Should OVC lose playoff auto-bid?

[TTUEagles]

No. Come on...

[danefan]

No one needs to lose at-larges.

But the OVC should not be a two-bid league, IMO.

[FCS Go!]

If that means 9 at large, maybe, but there really isn't anyone else to give their auto to. With the playoff expansion it doesn't matter anyway. Match an OVC up with a Big South or NEC and they'll get their win.






xpopcornx

[MoreheadEagle]

Give up their extra bid to a school from another conference (PFL) who does well. Dayton or SD have had legit arguments for making the playoff over two OVC teams.

[danefan]

If that means 9 at large, maybe, but there really isn't anyone else to give their auto to. With the playoff expansion it doesn't matter anyway. Match an OVC up with a Big South or NEC and they'll get their win.

xpopcornx

I'd say the winner of the OVC is always likely to be a top 15 team and they should beat the winner of the NEC or Big South.

[UNI Pike]

Sorry, but the AGS server flaked out on the message, but accepted the title of the post xconfusedx

The post deals with OVC history - 1993 was the start of the AQ system

OVC history (http://www.ovcsports.com//pdf2/132714.pdf?SPSID=31024&SPID=2441&DB_OEM_ID=6200)

2000 - 2007 playoff bids 12, 1 win
1993 - 2007 playoff bids 22, 3 wins

MVFC / Gateway football in comparison (http://www.fcspreview.com/history.html) (I may be off +/- because of the teams joining & leaving)

2000 - 2007 playoff bids 19, 21 win
1993 - 2007 playoff bids 30, 34 wins

[danefan]

Sorry, but the AGS server flaked out on the message, but accepted the title of the post xconfusedx

The post deals with OVC history - 1993 was the start of the AQ system

OVC history (http://www.ovcsports.com//pdf2/132714.pdf?SPSID=31024&SPID=2441&DB_OEM_ID=6200)

2000 - 2007 playoff bids 12, 1 win
1993 - 2007 playoff bids 22, 3 wins

MVFC / Gateway football in comparison (http://www.fcspreview.com/history.html) (I may be off +/- because of the teams joining & leaving)

2000 - 2007 playoff bids 19, 21 win
1993 - 2007 playoff bids 30, 34 wins

Does the OVC numbers include wins by teams who are no longer in the league?

[UNI Pike]

I believe it counts members at the time, I took it from the OVC press guide.

[danefan]

I believe it counts members at the time, I took it from the OVC press guide.

it does. The one OVC playoff win in this decade was by WKU.xreadx

Last playoff win by a current OVC member was 1996 with Murray State.

In the AQ era (post 1993) the second bid from the OVC has NEVER won a playoff game.

[Panthers_Blue]

Are we already complaining about this............


xeyebrowx

[appfan2008]

we complain and argue about this EVERY year... so what they arent going to lose it anytime soon even though it is obvious they have no business get an AQ

[appfan2008]

we complain and argue about this EVERY year... so what they arent going to lose it anytime soon even though it is obvious they have no business get an AQ

[UNI Pike]

AGS not working well

Not complaining, just asking a valid question. OVC needs to win some games otherwise they are going to be viewed as the equivalent of the 65th seed.

[wkuhillhound]

it does. The one OVC playoff win in this decade was by WKU.xreadx

Last playoff win by a current OVC member was 1996 with Murray State.

In the AQ era (post 1993) the second bid from the OVC has NEVER won a playoff game.

Ding! DingYou would be correct. Two after leaving the OVC, WKU wins the National Championship. What could have been for the OVC if they had not imposed their all or nothing mentality on the Toppers? xnonono2x xnonono2x xsmhx xsmhx

[wkuhillhound]

it does. The one OVC playoff win in this decade was by WKU.xreadx

Last playoff win by a current OVC member was 1996 with Murray State.

In the AQ era (post 1993) the second bid from the OVC has NEVER won a playoff game.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! You would be correct. Two years after leaving the OVC, WKU wins the National Championship. What could have been for the OVC if they had not imposed their all or nothing mentality on the Toppers? xnonono2x xnonono2x xsmhx xsmhx

Since WKU left the MVFC or Gateway, no national championships for the conference. xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx

[bluehenbillk]

The bottom line is we have 3 lesser to non-competitive autobid leagues right now, the MEAC & Patriot & to a lesse extent the OVC. There should be some kind of standard set, you have to win at least once every "x" amount of years to keep it.

