Patty Viverito: "24 As Soon As Possible" [Archive]

Lehigh Football Nation

July 24th, 2008, 03:22 PM

xeyebrowx xeyebrowx xeyebrowx

http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2008/07/22/usports/doc48868f3c7ff21212739235.txt

The Football Championship Subdivision playoffs will expand from 16 to 20 teams in 2010.

“And we hope it will go to 24 as quickly as possible,” said Viverito. “This is a very welcome development.”

xeyebrowx xeyebrowx xeyebrowx

danefan

July 24th, 2008, 03:23 PM

xeyebrowx xeyebrowx xeyebrowx

http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2008/07/22/usports/doc48868f3c7ff21212739235.txt

xeyebrowx xeyebrowx xeyebrowx

So we can add everyone except the PFL?

She's a dope.

Cue DUPFLFan in 3.....2.....1......(he hates her)

MplsBison

July 24th, 2008, 03:34 PM

South Dakota State coach John Stiegelmeier, whose Jackrabbits competed in the Great West Conference in 2007, doesn’t feel like a stranger around the other Valley coaches.

“We’re all related,” he said. “Our first name is Coach.”

What a nerd.

danefan

July 24th, 2008, 03:34 PM

What a nerd.

Seriously. Total dork.

danefan

July 24th, 2008, 03:42 PM

And BTW (this should get things going a bit)......the playoffs will be to 24 before you know it.

24 changes nothing. No logistical problems for the NCAA. No added weeks, etc......

24 will roll off a lot easier than 20 did.

bluehenbillk

July 24th, 2008, 04:26 PM

Once they expanded to 20 I thought it'd be inevitable for the # to rise to 24 and eventually settle at 32.

I assume once the field hits 24 the CAA will grab 6 spots per year.

Hammersmith

July 24th, 2008, 04:27 PM

I don't understand the fuss or why this would surprise anyone. I thought it was common knowledge that the original plan was to expand to 24 teams by adding 2 teams every other year starting in 2008. The lateness of the final decision meant that the 2008 expansion was lumped together with the 2010 expansion, but I think the 2012 & 2014 expansions are still planned. The 2014 autobid will most likely go to the Great West as long as they get a sixth team by the 2012 season. The 2012 autobid is still somewhat up for grabs(PFL, Ivy, SWAC, etc.), but if I were a betting man, I'd predict that the CAA will time a split for 2012 so the new conference will receive the new autobid.

Going all the way to 24 might also make seeding a little easier. As we all know, currently only the top 4 are seeded. Starting next year, that's going to have to change. In addition to the top four, the bottom 8 will also have to be determined in order to assign play-in games. With 12 of the 20 teams seeded in some way, you might as well do the whole 20. Now, do you assign game locations by seed or by bid/region? If you go to 24 teams, you only have to seed the top 8; the remaining 16 teams can be unseeded and be assigned using the current bid/regionality system.

TexasTerror

July 24th, 2008, 04:27 PM

JayJ79

July 24th, 2008, 04:35 PM

danefan

July 24th, 2008, 04:40 PM

24 is bad...

20 was bad enough (11 games in 11 weeks). If FCS went 24, look for a commotion from the SLC. There's already plenty of talks behind the scenes re: the SLC bailing ship and going FBS because of some of the decisions being made in the world of FCS football.

I don't want to go to FBS, so someone please make some better decisions before my school is forced to...

xwhistlex
SLC isn't going anyhere.
FBS = big $$$$$$$$$$$$ for little reward.
I just don't see the entire league being willing to spend that much more money to play in the East Bumble**ck Tampax Tampon Bowl.

Appstate29

July 24th, 2008, 04:40 PM

Once they expanded to 20 I thought it'd be inevitable for the # to rise to 24 and eventually settle at 32.

I assume once the field hits 24 the CAA will grab 6 spots per year.

once it goes to that, I'll switch my position from favoring staying in FCS to favoring moving to FBS.

dbackjon

July 24th, 2008, 04:43 PM

What a nerd.

Yup - all the cool kids just talk about what type of turf is the best.

DetroitFlyer

July 24th, 2008, 04:50 PM

24 is bad...

