7-4 vs 8-3

[umassfan]

I have a quick question... Do you think a team would get in with a 8-3 record(1 win over D-II team) over a team 7-4(1 loss vs I-A)?

[Eagle22]

I have a quick question... Do you think a team would get in with a 8-3 record(1 win over D-II team) over a team 7-4(1 loss vs I-A)?

I'd say almost everytime.

Assuming you're only talking about at-large entries, right ?

[umassfan]

I'd say almost everytime.

Assuming you're only talking about at-large entries, right ?
Yes I am talking about At-Large...

So by your theory it pays more to play a D-II and win over a I-A and loose... because really that is the only thing different between the 8-3 and 7-4. Both would have 7 D-IAA wins.

[Eagle22]

Considering how few 7-4 at-large teams have ever made the playoffs ... I'd say that it's not really theory ... it's pretty much fact.

[umassfan]

Considering how few 7-4 at-large teams have ever made the playoffs ... I'd say that it's not really theory ... it's pretty much fact.
Prior to this season didnt they have an unwriten rule that 4 losses will not get you in the playoffs... didnt they change that unwriten rule to 7 I-AA wins will get you in? I dont know maybe that is just my impression.

[Tod]

Prior to this season didnt they have an unwriten rule that 4 losses will not get you in the playoffs... didnt they change that unwriten rule to 7 I-AA wins will get you in? I dont know maybe that is just my impression.

I don't believe the rules were ever that constraining. They're open to the point that 7-4 could get you in, but the odds were very much against it. Now they're written so that it looks pretty bad if you don't have 7 D-I wins, but it's not a set-in-stone type of rule.

In your example, I think a lot would have to do with strength of schedule, etc.

[Eagle22]

There may be a new paradigm at work with the 7 win deal in effect, but until I see some 7-4 squads picked over 8-3 teams ... I'm not buying.

[rokamortis]

The 8-3 team has a DII win - so the are really a 7 win team. I think the committee will see these teams as having similar records and will have to choose.

[FlyYtown]

Considering the circumstances; I'd have to say there is a good chance those 7-4 teams also beat a Division II School. So most definately 8-3.

[SoCon48]

I have a quick question... Do you think a team would get in with a 8-3 record(1 win over D-II team) over a team 7-4(1 loss vs I-A)?

To the selection committee, an 8-3 team with one of those being a D-II win, is in actuality a 7-3 team. Period. So go from there in your comparison.


JCline

[ISUMatt]

In the interest of my Redbirds, I hope the 7-4 team with an all D-I schedule makes. I know odds are slim and none, but we can always hope!!! We mey be the best 7-4 team not to get into the playoffs!

[Cincy App]

Prior to this season didnt they have an unwriten rule that 4 losses will not get you in the playoffs... didnt they change that unwriten rule to 7 I-AA wins will get you in? I dont know maybe that is just my impression.

The rule has been changed to 7 Division I wins but I'm very skeptical that the Selection Committee will apply it. I won't believe it until I see it.

I really hope they do invite a 7-4 team - it's ridiculous that the playoff selection system encourages teams to play weak schedules. IMO, the strongest 8 at-larges should be selected.

[rokamortis]

The rule has been changed to 7 Division I wins but I'm very skeptical that the Selection Committee will apply it. I won't believe it until I see it.

I really hope they do invite a 7-4 team - it's ridiculous that the playoff selection system encourages teams to play weak schedules. IMO, the strongest 8 at-larges should be selected.

They don't look at just w/l record.

[bkrownd]

I really hope they do invite a 7-4 team - it's ridiculous that the playoff selection system encourages teams to play weak schedules. IMO, the strongest 8 at-larges should be selected.

Compare with the lacrosse selection committee, where W-L isn't too important, and "quality wins" pretty much determine everything. 8-7? That's a playoff spot if you beat 2 or 3 top-10s. 15-0? Without an autobid you're gonna stay home if none of those 15 are first-tier.

[ChickenMan]

I have a quick question... Do you think a team would get in with a 8-3 record(1 win over D-II team) over a team 7-4(1 loss vs I-A)?


no win vs Hofstra = no playoffs for UMass

[lugo02]

I think a 7-4 UMass should get in over an 8-3 Younstown St. and I don't even like UMass.