[GannonFan]

The expansion of the playoffs next year (?) have already taken care of this. Every conference that has the required number of teams and has a desire to be in the playoffs is getting an automatic qualifier. It's not like the OVC AQ is stopping anyone else's conference from getting a team in. And now 10 at large bids to be shared by the CAA, SoCon, and occassionally some other teams. Don't see any issue with that at all.

[danefan]

Expansion starts in 2010.

And like I've said earlier. the OVC doesn't deserve to lose its AQ. It just shouldn't be getting multiple bids.

[TTUEagles]

Every season is different. Don't punish the 2008 OVC teams by what the 2002 teams did. You have to base AQ on the strength of the conference as a whole, not whether or not they've won X amt of playoff games. I have never read anywhere that OVC fans, teams, coaches, etc. think the OVC is better than the SoCon, Southland, Big Sky, CAA, Gateway, etc., far from it, in my opinion. But, it's still a quality, long-established FCS league and does deserve an AQ. Multiple bids simply should be on a year-by-year/case-by-case basis; and I do agree here that not winning playoff games should influence only multiple bids.
Of course, what the hell do I know, I'm a fan of a team who hasn't won this damned league since 1975!

[Sonic98]

They should have at least 1 bid. If you take their's, then you have to take the bids of all our conferences in other sports if you go by the rationale of taking away the bids of conferences who don't do well. Give them time, they will come around. I just wish the playoffs started a couple weeks later.

[UAalum72]

The bottom line is we have 3 lesser to non-competitive autobid leagues right now, the MEAC & Patriot & to a lesse extent the OVC.
The Patriot League has had more playoff success in this century than the OVC or MEAC

[Franks Tanks]

The Patriot League has had more playoff success in this century than the OVC or MEAC

THANK YOU-- Even with that said no way should the OVC or the MEAC lose the auto.

[bigbluetiger]

Should Ohio State be kicked out of the BCS?

[UNI Pike]

They should have at least 1 bid. If you take their's, then you have to take the bids of all our conferences in other sports if you go by the rationale of taking away the bids of conferences who don't do well. Give them time, they will come around. I just wish the playoffs started a couple weeks later.

As my favorite Economics professor once said "Eventually, we're all dead". How long do you give a conference to show they belong? 10 years too many?



Should Ohio State be kicked out of the BCS?

They need their paycheck game also, apparently. xlolx At least the fallacy was exposed in September rather than January. Being the best team in a mediocre / bad conference = 2007 Hawaii not 2006 Boise State (98 times out of 100 at least).

[JaxSinfonian]

Should OVC lose playoff auto-bid?

No.

[OSRacer]

no

[PantherRob82]

They shouldn't lose it, but they better not be getting byes if they don't improve their play before expansion.

[aust42]

Should OVC lose playoff auto-bid?

Stupid question considering their expanding the playoff field in a couple years. The OVC, MEAC, NEC and whoever else their giving an auto bid to will just be destroyed in the 1st round by one of the CAA, MVC, Southern, Big Sky teams.

[DSUrocks07]

AGS not working well

Not complaining, just asking a valid question. OVC needs to win some games otherwise they are going to be viewed as the equivalent of the 65th seed.

hey thats OUR mantle...xthumbsupx

xnonono2x

[Mr. Tiger]

No. The OVC and any other conference that meets the requirements should be awarded automatic bids. We should not use history to keep teams or conferences out of the playoff system because each year is a different year. And the system works. The weak teams are matched against the strong in the first round and a true champion is determined on the field.

[Golden Eagle]

As my favorite Economics professor once said "Eventually, we're all dead". How long do you give a conference to show they belong? 10 years too many?

The OVC doesn't have to prove anything to deserve an auto-bid. We could lose a hundred straight years in the playoffs and still deserve it just as much as the Gateway. We offer the same amount of scholarships as any autobid conference in I-AA, and that is the only criteria that should be used.

[DetroitFlyer]

The OVC doesn't have to prove anything to deserve an auto-bid. We could lose a hundred straight years in the playoffs and still deserve it just as much as the Gateway. We offer the same amount of scholarships as any autobid conference in I-AA, and that is the only criteria that should be used.


Yep, typical OVC, (and NCAA and AGS attitude).... You pay your money, (athletic scholarships), and you buy your bid. NCAA corruption at its finest. Just a slight refinement of the FBS corruption.... Sad on so many levels....