20 was bad enough (11 games in 11 weeks). If FCS went 24, look for a commotion from the SLC. There's already plenty of talks behind the scenes re: the SLC bailing ship and going FBS because of some of the decisions being made in the world of FCS football.

I don't want to go to FBS, so someone please make some better decisions before my school is forced to...

PLEASE, I beg you and schools like you, GO FBS! It simply cannot happen soon enough IMHO!! No more FBS wanabees, either poop or get off the pot and stop complaining!

FargoBison

July 24th, 2008, 05:21 PM

24 is bad...

20 was bad enough (11 games in 11 weeks). If FCS went 24, look for a commotion from the SLC. There's already plenty of talks behind the scenes re: the SLC bailing ship and going FBS because of some of the decisions being made in the world of FCS football.

I don't want to go to FBS, so someone please make some better decisions before my school is forced to...

TT adding 4 more teams does nothing, it doesn't add any weeks or take any away from the regular season. If the SLC is staying now that the playoffs went to 20 it would make no sense to leave if it goes to 24.

BTW, I think a league like the Southland actually benefits from going to 24, I think the SLC will be a two bid league most years with that type of format.

TexasTerror

July 24th, 2008, 05:26 PM

danefan

July 24th, 2008, 05:27 PM

TT adding 4 more teams does nothing, it doesn't add any weeks or take any away from the regular season. If the SLC is staying now that the playoffs went to 20 it would make no sense to leave if it goes to 24.

BTW, I think a league like the Southland actually benefits from going to 24, I think the SLC will be a two bid league most years with that type of format.

TT will never agree that this isn't hurting the SLC. McTailgator is the same way. They can't see the big picture. Part of what many call the "old guard" because they think FCS is never changing. Unrealistic.

danefan

July 24th, 2008, 05:30 PM

The SLC is not happy with the 11 games in 11 weeks as is. The league is not a fan of 20 teams in the playoffs.

Adding four more teams does not necessarily benefit the league in any way and in fact would increase travel costs for the league.

The SLC used to be a two-bid league most years with 16 teams (until the last 2 years). One would hope with 24, they would be a three-year a league team.

All I'm saying is the SLC schools are not in favor of 20/24. They are not in favor of 11 games in 11 weeks. They support a 12 game schedule and 16 teams in the playoffs.

There was a whole thread on the Geaux Cowboys board about the NCAA ruining FCS with the move to 20...

Ohhhh...I'd love to read that...........Do tel TT. How exactly is the NCAA ruining the FCS?xlolx

FargoBison

July 24th, 2008, 05:46 PM

The SLC is not happy with the 11 games in 11 weeks as is. The league is not a fan of 20 teams in the playoffs.

Adding four more teams does not necessarily benefit the league in any way and in fact would increase travel costs for the league.

The SLC used to be a two-bid league most years with 16 teams (until the last 2 years). One would hope with 24, they would be a three-year a league team.

All I'm saying is the SLC schools are not in favor of 20/24. They are not in favor of 11 games in 11 weeks. They support a 12 game schedule and 16 teams in the playoffs.

There was a whole thread on the Geaux Cowboys board about the NCAA ruining FCS with the move to 20...

I don't think anyone is really that excited about playing 11 games in 11 weeks. But that is the reality ESPN and the NCAA are making us live with.

I meant that the SLC would be a lock to get 2 teams and I think a school would rather have the extra traveling costs if it meant a berth to the playoffs. I thought the playoffs were what this level of football was all about.

TexasTerror

July 24th, 2008, 06:11 PM

Ohhhh...I'd love to read that...........Do tel TT. How exactly is the NCAA ruining the FCS?xlolx

Here's the post...

http://forums.delphiforums.com/geauxcowboys/messages/?msg=9012.1

I don't think anyone is really that excited about playing 11 games in 11 weeks. But that is the reality ESPN and the NCAA are making us live with.

I meant that the SLC would be a lock to get 2 teams and I think a school would rather have the extra traveling costs if it meant a berth to the playoffs. I thought the playoffs were what this level of football was all about.

11 games in 11 weeks does not help the SLC with scheduling, because with that extra week of the schedule for all teams, there is more flexibility to make things happen.

