Which team had the worse showing Saturday?

[Cocky]

I would either go with Hampton or Colgate.

[TheValleyRaider]

Hampton

They were an undefeated seed playing at home. Colgate was facing the #1 team in the country. I think you could also make the case for GSU or EWU for blowing the leads they had in the 4th quarter. :twocents:

[AppGuy04]

I would either go with Hampton or Colgate.

I expected things to go the way they went, no surprise for me

[ISUMatt]

Hampton!!!

[Hansel]

Didn't Hampton hang around for a while? (didn't see the game). Colgate got waxed from the start.

Since Hampton was a seed playing at home however, I will have to give them the "award"

[mainejeff]

Hampton.

They looked like they hadn't seen a real I-AA opponent all season until Richmond.

[OldSchool85]

Didn't Hampton hang around for a while? (didn't see the game).

They did... However, Hampton only played 30 minutes of good football while Richmond played 60. It's pretty hard to make excuses for losing at home by a 28-point margin...

[JohnStOnge]

I don't know if Hampton has the worst showing but the game was an example of debunking that old, "I don't care who they played, it's hard to go undefeated against anybody" thing. I'm not saying they weren't a good team. They certainly belonged in the playoffs. But their lofty ranking was an example of pollsters (and playoff committee members) being overly impressed by records and not adequately taking schedule difficulty into account.

And I'm talking about real schedule difficulty, not that NCAA thing.

[Black and Gold Express]

Same old song and dance. No offense to the MEAC fans out here, but after this last weekend the MEAC should never, ever, get another seed again until they first start winning some playoff games with regularity.

Record-wise and seed-wise, this was the best MEAC entrant into the playoffs, perhaps ever. And they got blown out at home in the first round. Anyone that still tries to believe the schedule strength doesn't matter is simply blind to reality. The better team won this game.

Had HU won, I was ready to look at this team as truly being different from the past MEAC teams in the playoffs. But this just goes even further to prove that it still was the 2000 FAMU semifinalist team was the different and special team, the more and more seeming exception to the "rule" over the last 20 years.

[NovaHater]

My first response would be Hampton only because they were the #2 seed, but I think everyone that posted here (except for HU) thought Richmond would win. There was a poll taken of which seeded team would most likely win and Hampton won by a huge majority so their effort wasn't the worst showing, no one expected them to win anyway.
I would have to give the worst showing to Montana, playing a home game in a stadium that they are nearly unbeatable at come playoff time. Cal Poly is a team most people haven't seen, I hope they make it on TV next week.

[WMTribe90]

I don't know if Hampton has the worst showing but the game was an example of debunking that old, "I don't care who they played, it's hard to go undefeated against anybody" thing. I'm not saying they weren't a good team. They certainly belonged in the playoffs. But their lofty ranking was an example of pollsters (and playoff committee members) being overly impressed by records and not adequately taking schedule difficulty into account.

Agreed.

[GrizFoo]

I've got to agree that UM had the worst showing, at least of the games I watched. UM just didn't have an O that had all cylinders going all year. O-line was completely dominated. WR's were blanketed. And the OC was calling plays from the 5 step drop passing game regardless of the pressure coming thru the Oline.
Only positive on O was Hilliard, who was under used anyway.

[SoCon48]

I would either go with Hampton or Colgate.

GSU looked good, then got their usual cocky, choked, then got waxed.

Proved they weren't used to actually having to play a road game in the play-offs.
Couldn't have happened to nicer fans. :rolleyes:

[AppGuy04]

Hampton.

They looked like they hadn't seen a real I-AA opponent all season until Richmond.

thats b/c they hadn't played a "real team" all year :twocents:

[Tribe4SF]

The worst performance I saw was definitely Colgate. They are just not a playoff calibre team. Hampton had problems that most figured they would have. Their D was better than last year, but their offensive and defensive fronts just don't hold up against better competition. They did the right thing by using Smith and throwing the ball early, but over 60 minutes, team speed and physicality wear them down. Coleman and Daniels totalling 46 yards tells the whole story.