Those of you that think the FCS Championship is 100% decided on the field need to talk to me about a bridge I have for sale....xrolleyesx

[UAalum72]

We offer the same amount of scholarships as any autobid conference in I-AA, and that is the only criteria that should be used.
That's not even a criterion, and given the results it doesn't seem to have any effect.

[Hansel]

dump all the autobids xnodx

[Killtoppers90]

Having been in both the OVC and the Gateway, I believe that the OVC should lose their bid and give it to the Gateway. The OVC is a dying conference - the membership numbers are declining, the playoff appearances are "one and dones"; while the Gateway is a murder's row, with strong teams throughout (mostly), some of which deserve a playoff bid but not getting it.

[FCS Go!]

dump all the autobids xnodx

Probably the fairest way to do it but there would still be de-facto auto bids for the current ab holders (except maybe Patriot League).

[Killtoppers90]

Having been in both the OVC and the Gateway, I believe that the OVC should lose their bid and give it to the Gateway. The OVC is a dying conference - the membership numbers are declining, the playoff appearances are "one and dones"; while the Gateway is a murder's row, with strong teams throughout (mostly), some of which deserve a playoff bid but not getting it.

[UAalum72]

Probably the fairest way to do it but there would still be de-facto auto bids for the current ab holders (except maybe Patriot League).
Again, why the hate for the PL but still give a pass to the OVC and MEAC, which have not done even as well as the Patriot lately?

[grayghost06]

No. The OVC and any other conference that meets the requirements should be awarded automatic bids. We should not use history to keep teams or conferences out of the playoff system because each year is a different year. And the system works. The weak teams are matched against the strong in the first round and a true champion is determined on the field.

As long as a conference is giving a certain minimum of scholarships ( or whatever the Ivy/Patriot types give), I say let them keep their auto-bid. One thing to note though. FBS membership requires that member schools fund the equivalent of 90% of the scholarship max. I think FCS should do the same, but perhaps lower that figure to 80%. And as far as the above quote that the system works and the weak teams are matched w/ the strong in the first round....I only need to point to the 2006 FCS season. The Tournament Committee paired JMU & Youngstown in the first round. Because NDSU was ineligible that year, the JMU-Ytown game was a 4 vs 5 matchup- hardley fair to either team. Ideally, both teams would have been playing the 12th & 13th best teams and both teams should have been playing at home.

[danefan]

As long as a conference is giving a certain minimum of scholarships ( or whatever the Ivy/Patriot types give), I say let them keep their auto-bid. One thing to note though. FBS membership requires that member schools fund the equivalent of 90% of the scholarship max. I think FCS should do the same, but perhaps lower that figure to 80%. And as far as the above quote that the system works and the weak teams are matched w/ the strong in the first round....I only need to point to the 2006 FCS season. The Tournament Committee paired JMU & Youngstown in the first round. Because NDSU was ineligible that year, the JMU-Ytown game was a 4 vs 5 matchup- hardley fair to either team. Ideally, both teams would have been playing the 12th & 13th best teams and both teams should have been playing at home.

Why do you insist on a specific number of scholarships? Shouldn't you insist on the quality of play? That is clearly not a direct correlation. 63 rides (or 50 as you have indicated 80%) does not necessarily equate to a good team. Isn't the goal to get the best teams in the playoffs?
That has been proven.

[UAalum72]

My guess is that the OVC proposal was for a minimum of 50 not because it's 80%, but because it would be sure to include all the current autobid conferences while excluding everyone else. That's why they wouldn't propose 90% - either not all the OVC teams were there, or they wouldn't risk no votes from the Patriot and possibly the MEAC. Fortunately even that was rejected.

[WileECoyote06]

Why do you insist on a specific number of scholarships? Shouldn't you insist on the quality of play? That is clearly not a direct correlation. 63 rides (or 50 as you have indicated 80%) does not necessarily equate to a good team. Isn't the goal to get the best teams in the playoffs?
That has been proven.

Coming from Division II; believe me, that isn't what you want. The current system is great. Any changes from that, and you risk what almost happened in DII; splitting the division.

[USDFAN_55]

Why do you insist on a specific number of scholarships? Shouldn't you insist on the quality of play? That is clearly not a direct correlation. 63 rides (or 50 as you have indicated 80%) does not necessarily equate to a good team. Isn't the goal to get the best teams in the playoffs?
That has been proven.

Your thought process is way too logical for some people in herexlolx

[grayghost06]

Why do you insist on a specific number of scholarships? Shouldn't you insist on the quality of play? That is clearly not a direct correlation. 63 rides (or 50 as you have indicated 80%) does not necessarily equate to a good team. Isn't the goal to get the best teams in the playoffs?
That has been proven.

