The CAA Today: Crow Really Tastes Bad!

[CSN-info]

Bruce Dowd, CSN columnist
http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/skins/andreas_01/img/CAATODAY.JPG
“Eating Crow (archaically, eating boiled crow) is an English idiom meaning humiliation by admitting wrongness or having been proven wrong after taking a strong position.” So, to all Montana fans and other fans out West, I was wrong! Northern Iowa and Montana both proved they belong with the best that the CAA has to offer and definitely deserved to be where they are.

http://www.collegesportingnews.com/stats/writer/CAA/Bruce_Eating_Crow_1.jpg

As an early Holiday Season present to all you folks out West, here are a few pictures for you to enjoy over the Holiday Season;

http://www.collegesportingnews.com/stats/writer/CAA/Bruce_Eating_Crow_2.jpg

And by the way, Crow tastes about as bad as you would think it would taste. Chewy and hard to swallow, kind of like one’s pride.Read more ... http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/index.php?blog=5&title=the-caa-today-crow-really-tastes-bad&disp=single&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

[uofmman1122]

xlolx

He says throughout the entire article that he doesn't want to diminish what Montana has done, but then does so in the last paragraph. xlolx

Prove him wrong again, Grizzlies! xthumbsupx

[Hoyadestroya85]

xlolx

He says throughout the entire article that he doesn't want to diminish what Montana has done, but then does so in the last paragraph. xlolx

Prove him wrong again, Grizzlies! xthumbsupx

he actually quickly counters the first point by saying that they haven't been tested since.. Maybe he's saying that they're a very good team?

[uofmman1122]

he actually quickly counters the first point by saying that they haven't been tested since.. Maybe he's saying that they're a very good team?Could be, but the feeling I got from reading it is that Montana has a killer O-line and.....Well, he didn't really talk about anything other than Montana's Amazing O-Line, and everything JMU did to lose the game. And even after commenting on how JMU couldn't shut down our O-Line, he still tried to play it off as something wrong with JMU. I'd go out and say another reason JMU lost was that Montana's Defense and Special teams were just better. Turnovers are huge, but it's not like they happen for no reason. xsmiley_wix

Not that I was expecting anything else, since he is a huge CAA homer. I've kind of gotten used to it by now. xlolx

Don't get me wrong, though, I still think it was a good article. xreadx

[purplepeopleeaterv2]

Could be, but the feeling I got from reading it is that Montana has a killer O-line and.....Well, he didn't really talk about anything other than Montana's Amazing O-Line, and everything JMU did to lose the game. And even after commenting on how JMU couldn't shut down our O-Line, he still tried to play it off as something wrong with JMU. I'd go out and say another reason JMU lost was that Montana's Defense and Special teams were just better. Turnovers are huge, but it's not like they happen for no reason. xsmiley_wix

Not that I was expecting anything else, since he is a huge CAA homer. I've kind of gotten used to it by now. xlolx

Don't get me wrong, though, I still think it was a good article. xreadx

Not nit-picking or anything but that is pretty much how I saw the game as well. JMU made mistakes Montana did not. JMU could not overcome said mistakes because Montana's Offensive line was punishing. Your QB and RB made their plays but I think it was truly because of that O-Line. Nothing wrong with giving credit to the unsung heroes.

[UNH Fanboi]

Meh, UNI beat the 4th best CAA team by 2 points and lost to the 3rd best team at home. How competitive do you think South Dakota State and Western Illinois would have been at JMU?

No one really questioned that UNI and Montana could compete with the best of the CAA. Rather, we've been pointing out that the CAA has much more depth than any other conference, which has not been refuted by any of the results in this years playoffs.

[bluehenbillk]

Hey the game on Friday night was a tale of 2 teams. JMU definitely didnt play up to par - 4 turnovers - you can't make it simpler than that.

I will say I was very impressed with Montana, especially on the offensive side of the ball. They seem to be very well-coached and executed their game plan well. They're also a pretty good tackling team, not the fastest team in the world, but they brought the ball carrier down when they got there.

[SideLine Shooter]

Not nit-picking or anything but that is pretty much how I saw the game as well. JMU made mistakes Montana did not. JMU could not overcome said mistakes because Montana's Offensive line was punishing. Your QB and RB made their plays but I think it was truly because of that O-Line. Nothing wrong with giving credit to the unsung heroes.

Maybe Montana had something to do with JMU making those mistakes.xbowx

[zymergy]

Not to take anything away from Montana, but JMU turned the ball over 4 times and lost their QB (lets face it he was more of a threat than the backup) before the first half was over and still was in the game only losing by 8.

Montana played very well and like others I was impressed with their Offense. I expect a good game Friday night between them and Richmond.

[GtFllsGriz]

Not to prolong all the debate about what could'a been guys but do you really think only bad things happened to JMU. Not everything went the Griz way. A dropped pass on the two yard line by a sure handed Senior receiver. If not for replay, the score is a much bigger butt kicking. I watched the game again last night on my DVR. Still don't agree with the replay rulings on the two point conversion and pass. A botched snap for two points! Come on, it isn't like only one team had negative things happen. That is the game.

Heck, we can go clear back to 2004 and talk about the field conditions in Chatty. Most reasonable fans realize that is football. JMU won that night, the Griz won on Friday. The better teams got it done, period.

[Black and Gold Express]

Not to take anything away from Montana, but JMU turned the ball over 4 times and lost their QB (lets face it he was more of a threat than the backup) before the first half was over and still was in the game only losing by 8.

And ASU had turned the ball over five times and were one play away from getting within 3 and having all the momentum against Richmond. And we were playing while missing many key players and having our trigger man at 70% max.

The point is, championship teams do not shoot themselves in the foot time and again. Championship teams survive the wear and tear and injuries by controlling the one game-changing event they can control - turnovers.

In the end, ASU and JMU still are the two most talented teams in I-AA this year. You would be hard pressed to prove otherwise. However, as has been proven on the field, they are not the two best teams in I-AA this year. The best teams in the nation do not kill themselves with eye-popping numbers of turnovers in a season, let alone a single game as both these teams did in their final games.

Montana and Richmond earned their spots there by playing the best when it matters the most. At the top of that list is not putting yourselves in huge holes with mistakes you can control.

[Ronbo]

We're just in a rebuilding year. We don't expect to be as talented as anyone else. Oh yeah, heart isn't measured at the combine.xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx

[bluehenbillk]

The one thing you can't discount is the other team typically has something to do with turnovers. Just because JMU turned the ball over 4 times, you have to realize Montana forced a number of those turnovers on solid tackling or the pick.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

Let's all keep in perspective that Bruce is the CAA beat writer - Sure he is biased and I don't blame him - I have not agreed with him many times over the years but let me tell you, he is a great guy and loves FCS football. He is will listen to your opinions and respond. I was able to meet him personally this season after I convinced him he had to see a game at The Rock and he is truly a great guy - If any of you Montana fans happen to see him at Chatty, go up and introduce yourself - He will love to talk FCS football with you and he knows his stuff --- As I have said on other posts, it is not an east coast bias we have, it is that we never get to see any of your teams play - so please keep that in mind. Also I was extremely impressed watching The Griz last Friday and I have seen Richmond - I think this will be a classic game - enjoy it --- Bruce Dowd is the best FCS writer in the business!!!! ----

[zymergy]

Thank goodness for DVR because after JMU kick Fg I went to get kids a snack and came back and the score was 14-3. I had to rewind to find out WTH happened.

Montana was playing great game no doubt about it. And I also had some questions on the replay officials calls. That last one on the Montana catch was really iffy.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

Per the 2 replay reversals that aided JMU - I was just watching the game - not caring who won - I don't see how either play was overturned from the call on the field - I guess the ALL-Powerful ACC booth refs wanted to again try to show their self-perceived dominance over us JV programs ----

[Proud Griz Man]

The one thing you can't discount is the other team typically has something to do with turnovers. Just because JMU turned the ball over 4 times, you have to realize Montana forced a number of those turnovers on solid tackling or the pick.

No Freekin' Way. Respect!

I have wondered if the CAA teams should play only 9 or 10 guys, just to level the playing field for the rest of the FCS. ;)

[RabidRabbit]

Meh, UNI beat the 4th best CAA team by 2 points and lost to the 3rd best team at home. How competitive do you think South Dakota State and Western Illinois would have been at JMU?

No one really questioned that UNI and Montana could compete with the best of the CAA. Rather, we've been pointing out that the CAA has much more depth than any other conference, which has not been refuted by any of the results in this years playoffs.

We'll never know....this year.

I would like to see more CAA vs MVFC match ups. I know SDSU has three games with Delaware starting in '10. How about it UNH, how about adding some Bison, Salukis, Trees, Bears, Leathernecks or Redbirds to your OOC soon? Rabbits are booked up until 2012, but we'd love to schedule good inter-league games with the CAA teams.

[UNIFanSince1983]

The pick that Dudzik threw was a great play by that Montana defender. And at least one of the other turnovers was caused by a Montana player getting their helmet in on the ball. I would have to go watch the game again to see about the other two, but at least two turnovers were because Montana forced them. So don't say JMU just gave the ball away because they didn't.

[Ronbo]

The pick that Dudzik threw was a great play by that Montana defender. And at least one of the other turnovers was caused by a Montana player getting their helmet in on the ball. I would have to go watch the game again to see about the other two, but at least two turnovers were because Montana forced them. So don't say JMU just gave the ball away because they didn't.

Both kick returns were strips.

[putter]

Montana forced all 4 turnovers and almost forced a 5th when the defender didn't know that receiver fumbled. McGee fumbled when hit from behind. Landers fumbled when hit from the side and #10 (can't remember his name) fumbled when hit from the side and Featherston, who caused the fumble, hustled to also recover it. JMU didn't drop those balls on their own so please stop saying you gave the game away.

Montana had 4 turnovers against Weber St and lost by 17. They played again and had 0 turnovers and won by 11. Yes, it is possible that if Montana and JMU played again that JMU would win but that does not matter. That would have been like saying, if Montana and JMU played again, on a good field, that Montana would win....wait xsmiley_wix

[19Duke97]

We're just in a rebuilding year. We don't expect to be as talented as anyone else. Oh yeah, heart isn't measured at the combine.xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx

I keep hearing that from UofM fans, but you all have 18 seniors on your team, which is actually more than JMU - how is that rebuilding???

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

I keep hearing that from UofM fans, but you all have 18 seniors on your team, which is actually more than JMU - how is that rebuilding???

Due to the number of starters being lost last year. I can't give an exact number off the top of my head, but it was a lot. Several are playing pro ball this year so it was easy for a lot of people to expect a down year from last.

[19Duke97]

Montana forced all 4 turnovers and almost forced a 5th when the defender didn't know that receiver fumbled. McGee fumbled when hit from behind. Landers fumbled when hit from the side and #10 (can't remember his name) fumbled when hit from the side and Featherston, who caused the fumble, hustled to also recover it. JMU didn't drop those balls on their own so please stop saying you gave the game away.

Montana had 4 turnovers against Weber St and lost by 17. They played again and had 0 turnovers and won by 11. Yes, it is possible that if Montana and JMU played again that JMU would win but that does not matter. That would have been like saying, if Montana and JMU played again, on a good field, that Montana would win....wait xsmiley_wix

Not true, we fumbled one without even being touched on a kickoff.... Look UofM won, but saying that turnovers was not a factor and that UofM forced all of them is just not true.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

Not true, we fumbled one without even being touched on a kickoff.... Look UofM won, but saying that turnovers was not a factor and that UofM forced all of them is just not true.

He picked that one up and then got hit again. Maybe he didn't get it fully put back or something, but he got hit and then the fumble came. That is how I remember one fumble on the kickoff.

[putter]

He picked that one up and then got hit again. Maybe he didn't get it fully put back or something, but he got hit and then the fumble came. That is how I remember one fumble on the kickoff.

Yep, he dropped the kick but picked it up and ran, what, 15 yards before being hit? How do you put one with the other?

[bandl]

He picked that one up and then got hit again. Maybe he didn't get it fully put back or something, but he got hit and then the fumble came. That is how I remember one fumble on the kickoff.


Yep, he dropped the kick but picked it up and ran, what, 15 yards before being hit? How do you put one with the other?