[Hansel]

My first response would be Hampton only because they were the #2 seed, but I think everyone that posted here (except for HU) thought Richmond would win. There was a poll taken of which seeded team would most likely win and Hampton won by a huge majority so their effort wasn't the worst showing, no one expected them to win anyway.
I would have to give the worst showing to Montana, playing a home game in a stadium that they are nearly unbeatable at come playoff time. Cal Poly is a team most people haven't seen, I hope they make it on TV next week.
Cal Poly @ Tex St on ESPN2 this Sat :nod:

[JohnStOnge]

Let me be the first to say that we played like unadulterated schitt. However, I still say the whole schedule thing is BS. We have great talent, and we didn't play like it. Richmond is a good team. They are not as good as we made them look Saturday. They wanted it more than we did. No excuses. Good Luck to the Richmond Spiders the rest of the way. Shellshock will be cheering for you.

I'm not saying this to pile on but consider this:

The highest rated team in the GPI on Hampton's regular season schedule was SC State at 25th. The Pirates beat them by 4 points. Other than that, the highest rated team on their schedule was 56th. More than half the teams on their schedule (6) were rated 91st through 117th and there are only 120 teams in I-AA.

All I'm saying is that pollsters need to keep that kind of thing in mind when they see an undefeated record. And Hampton getting beaten 38-10 at home when it plays a team rated 11th sure isn't going to change my opinion that people who vote in polls put too much emphasis on won/loss records.

[89Hen]

I'd have to go with Montana as one and GSU as two. Both are playoff hardened teams against teams making their first ever I-AA playoff appearance. UM was at home playing a team they had already beaten this year. GSU built a lead that should have been insurmountable. BTW, this is not to take anything away from CalPoly or Texas State, both proved they are great teams.

Colgate... I don't see how you could pick them. They backed into the playoffs and had to go play the #1 team in the country.

Hampton... yes they were highly ranked and at home, but Richmond hasn't lost to a I-AA since moving Tutt back to QB and was perhaps the hottest team coming into the playoffs. :twocents:

[89Hen]

All I'm saying is that pollsters need to keep that kind of thing in mind when they see an undefeated record.
They do JSO. Hence San Diego wasn't in the top 20. I had Hampton ranked pretty highly, but I also thought Richmond would beat them.

[putter]

Let me be the first to say that we played like unadulterated schitt. However, I still say the whole schedule thing is BS. We have great talent, and we didn't play like it. Richmond is a good team. They are not as good as we made them look Saturday. They wanted it more than we did. No excuses. Good Luck to the Richmond Spiders the rest of the way. Shellshock will be cheering for you.

You're 11-0, supposedly the 2nd best team in the country and Richmond wanted it more? Shouldn't happen and it is a sign that no one in the MEAC even challenged Hampton all year. First sign of adversity and Richmond took the game over. :confused: Hampton had a good year and should be congratulated for their accomplishments but next year an undefeated record won't get you a #2 seed or a home game unless the school upgrades the OOC schedule.

[GtFllsGriz]

I would have to agree that Hampton was the biggest disappointment. I expected more from any I-AA team that was undefeated no matter what conference they are from.

In defense of the Griz; although disappointed at the loss to a real good Cal Poly, we ended about where many of us thought we would. I questioned whether we could even keep our playoff streak alive with the youth that we had this year. Most rebuilding teams go 4-8, not 8-4 and a home playoff game. It is great to have a reputation that carries you to such high expectations.

[ngineer]

Not seeing either Hampton or the second half of the GSU game--those would be my toss-ups. Hampton deserved to be in the playoffs, but not as a seed. I was hoping they'd give Richmond a better game so as to justify the lofty rating. GSU OTOH must of had a meltdown. I saw the first half and it seemed to me the Eagles were just getting 'warmed up' and would control the rest of thegame. Must be a huge disappointment, and hence, a 'worse' showing in that they didn't live up to expectations. The other games either were as expected or close to the result.