Yes, the goal is to get the best teams into the playoffs. As far as receiving an autobid though, I just feel that having a scholarship minimum demonstrates that a teams worthiness will have been demonstrated against a schedule slate that is on a more level playing field with other teams in consideration for playoff births. Sure you will always have a few low/ non scholarship schools that may be worthy of playoff consideration, but the conferences that they play in are weak in comparison to scholarship conferences. That's where the at large process comes into play. And like it or not, if you're playing a conference schedule against all non/low scholly teams- you're gonna have to prove your merit by scheduling & beating a couple of quality OOC teams to receive serious consideration.
I suppose it's just a committment thing for me and a way to strengthen FCS football. It just makes no sense to me to have a subdivision of Div I that includes schools with a lower level of committment than many D-2 schools.

[IndianaAppMan]

No. The OVC and any other conference that meets the requirements should be awarded automatic bids. We should not use history to keep teams or conferences out of the playoff system because each year is a different year. And the system works. The weak teams are matched against the strong in the first round and a true champion is determined on the field.

This isn't quite true. A few years ago, the NCAA stopped seeding the FCS playoffs 1-16 and now only has the top four teams seeded. The remaining teams are matched regionally, rather than by strongest-vs.-weakest, to reduce rising travel costs whenever possible. Since teams in the same conference cannot face each other in the first round, the new rules still require some teams to travel considerable distances. Thus last year Eastern Washington had to travel to McNeese State rather than the comparatively local Montana, which hosted far away Wofford.




I'd like to offer my opinion on whether the OVC should be allowed an autobid: OF COURSE THE SHOULD! When the MEAC, SoCon, Big South, and a half-dozen other conference champions fail notch a single NCAA Basketball Tournament win but once every ten or fifteen years, should they lose their autobid so another ACC, Big East, or Pac 10 team can get in? Absolutely not!

Look, 8 playoff spots for teams that likely came in below first place is a lot more than the two-team playoff that the FBS has, so it's rather sad that fans are whining about this. Is it fair if, hypothetically, a solid App State misses the playoffs this year because it fails to win the SoCon and has 3 or 4 tough losses, but a presumably weaker MEAC or OVC champion makes the playoffs? Probably not, but then again, life's not fair.

This happens in every sport. In the NFL, sometimes a team from the AFC misses the playoffs at 10-6 while an 8-8 or 9-7 NFC teams makes it. In the NBA, the Golden State Warriors missed the playoffs with 48 wins, which was more wins better than 5/8 Eastern Conference teams. The Toronto Blue Jays have missed the playoffs numerous times while much worse NL teams have made the playoffs.

In the FCS, there's a reason coaches put so much emphasis on winning the conference. Without winning the conference crown, there's never any certainty.

[WrenFGun]

The problem about insisting on a certain number of scholarships in conference is that while one team will succeed with 30 (Albany) or 0 (Dayton, San Diego), giving the autobid to a league that operates that way across the board is very risky because not every team will be on a level playing field. Without the additional scholarships (or no scholarships), the chances of variance within conference is very high. If FCS could guarantee that the quality of competition across the board in that conference was up to the standards of San Diego, Dayton and Albany, then yes, an autobid would be justified.

With that said, if Albany, Dayton and San Diego do enough in their OOC schedule to compensate for their "easy" matchups in conference, then I have little problem inviting them to the field. If Albany beats Delaware and runs the table, or if Dayton knocks of San Diego, Fordham and a third quality school, both have good arguments to be in the playoffs, IMO. Going undefeated against a bunch of bad competition is not good enough reason to be included, however.

[Franks Tanks]

Probably the fairest way to do it but there would still be de-facto auto bids for the current ab holders (except maybe Patriot League).

No NCAA tournament works this way. You just make an assertion such as this with no backing. The OVC, Patriot, and MEAC champs are much more competitive in the FCS playoffs then many other league champs are in other sports. NCAA mens and womens basketball is a prime example.

Also the Patriot league with no auto-bid would probably tear the league apart in football. We have members who are hot on schollys and others who are lukewarm or cold. I suspect the league will break up and those who want schollys will get them anbd join another league or from a new one. The auto helps keep the Patriot and other leagues together, it shouldnt be taken away.

[UNI Pike]

The difference is that there are 65 spots in March Madness, and currently only 16, soon 20 spots in FCS. That and the BB attempts to seed all teams, with regionalization much less of an issue.

