Does the NCAA have a Double Standard for FCS?

[Retro]

I found this article interesting especially considering how this past season the NCAA lumped 3 of the top teams all from the west into the same bracket. Even before the economy was an issue with some of the similar actions they've taken in the past years as far as favoring regionalization over placing top seeds againest what would be the bottom seeds.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3897386


INDIANAPOLIS -- The NCAA promises not to bust a budget or a bracket when March Madness arrives.

NCCA tournament selection committee chairman Mike Slive said his group still will try to keep teams close to their home fans, as it has in the past, but not if it would result in unfair competition.

"We're concerned, as are all Americans, but I think our primary obligation is to provide the nation with a geographically and balanced national tournament," Slive said during Tuesday's conference call with reporters.

[coover]

Of course they have a double standard regarding football and basketball. But the reason for the double standard is understandable ... a traveling basketball team and coaches is about 20 people with some fairly light equipment while a traveling FCS football team is problably 60 or more folks, and a lot of heavy equipment. I'm sure it is probably (at least) 3 times as expensive for a football team to travel as for a basketball team.

That said, the combining of Montana, Weber State, and Cal Poly into the same bracket should never have happened. Certainly these three teams were in the top 8 of the 16 playoff teams, and should have not met each other as opponents in the first round (as Cal Poly and Weber State did). Nor should the winner of the CP - Weber State game have met Montana in the 2nd round.

Finally, pairing the three western teams together was not cost effective. It probably cost nearly as much to send Weber State to San Luis Obispo as it would to send them to play an Eastern team. Or, assuming that the NCAA had decided to not give a home game to Poly, the cost of transporting them to and from an Eastern team would not have been considerably more than transporting them to and from Montana or Weber State. While distance is usually the biggest factor in transportation costs, it is not from these three schools.

[nms1987]

<i>Of course they have a double standard regarding football and basketball. But the reason for the double standard is understandable ... a traveling basketball team and coaches is about 20 people with some fairly light equipment while a traveling FCS football team is problably 60 or more folks, and a lot of heavy equipment. I'm sure it is probably (at least) 3 times as expensive for a football team to travel as for a basketball team.</i>

Of course. Also, the NCAA bball tourney makes about elevnty billion more dollars in profit than FCS playoffs, so they have no need to cut back on basketball tourney travel dollars

[UNH Fanboi]

A double standard is only bad if it is arbitrary, which this double standard is not. The FCS playoffs make a fraction of the money that March Madness does and transporting a football team is much, much more expensive than transporting a basketball team.

[achrist70]

Well you could put Dayton in the playoffs that wouldn't be as far of travel as another CAA team!xlolxxlolxxlolxxlolxxlolxxlolxxlolxxlolxxlolx xlolx

[Lehigh Football Nation]

"It's a good time to remind people that each team is chosen based on its own merit and being in a particular conference does not help or hurt your chances of making the tournament," he said. "It's the committee's job to pick the best of the best."

Now, I don't believe THAT for a second, in football OR basketball.

I'm of a very mixed opinion myself when it comes to regionalization, especially for March Madness. It sure as hell seems like regionalization is only really meant to give the power conferences home court for the first two rounds of the playoffs, while the "mid majors" and "little majors" that supposedly are helped get shipped out to LA, Kansas or Arizona. I can't remember the last time a Patriot League team played somewhat locally in the NCAA tournament. Bucknell's big upset over Kansas happened in the midwest somewhere.

This year for the FCS playoffs I didn't like the regionalization when it was announced, but it ended up creating such fantastic second round matchups that it ended up great. But I agree with others here: March Madness and the FCS Playoffs really are apples and oranges. They're not similar enough to imply a double standard.

[TheValleyRaider]

I can't remember the last time a Patriot League team played somewhat locally in the NCAA tournament. Bucknell's big upset over Kansas happened in the midwest somewhere.

For the record, PL in the NCAA Tournament

1992: Fordham L UMass at Worcester
1993: Holy Cross L Arkansas at Winston-Salem
1994: Navy L Missouri at Ogden, UT
1995: Colgate L Kansas at Dayton
1996: Colgate L UConn at Indianapolis
1997: Navy L Utah at Tucson
1998: Navy L North Carolina at Hartford
1999: Lafayette L Miami at Boston
2000: Lafayette L Temple at Buffalo
2001: Holy Cross L Kentucky at Uniondale, NY

2002: Holy Cross L Kansas at St. Louis
2003: Holy Cross L Marquette at Indianapolis
2004: Lehigh L Florida A&M at Dayton (Play-In...excuse me, "Opening Round" xrolleyesx)
2005: Bucknell W Kansas at Oklahoma City
Bucknell L Wisconsin at Oklahoma City
2006: Bucknell W Arkansas at Dallas
Bucknell L Memphis at Dallas
2007: Holy Cross L Southern Illinois at Columbus
2008: American L Tennessee at Birmingham, AL

We certainly don't rate highly enough to play locally, and certainly don't have anywhere near the fan numbers to justify keeping our champ anywhere close. That being said, since the switch to regionalization in 2002, well, I think it's pretty clear which teams are benefitting from it xpeacex xreadx xtwocentsx

[CollegeSportsInfo]

I'd have not problems with some stronger regionalization. The problem teams face will be when the top seeds STILL go to different locations...say and East team gets the last #3 seed but has to go out West...but play stronger teams from that region who get to play close to home. Stronger teams might be seeded lower so that they don't have to travel. It would be unfair to higher seeds, that's for sure.

[URMite]

Now, I don't believe THAT for a second, in football OR basketball.

I'm of a very mixed opinion myself when it comes to regionalization, especially for March Madness. It sure as hell seems like regionalization is only really meant to give the power conferences home court for the first two rounds of the playoffs, while the "mid majors" and "little majors" that supposedly are helped get shipped out to LA, Kansas or Arizona. I can't remember the last time a Patriot League team played somewhat locally in the NCAA tournament. Bucknell's big upset over Kansas happened in the midwest somewhere.

This year for the FCS playoffs I didn't like the regionalization when it was announced, but it ended up creating such fantastic second round matchups that it ended up great. But I agree with others here: March Madness and the FCS Playoffs really are apples and oranges. They're not similar enough to imply a double standard.

I haven't looked it up but as for non-BCS getting to play locally, I think UNCW played GW in North Carolina a few years ago...

[URMite]

Of course they have a double standard regarding football and basketball. But the reason for the double standard is understandable ... a traveling basketball team and coaches is about 20 people with some fairly light equipment while a traveling FCS football team is problably 60 or more folks, and a lot of heavy equipment. I'm sure it is probably (at least) 3 times as expensive for a football team to travel as for a basketball team.

That said, the combining of Montana, Weber State, and Cal Poly into the same bracket should never have happened. Certainly these three teams were in the top 8 of the 16 playoff teams, and should have not met each other as opponents in the first round (as Cal Poly and Weber State did). Nor should the winner of the CP - Weber State game have met Montana in the 2nd round.

Finally, pairing the three western teams together was not cost effective. It probably cost nearly as much to send Weber State to San Luis Obispo as it would to send them to play an Eastern team. Or, assuming that the NCAA had decided to not give a home game to Poly, the cost of transporting them to and from an Eastern team would not have been considerably more than transporting them to and from Montana or Weber State. While distance is usually the biggest factor in transportation costs, it is not from these three schools.

I don't agree with regionalization, but I'm not sure that your change would have been cost neutral. If 2 east coast teams were playing each other, and instead you fly one out west while flying CP or Weber to the east, you do create an extra flight.