If anyone has followed the SLC for the last few years (notably since 2005), scheduling issues have not been kind to the conference and has led the majority of the SLC to schedule 'out' of the playoffs. In fact, with about a month of play remaining last year, only the AQ (if not McNeese) was assured of making the playoffs.

The SLC is all about the playoffs, but if it were not for a) the addition of Lamar and b) the SWAC tossing the mandate -- the league would continue to have a flux of scheduling issues which would not help the league make the playoffs and therefore impact the desire of the league to stay in FCS.

MplsBison

July 24th, 2008, 07:47 PM

Ohhhh...I'd love to read that...........Do tel TT. How exactly is the NCAA ruining the FCS?xlolx

The NCAA doesn't make any money on FCS. There's nothing to be ruined.

Most of the schools don't even make money.

catdaddy2402

July 24th, 2008, 08:01 PM

Do two posts really count as a "thread"?

Syntax Error

July 24th, 2008, 08:13 PM

xnonox

DFW HOYA

July 24th, 2008, 08:25 PM

When I saw the headline, I thought it was about expanding the PFL to 24...

Let's see: Lipscomb, UNCW, Mercer, Detroit, Xavier, Marquette, Loyola-Chicago....

dgreco

July 24th, 2008, 08:31 PM

thats brings it to 19! or smething... Iona, SSU?

GOKATS

July 24th, 2008, 09:17 PM

No surprise seeing it going to 24. I was against the move to 20, 24 coming was plain as day and if it goes to 32 I say "what the hell, let's go to 64".xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex

What the hell was wrong with having a playoff of the top 16 teams vie for a National Championship?

downbythebeach

July 24th, 2008, 09:23 PM

If the Southland conference ever moves up to FBS, I see the Big Ten, SEC, etc. starting their own division because FBS has become too "watered-down."

McNeese75

July 24th, 2008, 09:57 PM

If the Southland conference ever moves up to FBS, I see the Big Ten, SEC, etc. starting their own division because FBS has become too "watered-down."

Too late for that xcoffeex

MplsBison

July 24th, 2008, 10:15 PM

No surprise seeing it going to 24. I was against the move to 20, 24 coming was plain as day and if it goes to 32 I say "what the hell, let's go to 64".xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex

Because 64 adds another week to the playoffs. Up to 32 keeps it at 5 weeks.

What the hell was wrong with having a playoff of the top 16 teams vie for a National Championship?

Deserving teams are left out.

GOKATS

July 24th, 2008, 11:15 PM

Because 64 adds another week to the playoffs. Up to 32 keeps it at 5 weeks.

Deserving teams are left out.

Not worth a response.xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex

Lionsrking

July 24th, 2008, 11:46 PM

Here's the post...

http://forums.delphiforums.com/geauxcowboys/messages/?msg=9012.1

11 games in 11 weeks does not help the SLC with scheduling, because with that extra week of the schedule for all teams, there is more flexibility to make things happen.

If anyone has followed the SLC for the last few years (notably since 2005), scheduling issues have not been kind to the conference and has led the majority of the SLC to schedule 'out' of the playoffs. In fact, with about a month of play remaining last year, only the AQ (if not McNeese) was assured of making the playoffs.

The SLC is all about the playoffs, but if it were not for a) the addition of Lamar and b) the SWAC tossing the mandate -- the league would continue to have a flux of scheduling issues which would not help the league make the playoffs and therefore impact the desire of the league to stay in FCS.

I'm not happy about playing 11 games in a 11 weeks, but I'm all for expanding the playoffs. 24 for sure and I would like to see 32 ideally. I disagree with those who say it "waters" it down and makes the regular season less meaningful...if anything, it makes it more meaningful to more schools. Plus it gives some wiggle room to schedule multiple guarantee games and tougher non-conference opponents. I know there are plenty of folks who disagree, and I may be in the minority, but that's okay...that's how I feel.