It is what it is, but I don't like it.

[Maroons]

This point is moot in my opinion. There are enough at-large bids for the strong 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th (!) and so on place teams in the A-10, SoCon and Gateway to get into the playoffs. If you start stripping bids from CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS, you're just going to end up with more members of the same 3 conferences in the playoffs and then it loses its credibility as the avenue by which a champion is crowned on the field. As others have said, there is only 1 wild card in MLB per league and 2 in the NFL per conference. The playoffs should remain a place for champions to determine who is the nation's best.

I don't hold anything against any team that finishes 2nd, 3rd or lower in their conference and wins a national championship... but does it mean as much if it wasn't in a format that vanquished all of the champions?

As for the non-schollys... I don't really care if they get a team in or not. But I think the NCAA is in a very defensible position when they say that until non-scholarship teams provide the financial commitment to compete in the FCS, they are not welcome in the playoffs except in truly exceptional circumstances.

[UAalum72]

As for the non-schollys... I don't really care if they get a team in or not. But I think the NCAA is in a very defensible position when they say that until non-scholarship teams provide the financial commitment to compete in the FCS, they are not welcome in the playoffs except in truly exceptional circumstances.
I don't know anywhere the NCAA said anything about financial commitment; I-AA/FCS was founded as a cost-controlled subdivision. The competition committee is supposed to consider only performance. 'Financial commitment' was the heart of the OVC's proposals to limit autobid availability but the NCAA rejected it.

[UNIFanSince1983]

No league needs to lose an auto-bid. When the playoffs expand I think it is going to be great! Like the other person was pointing to in professional sports. This year the AL East will have 4 teams with more wins than the Dodgers who will win the NL West. It isn't fair, but it is the league they play in.

If the 4th or 5th best team in a big time conference like the SoCon or CAA doesn't make it they don't need to blame the OVC, MEAC, or Patriot team because they didn't make it. They know the rules prior to the year starting so either do better or suffer the consequences of not making into the playoffs.

[MoreheadEagle]

No league needs to lose an auto-bid. When the playoffs expand I think it is going to be great! Like the other person was pointing to in professional sports. This year the AL East will have 4 teams with more wins than the Dodgers who will win the NL West. It isn't fair, but it is the league they play in.

If the 4th or 5th best team in a big time conference like the SoCon or CAA doesn't make it they don't need to blame the OVC, MEAC, or Patriot team because they didn't make it. They know the rules prior to the year starting so either do better or suffer the consequences of not making into the playoffs.

xthumbsupx
Sums up my thought exactly

[Hoyadestroya85]

yes they should.. and the CAA should get a second autobid

[blur2005]

As my favorite Economics professor once said "Eventually, we're all dead". How long do you give a conference to show they belong? 10 years too many?
Well, you either had John Maynard Keynes as an ECON professor or yours used Keynes' famous quote.

On the topic at hand, there are reasons to argue for taking the OVC bid but with playoff expansion happening in the near future it's not going to be necessary.

[Franks Tanks]

yes they should.. and the CAA should get a second autobid

Why, the second place team in the CAA is guaranteed a playoff spot anyway.

[Khan4Cats]

In the FCS, there's a reason coaches put so much emphasis on winning the conference. Without winning the conference crown, there's never any certainty.

From a UNI fans' perspective. NO SH!!!T. 13 Play-Off Appearances in 23 years, 0 by way of an at-large selection.

[Khan4Cats]

And on to the question at hand, No.

[Sycamore51]

Why shouldn't the OVC keep their bid? The SoCon, CAA, and MVC have to pull their first round games from some place. We don't want to be playing our own conferences in the first round, why wouldn't you want an easy win. I think the worst team in FCS should get an auto bid too, just to play the number one seed. That might be only way my Syc's make it! :)

[hawkeye]

No league needs to lose an auto-bid. When the playoffs expand I think it is going to be great! Like the other person was pointing to in professional sports. This year the AL East will have 4 teams with more wins than the Dodgers who will win the NL West. It isn't fair, but it is the league they play in.

If the 4th or 5th best team in a big time conference like the SoCon or CAA doesn't make it they don't need to blame the OVC, MEAC, or Patriot team because they didn't make it. They know the rules prior to the year starting so either do better or suffer the consequences of not making into the playoffs.

Well said UNI. They should stop crying xbawlingx. You know what you have to do when the year starts. Win or go home. Everybody wants a second chance or they cry about it.