aren't even 16 that are honestly worthy. xeyebrowx

I just think it would be interesting to see things like the #2 BSC vs #5 CAA debate settled on the field.

[CSN-info]

Retrodictive? Is that a word?Yes, it is used with types of ranking systems that use past data to rank teams. Predictive systems are nearly the opposite. There is no known data available to prove that poll voters move teams according to their playoff selection result (any more than they do for ranking results) so that is not a worry.

[CSN-info]

the GPI is trying to predict.The GPI is not trying to predict, it is retrodictive.

[james_lawfirm]

Yes, it is used with types of ranking systems that use past data to rank teams. Predictive systems are nearly the opposite. There is no known data available to prove that poll voters move teams according to their playoff selection result (any more than they do for ranking results) so that is not a worry.


Glad we got that cleared up. But, with all due respect, what other kind of data is there besides "past" data? Future data? Yeah, right.

[Syntax Error]

Glad we got that cleared up. But, with all due respect, what other kind of data is there besides "past" data? Future data? Yeah, right.I think it means ranking teams where they are now, not predicting how they will be in the future like saying who will win or lose etc. Some systems predict game outcomes but the GPI says wherre they are now based on what has transpired.

[appfan2008]

GPI is obviously very important to the committee...