Does it matter? Really? Except for your pride in perhaps proving another poster wrong, does it really matter? xeyebrowx

[19Duke97]

You all are right - I was actually thinking of the one int he second half, but the Grizz defender put his hand directly on the ball, a perfect strip. Hard to tell if McGee ever did fully handle the ball, when you drop it, instinctually these guys want to make up for dropping it, sometimes forget to secure it really well, but unless you are on the field nearly impossible to tell....

[placidlakegriz]

Not true, we fumbled one without even being touched on a kickoff.... Look UofM won, but saying that turnovers was not a factor and that UofM forced all of them is just not true.

Both kick off fumbles were strips from the GRIZ.

[Ronbo]

I keep hearing that from UofM fans, but you all have 18 seniors on your team, which is actually more than JMU - how is that rebuilding???

Only 8 of those seniors were starters. We lost 15 starters and both kickers. We activated 12 true freshmen to fill spots left by 24 lost seniors.

It's a rebuilding year. You ought to read our fall prospectus, it didn't paint a very good picture on our upcoming season.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

Does it matter? Really? Except for your pride in perhaps proving another poster wrong, does it really matter? xeyebrowx

NO pride here, I sold it on ebay years ago :D I think we are just having a discussion, friendly at that. xpeacex

[putter]

Does it matter? Really? Except for your pride in perhaps proving another poster wrong, does it really matter? xeyebrowx

There is no pride bandl and not trying to prove anybody anything. Just pointing out the error, that is all. And why so touchy? I don't remember hearing so many excuses from Montana fans when we lost to Umass at home in the semi's or when we lost to JMU in the NC. Sure there were the few gripers and coulda, woulda, shoulda, but most said the better team won in both games. In this article, and on the CAA board you would think that they had Harrisonburg HS playing Montana than JMU.

[griz8791]

Per the 2 replay reversals that aided JMU - I was just watching the game - not caring who won - I don't see how either play was overturned from the call on the field - I guess the ALL-Powerful ACC booth refs wanted to again try to show their self-perceived dominance over us JV programs ----

My buddy's theory is that the ACC refs were actually lording it over the "JV" FCS officiating crew on the field.

[19Duke97]

Only 8 of those seniors were starters. We lost 15 starters and both kickers. We activated 12 true freshmen to fill spots left by 24 lost seniors.

It's a rebuilding year. You ought to read our fall prospectus, it didn't paint a very good picture on our upcoming season.

Proof that prospectus are usually bunk. Everybody told us we were going to hit rock bottom after losing Rascati. Good teams rebuild, great teams reload. I fully expect JMU to be excellent next year weven after losing 10 starters.

[Ronbo]

Till the day of my death I will see the slow mo replay of that ball NOT getting into the endzone.xrolleyesx xconfusedx :(

[GannonFan]

Proof that prospectus are usually bunk. Everybody told us we were going to hit rock bottom after losing Rascati. Good teams rebuild, great teams reload. I fully expect JMU to be excellent next year weven after losing 10 starters.

Of course, this was the first year JMU won a playoff game since the '04 season, so it's not been all honky dorry. xcoffeex

[rob_p469]

Till the day of my death I will see the slow mo replay of that ball NOT getting into the endzone.xrolleyesx xconfusedx :(

Agreed.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

My buddy's theory is that the ACC refs were actually lording it over the "JV" FCS officiating crew on the field.

EXACTLY what I meant as well - and by the way with all the discussion of rebuilding years, seniors lost, etc. - if you care to, take a look at the APP roster - just 4 seniors who started all season - both OTs. 1 WR and 1 LB and our punter --- this really was a rebuilding year and will all the injuries we should have 4 early season starters back after losing them for the entire season ---

[CatMom07]

Rather, we've been pointing out that the CAA has much more depth than any other conference, which has not been refuted by any of the results in this years playoffs.

What are you referencing as far as depth? If it's w/l records, ok. But if you are looking at stats, they are far from it. Looking at the NCAA stat pages the CAA fairs kind of poorly in the top ten in most categories I checked out.

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2008&div=5&site=org

not that any of this matters when it comes to playoffs

[TCisMYhero]

Proof that prospectus are usually bunk. Everybody told us we were going to hit rock bottom after losing Rascati. Good teams rebuild, great teams reload. I fully expect JMU to be excellent next year weven after losing 10 starters.

Same for us. We lost a Peyton runner-up, and 2 NFL o-linemen, and were expected to compete for upper-mid pack in the MVFC. Is it September yet??

[TCisMYhero]

What are you referencing as far as depth? If it's w/l records, ok. But if you are looking at stats, they are far from it. Looking at the NCAA stat pages the CAA fairs kind of poorly in the top ten in most categories I checked out.

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2008&div=5&site=org

not that any of this matters when it comes to playoffs

"That's because they beat up on each other all year."
CAA fans are beginning to sound like Big 11 fans. Or maybe it's just Iowa fans. Who knows?

[Russell Trombone]

Meh, UNI beat the 4th best CAA team by 2 points and lost to the 3rd best team at home. How competitive do you think South Dakota State and Western Illinois would have been at JMU?

No one really questioned that UNI and Montana could compete with the best of the CAA. Rather, we've been pointing out that the CAA has much more depth than any other conference, which has not been refuted by any of the results in this years playoffs.

To the UNH fan: Before anyone from UNH pops off about the strength and depth of the CAA, can you recall what happened the last time UNH played UofM in the playoffs?

Weber State could beat any member of the CAA, and could probably send their band in to beat UNH.

[CatMom07]

Then again

CAA has 2 divisions totalling 12 teams
7 of those 12 have records above .500
However they don't play all the teams in their conference. Just a select (or rotating) 8

SLC has 8 teams, (who all play each other) 4 above .500. If you added 4 teams, chances are 2 of them, plausibly 3, could have winning records

Same for the BSC. 5 of 9 above .500 with 9 teams who also all play each other.

Let's face it, we're all biased to our teams and our conferences and stats don't win games. Let the teams on the field decide it.


"stats don't win games" - coach Brad Wright after loss to SMU

[CatMom07]

Hey, let's do Bowl Games. In 3 conferences we have 16 eligible teams.

[GannonFan]

What are you referencing as far as depth? If it's w/l records, ok. But if you are looking at stats, they are far from it. Looking at the NCAA stat pages the CAA fairs kind of poorly in the top ten in most categories I checked out.

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2008&div=5&site=org

not that any of this matters when it comes to playoffs

NCAA stats for depth? Why would you use that measure? From a depth standpoint, I think it's fairly easy to look at the past two year's worth of playoffs to see the depth the CAA has - 3 teams made it to the quarters last year and 2 made it to the semis, and this year 4 teams made it to the quarters and 2 made it to the semis. And before you say that should be expected with getting 5 teams into the playoffs, remember that the Gateway had 4 teams in the playoffs in '03 and none of their teams made it out of the quarters. And very little of this is homefield advantage as well - of the CAA's 6 playoff wins in '07, 3 came on the road. And of the 6 wins this year by the CAA 3 are again done on the road. Not shabby at all.

[CatMom07]

GannonFan,

I think you missed the last line of my post

[UNH Fanboi]

To the UNH fan: Before anyone from UNH pops off about the strength and depth of the CAA, can you recall what happened the last time UNH played UofM in the playoffs?

Weber State could beat any member of the CAA, and could probably send their band in to beat UNH.

You are not listening to what I am saying. The CAA is capable of producing 4-5 playoff caliber teams a year, whereas the other conferences have the depth to produce 1-2 playoff caliber teams per year. As a result, the CAA teams generally have tougher regular season schedules. HOWEVER, that does not mean that the 1 or 2 playoff teams from other conferences are worse than the CAA teams. I think Montana is playing great football right now, and if I have them favored over Richmond in the playoffs this year.

That is all I am saying. I fully admit that in any given year, the best team from the MVFC or BSC may be better than the best team from the CAA. However, I think that in most years the 4 best team from the CAA would smoke the 4th best team from the BSC. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing more inter-conference play to test out that theory.

[CatMom07]

The NCAA committee chooses to add those CAA teams to the playoffs. Odds are there are going to be wins.

There are 8 auto qualifiers, right? 8 at large. You give 50% of those to the same conference? There were no other conferences with a 7 - 5 or 8 - 4 (or better) team that deserved to get in? Please.

Good teams get overlooked every year to add CAA teams. What word would you use for that? My first choice is not necessarily depth.
You have your opinion, I have mine. I won't change yours and you won't change mine. Can we leave it there?

[ChickenMan]

Since 2000 the CAA has put 10 teams into the Semi-finals and 5 into the Finals.. I think that performance speaks for it's self.

[ChickenMan]

There were no other conferences with a 7 - 5 or 8 - 4 (or better) team that deserved to get in?




Like who???

Liberty.. no way.. very weak schedule and two bad loses

Elon.. has a better case.. but they lost big in their last game to Liberty

W&M.. had a better claim than either of the above and probably should have gotten in over Maine

[GannonFan]

The NCAA committee chooses to add those CAA teams to the playoffs. Odds are there are going to be wins.

There are 8 auto qualifiers, right? 8 at large. You give 50% of those to the same conference? There were no other conferences with a 7 - 5 or 8 - 4 (or better) team that deserved to get in? Please.

Good teams get overlooked every year to add CAA teams. What word would you use for that? My first choice is not necessarily depth.
You have your opinion, I have mine. I won't change yours and you won't change mine. Can we leave it there?


Hey, just making conversation here. You're saying the CAA didn't deserve the bids, and I'm saying they are. Exactly who, in your opinion, should've been in the playoffs rather than the CAA teams? I'm already on record, even before the playoffs, saying that Liberty should've gotten in ahead of Maine, but what 8-4 team (or better) was left out at the expense of the CAA teams and we can start talking about whether the NCAA was right in that decision or not?

And for the record, it's only been the last 2 years that the CAA has gotten 5 teams in, so it's not like this happens all the time. In the past, the conference typically would get 3 total teams in, sometimes even less (and once we got 4 in).

[CatMom07]

I think I need to discuss this with someone from outside the CAA that can see what I am actually saying. I have no stake in any of this. I, in reality, am an outside observer to this. I didn't go to any of these schools. I did not have anyone play for any of these schools. I have no history with family in any of these schools. (oops, wrong, my daughter went to TxSt... sorry)

Look at the odds here. If half a bracket is from the same conference... any conference... how much chance is there for one, or more, of those teams to continually advance? Pretty good in my book.

Maybe the solution is to revise who plays who when. Maybe then it could truly be argued one way or the other. Hey, if it proved me totally "out there" in my opinion I'd admit it.

The travel issue is bunk. TxSt travelled 2000 miles to play at UM. Richmond is 1500 miles, so saying they want to keep the teams close and cut those expenses is hogwash. (not that we would have beat them, that's not my point here)


If I was a betting person and the CAA having 4 - 5 teams in the playoffs, given the odds for 1 of them to get deep into the playoffs, I'd take it.

Conversely, a conference with 1 team I'd never bet on until the NC.

[ChickenMan]

If I was a betting person and the CAA having 4 - 5 teams in the playoffs, given the odds for 1 of them to get deep into the playoffs, I'd take it.




Sure one or two may go deep into the playoffs.. but's it's because they are very good teams.. not because there are too many of them.

[CatMom07]

Gannon,

Look, I'm stating my personal POV and opinion, that's all. I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, it's just how I see it. I'm also not saying you're wrong, nor advocating you're right.

For comparisons I'm using the other conferences I know about.

I'm a novice (4 years) at this (discussing the playoffs) compared to alot of folks on this board (not football in general) and I know I seem to be presenting an irrational POV here. Can't help that. It's how I perceive it.

Perhaps, in time, my views will change. For now, I stand by my posts.

"Discuss"

[CatMom07]

PS

Men find women irrational anyway. I can imagine how they find one with an opinion about football xbangx

[argh!]

the article seemed like a laundry list of excuses for jmu, in my opinion. however, i must admit that the incessant self-aggrandizing (and putting other teams down) by jmu supporters has probably made me over-reactive to such talk.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Meh, UNI beat the 4th best CAA team by 2 points and lost to the 3rd best team at home. How competitive do you think South Dakota State and Western Illinois would have been at JMU?

No one really questioned that UNI and Montana could compete with the best of the CAA. Rather, we've been pointing out that the CAA has much more depth than any other conference, which has not been refuted by any of the results in this years playoffs.

I agree with you fanboi, the depth of the mediocrity in the CAA is amazing. Our co-champ was better than your champ, got it. I do like the comparisons of conferences 3rd, 4th, 5th...place teams though so thanks.