[RatboyNU]

go ask coach brown if a 8-4 team will make the playoffs and he will tell you NO especially since that Northeastern 8-4 team beat the #1 team in the country who went on to win the National Title that year Deleware. The loss to Harvard may have seriously swayed the committee but they were a good team that year to going undefeated. NU wont he conference the year ebfore and didnt even get a chance the second year.

[lugo02]

The rule has been changed to 7 Division I wins but I'm very skeptical that the Selection Committee will apply it. I won't believe it until I see it.

I really hope they do invite a 7-4 team - it's ridiculous that the playoff selection system encourages teams to play weak schedules. IMO, the strongest 8 at-larges should be selected.

No I don't think the rule is meant to encourage playing weaker schedules. Rather it encourages that you play within your own division, and discourages both D-II games and I-A money games.

[Cincy App]

No I don't think the rule is meant to encourage playing weaker schedules. Rather it encourages that you play within your own division, and discourages both D-II games and I-A money games.

The bottom line is that your overall record has been weighed heavier than your strength of schedule in prior years. Accordingly, I think the Selection Committee indirectly encourages teams to play lighter schedules.

IMO, games against non-scholarship I-AA games should not be credited towards the "7 win" requirement either. For instance, I believe that the top Division II teams are stronger than the non-scholarship teams.

The I-A games are a tricky subject. They generally hurt your W-L record but most I-AA players enjoy the chance to face off against I-A teams. More importantly, Division I-AA football is "cost containment" football. Receiving a big paycheck doesn't lower your gross operating costs but it sure helps your net cost of running the program.

[umassfan]

Considering the circumstances; I'd have to say there is a good chance those 7-4 teams also beat a Division II School. So most definately 8-3.
If you look at the question I said both teams had 7 I-AA wins... if the 7-4 team beat a D II team then they wouldnt have 7 D-I AA wins now would they?

[lugo02]

...IMO, games against non-scholarship I-AA games should not be credited towards the "7 win" requirement either. For instance, I believe that the top Division II teams are stronger than the non-scholarship teams.

But I-AA Non-Schollie are still I-AA. The IVY League is Non-Schollie, should games against them be treated as D-II games?


...Receiving a big paycheck doesn't lower your gross operating costs but it sure helps your net cost of running the program.

Get your check and watch the playoff's while gripping about your supperior SOS.

[SoCon48]

But I-AA Non-Schollie are still I-AA. The IVY League is Non-Schollie, should games against them be treated as D-II games?



Get your check and watch the playoff's while gripping about your supperior SOS.

Not even in the same way Middle Tennessee State is in the Div I-A with Southern Cal, Notre Dame, etc.

A non scholly is a team having to play with one arm tied behind their back. Believe me. We stomped Davidson for years.
It's like playing GSU or Furman with all your own scholarship players benched and using only the walk-ons. It would be pathetic.

[SoCon48]

IMO, games against non-scholarship I-AA games should not be credited towards the "7 win" requirement either. For instance, I believe that the top Division II teams are stronger than the non-scholarship teams.



Exactly. Can't figure out why that is so hard to understand. As things stand, it's unfair that there aren't enough of those poor guys to go around to pad the rest of our scheds. :D

[SoCon48]

But I-AA Non-Schollie are still I-AA. The IVY League is Non-Schollie, should games against them be treated as D-II games?



Get your check and watch the playoff's while gripping about your supperior SOS.

We gained FAR and away more respect losing to LSU than we did beating the **** out of Coastal. And a H of a lot of recruiting interest.

[umassfan]

Exactly. Can't figure out why that is so hard to understand. As things stand, it's unfair that there aren't enough of those poor guys to go around to pad the rest of our scheds. :D
They count because they are I-AA not DII... I cant figure out why that is so hard to understand.

[SoCon48]

They count because they are I-AA not DII... I cant figure out why that is so hard to understand.

It IS hard for us to understand who aren't out there looking for pussies to pad our schedule. We believe in quality football not sleight of hand tricks to LOOK like a good team. Much rather stay home for the play-offs than to play wussies all season to get in.