MplsBison

July 25th, 2008, 09:36 AM

Not worth a response.xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex xwhistlex

Translation: I have no counter argument.

slostang

July 25th, 2008, 09:51 AM

I'm not happy about playing 11 games in a 11 weeks, but I'm all for expanding the playoffs. 24 for sure and I would like to see 32 ideally. I disagree with those who say it "waters" it down and makes the regular season less meaningful...if anything, it makes it more meaningful to more schools. Plus it gives some wiggle room to schedule multiple guarantee games and tougher non-conference opponents. I know there are plenty of folks who disagree, and I may be in the minority, but that's okay...that's how I feel.

I agree with you on 24, but I think that 32 is too many. Had the playoffs been at even 18 in 2004, a very good and very deserving 9-2 Cal Poly team would have made the playoffs. If they did, I think that they would have made some noise. Their defense was one of the top defenses in the FCS and had three future Buck Buchanan winners starting on it (Beck, Gocong and Shotwell).

I think it is easy for the fans of teams that are playoff regulars to want to see the playoffs kept at 16, but for fans of teams that have been deserving and left out in favor of a school that is getting in on reputation alone, expanding the playoffs is a good thing.

aust42

July 25th, 2008, 10:10 AM

Wow, if it goes to 24 teams, there will be some bad teams making the playoff field.

DetroitFlyer

July 25th, 2008, 11:26 AM

Wow, if it goes to 24 teams, there will be some bad teams making the playoff field.

Yeah, we sure would not want more teams like the MEAC Champion, the OVC Champion, or the Patriot League Champion in the playoffs....

I think we should simply change the name of the FCS playoffs to what many on this board desire:

FBS Wannabee Playoffs!

Yeah, kind of has a nice ring to it....

There is absolutely nothing better that could happen to FCS than to get all of these FBS wannabees out of the division ASAP. How I long for the day....

TexasTerror

July 25th, 2008, 11:40 AM

There is absolutely nothing better that could happen to FCS than to get all of these FBS wannabees out of the division ASAP. How I long for the day....

And there's nothing more I'd like for the NCAA to form a subdivision for programs like Dayton and Butler, who can not properly maintain a footing with the rest of FCS, but continue to play football at the Division I level. That's one of the bigger problems the NCAA has...may encourage the Stetsons, Detroit Mercys, etc if they had a 1 in 16 chance of competing for a national title.

MplsBison

July 25th, 2008, 12:14 PM

I'd actually like to see the playoffs expand to 32 teams.

It's a nice reward for teams to make the playoffs after spending all that money during the regular season to field a team.

Almost no schools make money in FCS. That's not the point in this division.

BeauFoster

July 25th, 2008, 12:24 PM

I agree with her - I'm looking forward to the 7th season of 24, too.

Oh, wait. She wasn't talking about Jack Bauer? Playoffs to 24 teams? Further dilutes an already weak field (of 20 teams).

DetroitFlyer

July 25th, 2008, 12:36 PM

And there's nothing more I'd like for the NCAA to form a subdivision for programs like Dayton and Butler, who can not properly maintain a footing with the rest of FCS, but continue to play football at the Division I level. That's one of the bigger problems the NCAA has...may encourage the Stetsons, Detroit Mercys, etc if they had a 1 in 16 chance of competing for a national title.

Not gonna happen! The teams of the NEC, PFL, PL, Ivy League, and others that do not provide a full complement of 63 athletic scholarships are firmly entrenched in FCS by the NCAA. The FBS Wannabees, however, are free to move up as soon as the moratorium is lifted. Start planning now so you will be ready when it is lifted. Oh, and do not let the door hit you on the way out!

TexasTerror

July 25th, 2008, 01:46 PM

I'd actually like to see the playoffs expand to 32 teams.

32 teams? That's like the bowl system where a large percentage of teams get rewarded. There aren't even 32 teams with at least seven Div I wins, are there?

Almost no schools make money in FCS. That's not the point in this division.

I thought the point of FCS was cost-contained football...

Lionsrking

July 25th, 2008, 01:50 PM

Wow, if it goes to 24 teams, there will be some bad teams making the playoff field.

I guarantee you there won't be any BAD teams make the playoffs if it goes to 24. There may be some teams that aren't as good relative to others or some that many consider mediocre, but there won't be any BAD teams.

Lionsrking

July 25th, 2008, 02:01 PM

32 teams? That's like the bowl system where a large percentage of teams get rewarded. There aren't even 32 teams with at least seven Div I wins, are there?

