2007 Playoffs IF we had 20 teams

[89Hen]

Let's try to get some ideas of what the field would have looked like this past year if we had the 20 teams this year and make the assumption that the NEC and Big South got autos. The two at large are the ones that are a tough call. Many thought Villanova was the Woofed team this past year. Some mentioned GSU, but they didn't have 7 DI wins, neither did CalPoly or YSU who were also 7-4. There's reason to believe Dayton would have been in the mix since there were so few teams that had 7 DI wins. Pick who you want for the last two at-large, but here's my field...

AUTOS
UNI (11-0)
McNeese (11-0)
Montana (11-0)
Delaware State (10-1)
Eastern Kentucky (9-2)
Massachusetts (9-2)
Fordham (8-3)
Wofford (8-3)
Albany (8-3)
Liberty (8-3)

AT-LARGE
Southern Illinois (10-1)
Appalachian State (9-2)
Richmond (9-2)
Delaware (8-3)
James Madison (8-3)
Eastern Washington (8-3)
Eastern Illinois (8-3)
New Hampshire (7-4)
Dayton (10-1)
Villanova (7-4)

Now comes the real fun part. We assume the four seeds are still the four seeds. I also assume that the NCAA will want hosts to be the places where they have the best chance for a good draw. I also assume that the all the autos won't get byes (the seeds don't all go to autos).

Keeping with regionalization, I see a first round of:

Dayton at Liberty - winner at UNI
Fordham at Villanova - winner at McNeese
Albany at UNH - winner at Montana
EIU at EKU - winner at SIU

Obviously I'm giving the four seeds the first round winners, but if you stuck with regionalization you'd have something very different. The rest of the bracket you can do with what you like. Perhaps I will try to fill that in too.

What say ye?

[Touchdown Yosef]

I think with 20 teams the 7 win suggestion would be used less and less. I would have to put GSU in as an at large. Nova is alright with me but that makes 6 CAA teams and I just don't know if I see the committe doing that. I'll have to think on who the last team would be in my book.

[MplsBison]

Cal Poly would've gotten in over Dayton.

[89Hen]

Cal Poly would've gotten in over Dayton.
At 6-4 vs DI? Their only win over a winning team was Iona who was 4-3 vs DI. The others were:

Weber (5-6)
UC Davis (5-6)
Idaho State (3-8)
UNC (1-11)
SUU (0-11)

and a loss to 4-7 Texas State. At least Dayton beat a playoff team in Fordham.

GSU would have gotten in over CP.

[aceinthehole]

A great exercise! xthumbsupx

IMO -- the last 2 at larges would have been 'Nova and GSU (although its hard to argue against Dayton).

So what happend? The NEC got their AQs and the CAA and SoCon got an extra at-large.

I'd think this is what would happend in most years as the "power conferences" get the additional at large spots.

So my question is how does this new structure diminish the tourney? I'd argue this is an enhancement!

[uni88]

If we keep the 7 DI wins requirement than I agree that Villanova and Dayton are the likely picks. Without that requirement, GSU gets in and there's a dogfight for the final at-large spot and Villanova gets left out due to a reluctance to have 6 CAA teams.

We would also need another 2 teams for the first round games - I would predict Eastern Illinois and either Delaware St or Eastern Washington. My first round would haved looked like this:

Fordham @ Villanova, winner @ UNI
Liberty @ Delaware St, winner @ McNeese
Albany @ UNH, winner @ Montana
Dayton @ Eastern Illinois, winner @ SIU

[putter]

I still think that the 7 win rule would still be in place because the committee does not want to water down the playoff field, just expand the opportunities for 2 other conferences and 2 at large teams. The fact is, that the major conferences will probably have the inside track to those at-large bids but it can also open up the San Diego's to have a chance which is a good thing.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

What say ye?

You need one more first round game. Eastern Illinois was definitely in the bottom eight teams so they'd be one participant. Who was viewed as the #13 team, Eastern Kentucky, Eastern Washington, or ??????? If the NCAA went the cost saving route, then it would have been EIU and EKU and because they are both OVC teams, then that would alter your three other games to avoid a conference match-up. I think that an OVC team playing Dayton would have been high AGS Theatre. With the regionalization theme for the first round, I'd see:

Albany @ UNH
Villanova-Fordham (not sure who would bid higher)
Liberty @ EKU
Dayton @ EIU

I think the seven D-I wins threshold would still be in play. And didn't someone else on another thread mention Norfolk State as the next team in along with Villanova.

Contrary to your feeling 89, I think an Albany at UNH game would have been SRO.

[89Hen]

So my question is how does this new structure diminish the tourney? I'd argue this is an enhancement!
For there to be a change made, it better darn well enhance it. However, all you've done is add four teams that aren't in the Top 20 according to the fans here. Final regular season AGS Poll standings:

21. Georgia Southern
23. Villanova
28. Dayton
29. Albany
31. Liberty

[Dane96]

You need one more first round game. Eastern Illinois was definitely in the bottom eight teams so they'd be one participant. Who was viewed as the #13 team, Eastern Kentucky, Eastern Washington, or ??????? If the NCAA went the cost saving route, then it would have been EIU and EKU and because they are both OVC teams, then that would alter your three other games to avoid a conference match-up. I think that an OVC team playing Dayton would have been high AGS Theatre. With the regionalization theme for the first round, I'd see:

Albany @ UNH
Villanova-Fordham (not sure who would bid higher)
Liberty @ EKU
Dayton @ EIU

I think the seven D-I wins threshold would still be in play. And didn't someone else on another thread mention Norfolk State as the next team in along with Villanova.