[ChickenMan]

I do like the comparisons of conferences 3rd, 4th, 5th...place teams though so thanks.

Really it's not much of a comparison.. the CAA's 3rd, 4th, and 5th place teams are in the playoffs and winning games.. the other league's 3rd, 4th, and 5th place teams are..... where???

[UNH Fanboi]

I agree with you fanboi, the depth of the mediocrity in the CAA is amazing. Our co-champ was better than your champ, got it. I do like the comparisons of conferences 3rd, 4th, 5th...place teams though so thanks.

Yeah, the third place team making the finals really demonstrates mediocrity. xrolleyesx

[TCisMYhero]

PS

Men find women irrational anyway. I can imagine how they find one with an opinion about football xbangx

xoutofrepx

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Really it's not much of a comparison.. the CAA's 3rd, 4th, and 5th place teams are in the playoffs and winning games.. the other league's 3rd, 4th, and 5th place teams are..... where???


Yeah, the third place team making the finals really demonstrates mediocrity. xrolleyesx

See Catmom, you have a couple that agree with you. You get enough in and good things can happen for one of them. God job on turning these guys.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

Hey, just making conversation here. You're saying the CAA didn't deserve the bids, and I'm saying they are. Exactly who, in your opinion, should've been in the playoffs rather than the CAA teams? I'm already on record, even before the playoffs, saying that Liberty should've gotten in ahead of Maine, but what 8-4 team (or better) was left out at the expense of the CAA teams and we can start talking about whether the NCAA was right in that decision or not?

And for the record, it's only been the last 2 years that the CAA has gotten 5 teams in, so it's not like this happens all the time. In the past, the conference typically would get 3 total teams in, sometimes even less (and once we got 4 in).

GannonFan - I know you know your stuff - let me give a perspective from the SoCon point of view - First, I agree that Liberty should have gotten in over Maine - however so should have W&M - so I have no problem there - last year, the committee chairman said he threw out all teams with less than 7 wins - thus leaving NH as the only team which could have been chosen - not a great problem with NH getting in just the way it happened - The lady is correct in her statement that if you have more teams in it is inherently a great possibility that you will have more teams advance ---

Here's the problem and honestly there is no solution - with a 12 team conference you can't play everyone - If I'm not mistaken, NH did not have to play JMU, Richmond and Delaware - if they did, then there would be 4 more losses added to the records - It was similar last season as well. All other conferences have to play everyone. My solution is for a conference who, like the CAA, doesn't play a true round robin schedule, then if say more than 3 teams get invites to the field of 16, then I say you waive the clause where conference teams can't meet each other in the first round, - just a thought ---

[Russell Trombone]

New Hampshire and Maine did not belong in the playoffs. A conference should not get 5 teams in a 16-team bracket. MAYBE with the coming expansion four teams could be justified.

If you invite five teams from a conference, thereby eliminating at-large bids for other conferences, you breed elitism (or have an AD from UMass running the committee). That mindset starts to sound something like the troubled ideology of the BCS system.

What CATmom and other writers are trying to tell CAA fans is that, with five teams in the bracket, it shouldn't be surprising to see two in the semis and one in the finals. I got to see a little of Richmond during Saturday's game. They look like a quality team. What about the two potential at-large contenders who didn't get invited to the playoffs or get a chance to make that Game? What if a SoCon representative ran the playoff committee and invited Elon and Furman over Richmond and New Hampshire? Would App State be in the finals again this year if that had happened?

Sorry, CAA, you're not as deep as you keep telling yourselves....

[ChickenMan]

You get enough in and good things can happen for one of them.

Obviously you have confused quality with quantity... :p

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Obviously you have confused quality with quantity... :p

That happens all the time CM.

[ChickenMan]

Sorry, CAA, you're not as deep as you keep telling yourselves....

Don't tell us.. tell the selection 'committee'... :p

[eaglesrthe1]

On the # of teams from the CAA.

The last two years (as is most) there have been a handful of teams that compete for the last spot. I don't have a problem with the CAA getting five in, since their last team was a qualified as any. It's now happened twice in a row though, which is defying the odds quite a bit. The chair of the committee could be construed as having too much influence in the selection process.

It can't happen for a third time, without the appearance of impropriety. Some will say that there already has been.

[fencer24]

I think I need to discuss this with someone from outside the CAA that can see what I am actually saying. I have no stake in any of this. I, in reality, am an outside observer to this. I didn't go to any of these schools. I did not have anyone play for any of these schools. I have no history with family in any of these schools. (oops, wrong, my daughter went to TxSt... sorry)

Look at the odds here. If half a bracket is from the same conference... any conference... how much chance is there for one, or more, of those teams to continually advance? Pretty good in my book.

Maybe the solution is to revise who plays who when. Maybe then it could truly be argued one way or the other. Hey, if it proved me totally "out there" in my opinion I'd admit it.

The travel issue is bunk. TxSt travelled 2000 miles to play at UM. Richmond is 1500 miles, so saying they want to keep the teams close and cut those expenses is hogwash. (not that we would have beat them, that's not my point here)


If I was a betting person and the CAA having 4 - 5 teams in the playoffs, given the odds for 1 of them to get deep into the playoffs, I'd take it.

Conversely, a conference with 1 team I'd never bet on until the NC.

I agree with you CatMom. This is a combination of problems: statistics and circular reasoning. Statistics, because if you seed enough of any variable, you should have a corresponding rate of selecting that variable. So that if you put in five teams, you should have five times the chances to make the final cut as a conference that only gets one team in. Admittedly, each contest is a discreet event so the fact that there are more teams from one conference shouldn't affect the outcome of each game. Except at the playoff level, you aren't playing patsies, you are playing as near your equals as the selection committee could come up with. This is especially true now that we no longer have 1-16 seedings, (Ah, for the good old days).
But the other problem is with circular reasoning. If you declare teams A, B, C, and D as the four best teams, are they really? On what independent analysis is that assessment made? What happens if none of them play head to head, or if they all play head to head? Statistically, if I remember right, the distribution should have one team 3-1, two at 2-2 and one at 1-3, just as a pure matter of chance.
But let's say that teams W, X, Y and Z are thrown in the mix, but you know nothing about them, have never seen them play, and they have never played A, B, C and D. How do you make an informed evaluation of the comparisons? And that is how A-D may have an unjustified higher rating that W-Z. Luckily, we get to play it out at the end to find out.
xblahblahx xblahblahx xblahblahx

[GannonFan]

I think I need to discuss this with someone from outside the CAA that can see what I am actually saying. I have no stake in any of this. I, in reality, am an outside observer to this. I didn't go to any of these schools. I did not have anyone play for any of these schools. I have no history with family in any of these schools. (oops, wrong, my daughter went to TxSt... sorry)

Look at the odds here. If half a bracket is from the same conference... any conference... how much chance is there for one, or more, of those teams to continually advance? Pretty good in my book.

Maybe the solution is to revise who plays who when. Maybe then it could truly be argued one way or the other. Hey, if it proved me totally "out there" in my opinion I'd admit it.

The travel issue is bunk. TxSt travelled 2000 miles to play at UM. Richmond is 1500 miles, so saying they want to keep the teams close and cut those expenses is hogwash. (not that we would have beat them, that's not my point here)


If I was a betting person and the CAA having 4 - 5 teams in the playoffs, given the odds for 1 of them to get deep into the playoffs, I'd take it.

Conversely, a conference with 1 team I'd never bet on until the NC.

I'm just reading into it what you're writing and it's not like this hasn't been a topic of discussion before.

As to teams advancing, it really has little to do with the number of teams in the playoff field. Bad teams aren't going to advance, no matter how many bad ones you put in (well, to a point obviously, if you put 16 bad teams in someone's going to do well). Look at 3 conferences that get autobids now but haven't done well in the playoffs lately. The Patriot League hasn't won a playoff game since 2003, and since then have gone 0-7. The MEAC hasn't won a playoff game since 1999 and since then has gone 0-9. And the OVC hasn't won a playoff game since 1997 and have gone 0-15 since then. That's a combined 0-31 for those three conferences since their last wins. What makes you think if we just started adding more teams from those conference (and teams that aren't as good as the ones that did get in to make that 0-31 record) that they'll start winning games and going deep in the playoffs? You could 5 of those teams in (in some years there have been 4 from those conferences) and they probably won't (and haven't) win a single game.

As for the travel, yeah, most people would agree that the idea of cutting down travel isn't perfect. But that wouldn't matter for western teams like Tex St anyway - everybody is far away. There's a map on these boards showing all the teams in FCS and where they are located and it's just a matter of geography - the western part of the US (west of the Mississippi) is large and there are very few FCS teams in it. And frankly, other teams that aren't Western travel as well. UNH went to S. Illinois and N.Iowa in the first two rounds this year, Delaware did the same in reverse in consecutive rounds last year. It's not like CAA teams are advancing far because they are feasting on bad, local teams and are getting favoritism because of the geography component.

There's only been 3 years I can remember where conferences got more than 3 teams into the playoffs in one year - the Gateway got 4 in '03, and the CAA got 5 in '07 and '08. The Gateway bombed out with only 2 wins in '03 and no one got past the quarterfinals. The CAA's had 6 wins in both their years and in '08 have gotten that even though two of their best teams had to play each other early (JMU/nova) and could win a 7th game. And in both years the CAA had half of the final four and half of the finals.

I know you say you've only been around this for 4 years so to you, it probably looks like the CAA gets favorable treatment every year. However, this is just a recent phenomenon and we just happen to be in a strong era for the CAA - maybe not strong enough to have a team win a title (the last two were UD in '03 and JMU in '04) but strong enough to have representatives in 5 of the last 6 title games and only one team (UD) got there twice (JMU, UMass, and Richmond being the other ones). This didn't happen in the 90's because the conference, while being as big as it is now, wasn't as good. 'Dem da breaks. xthumbsupx

[MacThor]

I got to see a little of Richmond during Saturday's game. They look like a quality team. What about the two potential at-large contenders who didn't get invited to the playoffs or get a chance to make that Game? What if a SoCon representative ran the playoff committee and invited Elon and Furman over Richmond and New Hampshire? Would App State be in the finals again this year if that had happened?

Sorry, CAA, you're not as deep as you keep telling yourselves....

So an 8-4 Elon team should have gotten in over a 9-3 (9-2 FCS) Richmond team who beat them 28-10 @ Elon.....to meet some kind of "conference affirmative action" quota?

[GannonFan]

New Hampshire and Maine did not belong in the playoffs. A conference should not get 5 teams in a 16-team bracket. MAYBE with the coming expansion four teams could be justified.

If you invite five teams from a conference, thereby eliminating at-large bids for other conferences, you breed elitism (or have an AD from UMass running the committee). That mindset starts to sound something like the troubled ideology of the BCS system.

What CATmom and other writers are trying to tell CAA fans is that, with five teams in the bracket, it shouldn't be surprising to see two in the semis and one in the finals. I got to see a little of Richmond during Saturday's game. They look like a quality team. What about the two potential at-large contenders who didn't get invited to the playoffs or get a chance to make that Game? What if a SoCon representative ran the playoff committee and invited Elon and Furman over Richmond and New Hampshire? Would App State be in the finals again this year if that had happened?

Sorry, CAA, you're not as deep as you keep telling yourselves....

Ugh, you guys are killing me. You know why Elon didn't get in over Richmond? Because Richmond beat Elon, at Elon, by more than 2 TD's. By any measure you want to use, Richmond was better than Elon. You know why UNH got into the playoffs? They were 9-2, including a win over an FBS school. Seriously, UNH was a mortal lock for the playoffs, are you actually now saying that UNH didn't deserve to make it? On what basis?

And a UMass guy didn't run the committee - every conference is represented equally in the selection committee (which, considering that the CAA has more teams, are actually underrepresented compared to conferences with only 6 teams). And they all vote on who gets in, not just the UMass guy.

And yes, the CAA is as deep as we are telling ourselves. xnodx

[MacThor]

There's only been 3 years I can remember where conferences got more than 3 teams into the playoffs in one year - the Gateway got 4 in '03, and the CAA got 5 in '07 and '08. The Gateway bombed out with only 2 wins in '03 and no one got past the quarterfinals. The CAA's had 6 wins in both their years and in '08 have gotten that even though two of their best teams had to play each other early (JMU/nova) and could win a 7th game. And in both years the CAA had half of the final four and half of the finals.


The CAA already has 7 wins this year.