I thought the point of FCS was cost-contained football...

The seven D-I win requirement is B.S. anyway. If you take our '08 schedule, hypothetically, we could go 8-4, with two FBS losses and two conference losses and not reach the seven win minimum because we have South Dakota and North Dakota on our schedule. Neither are counters this year but are better than a majority of FCS schools. And we're not playing them because we're trying to schedule easy wins...we're playing because we couldn't find anyone else and we also needed some home games. 8-4 may not be good enough for the playoffs anyway, but that would still be a pretty good season against our schedule, and should be considered.

MplsBison

July 25th, 2008, 02:01 PM

32 teams? That's like the bowl system where a large percentage of teams get rewarded. There aren't even 32 teams with at least seven Div I wins, are there?

Seven DI wins is a guideline, not a rule AFAIK.

I thought the point of FCS was cost-contained football...

FCS is perpetuated by the fact that schools playing DI bball must play DI football. Take that rule away and you could legitimally have just a single DI division with perhaps an upgraded maximum scholarship limit on DII.

bluehenbillk

July 25th, 2008, 02:09 PM

I guarantee you there won't be any BAD teams make the playoffs if it goes to 24. There may be some teams that aren't as good relative to others or some that many consider mediocre, but there won't be any BAD teams.

That's the whole point, why should a mediocre team be awarded a playoff berth?? You're going to have a slew of 7-4 teams make it & you'll probably see a 6-5 team make it at some point too. Shouldn't the postseason be a reward for a great season?

McTailGator

July 25th, 2008, 02:37 PM

TT adding 4 more teams does nothing, it doesn't add any weeks or take any away from the regular season. If the SLC is staying now that the playoffs went to 20 it would make no sense to leave if it goes to 24.

BTW, I think a league like the Southland actually benefits from going to 24, I think the SLC will be a two bid league most years with that type of format.

The SLC or any other conference does not need a 2nd bid.

IF YOU CAN'T WIN YOUR CONFERENCE, YOU DON'T DESERVE A SHOT AT A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

WE NEED 12 REGULAR SEASON GAMES, AND THE PLAYOFFS NEEDS TO NOT START UNTIL DECEMBER.

I-AA Fan

July 25th, 2008, 02:52 PM

um, it's still going to be 11 games in 11 weeks with 24 (or even 32) teams making the playoffs.

Actually, 24 is perfect. There are 8 teams now that receive auto-bids, & they receive a bye week with 24-teams. The remaining 16 teams play each other. Then the remaining play. It adds one week (5 total), the same as 18 or 20 will do. DIII used to do this & I think DII still does.

dbackjon

July 25th, 2008, 02:53 PM

Lionsrking

July 25th, 2008, 03:22 PM

IF YOU CAN'T WIN YOUR CONFERENCE, YOU DON'T DESERVE A SHOT AT A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

A lot of people, including myself, would disagree with that notion. It's very possible to have the two best teams in the country in the same league, and using your logic, one of them would not deserve a playoff bid.

Lionsrking

July 25th, 2008, 03:28 PM

Actually, 24 is perfect. There are 8 teams now that receive auto-bids, & they receive a bye week with 24-teams. The remaining 16 teams play each other. Then the remaining play. It adds one week (5 total), the same as 18 or 20 will do. DIII used to do this & I think DII still does.

32 is better in my opinion. Sure, there may be some teams that get in who are borderline, or maybe even below, but there will be little doubt that all deserving teams will be in. Plus it makes the entire season more meaningful for more schools.

MplsBison

July 25th, 2008, 03:28 PM

Absolutely.

If anything, I'd like to see the entire field selected by committee.

RabidRabbit

July 25th, 2008, 03:50 PM

The SLC or any other conference does not need a 2nd bid.

IF YOU CAN'T WIN YOUR CONFERENCE, YOU DON'T DESERVE A SHOT AT A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

WE NEED 12 REGULAR SEASON GAMES, AND THE PLAYOFFS NEEDS TO NOT START UNTIL DECEMBER.

I will note that Delaware 07, and I believe UNI 06 were not the auto-qualifiers, and neither was App St. in 2007. So that argument is bogus.xnonox