Contrary to your feeling 89, I think an Albany at UNH game would have been SRO.

Bet your arse that Albany would bring in the neighborhood of 1000 people for that game alone. For hoops we average something like 200-300 for regular season road games.

Add in busing of students, alumni in the Boston area...yeah...you would get about 1000...plus the UNH fans.

[89Hen]

We would also need another 2 teams for the first round games


You need one more first round game.

Contrary to your feeling 89, I think an Albany at UNH game would have been SRO.
xoopsx xoopsx I actually screwed it up the other way at first thinking I was dealing with 24 and had 8 byes. Yes, 8 teams in the first round and 12 byes. So the four seed could get the four first round winners.

BTW, not sure why you think I'd feel UNH wouldn't be SRO. xconfusedx

[stevdock]

So my question is how does this new structure diminish the tourney? I'd argue this is an enhancement!

I completely agree. It isn't going to hurt the playoffs as much as some people think and then most years the at-large's will come out of the power conferences anyways. So then teams like Villanova, GSU, and YSU would have had quality arguments to make the field and have a good chance of winning at least one game. The good thing is with a few more at-large spots that will give the Dayton's and San Diego's a more realistic shot of making it. The way it was setup, there was very little shot of someone from those conferences making it to the playoffs.

[catbob]

I could see another Big Sky team in there as well. NAU has themselves set up for a 2-1 worst-case OOC record, could finish 8-3 or 7-4. Weber should finish 2-2 in OOC, and was on a roll at the end of last year. They have 12 games, and could finish 8-4 or better. MSU will also finish 2-2 OOC (unless they can pull off the upset at U Minn), and they have a chance to win 8 or 9 games as well.

EWU on the other hand will finish 1-2 OOC, and will have an uphill battle to get an at-large. They only play 11.

[downbythebeach]

I agree with the majority.....it looks good to me!!!!!!

[TheValleyRaider]

At 6-4 vs DI? Their only win over a winning team was Iona who was 4-3 vs DI. The others were:

Weber (5-6)
UC Davis (5-6)
Idaho State (3-8)
UNC (1-11)
SUU (0-11)

and a loss to 4-7 Texas State. At least Dayton beat a playoff team in Fordham.

GSU would have gotten in over CP.

Wait, they did?!? xeekx When did that happen?!? xeekx :p

I'd probably have taken Dayton, although I think you also need to consider Norfolk State as another possible team. Finished 7-3 (8-3 with a win over D-II Virginia St.)

My other question comes from the seeds. Are they just keeping the Top 4, or does this presage some kind of expansion of the seeds. I figured we would have heard if they were now deciding to seed 8, but I figured I'd ask anyway

I like what you set up, although you might actually have seen Villanova at Fordham for the first round, since I can't believe the bidding process would have changed for this xtwocentsx

[89Hen]

teams like Villanova, GSU, and YSU would have had quality arguments to make the field
Not really. They were the first teams left out, but at 7-4 you don't have much room on which to stand IMO.

[stevdock]

I could see another Big Sky team in there as well. NAU has themselves set up for a 2-1 worst-case OOC record, could finish 8-3 or 7-4. Weber should finish 2-2 in OOC, and was on a roll at the end of last year. They have 12 games, and could finish 8-4 or better. MSU will also finish 2-2 OOC (unless they can pull off the upset at U Minn), and they have a chance to win 8 or 9 games as well.

EWU on the other hand will finish 1-2 OOC, and will have an uphill battle to get an at-large. They only play 11.

For next year I agree that the Big Sky could get another team. I'm pretty sure that the Gateway will get another team next year also. They were talking about last season though, which is why none of those teams were mentioned.

[89Hen]

My other question comes from the seeds. Are they just keeping the Top 4, or does this presage some kind of expansion of the seeds. I figured we would have heard if they were now deciding to seed 8, but I figured I'd ask anyway
I think that's what the next two years are for. xsmiley_wix

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

Bet your arse that Albany would bring in the neighborhood of 1000 people for that game alone. For hoops we average something like 200-300 for regular season road games.

Add in busing of students, alumni in the Boston area...yeah...you would get about 1000...plus the UNH fans.

I was figuring that into what I knew would be a strong UNH showing. Net result was a SRO crowd. xthumbsupx

[stevdock]

Not really. They were the first teams left out, but at 7-4 you don't have much room on which to stand IMO.

With expansion they wouldn't have had an argument? There were many people on here saying they had an argument this last year without expanding the playoffs.