[fencer24]

I'm just reading into it what you're writing and it's not like this hasn't been a topic of discussion before.
. . . The CAA's had 6 wins in both their years and in '08 have gotten that even though two of their best teams had to play each other early (JMU/nova) and could win a 7th game. And in both years the CAA had half of the final four and half of the finals.

I know you say you've only been around this for 4 years so to you, it probably looks like the CAA gets favorable treatment every year. However, this is just a recent phenomenon and we just happen to be in a strong era for the CAA - maybe not strong enough to have a team win a title (the last two were UD in '03 and JMU in '04) but strong enough to have representatives in 5 of the last 6 title games and only one team (UD) got there twice (JMU, UMass, and Richmond being the other ones). This didn't happen in the 90's because the conference, while being as big as it is now, wasn't as good. 'Dem da breaks. xthumbsupx

What if Montana and Weber didn't have to play each other, or for that matter Cal Poly. But all three were in the same part of the bracket. Spread them around, and you could have had those three in the semi-finals after knocking off Villanova, JMU and Richmond, but we will never know.

[UNH Fanboi]

New Hampshire and Maine did not belong in the playoffs.

Please tell me who deserved to be in ahead of UNH this year. I haven't had a good laugh yet today.

[Russell Trombone]

So an 8-4 Elon team should have gotten in over a 9-3 (9-2 FCS) Richmond team who beat them 28-10 @ Elon.....to meet some kind of "conference affirmative action" quota?

No, in fact I think that teams from less 'visible' conferences should have gotten the nod. I used Elon as a parallel to bids for UNH and Maine. The point was that, if you invite too many squads from one conference, you preclude others from competing. I gave a hypothetical of a SoCon tilt on the selection committee which may have resulted in Richmond getting snubbed for a bid and having App State in the finals. If the point STILL isn't sinking in, let me be clearer...
THE CAA DOESN'T DESERVE 5 BIDS IN A FIELD OF 16! think about it, the NCAA basketball tourney has 65 bids and getting 5 teams from a conference into that bracket is something of a feat.

I will now repeat what I said before... Weber State can beat everyone in your conference top to bottom.

[GannonFan]

GannonFan - I know you know your stuff - let me give a perspective from the SoCon point of view - First, I agree that Liberty should have gotten in over Maine - however so should have W&M - so I have no problem there - last year, the committee chairman said he threw out all teams with less than 7 wins - thus leaving NH as the only team which could have been chosen - not a great problem with NH getting in just the way it happened - The lady is correct in her statement that if you have more teams in it is inherently a great possibility that you will have more teams advance ---

Again, see my earlier post - the MEAC, Patriot, and OVC are a combined 0-31 over the past few years in the playoffs - if she was correct in her statement that having more teams in the playoffs is inherently a greater chance of having them winning, then by the same rationale there's no way that those conferences go 0-31. The flaw in that logic is assuming that every playoff team is equal and everyone has a equal chance to win. Reality tells us that's not the case.


Here's the problem and honestly there is no solution - with a 12 team conference you can't play everyone - If I'm not mistaken, NH did not have to play JMU, Richmond and Delaware - if they did, then there would be 4 more losses added to the records - It was similar last season as well. All other conferences have to play everyone. My solution is for a conference who, like the CAA, doesn't play a true round robin schedule, then if say more than 3 teams get invites to the field of 16, then I say you waive the clause where conference teams can't meet each other in the first round, - just a thought ---

UNH probably would've liked to play UD this year xsmhx . But they did play W&M and nova and Maine and UMass and an FBS team. It's not like they played nobody. That point has validity if one of the CAA divisions (the CAA South) has 3 great teams and a team, by schedule can avoid all 3 of them. However, that didn't happen this year (there were 4 good CAA South teams) and next year it probably won't happen again (5 of the CAA South could be good). And it's not like the OOC schedules for the CAA are weak - JMU played Duke and Appy St, Richmond played Elon and UVA, nova played West Virginia and Lehigh, UD played Maryland and Furman.

But, to answer your other question, I would have no problem with waiving the rule that conference foes can't play each other in the first round. But beware what you ask for, I'm sure the first time they do that there'll be criticism that the CAA is getting favoritism by guaranteeing that a team from the CAA will advance to the next round.

[GannonFan]

The CAA already has 7 wins this year.

I was originally only referring to wins against non CAA teams (not counting JMU's win over nova).

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

New Hampshire and Maine did not belong in the playoffs.


Please tell me who deserved to be in ahead of UNH this year. I haven't had a good laugh yet today.

No kidding! I can't believe anyone would be crazy enough to say a team that won an opening round game on the road at a MVC school and lost by two at one of the toughest venues in FCS doesn't belong in the playoffs. Just because a league shouldn't have more than three teams. xoopsx

[GolfingGriz]

Does anybody else think that the west teams could truely be the class of the FCS this year? I consider the west teams as Cal Poly, Weber State, and Montana. The western teams have only lost to other western teams in the playoffs this year. The only matchup between east and west has been JMU vs. UM and we all know how that went. From watching the griz games the last two weeks I thought Weber was better than JMU. Alot can be proven on Friday, but I think the west may be the class of the FCS this year.

[GannonFan]

No, in fact I think that teams from less 'visible' conferences should have gotten the nod. I used Elon as a parallel to bids for UNH and Maine. The point was that, if you invite too many squads from one conference, you preclude others from competing. I gave a hypothetical of a SoCon tilt on the selection committee which may have resulted in Richmond getting snubbed for a bid and having App State in the finals.

What "tilt" on the selection committee??? There is no tilt, it's not like the CAA gets any more representation on the committee than any other conference (and again, that means each individual school in the CAA actually gets less representation than say, teams from the smaller Southland)


If the point STILL isn't sinking in, let me be clearer...
THE CAA DOESN'T DESERVE 5 BIDS IN A FIELD OF 16! think about it, the NCAA basketball tourney has 65 bids and getting 5 teams from a conference into that bracket is something of a feat.

No, it's not sinking in because you keep using bad analogies (as well as just being fundamentally wrong). The Big East has gotten 8 and 9 teams into the NCAA tourney over the past few years, and the ACC has gotten more than 5 in. It happens a lot. Heck, the Big East only has 16 teams in its conference so they're doing even better than the CAA just getting 5 of their 12 in.




I will now repeat what I said before... Weber State can beat everyone in your conference top to bottom.

And the point there is what exactly? Weber St was in the playoffs so it's not like they got snubbed.

[GannonFan]

Does anybody else think that the west teams could truely be the class of the FCS this year? I consider the west teams as Cal Poly, Weber State, and Montana. The western teams have only lost to other western teams in the playoffs this year. The only matchup between east and west has been JMU vs. UM and we all know how that went. From watching the griz games the last two weeks I thought Weber was better than JMU. Alot can be proven on Friday, but I think the west may be the class of the FCS this year.

A point we'll never know - all that can be proven on Friday is whether Montana or Richmond are better than the other. That will give us all of 2 games of your definition of East versus West. I rip the GPI left and right and even that has a better sample size than the two games you're offering up.

[bostonspider]

One thing that I think western teams do have a right to complain about is that just because of geography CAA and SoCon teams do get to play the PL, OVC and MEAC teams in the first round with regularity, which tends to allow more teams from those better eastern leagues to advance out of the first round. That is a legitimate argument, though one that should be aimed not at the CAA and SoCon, but at the NCAA. I really think the field should be seeded 1-16 or 1-20 in the future, and all teams play according to their seed, whether or not the are conference members or have to travel great distances. I think that would be fair. But it will be more expensive, and will likely cause more fans to miss seeing their team live as they will not be able to travel. But the CAA cannot help it if they have had more strong teams in recent years than other leagues, but it is cyclical, there will be years where the SoCon gets 4 teams in, and the CAA 2.

[GolfingGriz]

A point we'll never know - all that can be proven on Friday is whether Montana or Richmond are better than the other. That will give us all of 2 games of your definition of East versus West. I rip the GPI left and right and even that has a better sample size than the two games you're offering up.

True. I guess the basis of my point is that I think that Weber is the best team that we have played so far this year. If Cal Poly played any defense at all they would be playing on Friday night.

Will this year do anything to shut up the naysayers who claim no football is played out west, and that the Grizzlies are weak?

[eaglesrthe1]

Again, see my earlier post - the MEAC, Patriot, and OVC are a combined 0-31 over the past few years in the playoffs - if she was correct in her statement that having more teams in the playoffs is inherently a greater chance of having them winning, then by the same rationale there's no way that those conferences go 0-31. The flaw in that logic is assuming that every playoff team is equal and everyone has a equal chance to win. Reality tells us that's not the case.



UNH probably would've liked to play UD this year xsmhx . But they did play W&M and nova and Maine and UMass and an FBS team. It's not like they played nobody. That point has validity if one of the CAA divisions (the CAA South) has 3 great teams and a team, by schedule can avoid all 3 of them. However, that didn't happen this year (there were 4 good CAA South teams) and next year it probably won't happen again (5 of the CAA South could be good). And it's not like the OOC schedules for the CAA are weak - JMU played Duke and Appy St, Richmond played Elon and UVA, nova played West Virginia and Lehigh, UD played Maryland and Furman.

But, to answer your other question, I would have no problem with waiving the rule that conference foes can't play each other in the first round. But beware what you ask for, I'm sure the first time they do that there'll be criticism that the CAA is getting favoritism by guaranteeing that a team from the CAA will advance to the next round.

Shouldn't include the Patriot in the 0-31 run. Colgate advanced to the finals in 03', Lehigh to the quarters in 00' and 01', and Fordham to the quarters in 02'.

[MacThor]

I was originally only referring to wins against non CAA teams (not counting JMU's win over nova).

Got it. I'm with ya, Gannon.

There is no tilt to the selection committee. Once they have the 8 auto-bids, they take all of the eligible at-large teams and rank 'em until they come up with eight, ignoring conference affiliation.

It's baffling that we are still debating the merits of these CAA at-larges. One is in the final, after eliminating the #2 and #3 seeds on the road. Another eliminated the MVFC co-champion on the road. CAA teams have eliminated the 2 best teams from the SoCon, the 2 best teams from the MVFC, the PL and OVC champions.

So what if Weber St could beat all the CAA teams. On any given Saturday Richmond could beat all the Big Sky teams. If you are saying that the final should be Weber St. vs. Montana, then your problem is with regionalization, not the last at-large team in the field. I agree that regionalization sucks and they should seed 1-16.

[Syntax Error]

Great pictures of Bruce eating crow! xlolx Members here that still harp on him will never be pleased by what he wrote, which was very complimentary of the Griz. Of course he had picked an all-CAA final just like Kent picked an all-West final. Of course he wrote more about the CAA teams, that's his job.

As for the CAA had too many teams in/the committee is fixed for the CAA... hogwash. Three polls and two GPIs all concurred that five come from the CAA (and actually had W&M over Maine). I don't remember that topic coming up in this article... but it continues to rear it's head in a billion threads.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

Does anybody else think that the west teams could truely be the class of the FCS this year? I consider the west teams as Cal Poly, Weber State, and Montana. The western teams have only lost to other western teams in the playoffs this year. The only matchup between east and west has been JMU vs. UM and we all know how that went. From watching the griz games the last two weeks I thought Weber was better than JMU. Alot can be proven on Friday, but I think the west may be the class of the FCS this year.

One thing I've learned from my time on AGS is not to jump to conclusions about the quality (or lack of quality) of an individual or team based on one game. How many other JMU games did you watch? I don't think you can make any assumptions about how another team will do based on watching one game. For all you know if Weber played JMU, then Weber could put the ball all over the deck or make a slew of killing penalties.

There just aren't enough inter-sectional games to come to a definitive opinion. But if Montana wins Friday, you'll definitely get to claim to be the best in FCS. Isn't that really more important?

[CatMom07]

The AB's are 8 conference champions. Right? So they are in. IMHO a championship is a playoff of the champions. So grab the next set of Conf champions/co-champions or second place teams. You can get 16 teams there.
Tell me you can't get 16 teams there. If you don't take you conference why should you get the chance to win the NC? (this is conjecture here) Because you have a better record but didn't win your conference?

So not all teams that take their conference are as good as others, I know believe me but, they earned that right (by current rules) to be there.
TxSt went 8-4 (after a bad start) and went out to UM in the first round. 3-2 in 2 appearances but we want to go back. Do you think those teams from those other schools don't feel the same? Or do we just start excluding conferences because they haven't had great playoff runs?