[WhereDoITypeMyUsername?]

Another Montana fan with a vote for Montana. Sure, big losses for 'gate, Lafayette, and the Pirates, but they were pretty much expected, since they were playing the three hottest teams in the country, everyone disses the Patriot, and Hampton was playing their first game against I-AA opponents (hey, easy there, I'm just repeating what I heard earlier!).

Montana, on the other hand, is and was:
1. one of the most storied progams in I-AA history
2. playing in one of the most (if not the most) feared venues in the country and one of the most difficult places to get a road win
3. opening in its 13th consecutive playoff against a team who is fairly new to I-AA and in its first playoff appearance
4. playing a team from Southern California, in Missoula, at 3,000 feet elevation, in late November, on a snowy afternoon with temperatures in the 30's
5. pretty high in the GPI and won a share of the GPI's highest-rated conference, and
6. playing a team that they'd beaten about a month ago, who were without their starting quarterback.

To get taken to the woodshed despite the advantages indicates a dismal performance indeed. The youth and inexperience of this Griz team notwithstanding, no one had a worse showing Saturday than Montana.

[JohnStOnge]

They do JSO. Hence San Diego wasn't in the top 20. I had Hampton ranked pretty highly, but I also thought Richmond would beat them.

What I'm really getting at is too much emphasis is put on the record. If just about everybody on this board who wasn't a Hampton or MEAC fan was favoring Richmond to beat them at their place (and that's how it appeared to me), what were they doing ranked as high as they were in the AGS poll? If most people believed they were really that good you'd have seen a lot more favoring them to win a home game under these circumstances.

Yes, pollsters consider schedule strength some...but not enough.

[R.A.]

Hampton. They let a lot of people down in the second half.

[primetime21]

Agreed.


Record or not, they should have never received that seed. The majority of the people on this board knew they would be the first seed to go down and go down they did. It was ridiculous, the committee needs to come up with a better seeding system.

[Black and Gold Express]

Hampton. They let a lot of people down in the second half.

Yeah, I don't think it's unfair to say this loss will have reverberations for all MEAC schools for many years down the road now. They may have to run the table just to get a first round home game, nevermind a seed, for a while.

That being said, 11-0 and a 3 seed made it very clear that 10-1 would not have gotten HU a seed. So in one way they were kinda hedging their bets. But HU coulda done a lot for the whole conference by winning that game.

[89Hen]

The majority of the people on this board knew they would be the first seed to go down
They also faced the toughest opponent of the seeds IMO.

[Black and Gold Express]

They also faced the toughest opponent of the seeds IMO.

I haven't seen UR, but I would have placed them even with GSU at the least.

To that note, I think Texas State had the most IMPRESSIVE WIN of the first round.

[89Hen]

Yeah, I don't think it's unfair to say this loss will have reverberations for all MEAC schools for many years down the road now.
Losses haven't had much effect in the past, why would this one? Bethune lost in the first round 34-0 in 2002, but hosted a game in 2003.

[matfu]

there needs to be some change in the seeding...an 11-0 hampton from the weak meac did not deserve the # 3 seed. getting whipped soundly by a very good richmond team proved it. as stated by others, i am not sure hampton would have been favored to beat any of the other 15 teams in the playoffs.

[blackfordpu]

GSU in the fourth.

[selurfesoy]

IMHO, the Apps had a bad showing against LC. Although ASU came out flat, LC was impressive and probably should have won the game. Meanwhile UNH was blowing away Colgate, the other PL team.

With the Apps playing at home against what should have been a much weaker opponent, we should have blown away LC like UNH did to Colgate.

Makes one a little concerned going forward if you're an ASU fan.