[Hoyadestroya85]

no offense to the UNH people.. but i think we got screwed out of the playoffs this year, the only reason they got in and we didn't is the UNH's win against Marshall and the fact that we didn't have a Marquee player like Ricky Santos. But I think the Best teams should get at large bids as long as they're playoff eligible.. and judging by the performance of the CAA teams in the playoffs this year i can see no logical argument against the CAA being the best conference top to bottom.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

BTW, not sure why you think I'd feel UNH wouldn't be SRO. xconfusedx

Because you often point out how the first round games are poorly attended. That's all. And I couldn't really speak for the other games so I only pontificated on the game at UNH. :p

[89Hen]

With expansion they wouldn't have had an argument? There were many people on here saying they had an argument this last year without expanding the playoffs.
They only had an arguement against being the last in, not so much that they were really worthy. At 16 a couple unworthy teams get in every year. At 20 that number increases by four. As I pointed out, NONE of the additional four teams that would make it were in the Top 20. To me that says these additions are not good.

[89Hen]

Because you often point out how the first round games are poorly attended. That's all. And I couldn't really speak for the other games so I only pontificated on the game at UNH. :p
SRO at UNH is only 9k. :p

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

no offense to the UNH people.. but i think we got screwed out of the playoffs this year, the only reason they got in and we didn't is the UNH's win against Marshall and the fact that we didn't have a Marquee player like Ricky Santos. But I think the Best teams should get at large bids as long as they're playoff eligible.. and judging by the performance of the CAA teams in the playoffs this year i can see no logical argument against the CAA being the best conference top to bottom.

Then why bring it up again? This thread is about 20 teams in the playoffs which would have put Villanova into the playoffs. xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx xconfusedx

More germane to this thread is whether Villanova would have outbid Fordham.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

SRO at UNH is only 9k. :p

Actually, for the record SRO at UNH is 7.5K IF the temporary bleachers are still in place in the East End Zone; otherwise, it is 6.5K. But it wasn't so long ago that we couldn't put 5K in the place. And more recently we've put 11K and 13K into the place. The bottomline is that we wouldn't have had the drop off in attendance that happens that weekend at some places.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

Actually, for the record SRO at UNH is 7.5K IF the temporary bleachers are still in place in the East End Zone; otherwise, it is 6.5K. But it wasn't so long ago that we couldn't put 5K in the place. And more recently we've put 11K and 13K into the place. The bottomline is that we wouldn't have had the drop off in attendance that happens that weekend at some places.

The HS football season would be complete in both NH and Maine that alone would add 2k or so.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Wouldn't 8-3 Norfolk State have made it in before Dayton and Villanova?

Of course, the point 89 wants to make is that there are barely enough teams that qualify given the criteria as they stand now. So with a 20 team playoff field, they would most likely have to change - probably to 6 D-I wins, which is something that has been kicked around before.

Pros of 6 D-I wins: SLC teams will be able to schedule both Texas, Texas A&M and Abeline Christian and still have an outside shot at postseason play. MEAC teams will be able to play Virginia Union in a big HBCU Classic and not have to kick themselves that they have to run the MEAC table to get into the postseason with their large number of conference games.

Cons of 6 D-I wins: Butler could schedule Waldorf, William Penn, Cheney and Abeline Christian, have a 10 game schedule and still qualify for postseason play if they go 10-0. Also, Villanova could go 6-5 with 5 CAA losses and still be playoff-eligible.

Thoughts?

[89Hen]

Of course, the point 89 wants to make is that there are barely enough teams that qualify

Thoughts?
Thoughts are we laugh at 6-5 teams making the post-season in I-A and that's only for stinking bowls, we're talking about them making the championship playoffs. Seem funny to me.

[bluehenbillk]

Ugh, I don't like the move to 20. I see it opening up a lot of boring-ass OOC games now that the NEC & Big South have been "legitimized". Dayton in the playoffs? There's enough crap in there now with the MEAC & OVC, do we need more?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Thoughts are we laugh at 6-5 teams making the post-season in I-A and that's only for stinking bowls, we're talking about them making the championship playoffs. Seem funny to me.

To be fair here, if you add 6 D-I win teams into consideration, you get some pretty compelling 7-win teams with a sub-D-I victory in the mix: Georgia Southern, Elon, The Citadel, Youngstown State... last year, a 6-5 team wouldn't have gotten any sniff of consideration. And remember that Cal Poly, Colgate, Norfolk State, Dayton, and Villanova had 7+ D-I wins, too. That's five teams before dipping to 6 D-I win teams, and four strong candidates that are at 7/6 that would get in before a 6-5 team...

[Hoyadestroya85]

More germane to this thread is whether Villanova would have outbid Fordham.

The answer in my opinion is no.. the apathy about football this season on campus seems to be at an all time high.. sometimes I feel like the only student who cares, which is frustrating..

[89Hen]

I think the "first round" games actually look better than some of the first round games we've had in the past BUT that's only because they match-up more closely matched teams. The winner is still most likely going to get whalloped in the round of 16 which is right where we were.

BTW, from a selfish standpoint, Thanksgiving weekend Delaware home playoff games were a highlight for my family since 2003. We'd go to the beach and drive up from there. Unless they change the way home games are determined (attendance), I'm guessing the Hens will never play in the first round.

[89Hen]

To be fair here, if you add 6 D-I win teams into consideration, you get some pretty compelling 7-win teams with a sub-D-I victory in the mix: Georgia Southern, Elon, The Citadel, Youngstown State...
Compelling in what way? All of those teams controlled their own destiny and lost. I'm not compelled by a 6-4 team.