If it is to be a true playoff system you include all the conferences that wish (are deemed able) to participate, otherwise we start to look like the BCS.

But, one thing is right. It's all circular, it's all opinions and perspectives and we can go on and on about this forvever without changing minds or making any progress on the subject.

I'll stick to my personal guns and keep watching to see how it goes nextyear and after.......

Have a great game Richmond and UM, stay safe and happy holidays everyone.

[GannonFan]

True. I guess the basis of my point is that I think that Weber is the best team that we have played so far this year. If Cal Poly played any defense at all they would be playing on Friday night.

Will this year do anything to shut up the naysayers who claim no football is played out west, and that the Grizzlies are weak?

Nope, won't shut that up at all. First of all, most of that invective is directed at the Big Sky - I don't think people have diminished Cal Poly over the past few years. And with the Big Sky being the focus, the main argument has been that it's Montana and then no one else. This year we again have Montana rather than another Big Sky team. A non-Montana Big Sky team hasn't made the semis since 1997 when EWU did it, and it's not like there's been a Western "pod" grouping like what happened this year every year to prevent a team like Weber going further - in fact, I'm not sure it's ever happened like this year.

As for Montana, no one rips Montana when they have a good team, but they do get ripped when they keep making the playoffs, what is it, 16 years in a row, yet have lost 5 out the past 10 first round games (most at home) before this year.

[fencer24]

True. I guess the basis of my point is that I think that Weber is the best team that we have played so far this year. If Cal Poly played any defense at all they would be playing on Friday night.

Will this year do anything to shut up the naysayers who claim no football is played out west, and that the Grizzlies are weak?

I wonder what we would be talking about if JMU, Nova, UNH, and Richmond had to play each other just to get through the quarters?

[Russell Trombone]

Please tell me who deserved to be in ahead of UNH this year. I haven't had a good laugh yet today.

UNH fanboi, for a good laugh, see if you can watch a recording of UNH's playoff game against the Griz from December 4, 2004. It ended 47-17 and wasn't even as close as the score suggested. Play that tape every time your unwarranted pride made you feel deserving. While you ruminate over that humiliating loss, please remember that Ricky Santos had Payton Award stats when he faced foes in your own conference, but looked more like a third string Div III Qb in that game.

More deserving teams would include Central Arkansas and Liberty. If you think it is OK to keep accepting 5 teams from YOUR conference, why not invite Montana State, North Dakota State, and McNeese State, too? They probably don't deserve to be in with ass many losses as they accumulated, but they could thump up on New Hampshire as well.

[GannonFan]

I wonder what we would be talking about if JMU, Nova, UNH, and Richmond had to play each other just to get through the quarters?


I guarantee half the posters on here would be complaining that the committee set it up that way to ensure that the CAA gets one of them into the semis. xrotatehx xnodx

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

True. I guess the basis of my point is that I think that Weber is the best team that we have played so far this year. If Cal Poly played any defense at all they would be playing on Friday night.

Will this year do anything to shut up the naysayers who claim no football is played out west, and that the Grizzlies are weak?

It should, but logical, fact based posts don't seem to stop the CAA gets preferential treatment posts either. There are always going to be forum members who can't view a subject objectively.

[CatMom07]

I would have issue if it was another conference too. Anyway, my vicodin is kicking in and my keyboard is getting blurrier and further away, so I'm gone...... for now

[GannonFan]

UNH fanboi, for a good laugh, see if you can watch a recording of UNH's playoff game against the Griz from December 4, 2004. It ended 47-17 and wasn't even as close as the score suggested. Play that tape every time your unwarranted pride made you feel deserving. While you ruminate over that humiliating loss, please remember that Ricky Santos had Payton Award stats when he faced foes in your own conference, but looked more like a third string Div III Qb in that game.

Do we get to watch Montana lose in the first round to Wofford last year (a Wofford team that went on to get thumped by CAA Richmond in the next round?). How about getting to watch UMass beat the Griz in '06? Or Montana losing at home again by 2 TD's in '05 in the first round? Come on, man, that's smack in the extreme and you know it.



More deserving teams would include Central Arkansas and Liberty. If you think it is OK to keep accepting 5 teams from YOUR conference, why not invite Montana State, North Dakota State, and McNeese State, too? They probably don't deserve to be in with ass many losses as they accumulated, but they could thump up on New Hampshire as well.

Central Arkansas wasn't even eligible this year - they are still in transition from DII and they couldn't even be considered for the playoffs. And Montana St, NDSU, and McNeese didn't have the required 7 DI wins to be considered to make the playoffs. Heck, McNeese even played 2 DII teams so they were 2 wins short of the magic number. And NDSU? You have something againt SDSU and W. Illinois, both of whom finished above of NDSU in the MVC standings??? xlolx

[Syntax Error]

BTW, the OVC's last FCS playoff win was Western Kentucky’s first round 27-0 victory over FAMU in 2000.

[GannonFan]

BTW, the OVC's last FCS playoff win was Western Kentucky’s first round 27-0 victory over FAMU in 2000.

My bad, I thought they switched conferences before that - they switched right after the 2000 playoffs. Still doesn't make the OVC record look any better, though.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

The AB's are 8 conference champions. Right? So they are in. IMHO a championship is a playoff of the champions. So grab the next set of Conf champions/co-champions or second place teams. You can get 16 teams there.
Tell me you can't get 16 teams there. If you don't take you conference why should you get the chance to win the NC? (this is conjecture here) Because you have a better record but didn't win your conference?

So not all teams that take their conference are as good as others, I know believe me but, they earned that right (by current rules) to be there.
TxSt went 8-4 (after a bad start) and went out to UM in the first round. 3-2 in 2 appearances but we want to go back. Do you think those teams from those other schools don't feel the same? Or do we just start excluding conferences because they haven't had great playoff runs?

If it is to be a true playoff system you include all the conferences that wish (are deemed able) to participate, otherwise we start to look like the BCS.

But, one thing is right. It's all circular, it's all opinions and perspectives and we can go on and on about this forvever without changing minds or making any progress on the subject.

I'll stick to my personal guns and keep watching to see how it goes nextyear and after.......

Have a great game Richmond and UM, stay safe and happy holidays everyone.

Get back to me when the NCAA selects a second team for the Big Dance from the America East Conference, Northeast Conference, Ivy League, Patriot League, MEAC, etc., etc. over the 8th team from the Big East, SEC or ACC. I'd be very happy because it would give my alma mater a better chance of making the tournament, but I know the reality is that it's not happening unless the America East teams prove on the hardwood that they deserve a second bid. That's just the way it is.

BTW, all conferences that want in the playoffs are given that opportunity with playoff expansion. I think the precedent has been set, more expansion will occur if eligible league ask. Are you listening Pioneer League?

Happy and safe holidays back at ya!!! xnodx

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

UNH fanboi, for a good laugh, see if you can watch a recording of UNH's playoff game against the Griz from December 4, 2004. It ended 47-17 and wasn't even as close as the score suggested. Play that tape every time your unwarranted pride made you feel deserving. While you ruminate over that humiliating loss, please remember that Ricky Santos had Payton Award stats when he faced foes in your own conference, but looked more like a third string Div III Qb in that game.

More deserving teams would include Central Arkansas and Liberty. If you think it is OK to keep accepting 5 teams from YOUR conference, why not invite Montana State, North Dakota State, and McNeese State, too? They probably don't deserve to be in with ass many losses as they accumulated, but they could thump up on New Hampshire as well.

My gawd, you're basing all this venom on one freaking game five seasons ago? xconfusedx xconfusedx xoopsx xoopsx xoopsx xoopsx

In case you missed it, UNH beat Georgia Southern at their place the week before. That was a pretty high quality win IMHO. Then had to travel again, this time something like 2,000 miles. And oh yeah, Santos was a redshirt freshman that year who had just lost to injury the WR he totally depended on during that freshman season. Maybe you're heard of this guy, David Ball, he set a few records during his time at UNH. xrolleyesx I'm sure no other inexperienced QB has wilted under the pressure of the playoff crowd at Wash-Griz! xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx

You need to get a new axe to grind because UNH has proven on the field that they've belonged in the playoffs EVERY year they've been selected. Go whine to the NCAA if you don't like the guideline to select the best at large teams available rather than balance the bids among the conferences. Of course, all these other conferences also can schedule CAA teams for OOC games and prove there are other teams more deserving. As long as the CAA teams have success in OOC games, in the playoffs and have strong showings against FBS teams, then the high ranking of CAA teams is going to continue.

[Russell Trombone]

Do we get to watch Montana lose in the first round to Wofford last year (a Wofford team that went on to get thumped by CAA Richmond in the next round?). How about getting to watch UMass beat the Griz in '06? Or Montana losing at home again by 2 TD's in '05 in the first round? Come on, man, that's smack in the extreme and you know it.



Central Arkansas wasn't even eligible this year - they are still in transition from DII and they couldn't even be considered for the playoffs. And Montana St, NDSU, and McNeese didn't have the required 7 DI wins to be considered to make the playoffs. Heck, McNeese even played 2 DII teams so they were 2 wins short of the magic number. And NDSU? You have something againt SDSU and W. Illinois, both of whom finished above of NDSU in the MVC standings??? xlolx

Gannon Fan, UNH fanboi asked for a good laugh, and I gave him one. If you're trying to talk smack about the Griz for the first round losses they have had, please try to remember that going to the playoffs and losing at all is an off-year for us. What's an off year for you? Let me guess, 3-7 and now bid at all?

I don't have anything against SDSU nor W Illinois. Most Griz fans hold grudges against McNeese (esp if they remember a certain incident from 1994). I understand Central Arkansas' predicament, but UNH fanboi asked me who was more deserving. ND State sat idle in their transition period, too, and there were two years where they would likely have beaten anyone in the playoffs. I doubt that made your radar from east of the Mississippi. I simply gave the misled lad some examples of teams which could beat UNH and make a better showing in the playoffs.

Gannon, I tink you'd be happier if FCS invited all of the CAA teams to the playoffs and then grant you a big game at the end of it with at least one of your squads.... no wait... that's how they do the Rose Bowl.

[Russell Trombone]

My gawd, you're basing all this venom on one freaking game five seasons ago? xconfusedx xconfusedx xoopsx xoopsx xoopsx xoopsx

In case you missed it, UNH beat Georgia Southern at their place the week before. That was a pretty high quality win IMHO. Then had to travel again, this time something like 2,000 miles. And oh yeah, Santos was a redshirt freshman that year who had just lost to injury the WR he totally depended on during that freshman season. Maybe you're heard of this guy, David Ball, he set a few records during his time at UNH. xrolleyesx I'm sure no other inexperienced QB has wilted under the pressure of the playoff crowd at Wash-Griz! xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx xrolleyesx

You need to get a new axe to grind because UNH has proven on the field that they've belonged in the playoffs EVERY year they've been selected. Go whine to the NCAA if you don't like the guideline to select the best at large teams available rather than balance the bids among the conferences. Of course, all these other conferences also can schedule CAA teams for OOC games and prove there are other teams more deserving. As long as the CAA teams have success in OOC games, in the playoffs and have strong showings against FBS teams, then the high ranking of CAA teams is going to continue.

No, my venom has nothing to do with a UM - UNH game (4, not 5 seasons ago there Dr Hawking). My axe grinds because of the unwarranted sense of entitlement that the CAA has. It reminds me of the way Paris Hilton thought she was entitled to avoid jail time.

[BDKJMU]

We're just in a rebuilding year. We don't expect to be as talented as anyone else. Oh yeah, heart isn't measured at the combine.xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx

Montana had 6 seniors on offense and 4 on defense (from game notes) start against JMU. That doesn't sound like much of a rebuilding year to me.

[MacThor]

No, my venom has nothing to do with a UM - UNH game (4, not 5 seasons ago there Dr Hawking). My axe grinds because of the unwarranted sense of entitlement that the CAA has. It reminds me of the way Paris Hilton thought she was entitled to avoid jail time.

JMU, 'Nova, UR, W&M, UNH, Maine, and UMass were 17-0 against FCS this season OOC. And they don't feel "entitled" to anything. xnonox

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

No, my venom has nothing to do with a UM - UNH game (4, not 5 seasons ago there Dr Hawking). My axe grinds because of the unwarranted sense of entitlement that the CAA has. It reminds me of the way Paris Hilton thought she was entitled to avoid jail time.