[DB_Atlantic10]

I really think it's time to leave Hampton alone.... They knew exactly what they were doing..... The coach is also the AD and obviously knows how the system works, so why not schedule a weak schedule, go undefeated, make the play-offs each year and keep your job.... As with the "Highlander", there can be only One. I'm sure he knew that there was a snow ball chance in H#ll, that Hampton could win it all, but finishing undefeated and hosting as a top seed looks a lot better than getting in at 8-3 on the road and still losing. Look at the big picture, Hampton is setting right pretty as a program.... I mean they would have made the play-offs seed or not, but their chances at home is a lot better than on the road....

I honestly don't think the Committee gives a crap about how weak the MEAC, OVC or PL are...they are a part of this great I-AA system and are not going anywhere. It should only benefit the stronger conferences in the end. I don't agree with the system 100%, but one thing is for sure, win and you are in and lose and you are not, regardless of the conference....and if your conference is as strong as you claim, then your annual representative should bring home the trophy. :hurray:

[Spider]

Richmond is a good team. They are not as good as we made them look Saturday.
You didn't make us look good; we did..........

[Cap'n Cat]

Eastern Washington looked awesome Saturday.

[Reed Rothchild]

I vote for Colgate High.

[skinny_uncle]

I would say that any team that lost a home game last Saturday might name their own team. Hampton could probably make the best case.

[DTSpider]

I'll state upfront that I'm a little biased, but I thought that Hampton was a solid team. They have tremendous athletes. By far the most athletic team we faced all year. Great team speed, but a little out of control. The defenders overpursued the gaps which allowed Richmond to run a lot of counters for big gains. Losing as a #3 seed at home with the reputation of the MEAC on the line is bad, but they weren't the worst team in the playoffs. Hopefully Richmond can play a good game against Furman and prove that we're a legit playoff team.

So for those bashing the MEAC and Hampton be careful, this team would have beaten several A10 teams. However, given all the hype and the chip that should have been on their shoulders, they get the award for worst first round loss. Followed closely by a Montana team that should have won. Colgate also wasn't impressive, but I don't think anyone expected them to be.

[TheValleyRaider]

Yeah, I don't think it's unfair to say this loss will have reverberations for all MEAC schools for many years down the road now. They may have to run the table just to get a first round home game, nevermind a seed, for a while.


Nahh, the committee themselves said home games after the seeds are based almost entirely on the size of the bids. If a MEAC team puts up the $$$$, they'll get a home game.

[Menudo]

I'll state upfront that I'm a little biased, but I thought that Hampton was a solid team. They have tremendous athletes. By far the most athletic team we faced all year. Great team speed, but a little out of control. The defenders overpursued the gaps which allowed Richmond to run a lot of counters for big gains. Losing as a #3 seed at home with the reputation of the MEAC on the line is bad, but they weren't the worst team in the playoffs. Hopefully Richmond can play a good game against Furman and prove that we're a legit playoff team.

So for those bashing the MEAC and Hampton be careful, this team would have beaten several A10 teams. However, given all the hype and the chip that should have been on their shoulders, they get the award for worst first round loss. Followed closely by a Montana team that should have won. Colgate also wasn't impressive, but I don't think anyone expected them to be.



Well Hampton is only losing 5 starters next year, unfortunately their schedule will remain weak. I think Winston Salem and North Carolina Central or both slotted to be on the schedule next year. Hampton also has the annual classic ( Urban League ). Rumors have been going on forever about NCCU rejoining the MEAC. Well we can always look forward to 2007 when Hampton will play Princeton.

[FlyBoy8]

Well we can always look forward to 2007 when Hampton will play Princeton.

Let's hope both programs are good in 2007.

[JohnStOnge]

Look, it's not just Hampton. McNeese got too much credit for being undefeated against I-AAs (lost to Kansas State) in 2003. Power ratings indicated they were more like a 8 to 15 range team but they got seeded number 1. Then they got jacked up in the first round.

I know people make SOME allowance for schedule but I don't think it's enough. I think if you look at a situation where polls have a team in the top 5 but power ratings have them way lower than that something's wrong. No way a team rated 28 in Massey and 21 in Sagarin after the regular season was really a top 5 team. The power ratings might be off some but not by that much.