[stevdock]

With the incoming FCS teams will the D1 7 win criteria need to be changed once those teams get through the transition period? If you look at last year I would have hoped that we would have gotten an at-large bid, and it was possible for SDSU to get one also (I think they had 7 D1 wins). Central Arkansas I believe also had 7 D1 wins, but might be wrong on that. And I would assume that once UND gets through transition they will always be challenging for a playoff spot. So if you look at those 4 teams added into the mix, I don't think that 7 win criteria is going to have to be addressed much.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Compelling in what way? All of those teams controlled their own destiny and lost. I'm not compelled by a 6-4 team.

GSU - beat Appalachian State, Wofford, The Citadel, SDSU (ranked)
Elon - wins over Wofford, GSU, Liberty* (field of 20 playoff team)
YSU - wins over SDSU, Western Illinois, only losses to FBS Ohio State, UNI, SIU and Illinois State

The Citadel - beat Elon (granted this is the weakest of the at-larges)

Three of those four are not bad resumes - unless you want to argue that the SoCon was a weak conference in 2007? xlolx

[89Hen]

With the incoming FCS teams will the D1 7 win criteria need to be changed once those teams get through the transition period? If you look at last year I would have hoped that we would have gotten an at-large bid, and it was possible for SDSU to get one also (I think they had 7 D1 wins).
However, being in the Gateway now, somebody who made it to 7 last year, won't this year.

[stevdock]

However, being in the Gateway now, somebody who made it to 7 last year, won't this year.

Probably not, but I'm pretty sure most years the Gateway will get 3 bids, with a possibility of 4, from teams that meet the 7 win criteria. In the Gateway it will depend on what the OOC schedule looks like. Just like the other power conferences.

[89Hen]

I'm pretty sure most years the Gateway will get 3 bids, with a possibility of 4, from teams that meet the 7 win criteria. In the Gateway it will depend on what the OOC schedule looks like. Just like the other power conferences.
xnodx xnodx

[89Hen]

Three of those four are not bad resumes
Not bad, but not playoff worthy IMO.

[Touchdown Yosef]

Probably not, but I'm pretty sure most years the Gateway will get 3 bids, with a possibility of 4, from teams that meet the 7 win criteria. In the Gateway it will depend on what the OOC schedule looks like. Just like the other power conferences.

The gateway will rightfully take its place amoung the "power conferences" if it wasn't there already but you may suffer through the same thing the Socon did last year where we all beat each other and make it too tough to qualify 4 teams w/ 7 D-1 wins, especially if you play a tough ooc. That is where the size of the CAA has an advantage b/c not everyone can feasibly play each other.

I think GSU and Elon would have made better playoff teams than some of the others being considered especially those that are AQ's from weak conferences. Put a decent Socon team in another conference other than the big 4 and I wonder how they would do? I think the Gateway will be running down this same road very shortly.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

I think the "first round" games actually look better than some of the first round games we've had in the past BUT that's only because they match-up more closely matched teams. The winner is still most likely going to get whalloped in the round of 16 which is right where we were.

BTW, from a selfish standpoint, Thanksgiving weekend Delaware home playoff games were a highlight for my family since 2003. We'd go to the beach and drive up from there. Unless they change the way home games are determined (attendance), I'm guessing the Hens will never play in the first round.

Playing Devil's Advocate here, not trying to get you upset.

UNH didn't get whalloped in the round of 16 last year and theoretically they'd have won the first round game in the 20 team tournament. Do you think Villanova would have got crushed if they beat Fordham and moved on? As it is, Fordham didn't get spanked by UMass. In theory the same type of teams will be filling the 13-16 slots in the tournament and first round games should be just like they are today. Some will be close, there might be an upset every now and then, there will be blowouts just like today.

And why is it that Delaware won't ever be in the position that UNH and Villanova were in this year? It's quite conceivable that Delaware could be in the 13-20 mix and guess what, you'll get a home game in the first round.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

The gateway will rightfully take its place amoung the "power conferences" if it wasn't there already but you may suffer through the same thing the Socon did last year where we all beat each other and make it too tough to qualify 4 teams w/ 7 D-1 wins, especially if you play a tough ooc. That is where the size of the CAA has an advantage b/c not everyone can feasibly play each other.

I think GSU and Elon would have made better playoff teams than some of the others being considered especially those that are AQ's from weak conferences. Put a decent Socon team in another conference other than the big 4 and I wonder how they would do? I think the Gateway will be running down this same road very shortly.

Stop with that nonsense! No matter who the CAA teams play in conference, they play as many difficult in conference games as any other conference does. We don't need to play every conference member to achieve that.

And guess what, the members from the SoCon and CAA could choose to move to one of those non "big four" conferences. I'm sure the Big South would welcome Western Carolina with open arms just like the OVC would TN Chattanooga and the NEC would URI, Maine or UNH. They'd probably all do fine in those new leagues. But that's not the point, NCAA tournaments have never been about getting the best teams into the field only the best teams into the at large berths.

[Touchdown Yosef]

Stop with that nonsense! No matter who the CAA teams play in conference, they play as many difficult in conference games as any other conference does. We don't need to play every conference member to achieve that.