2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 then 2008, that's five seasons the way I count. xpeacex

I really don't think "the CAA" has a unwarranted sense of entitlement. As a fan of one CAA school, I think we've earned everything with performance on the field. I know my school has earned everything and more times than not on the road to boot. I watch the teams within my league do well in their OOC games, their playoff games and in their FBS games. I attend multiple games a year and see how little difference there is between top and mid tier teams in the CAA.

I don't like regionalization and I wish the FCS schools had more money so inter-sectional games were feasible. There just won't be a lot of Big Sky-CAA game. But the Ivy, Patriot, NEC, MEAC and SoCon have plenty of opportunities to schedule CAA teams (and perform well). There have been at least six other opportunities to beat a CAA team in this year's playoffs. I'm sorry if achievement on the field comes across as entitlement to you.

[gbhmt]

Montana had 6 seniors on offense and 4 on defense (from game notes) start against JMU. That doesn't sound like much of a rebuilding year to me.

We lost 15 starters from last year, three of which are now in the NFL, one of which was the Buchanan Award. If there's one thing Griz fans know better than anyone else, it's the progression of their own program. Most people were hoping for a playoff appearance AT MOST and nobody expected a conference title.

[BDKJMU]

Proof that prospectus are usually bunk. Everybody told us we were going to hit rock bottom after losing Rascati. Good teams rebuild, great teams reload. I fully expect JMU to be excellent next year weven after losing 10 starters.

Make that 8:
4 offense:
-Landers (1st team All CAA) but Dudzick proved he could play
-Holloman (2nd team CAA RB) but have Yancey & Sullivan back
-Apted (2nd team CAA tackle)
-Lemm (1st team CAA center)

4 defense:
-McCollough (1st team CAA corner)
-Derrius Ramsey, corner. Have 2 corners back, MCgee & sanders, with significant starting experience
-Haywood (1st team CAA safety)
-Abdul-Wahid (2nd team CAA De end) but other 3 starters on d line back (inlcuding Moats, 2nd team CAA & Daniels, 3rd team).

Pat Ward #10 started the 1st 6 games at receiver, but not after that, and LB #11 DJ Brandon was out since the UR game, so they don't count as starters lost.

So thats 14 of 22 starters slated to come back + 3 more with significant starting experience.
-MCGee back at corner (started a 4 games this season)
-Sanders back at corner. He started the 1st 3 games of the season at corner and 3 more at WS.
-Yancey who started 2 games at RB when Holloman was out, 2 games at
receiver/wingback, plus started several games 07'

36 of 48 on 2 deep. JMU will be back in the playoffs next yr. xcoffeex

[Russell Trombone]

JMU, 'Nova, UR, W&M, UNH, Maine, and UMass were 17-0 against FCS this season OOC. And they don't feel "entitled" to anything. xnonox

Looks more like 6-3 against non-conf teams when it mattered, Mac-Thor... and that's with FIVE teams in the mix. Has your television not been working the past few weekends, or did you take math with the UNH alum from Conneticut?

[griz8791]

Do we get to watch Montana lose in the first round to Wofford last year (a Wofford team that went on to get thumped by CAA Richmond in the next round?). How about getting to watch UMass beat the Griz in '06? Or Montana losing at home again by 2 TD's in '05 in the first round? Come on, man, that's smack in the extreme and you know it.

Wish I could say Russell Trombone didn't have that one coming to him.

[BDKJMU]

I'm just reading into it what you're writing and it's not like this hasn't been a topic of discussion before.

As to teams advancing, it really has little to do with the number of teams in the playoff field. Bad teams aren't going to advance, no matter how many bad ones you put in (well, to a point obviously, if you put 16 bad teams in someone's going to do well). Look at 3 conferences that get autobids now but haven't done well in the playoffs lately. The Patriot League hasn't won a playoff game since 2003, and since then have gone 0-7. The MEAC hasn't won a playoff game since 1999 and since then has gone 0-9. And the OVC hasn't won a playoff game since 1997 and have gone 0-15 since then. That's a combined 0-31 for those three conferences since their last wins. What makes you think if we just started adding more teams from those conference (and teams that aren't as good as the ones that did get in to make that 0-31 record) that they'll start winning games and going deep in the playoffs? You could 5 of those teams in (in some years there have been 4 from those conferences) and they probably won't (and haven't) win a single game.

As for the travel, yeah, most people would agree that the idea of cutting down travel isn't perfect. But that wouldn't matter for western teams like Tex St anyway - everybody is far away. There's a map on these boards showing all the teams in FCS and where they are located and it's just a matter of geography - the western part of the US (west of the Mississippi) is large and there are very few FCS teams in it. And frankly, other teams that aren't Western travel as well. UNH went to S. Illinois and N.Iowa in the first two rounds this year, Delaware did the same in reverse in consecutive rounds last year. It's not like CAA teams are advancing far because they are feasting on bad, local teams and are getting favoritism because of the geography component.

There's only been 3 years I can remember where conferences got more than 3 teams into the playoffs in one year - the Gateway got 4 in '03, and the CAA got 5 in '07 and '08. The Gateway bombed out with only 2 wins in '03 and no one got past the quarterfinals. The CAA's had 6 wins in both their years and in '08 have gotten that even though two of their best teams had to play each other early (JMU/nova) and could win a 7th game. And in both years the CAA had half of the final four and half of the finals.

I know you say you've only been around this for 4 years so to you, it probably looks like the CAA gets favorable treatment every year. However, this is just a recent phenomenon and we just happen to be in a strong era for the CAA - maybe not strong enough to have a team win a title (the last two were UD in '03 and JMU in '04) but strong enough to have representatives in 5 of the last 6 title games and only one team (UD) got there twice (JMU, UMass, and Richmond being the other ones). This didn't happen in the 90's because the conference, while being as big as it is now, wasn't as good. 'Dem da breaks. xthumbsupx

CAA also got 4 in 04'

[fencer24]

Make that 8:
4 offense:
-Landers (1st team All CAA) but Dudzick proved he could play
-Holloman (2nd team CAA RB) but have Yancey & Sullivan back
-Apted (2nd team CAA tackle)
-Lemm (1st team CAA center)

4 defense:
-McCollough (1st team CAA corner)
-Derrius Ramsey, corner. Have 2 corners back, MCgee & sanders, with significant starting experience
-Haywood (1st team CAA safety)
-Abdul-Wahid (2nd team CAA De end) but other 3 starters on d line back (inlcuding Moats, 2nd team CAA & Daniels, 3rd team).

Pat Ward #10 started the 1st 6 games at receiver, but not after that, and LB #11 DJ Brandon was out since the UR game, so they don't count as starters lost.

So thats 14 of 22 starters slated to come back + 3 more with significant starting experience.
-MCGee back at corner (started a 4 games this season)
-Sanders back at corner. He started the 1st 3 games of the season at corner and 3 more at WS.
-Yancey who started 2 games at RB when Holloman was out, 2 games at
receiver/wingback, plus started several games 07'

36 of 48 on 2 deep. JMU will be back in the playoffs next yr. xcoffeex


Jesu Christi What's it going to take, a silver bullet, a wooden stake?
Hey, with Studzik, you are still going to be giving the CAA fits. Good Luck, next year. (At least until we have to meet you).

[Syntax Error]

Oh, and the article had that pic showing how Landers got hurt:

http://www.collegesportingnews.com/stats/writer/20081213UM-JMUgallery/images/MJ_Landers_HurtAnkle.jpg

I don't think the foot is supposed to twist that way.

[Russell Trombone]

2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 then 2008, that's five seasons the way I count. xpeacex

I really don't think "the CAA" has a unwarranted sense of entitlement. As a fan of one CAA school, I think we've earned everything with performance on the field. I know my school has earned everything and more times than not on the road to boot. I watch the teams within my league do well in their OOC games, their playoff games and in their FBS games. I attend multiple games a year and see how little difference there is between top and mid tier teams in the CAA.

I don't like regionalization and I wish the FCS schools had more money so inter-sectional games were feasible. There just won't be a lot of Big Sky-CAA game. But the Ivy, Patriot, NEC, MEAC and SoCon have plenty of opportunities to schedule CAA teams (and perform well). There have been at least six other opportunities to beat a CAA team in this year's playoffs. I'm sorry if achievement on the field comes across as entitlement to you.

Dude... 2008 to 2004 is four years.

You really haven't achieved much, UNH. Live free or die, man...but don't talk to a Griz fan about your so-called "achievements".
If you think CAA deserved five teams in the field, you have an undue sense of entitlement. If you think 2004 was 5 seasons ago, I'm go to pray that my office building wasn't designed with the help of a UNH engineer.

[UNH Fanboi]

Oh, and the article had that pic showing how Landers got hurt:

http://www.collegesportingnews.com/stats/writer/20081213UM-JMUgallery/images/MJ_Landers_HurtAnkle.jpg

I don't think the foot is supposed to twist that way.

Damn, that will tear something. That's the risk you take with a QB that runs as much as Landers.

[Syntax Error]

Dude... Can you take the smack -------------->

[gbhmt]

Damn, that will tear something. That's the risk you take with a QB that runs as much as Landers.

Yeah I figured he tore something, since he wasn't limping. Pain didn't keep him out, instability did.

[fencer24]

Damn, that will tear something. That's the risk you take with a QB that runs as much as Landers.

What I am really amazed at is that he didn't even seem to be limping when he came back.

[griz8791]

FWIW, an argument that the Big Sky is better than the CAA wants to admit is a winnable argument. Any argument that the CAA sucks, which is where this thread seems to have been headed in the last 3 pages, is absurd.

[BDKJMU]

Jesu Christi What's it going to take, a silver bullet, a wooden stake?
Hey, with Studzik, you are still going to be giving the CAA fits. Good Luck, next year. (At least until we have to meet you).

Jeez, calm down. I was just correcting a fellow JMU poster who said JMU lost 10 starters for next season, when its 8. Had nothing to so with the JMU-Montana game.

As far as Dudzick next yr, it may be only 50/50 he will even start. There is a true freshman QB, Justin Thorpe, (6'2", 210) who was recruited by VT, Duke, UConn, & Syracuse as an "athlete" or DB. Was offered by JMU, UR, & ASU to play QB. From what I heard and read did very well this fall while being redshirted. So at least JMU should have 2 good QBs

[Russell Trombone]

FWIW, an argument that the Big Sky is better than the CAA wants to admit is a winnable argument. Any argument that the CAA sucks, which is where this thread seems to have been headed in the last 3 pages, is absurd.

The CAA football conf does not suck. It sucks more than UNH fanboi seems to believe, but it does not suck. What 'sucks' is the supposition that they deserve to get 5 bids

Big Sky fans have never alleged that they deserved 5 teams in the bracket. If they were to ever get 5 teams, I think they would be magnanimous enough to admit that it was unwarranted.

UNH math...yes, it sucks

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

Dude... 2008 to 2004 is four years.

You really haven't achieved much, UNH. Live free or die, man...but don't talk to a Griz fan about your so-called "achievements".
If you think CAA deserved five teams in the field, you have an undue sense of entitlement. If you think 2004 was 5 seasons ago, I'm go to pray that my office building wasn't designed with the help of a UNH engineer.

Dude, my season is over so 2004 is five seasons ago. If it was only four seasons, then Ricky Santos would have still been our QB. ;) And I was talking seasons not years wise arse.

I've got a newsflash for you, the next team into the playoffs the last two years was a CAA team. Get ready for six CAA teams when the playoffs expand. And it will be based on achievement. The achievements might not be winning the Championship, but they are achievements worthy of playoff bids. There is no sense of entitlement involved. You obviously have a warped definition of entitlement or don't understand the NCAA guidelines for the playoffs.

This is going nowhere so I'll man up and end it. Good luck in Chatty.

[GolfingGriz]

How bout we take this years playoffs as a measure. Games against its own conference will not count. The CAA is 6-3. Very good and could be 7-3 after weekend. The bigsky is 3-0 so far. I'm not saying that the bigsky is better, but they are atleast as good in these playoffs.

[Syntax Error]

UNH_Alum_In_CT just ignore the troll. The person ignores facts and has no backup for his smack. DO NOT REPLY is a wise choice. xnodx

[Russell Trombone]

Dude, my season is over so 2004 is five seasons ago. If it was only four seasons, then Ricky Santos would have still been our QB. ;) And I was talking seasons not years wise arse.