Esse Quam Videri.

[SoCon48]

They count because they are I-AA not DII... I cant figure out why that is so hard to understand.

The really hard part is to understand what the hell they are doing in I-AA with the exception of the older traditional football programs.

[umassfan]

It IS hard for us to understand who aren't out there looking for pussies to pad our schedule.
Sorry all of us dont have Citadels, ELONs and TENN CHATTYs to pad our schedule with every year in the A10.

[Cincy App]

But I-AA Non-Schollie are still I-AA. The IVY League is Non-Schollie, should games against them be treated as D-II games?

Get your check and watch the playoff's while gripping about your supperior SOS.

non-scholly:
I thought the Ivies had some scholarship help. Regardless, most Ivy teams play respectable football and I didn't intend to classify the Ivy (or Patriot conference, for that matter) as non-scholly. It's the MAAC, Northeast, Pioneer conferences, etc. that I'm talking about. It's an absolute joke that those schools are considered I-AA.

SOS:
ASU has qualified for the playoffs so I guess we have both our check and the playoffs this year. Anyway, finances are a part of I-AA football. As well, I guess I don't get excited about the chance to play St Peters or Austin Peay in football.

[ngineer]

Who the heck knows. "Justice" by committee is like watch hotdogs being made. Look at WKU two years ago with two D-II wins and still leapfrogging in.
Really difficult to say what they focus on. What you've done 'recently' or entire 'work of art' over the entire season, plus reputation of the league and past playoff history. A lot of ingredients--just like hotdogs.... xpumpukex

[UMass922]

I have a quick question... Do you think a team would get in with a 8-3 record(1 win over D-II team) over a team 7-4(1 loss vs I-A)?

Anxious about the Hofstra game, are we?
;)

[Mr. C]

Sorry all of us dont have Citadels, ELONs and TENN CHATTYs to pad our schedule with every year in the A10.Citadel gave Florida State all it wanted until getting worn down in the second half and played well against Mississipi. They have a very good defense, but lack talent on offense at this point. Kevin Higgins is a great coach and will turn the Dogs around, just like he did at Lehigh. Chattanooga is a very good team this year and gave ASU its toughest game outside of Furman in I-AA. Chattanooga has a very good offensive line and a great running back in Buckley. This is a team to keep an eye on in the years ahead. As far as Elon is concerned, every league has one team that is a bottom feeder, even the mighty A-10 (Northeastern seems to be that team this year).

[umassfan]

Anxious about the Hofstra game, are we?
;)
I wasnt even asking meaning UMass... I did think of the question because of UMass but I think after Hofstras problems with Northeastern, we should win that one.

[UMass922]

I wasnt even asking meaning UMass... I did think of the question because of UMass but I think after Hofstras problems with Northeastern, we should win that one.

I think it's a loseable game for us. Hofstra struggled with Northeastern, but they also came within inches of beating UNH. So it's hard to say which Hofstra team will show up. For our sake, I hope it's the former. In any case, we'd do ourselves a big favor by not beating ourselves with penalties. That's what really worries me.

[Maroon&White]

I think it's a loseable game for us.

Any and every game is loseable.

[RatboyNU]

Hofstra has a very very good defensive line Umass better bring there A game for the pass rush

[Maroon&White]

Hofstra has a very very good defensive line Umass better bring there A game for the pass rush

Just what they need after the Army DL manhandled the UMass OL.

[HensRock]

I-AA is right. THe real question you are asking is would a 7-3 team be picked over a 7-4 team. That is exactly the way the committee will evaluate it. I think when you look at it that way, the answer is pretty obvious.

The selection guidelines (I won't call them rules), do not eliminate a team with less than 7 D-I wins. Such a team would be "in jeopardy" of not being selected.

If UMass loses to Hofstra, they are a bubble team at 7-4 and this year, probably left out of the dance. A loss also eliminates them from any possible A-10 auto bid.

[UMass922]

Any and every game is loseable.

Nah. You know what I mean. Of course, technically speaking, every game is loseable and every game is winnable.

What I mean is that we could play a good game and still get beat. Which wouldn't be the case if we were playing, say, Iona.