And guess what, the members from the SoCon and CAA could choose to move to one of those non "big four" conferences. I'm sure the Big South would welcome Western Carolina with open arms just like the OVC would TN Chattanooga and the NEC would URI, Maine or UNH. They'd probably all do fine in those new leagues. But that's not the point, NCAA tournaments have never been about getting the best teams into the field only the best teams into the at large berths.

UNH, I meant no knock on the CAA and I am not saying you need to play everyone to earn your playoff bid. I am saying that you could have andvantage to your schedule by missing certain teams in their best years. Or have a disadvantage by that same token.

[89Hen]

In theory the same type of teams will be filling the 13-16 slots in the tournament and first round games should be just like they are today. Some will be close, there might be an upset every now and then, there will be blowouts just like today.

And why is it that Delaware won't ever be in the position that UNH and Villanova were in this year? It's quite conceivable that Delaware could be in the 13-20 mix and guess what, you'll get a home game in the first round.
That really was my point... that we'll have the same second round as we have first round now.

I think the NCAA will want UD (or Montana or AppSt, etc) to host a second round game. These teams get preferential treatment now for home games, I would just expect that to continue. If they got in at 7-4 they may have to play round one.

[89Hen]

you could have andvantage to your schedule by missing certain teams in their best years. Or have a disadvantage by that same token.
So it evens out. We play 8 conference games, you play 8 conference games. We'll have the same number of losses per team to distribute just like every other conference with at least 9 members.

[Touchdown Yosef]

So it evens out. We play 8 conference games, you play 8 conference games. We'll have the same number of losses per team to distribute just like every other conference with at least 9 members.

point taken, I just think for instance in 2004 teams that didn't have to play JMU or 03 w/ UD may have had a slight advantage over the teams that did.

[89Hen]

point taken, I just think for instance in 2004 teams that didn't have to play JMU or 03 w/ UD may have had a slight advantage over the teams that did.
They did, but the same number of teams from the North had them and didn't have them. So from an outside viewpoint, the CAA as a whole was even.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Stop with that nonsense! No matter who the CAA teams play in conference, they play as many difficult in conference games as any other conference does. We don't need to play every conference member to achieve that.

That's very, very surprising coming from a UNH fan. From the South, UMass played Towson, Villanova, and William & Mary. UNH played James Madison, Delaware, and Richmond. Think UMass' and UNH's schedules were a equal degree of difficulty?

[89Hen]

That's very, very surprising coming from a UNH fan. From the South, UMass played Towson, Villanova, and William & Mary. UNH played James Madison, Delaware, and Richmond. Think UMass' and UNH's schedules were a equal degree of difficulty?
Doesn't matter except to UNH. There were two other teams that had to play the same as UMass and two more that played the same as UNH. It all evens out when you're talking about how many teams will get to 7 wins from the CAA. xoopsx

[stevdock]

The gateway will rightfully take its place amoung the "power conferences" if it wasn't there already but you may suffer through the same thing the Socon did last year where we all beat each other and make it too tough to qualify 4 teams w/ 7 D-1 wins, especially if you play a tough ooc. That is where the size of the CAA has an advantage b/c not everyone can feasibly play each other.

I think GSU and Elon would have made better playoff teams than some of the others being considered especially those that are AQ's from weak conferences. Put a decent Socon team in another conference other than the big 4 and I wonder how they would do? I think the Gateway will be running down this same road very shortly.

Are you saying there might be another power conference besides the CAA and the SoCon?? I don't think I've heard that before on here.

You are right though. When the Gateway has alot of parity, then they will beat each other up and probably not get alot of teams in. Definitely depends on the year.

[Go...gate]

Cal Poly would've gotten in over Dayton.


Colgate might have gotten in over Dayton, IMO.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

UNH, I meant no knock on the CAA and I am not saying you need to play everyone to earn your playoff bid. I am saying that you could have andvantage to your schedule by missing certain teams in their best years. Or have a disadvantage by that same token.

I'm not sure how that alleged advantage comes into play though. Maybe a team might get the AQ and not have proven they were the best conference team, but so what. That team would still be going to the playoffs and I'll pretty sure that the committee would not take that AQ into account when seeding teams 1-4.

This past season I think UMass took the brunt of this type of complaint. I don't think anybody felt they didn't deserve to be in the playoffs. I read this type of comment to insinuate that UMass had a bloated record because of the North-South schedule split. Did UMass get seeded with said record -- no. Did UMass play at home during the Quarterfinals -- no. I don't see any advantage that UMass obtained this past season. I see a committee that seemed to evaluate UMass accurately.

Yes, I know that is only one year, but when has this alleged advantage given a CAA team an unwarranted playoff bid or a seed? Everything else in our playoffs is based on financial bids for home games. I see years where the competition in the CAA resulted in the same thing as happened in the SoCon and Gateway this year -- teams beating each other causing few teams to be playoff eligible. In 2005 only UNH and Richmond made the playoffs. I can say with extreme confidence that 7-4 UMass, JMU and Hofstra would have represented themselves very, very well in the playoffs just like I'm sure GA Southern or Elon would have this past season.

Sorry, I just don't see this alleged advantage.

[MplsBison]

Colgate might have gotten in over Dayton, IMO.