I've got a newsflash for you, the next team into the playoffs the last two years was a CAA team. Get ready for six CAA teams when the playoffs expand. And it will be based on achievement. The achievements might not be winning the Championship, but they are achievements worthy of playoff bids. There is no sense of entitlement involved. You obviously have a warped definition of entitlement or don't understand the NCAA guidelines for the playoffs.

This is going nowhere so I'll man up and end it. Good luck in Chatty.

UNH... 2004 was four seasons ago. Start with you thumb, then count backward to your pinky and see how many lil fingers you traverse. If you still believe that the number is 5, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that your didn't run out of fingers, either.

Now you want 6 in a field of 20? Wow, this is why I enjoy addressing you. Ya see, the playoffs are supposed to be a chance for teams from conferences all over the country to meet. The other conferences in the country aren't like wild beasts being fed to the the CAA gladiators for your fans to watch.

A college tournament is a great thing because it gives teams and conferences from all 'levels' (trying not to make that sounds sanctimonious) a chance at the prize. Does anyone expect St Mary's to beat North Carolina in the first round of March madness? No... but what makes it so much fun to watch is that they get a shot to do so. It's fun to watch the cinderella games. If your team finished fifth in your conference, I think they should forfeit their bid spot to a cinderella for not taking care of business at home during the season. That's what the regular season is for.

[TCisMYhero]

JMU, 'Nova, UR, W&M, UNH, Maine, and UMass were 17-0 against FCS this season OOC. And they don't feel "entitled" to anything. xnonox

So now the playoffs don't count as this season....?

[Russell Trombone]

UNH_Alum_In_CT just ignore the troll. The person ignores facts and has no backup for his smack. DO NOT REPLY is a wise choice. xnodx

Which facts do I ignore, Syntax? I have not botched subtracting 4 from 8, nor have I cited erroneous grounds for my assertions. I am merely trying to bring the disillusioned CAA blowhards down to earth

[eaglesrthe1]

Looks more like 6-3 against non-conf teams when it mattered, Mac-Thor... and that's with FIVE teams in the mix. Has your television not been working the past few weekends, or did you take math with the UNH alum from Conneticut?

I've got to say Russell, that's all after the fact. Has nothing to do with being selected beforehand.

[MacThor]

So now the playoffs don't count as this season....?

I was obviously referring to the regular season....as a measure of teams who could be considered by the committee. I don't know why I fed the troll.

Anybody who says Richmond didn't deserve their bid hasn't been paying attention.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

UNH probably would've liked to play UD this year xsmhx . But they did play W&M and nova and Maine and UMass and an FBS team. It's not like they played nobody. That point has validity if one of the CAA divisions (the CAA South) has 3 great teams and a team, by schedule can avoid all 3 of them. However, that didn't happen this year (there were 4 good CAA South teams) and next year it probably won't happen again (5 of the CAA South could be good). And it's not like the OOC schedules for the CAA are weak - JMU played Duke and Appy St, Richmond played Elon and UVA, nova played West Virginia and Lehigh, UD played Maryland and Furman.

But, to answer your other question, I would have no problem with waiving the rule that conference foes can't play each other in the first round. But beware what you ask for, I'm sure the first time they do that there'll be criticism that the CAA is getting favoritism by guaranteeing that a team from the CAA will advance to the next round.

I'm not saying the CAA didn't deserve 5 teams and they clearly are the deepest conference - my problem is with the system of not seeding all teams and stupid 1st round match-ups because of "regional" - How would you set the playoffs if you had the power? ----

[Griz Fan]

gee if we combine the bsc and the great west we could have at least 3 western teams in the top 16 and in a good year probably one the dakotas would be there for 4. and if we didnt have to play each other in the first two rounds we could have two teams in the semis as well. the brilliant thing is not to overload the western teams in one bracket so they dont have to knock each other off before the semis.

[ChickenMan]

For the second consecutive year the CAA South's 3rd place team has advanced to the FCS title game. I think that is evidence enough to validify the recent strength of the CAA. Also in '98 UMass was a 3rd place A10/CAA team when they won the title.

Has any other league ever had a 3rd place team place team play in the title game?

[uofmman1122]

Has any other league ever had a 3rd place team place team play in the title game?They generally don't give the third place team in any other conference a chance at the playoffs, however this year there really weren't any third place teams from other conferences that had much of a fight, save for maybe Elon.

[GtFllsGriz]

That's absurd to say that the 3rd place team validates the strength of the conference! Where are #1 and #2? Gone! All that tells me is that the 3rd best team was better than #1 and #2. If Weber and Cal Poly don't have to play in the same bracket with the Griz then we MAY, notice I said may, have an all west championship.

Having five teams from the CAA is not the fault of the conference but the NCAA and selection committee. So relax boys. And, there may not have been any other teams more qualified than Maine. Again, chill. HOWEVER, don't preach all summer, as many of you did, that the CAA is so superior to every other conference in the country. Three teams in one bracket and two in the other stacks the odds in the CAA favor of having one or more teams in the championship, period. Putting three teams (two different conferences) in the same bracket makes it impossible for the west to prove to the rest of the country that they can play and beat the CAA. The end result is still only one CAA team playing much to the chagrin of the elitest CAA following. For those of you that are reasonable, ignore my rant.

[griz_fan_in_SanDiego]

One thing I've learned from my time on AGS is not to jump to conclusions about the quality (or lack of quality) of an individual or team based on one game. How many other JMU games did you watch? I don't think you can make any assumptions about how another team will do based on watching one game. For all you know if Weber played JMU, then Weber could put the ball all over the deck or make a slew of killing penalties.

There just aren't enough inter-sectional games to come to a definitive opinion. But if Montana wins Friday, you'll definitely get to claim to be the best in FCS. Isn't that really more important?

Trust me, even when we win a lot CAA and SoCon fans on this site will keep up what they're doing now. Making excuses and diminishing UM's accomplishment. We could win 10 NC's in a row and still not get any respect from some xlolx but such is life.

[GannonFan]

Trust me, even when we win a lot CAA and SoCon fans on this site will keep up what they're doing now. Making excuses and diminishing UM's accomplishment. We could win 10 NC's in a row and still not get any respect from some xlolx but such is life.

Oh stop it - Montana gets plenty of respect, it's the rest of the Big Sky that takes a beating. xrulesx

[GannonFan]

I'm not saying the CAA didn't deserve 5 teams and they clearly are the deepest conference - my problem is with the system of not seeding all teams and stupid 1st round match-ups because of "regional" - How would you set the playoffs if you had the power? ----

I stay away from seeding - that was an abysmal failure when they used it before and it would be again.

If I had the power, I would dump any attempts at regionalization - just match up teams by avoiding conferences playing each other in the first round, avoiding rematches of games from during the year (Cal Poly's had to play regular season opponents in the playoffs too much IMO) and balance the brackets so you don't have too much from one region (East or West) all in one part of the bracket. Then let the chips fall where they may. I'd even look into the past and try to avoid rematches of very recent years' playoff games - no reason why we had to see EKU play Richmond again this year, for instance. I don't mind games that make sense locally (last year's UD/DSU game, for instance, was fine - this year Wofford/SC State should've happened) but don't go overboard making sure they happen. That's what I'd do as the Playoff Czar. xthumbsupx

[griz_fan_in_SanDiego]

Oh stop it - Montana gets plenty of respect, it's the rest of the Big Sky that takes a beating. xrulesx

OH please...all I ever hear, "you don't deserve your ranking, you don't play any good teams, you never go on the road, we'd make the playoffs every year too if we were in the big sky" blah blah blah and look at this thread..."you wouldn't have won if it weren't for the turnovers" well duh that's football, you want to win a football game hold on to the freaking ball people it's that simple xlolx and as I recall we forced those turnovers...and then there's "our quarterback was injured" what quarterback is that? All I saw was three running backs I didn't see a quarterback ;) use your qb like a half back and yeah, he's likely to get injured

[MacThor]

OH please...all I ever hear, "blah blah blah"

If that's all you hear, you aren't listening. Montana gets full props from many CAA homers. In fact probably the majority. UR certainly doesn't expect anything less than their toughest game of the year.

[griz_fan_in_SanDiego]

If that's all you hear, you aren't listening. Montana gets full props from many CAA homers. In fact probably the majority. UR certainly doesn't expect anything less than their toughest game of the year.

I didn't say we didn't get full props from all CAA homers, I said there are many we don't get full props from no matter who we beat or how well we play. This whole thread is based on having to eat crow cuz he said UNI and UM pretty much shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as a team from the mighty CAA xsmiley_wix

[WVAPPmountaineer]

I stay away from seeding - that was an abysmal failure when they used it before and it would be again.

If I had the power, I would dump any attempts at regionalization - just match up teams by avoiding conferences playing each other in the first round, avoiding rematches of games from during the year (Cal Poly's had to play regular season opponents in the playoffs too much IMO) and balance the brackets so you don't have too much from one region (East or West) all in one part of the bracket. Then let the chips fall where they may. I'd even look into the past and try to avoid rematches of very recent years' playoff games - no reason why we had to see EKU play Richmond again this year, for instance. I don't mind games that make sense locally (last year's UD/DSU game, for instance, was fine - this year Wofford/SC State should've happened) but don't go overboard making sure they happen. That's what I'd do as the Playoff Czar. xthumbsupx

Makes sense - I hate the regional match-ups. Would you still seed the top 4? - would you still set the games at the sites who make the best $ guarantee? More balance between East and West in the brackets would be great. I know many have complained that APP bought their championships by getting home field advantage - however last year without upsets we would have had to have gone to McNeese and Montana. Not having to do that was a big plus, no doubt but the other 3 years I believe we a top 1/2 seed ----

[mtgrizfankb]

Meh, UNI beat the 4th best CAA team by 2 points and lost to the 3rd best team at home. How competitive do you think South Dakota State and Western Illinois would have been at JMU?

No one really questioned that UNI and Montana could compete with the best of the CAA. Rather, we've been pointing out that the CAA has much more depth than any other conference, which has not been refuted by any of the results in this years playoffs.

REALLY? way to back petal. i remember the talk before the JMU game being. Montana might be a low to mid CAA team. one person said 8-10 time W&M would beat montana. I also believe appaholic made a thread about the west teams not getting past semi, The only reason west teams dont get respect is cause you guys dont get to see us on TV. you see all the eastern teams and so you forget we have talent out here too. you just dont get to see how good we really are.xeyebrowx xthumbsupx

[GATA]

REALLY? way to back petal. i remember the talk before the JMU game being. Montana might be a low to mid CAA team. one person said 8-10 time W&M would beat montana. I also believe appaholic made a thread about the west teams not getting past semi, The only reason west teams dont get respect is cause you guys dont get to see us on TV. you see all the eastern teams and so you forget we have talent out here too. you just dont get to see how good we really are.xeyebrowx xthumbsupx

I've never seen anybody from the CAA on TV. however, if you get Comcast cable you can usually see some CAA and SOCON games on CSS.

[ChickenMan]

That's absurd to say that the 3rd place team validates the strength of the conference! Where are #1 and #2? Gone! All that tells me is that the 3rd best team was better than #1 and #2. If Weber and Cal Poly don't have to play in the same bracket with the Griz then we MAY, notice I said may, have an all west championship.



Are you serious??? What that tells you is that all three CAA teams are top quality and can compete with the best for the FCS title. As for Cal Poly and Weber St.. you are making a giant leap when you conjecture that they could defeat a good CAA, MVC or SoCon playoff team. I believe that Weber and Cal Poly have a grand total of TWO.. FCS playoff wins.. all-time.. between them. Cal Poly beat Montana a few years ago.. Weber beat Idaho way back in '87. You might like to believe that those two are now FCS powers.. but history certainly says otherwise.

[MacThor]

I didn't say we didn't get full props from all CAA homers, I said there are many we don't get full props from no matter who we beat or how well we play. This whole thread is based on having to eat crow cuz he said UNI and UM pretty much shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as a team from the mighty CAA xsmiley_wix

hmmm....I could have sworn you said "all I ever hear..........."

[ur2k]

Can we just quit all these 'my conference is better than yours' discussions?

The last time I checked Montana is playing Richmond. The Big Sky is not playing the CAA.