Ok fine, a lot of teams would've and should've gotten in over Dayton.



If you're going to go against the DI philosophy of providing athletic merit aid to your players, then the playoff selection committee is going to give you zero respect unless you schedule the top 11 teams non conference.

[Touchdown Yosef]

I'm not sure how that alleged advantage comes into play though. Maybe a team might get the AQ and not have proven they were the best conference team, but so what. That team would still be going to the playoffs and I'll pretty sure that the committee would not take that AQ into account when seeding teams 1-4.

This past season I think UMass took the brunt of this type of complaint. I don't think anybody felt they didn't deserve to be in the playoffs. I read this type of comment to insinuate that UMass had a bloated record because of the North-South schedule split. Did UMass get seeded with said record -- no. Did UMass play at home during the Quarterfinals -- no. I don't see any advantage that UMass obtained this past season. I see a committee that seemed to evaluate UMass accurately.

Yes, I know that is only one year, but when has this alleged advantage given a CAA team an unwarranted playoff bid or a seed? Everything else in our playoffs is based on financial bids for home games. I see years where the competition in the CAA resulted in the same thing as happened in the SoCon and Gateway this year -- teams beating each other causing few teams to be playoff eligible. In 2005 only UNH and Richmond made the playoffs. I can say with extreme confidence that 7-4 UMass, JMU and Hofstra would have represented themselves very, very well in the playoffs just like I'm sure GA Southern or Elon would have this past season.

Sorry, I just don't see this alleged advantage.


Once again UNH I am not attacking the CAA, their system, or their strength of schedule. Maybe I am not being clear as to my point or maybe it just isn't worth arguing over. (or maybe I don't have one)

I am saying that if the Socon was split in two and looking at say 2006 when App pretty much rolled through the conference (except for wofford and gsu) that if say Wofford finished w/ 6 D1 wins that year and had lost to App they would have benefitted if we were split in two and they did not have to play the conferene's dominant team that year. Hence giving themselves a better chance at that 7th D1 win.

I am not saying that any CAA team was not completly worthy of their bid to the playoffs what I am saying is that if less of the very best teams played each other every year teams would gain an advantage by not having to play them every year. You sub playing JMU in 04 for anyone else (as anyone else would be considered a lesser team that year based on the NC) and they have a better shot at a win.

Once again I am not knocking the CAA but in certain years in certain situations it could give you a better shot at that 7 d1 wins. I also understand that the oposite is true as well.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

That's very, very surprising coming from a UNH fan. From the South, UMass played Towson, Villanova, and William & Mary. UNH played James Madison, Delaware, and Richmond. Think UMass' and UNH's schedules were a equal degree of difficulty?

Why? Personally, I don't find the split of schools to be as significant as others do. There isn't a "Big Three or Four" every year like in some conferences when 10 of the 12 CAA teams have made the playoffs this decade (or whatever that stat was in the prospectus). So it is impossible to split the teams on strength of program. And even if one rotation is having down seasons, they are still just as high a quality opponent than than we'd find OOC with other FCS schools in the Mid-Atlantic and the Northeast. They still provide playoff worthiness status if they are defeated.

Guess what, when UNH had the other rotation, W&M was a top four seed one year and coming off that season the next year. When UNH last played Villanova on the Main Line, they had the number one ranked defense in I-AA. If anything, I could complain about UNH's bad luck of getting each rotation when they were strongest. But that's just the way of life in the CAA. And if you play well enough, you still make the playoffs, which UNH did in all four years.

My only complaint with the schedule rotation is that UNH has to go to VA twice in the same season (JMU and Richmond). I hoped that the schedule would balance the travel by having JMU in VA one year and Richmond the other. And some of that is selfish because I know going to two games in VA in one season is a hardship for me.

And for everybody that assumes that UNH has the "easier" split the next two years, let me just say that hands down the most difficult team in the CAA South for UNH is William & Mary. Not even close, no other South team has a record against UNH that approaches W&M. And Delaware, I'm talking about since 1986 when you joined the Yankee Conference.

[walliver]

If the 2007 playoffs had had 20 teams, I doubt Wofford would have had to play at Montana in the first round. (But you never knowxnodx )

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

Once again UNH I am not attacking the CAA, their system, or their strength of schedule. Maybe I am not being clear as to my point or maybe it just isn't worth arguing over. (or maybe I don't have one)

I am saying that if the Socon was split in two and looking at say 2006 when App pretty much rolled through the conference (except for wofford and gsu) that if say Wofford finished w/ 6 D1 wins that year and had lost to App they would have benefitted if we were split in two and they did not have to play the conferene's dominant team that year. Hence giving themselves a better chance at that 7th D1 win.

I am not saying that any CAA team was not completly worthy of their bid to the playoffs what I am saying is that if less of the very best teams played each other every year teams would gain an advantage by not having to play them every year. You sub playing JMU in 04 for anyone else (as anyone else would be considered a lesser team that year based on the NC) and they have a better shot at a win.

Once again I am not knocking the CAA but in certain years in certain situations it could give you a better shot at that 7 d1 wins. I also understand that the oposite is true as well.

Sorry if it seems like I'm attacking you on this, but others have expressed a similar opinion. Unfortunately, you made the post that triggered my reaction and I felt the need to make a counter argument. And there have been so many "the CAA is too big" comments that anything related becomes a very sensitive subject.

See, I don't think you can use a SoCon example without knowing who the teams were that caused it to be divided into two divisions. If there were three more teams of high quality then missing App this year might not have been a significant factor.

Since you brought up 2004, it so happens that UNH didn't play JMU that season. UNH only played four home games that year, they played at Delaware in an "OOC game", they played at Villanova in September when they were viewed as legitimate title contenders, they played W&M who beat JMU in the regular season and lost to them in the playoffs IIRC, they played @ Rutgers, etc.

Even if somehow they played JMU that season and lost, that 8-3 UNH team would have still deserved to make the playoffs with the win over Rutgers. And even if that 8th win had been against Iona (all D-I by definition BTW), UNH still would have had seven D-I wins that couldn't be questioned.

I suppose you could have "certain years in certain situations" where "it could give you a better shot at seven D-I wins". But frankly I think that would be so infrequent that it's a non-issue. I really feel that the opposite (teams beating each other up) happens often and your scenario doesn't happen often if at all. The biggest "advantage" that I see the CAA teams having in getting seven D-I wins is by playing a full slate of D-I opponents. Beating FBS opponents sure has helped too.

[Go...gate]

Ok fine, a lot of teams would've and should've gotten in over Dayton.



If you're going to go against the DI philosophy of providing athletic merit aid to your players, then the playoff selection committee is going to give you zero respect unless you schedule the top 11 teams non conference.

Hey, take it easy, MPLS - I'm only expressing my opinion.

[kardplayer]

For there to be a change made, it better darn well enhance it. However, all you've done is add four teams that aren't in the Top 20 according to the fans here. Final regular season AGS Poll standings:

21. Georgia Southern
23. Villanova
28. Dayton
29. Albany
31. Liberty

This is a pretty weak argument, considering the playoffs proved that the pollsters didn't really have a good sense of which teams were betters than others.

All rankings from the final regular season poll:
http://www.anygivensaturday.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33196

Round 1:
#1 UNI squeaks past #17 UNH 38-35 - hate to see what #2-#16 would have done to them ;)
#14 Eastern Washington crushed #2 McNeese State 44-15
#11 Wofford squeaked past #3 Montana 23-22
#4 Southern Illinois whoops #15 Eastern Illinois 30-11
#5 Appalachian State squeaked past #12 James Madison 28-27 (and shouldn't JMU have won that game?)
#7 Richmond beat #10 Eastern Kentucky 31-14
#8 UMass beats #25 Fordham 49-35 (I think this game was closer than the final score would indicate, although I may not recall correctly)
#13 Delaware wallops #9 Delaware State 44-7

So to recap round 1... 3 upsets, 2 of which were by 29+ points, and 2 games were teams ranked 7 and 16 spots higher than their opponents won by less than 3 points. Not exactly a strong statement that being ranked 20th or worse doesn't mean you're not actually one of the better teams...

For the remainder of the tournament, the favorites went 5-2, with more close games between teams that the polls would indicate should have been much easier (e.g. #5 App State slipping past #14 EWU by 3)...

What say thee Hen???

[uni88]

Are you saying there might be another power conference besides the CAA and the SoCon?? I don't think I've heard that before on here.

You are right though. When the Gateway has alot of parity, then they will beat each other up and probably not get alot of teams in. Definitely depends on the year.

Maybe I'm mistaken but I'm of the opinion that the Gateway is a power conference and there is not doubt that the league already has a lot of parity - UNI, SIU, YSU (and WKU) are (were) always knocking each other off and making it difficult for the conference winner to be seeded while IlSU and WIU while not as consistently good have had very good teams and done some damage. With WKU, that is 6 of 8 teams with playoff aspirations in any given year. NDSU and SDSU are adding to the competitive nature of the conference, not creating it.

[89Hen]

You sub playing JMU in 04 for anyone else (as anyone else would be considered a lesser team that year based on the NC) and they have a better shot at a win.

Once again I am not knocking the CAA but in certain years in certain situations it could give you a better shot at that 7 d1 wins. I also understand that the oposite is true as well.
It still doesn't matter when talking about how many teams in the CAA get to 7 wins. For every team that doesn't have to play JMU in 2004, there is a team that does. The math doesn't change just because there are teams that miss each other. There are 8 conference games for everyone so there are the same total number of losses per team that have to be distributed. It's not like all of one division misses the JMU/UD/UR or UNH/UMass gauntlet in a year. Half play them, half don't.

[89Hen]

Maybe I'm mistaken but I'm of the opinion that the Gateway is a power conference and there is not doubt that the league already has a lot of parity
Not to speak for Steve, but I think he was speaking a little TIC... there is a lot of CAA and SoCon banter on these boards and sometimes it does seem that the Gateway doesn't get their due just because there aren't as many Gateway fans compared to CAA and SoCon. xthumbsupx

[89Hen]

This is a pretty weak argument, considering the playoffs proved that the pollsters didn't really have a good sense of which teams were betters than others.

So to recap round 1... 3 upsets

For the remainder of the tournament, the favorites went 5-2,

What say thee Hen???
So the pollsters went 10-5 in the playoffs and if pressed, I'm not sure many of the pollsters would have picked DSU over UD in the first round. That's not a bad average.