[GannonFan]

Makes sense - I hate the regional match-ups. Would you still seed the top 4? - would you still set the games at the sites who make the best $ guarantee? More balance between East and West in the brackets would be great. I know many have complained that APP bought their championships by getting home field advantage - however last year without upsets we would have had to have gone to McNeese and Montana. Not having to do that was a big plus, no doubt but the other 3 years I believe we a top 1/2 seed ----

Seeding the top 4 is fine with me - gives something to the teams that warrant those seeds and you avoid, a little, the "Marshall Invitational" nonsense that sullied the early 90's once Marshall got the NC game at their stadium. And yeah, I'd still go with the school that can put the best bid in - they do tie it to attendance so I'd rather a school with 20k fans get the game over a school that's only going to put 5k in the stands - it's better for the fans that way and actually rewards fans.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

And yeah, I'd still go with the school that can put the best bid in - they do tie it to attendance so I'd rather a school with 20k fans get the game over a school that's only going to put 5k in the stands - it's better for the fans that way and actually rewards fans.

I believe I read where Richmond had something like 2,500 at their first round game - they weren't a top seed - how did that happen? - Don't get me wrong, I ranked them very high all year and I have said on this board and others that Richmond had the best defense I had see APP play against in this 4 year run (excluding LSU - including Michigan), so I am absolutely not saying they weren't worthy - but 2,500 fans??? and they are in a reasonably large city ---

[GannonFan]

I believe I read where Richmond had something like 2,500 at their first round game - they weren't a top seed - how did that happen? - Don't get me wrong, I ranked them very high all year and I have said on this board and others that Richmond had the best defense I had see APP play against in this 4 year run (excluding LSU - including Michigan), so I am absolutely not saying they weren't worthy - but 2,500 fans??? and they are in a reasonably large city ---

And that's why it shouldn't just be about money - they need to incorporate expected attendance into that decision as well as just the bid they get. It wasn't shocking that Richmond got that number - based on their attendance during the year, and based on the routine across all of FCS that the first round of the playoffs, on Thanksgiving Weekend, have significant dropoffs in attendance, anyone could've correctly come within 2k on a guess on what Richmond would've had for that game. Richmond's fanbase is pretty good, but it's small. The small group they have travels well (Richmond is one of the better travelling bases that come to Newark - they even beat the obviously much larger JMU fanbase in that regard in years when both play in Newark) but they are small. Small school, private school, football's never been a factor on their campus (just now building a stadium on campus), and alumni generally don't live in the area equals small fanbase.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

And that's why it shouldn't just be about money - they need to incorporate expected attendance into that decision as well as just the bid they get. It wasn't shocking that Richmond got that number - based on their attendance during the year, and based on the routine across all of FCS that the first round of the playoffs, on Thanksgiving Weekend, have significant dropoffs in attendance, anyone could've correctly come within 2k on a guess on what Richmond would've had for that game. Richmond's fanbase is pretty good, but it's small. The small group they have travels well (Richmond is one of the better travelling bases that come to Newark - they even beat the obviously much larger JMU fanbase in that regard in years when both play in Newark) but they are small. Small school, private school, football's never been a factor on their campus (just now building a stadium on campus), and alumni generally don't live in the area equals small fanbase.

I agree with your premise that it shouldn't be about the money but isn't that the format used by the committee? - my understanding is that after matching the 4 seeds with opponents, then they do their "regional matching" and once the other 8 are matched then they open bids from those teams - I can't believe E KY would have a lower bid than Richmond - could be so, I guess.

[ur2k]

I agree with your premise that it shouldn't be about the money but isn't that the format used by the committee? - my understanding is that after matching the 4 seeds with opponents, then they do their "regional matching" and once the other 8 are matched then they open bids from those teams - I can't believe E KY would have a lower bid than Richmond - could be so, I guess.

That was the case. In an article in the Richmond paper - it stated that UR bid $65k and EKU bid $50k.

Also official attendance was listed at 2,994.
2994 x $22 (ticket price) = $65,868 - or suspicially close to the bid amount.

I was there that day and think we had more like 5k or 6k - not great but better than 3k

[GannonFan]

I agree with your premise that it shouldn't be about the money but isn't that the format used by the committee? - my understanding is that after matching the 4 seeds with opponents, then they do their "regional matching" and once the other 8 are matched then they open bids from those teams - I can't believe E KY would have a lower bid than Richmond - could be so, I guess.

Richmond's a rich university - I don't have any doubt that they could outbid most teams. The committee is supposed to also weigh expected attendance in their determination of the host school (to make sure schools don't bankrupt themselves bidding for football games), but I doubt this factors in as much as the actual money does, and like I said, Richmond is loaded.

[WVAPPmountaineer]

That was the case. In an article in the Richmond paper - it stated that UR bid $65k and EKU bid $50k.

Also official attendance was listed at 2,994.
2994 x $22 (ticket price) = $65,868 - or suspicially close to the bid amount.

I was there that day and think we had more like 5k or 6k - not great but better than 3k

Thanks for the info - Richmond deserved to host and my only wish would have been to see them on the other side of the bracket - As I mentioned previously, they were the one team I didn't want to see prior to Chatty -
I just don't ever get a good feel from our selection committees - to much goes unanswered or not explained properly ----

[GtFllsGriz]

chickenman: I could care less about years past. This year Cal Poly and Weber would have given the CAA all they could handle! Period!

[rcny46]

We'll never know....this year.

I would like to see more CAA vs MVFC match ups. I know SDSU has three games with Delaware starting in '10. How about it UNH, how about adding some Bison, Salukis, Trees, Bears, Leathernecks or Redbirds to your OOC soon? Rabbits are booked up until 2012, but we'd love to schedule good inter-league games with the CAA teams.

Personally,I'd love to see that type of scheduling by UNH.I'd be more interested in seeing them play SDSU or Illinois St. for example than Dartmouth or some FBS team.Let's hope things can move in that direction.

[eaglesrthe1]

For the second consecutive year the CAA South's 3rd place team has advanced to the FCS title game. I think that is evidence enough to validify the recent strength of the CAA. Also in '98 UMass was a 3rd place A10/CAA team when they won the title.

Has any other league ever had a 3rd place team place team play in the title game?

It's all relative. The third place team from a twelve member conference is akin to the second place team from an eight member conference.

There have been numerous non conference champs making the title game.

[bostonspider]

Well UR was third in their 6 team division, and technically tied with UNH at 6-2 in league, so they could have almost been construed as 4th in the CAA. Not sure what the tiebreaker would have been between the two.

[BDKJMU]

That's absurd to say that the 3rd place team validates the strength of the conference! Where are #1 and #2? Gone! All that tells me is that the 3rd best team was better than #1 and #2. If Weber and Cal Poly don't have to play in the same bracket with the Griz then we MAY, notice I said may, have an all west championship.

Having five teams from the CAA is not the fault of the conference but the NCAA and selection committee. So relax boys. And, there may not have been any other teams more qualified than Maine. Again, chill. HOWEVER, don't preach all summer, as many of you did, that the CAA is so superior to every other conference in the country. Three teams in one bracket and two in the other stacks the odds in the CAA favor of having one or more teams in the championship, period. Putting three teams (two different conferences) in the same bracket makes it impossible for the west to prove to the rest of the country that they can play and beat the CAA. The end result is still only one CAA team playing much to the chagrin of the elitest CAA following. For those of you that are reasonable, ignore my rant.

If that was the case then how come #1 JMU and #2 Nova beat #3 UR during the season? You might respond with, "Well the best team doesn't always win." I could respond to that then thats what happened last Fri night. xsmiley_wix

[GtFllsGriz]

Nope, it just says they were the third best team in that conference at that time. Nothing more. Right now I guess they are the best in the CAA.

[BDKJMU]

Nope, it just says they were the third best team in that conference at that time. Nothing more. Right now I guess they are the best in the CAA.

If they beat Montana, then yes. If not, then no.

[UncleSam]

Nope, it just says they were the third best team in that conference at that time. Nothing more. Right now I guess they are the best in the CAA.

What it says is that they are all outstanding teams who were capable of going deep into the playoffs. That is what makes the CAA so tough, over the past few years, every season there has been 3 or 4 CAA teams that are capable of competing with the nations best. Unless you are completely delusion, you know that isn't the case in the Big Sky. Montana is a great program, but excepting Montana, the last Big Sky team to win more than 1 playoff game in a season was EWU - 11 yrs ago. xeekx Face it, it's been Montana and their little sisters for many years. Maybe the competition is starting to change, but the proof will have to come with some non-Montana playoff runs, not with your CAA bashing.

[Griz Fan]

[QUOTE=UncleSam;1265123]What it says is that they are all outstanding teams who were capable of going deep into the playoffs. That is what makes the CAA so tough, over the past few years, every season there has been 3 or 4 CAA teams that are capable of competing with the nations best. Unless you are completely delusion, you know that isn't the case in the Big Sky. Montana is a great program, but excepting Montana, the last Big Sky team to win more than 1 playoff game in a season was EWU - 11 yrs ago. xeekx Face it, it's been Montana and their little sisters for many years. Maybe the competition is starting to change, but the proof will have to come with some non-Montana playoff runs, not with your CAA bashing.[/QUOTE

yep, its pretty hard to advance more than one western team into the quarterfinals when you play each other in the first two rounds. i can see why you make this point. it is too bad that these teams werent spread out in their bracket, better yet maybe spread out in both brackets, maybe the west would have had a better chance to make a stronger presence. Course when you have 5 teams spread out in both brackets it is even easier for you to make this point. i am not sure if it is only shere talent that proves who is the best as it does who you play to get there. in this case weber and cal poly will never know since they were not given the chance any team east of denver.

[UncleSam]

yep, its pretty hard to advance more than one western team into the quarterfinals when you play each other in the first two rounds.


I took the time to do a little research and the above statement is not factual. Here's who Big Sky teams (other than Montana) played in their 1st and 2d round games since the last non-Montana team (EWU) was able to advance to the semi-finals way back in 1997.

'98 - none
'99 - GSU 72 NAU 29
'00 - Delaware 49 Portland St 14
'01 - Sam Houston St 34 NAU 31
'02 - McNeese St 21 Montana St 14
'03 - UNI 35 Montana St 14
'04 - EWU 35 SIU 21
'04 - 2d round - Sam Houston 35 EWU 34
'05 - UNI 41 EWU 38
'05 - 2d round Texas St 14 Cal Poly 7
'06 - Montana St 31 Furman 13
'06 - 2d round - ASU 38 Montana St 17
'07 - EWU 44 McNeese St 15
'07 - 2d round - ASU 38 EWU 35
'08 - Weber St 49 Cal Poly 35
'08 - 2d round - Montana 24 Weber St 13

There have been 15 playoff games involving Big Sky schools other than Montana and with the exception of this year, none of those playoffs games were vs other Big Sky or so called western teams.

If your looking for an excuse as to why Big Sky or western teams (other then Montana) have fairly poorly in the playoffs, you'll have to look someplace else.

It does look like things are improving out west as over the last 3 yrs a team other than Montana has won a 1st round playoff game. Hopefully that trend will continue.


http://www.fcspreview.com/history.html

[GannonFan]

I took the time to do a little research and the above statement is not factual. Here's who Big Sky teams (other than Montana) played in their 1st and 2d round games since the last non-Montana team (EWU) was able to advance to the semi-finals way back in 1997.

'98 - none
'99 - GSU 72 NAU 29
'00 - Delaware 49 Portland St 14
'01 - Sam Houston St 34 NAU 31
'02 - McNeese St 21 Montana St 14
'03 - UNI 35 Montana St 14
'04 - EWU 35 SIU 21
'04 - 2d round - Sam Houston 35 EWU 34
'05 - UNI 41 EWU 38
'05 - 2d round Texas St 14 Cal Poly 7
'06 - Montana St 31 Furman 13
'06 - 2d round - ASU 38 Montana St 17
'07 - EWU 44 McNeese St 15
'07 - 2d round - ASU 38 EWU 35
'08 - Weber St 49 Cal Poly 35
'08 - 2d round - Montana 24 Weber St 13

There have been 15 playoff games involving Big Sky schools other than Montana and with the exception of this year, none of those playoffs games were vs other Big Sky or so called western teams.

If your looking for an excuse as to why Big Sky or western teams (other then Montana) have fairly poorly in the playoffs, you'll have to look someplace else.

It does look like things are improving out west as over the last 3 yrs a team other than Montana has won a 1st round playoff game. Hopefully that trend will continue.


http://www.fcspreview.com/history.html

That's the problem when dealing with the bandwagon people - most don't realize that FCS football has been going on for more than just this year and that's there's plenty of history. Nice job pulling that together. xthumbsupx