But again, the arguement is that adding these teams somehow enhanced the tournament... I don't see how you can make that case.

[kardplayer]

So the pollsters went 10-5 in the playoffs and if pressed, I'm not sure many of the pollsters would have picked DSU over UD in the first round. That's not a bad average.

But again, the arguement is that adding these teams somehow enhanced the tournament... I don't see how you can make that case.

But the basis of your argument was that based on the AGS poll we'd be adding teams that were ranked 20th or higher. Clearly the pollsters were wrong about a lot of teams (nice cherry picking of my points, BTW), so why do you think they might not be missing the boat on one of the teams in the 20's?

And clearly a lot of pollsters thought DSU was better than Delaware or their order would have been reversed in the poll.

[danefan]

So the pollsters went 10-5 in the playoffs and if pressed, I'm not sure many of the pollsters would have picked DSU over UD in the first round. That's not a bad average.

But again, the arguement is that adding these teams somehow enhanced the tournament... I don't see how you can make that case.

I'm not so sure that the argument for many (at least not for me) is that adding the teams enhances the tournament. What I'm saying is that adding these teams really doesn't change the tournament, except for the NEC and MEAC teams (and the bubble at-larges squads).

If there is an added benefit it will be the increased exposure in markets and universities not previously invoolved in the playoffs (Albany, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, etc....).

[89Hen]

Clearly the pollsters were wrong about a lot of teams (nice cherry picking of my points, BTW)
xconfusedx cherry picking your points? There was one point, that you think "the pollsters were wrong about a lot of teams"... the pollsters (who don't pick head to head games as evidenced by ranking teams over teams they lost to) went 10-5 throughout the playoffs. That's a very good number in the betting world. The point is, you are adding four teams that are even lower in the rankings. Could a #30 upset a #2.... AGS, but that doesn't justify them making the field... if you're going to use that arguement, then add all 110 teams and be done with it.

I could beat Tiger Woods, but I'm not expecting my invite to the AT&T Classic any time soon. That's a ridiculous comparison, but there's actually a good analogy in there now that I've typed that. Several years back the Kemper Open gave a sponsors exemption to Mark Rypien, the former Redskins QB. He was/is a very good golfer and the sponsors I'm sure they felt he would be a great addition to the field as he'd bring in more fans. Of course he shot something like 85-82 and had little chance of actually competing. Adding MORE teams that are ranked below the rest of the field is the same thing. It may add to the exposure of the tourney, but trying to make it a competitive arguement is plain silly IMO.

[89Hen]

I'm not so sure that the argument for many (at least not for me) is that adding the teams enhances the tournament. What I'm saying is that adding these teams really doesn't change the tournament, except for the NEC and MEAC teams (and the bubble at-larges squads).

If there is an added benefit it will be the increased exposure in markets and universities not previously invoolved in the playoffs (Albany, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, etc....).
And that's a good arguement to make. Others are arguing that we wouldn't have a true champion if we don't add these other teams... that's a competitive arguement.

[kardplayer]

xconfusedx cherry picking your points? There was one point, that you think "the pollsters were wrong about a lot of teams"... the pollsters (who don't pick head to head games as evidenced by ranking teams over teams they lost to) went 10-5 throughout the playoffs. That's a very good number in the betting world.

Actually, in the betting world the pollsters would have lost their shirts since at least two of those games in the first round (UNI + App State) the favorite wouldn't have covered and App State's second game as well. That's 7-8 vs. the spread and with the vig they'd have lost about 7% of their money :D :D :D

[uni88]

Not to speak for Steve, but I think he was speaking a little TIC... there is a lot of CAA and SoCon banter on these boards and sometimes it does seem that the Gateway doesn't get their due just because there aren't as many Gateway fans compared to CAA and SoCon. xthumbsupx

Hopefully my post didn't come across as derogatory because I didn't mean it that way. I was simply trying to provide a little background about the Gateway's history. When you combine the fact that there is a lot of CAA and SoCon banter with the reality that 2007 was an unusual year in the Gateway (UNI & SIU losing a total of one conference game) newer posters might not realize how deep and competitive the Gateway typically is.

[stevdock]

Hopefully my post didn't come across as derogatory because I didn't mean it that way. I was simply trying to provide a little background about the Gateway's history. When you combine the fact that there is a lot of CAA and SoCon banter with the reality that 2007 was an unusual year in the Gateway (UNI & SIU losing a total of one conference game) newer posters might not realize how deep and competitive the Gateway typically is.

Yes I got that and that's why I said earlier that most years I expect the Gateway to get at least 3 teams in the playoffs with sometimes getting 4 teams in. I'm excited we are going into the Gateway, which is a conference where you have to run the gauntlet and play every team. I hate the fact that the Big Ten rotates games, so you don't play every team in the conference every year.

[89Hen]

Actually, in the betting world the pollsters would have lost their shirts since at least two of those games in the first round (UNI + App State) the favorite wouldn't have covered and App State's second game as well. That's 7-8 vs. the spread and with the vig they'd have lost about 7% of their money :D :D :D
They didn't cover the spread. The spread is 1.