Do you like FBS games for your team?

[89Hen]

Always a divided issue. I guess there are several ways you could feel about it, from excited for the team to get exposure at a high level I-A, good money for your program, a chance of a miracle win a la AppSt, only like games against mid-level I-A's, etc...

What's your take?

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

The money and the excitement. Any more than 1 in a season is too much because I like to make the playoffs, too.

[GOKATS]

The money definitely helps, I think the Cats get $650,000 for the Mich. St. game next fall and I think the coaches, players, and fans enjoy the playup game and it adds to exposure and recruiting opportunities. Last year the Cats had both Kansas St. and Minnesota but it was a 12 game season. Just because of the nice paycheck I see the Cats playing one Playup game a year for the foreseeable future.

[Cobblestone]

In our case we need the money. Last season we played BC. We currently have I-A games scheduled with UCONN, Buffalo and Maryland. Without I-A games in our future, our program may not have a future.

[Reign of Terrier]

As good as money is I want to be able to realistically win one of these games. Think about your C-USA, MWC, MAC, and WAC teams.

[Bill Hanson]

If one cannot make the big bucks with home games, most of FCS teams, FBS games are a must to keep budgets in balance.

[Hoyadestroya85]

I like Villanova's game this year against temple.. and i'll go to the other ones but i'm not a huge fan of them

[DFW HOYA]

Hard to say, the last I-A opponent was in 1950.

How long ago was that? Its season opener was Joe Paterno's debut as an assistant coach at Penn State.

[Old Cage]

Our recent games at Army, Navy and Boston College were excellent game day experiences and the weekend at Annapolis was outstanding. We were in all three and could have won one or two.

Texas Tech and Kansas State I could do without, but the $$$ were outstanding.

Of course, among our best road games in the last few years were this little win at Montana and our late loss to that Appy team in Chatty. :D

[ValleyChamp]

I like the money. And in UNI's case, I like when we play Iowa and ISU because it is great for the state. I'm not a big fan of playing teams like BYU or other random teams other than the finincial gain.

[Gil Dobie]

I like them, and they are not always a long-shot.
And a FCS team can win 2 in a season.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

One game a year against mid-level 1A teams.
We need the money. They are always great road trips for the fans.

Pick the right teams at the right times you can get a W and the $$$$$:D

The Army,Marshall, and Chicago trips will be long remembered by the UNH fans who made them.

[Fordham]

with our first ones in a long, long time now on our future schedules I'm definitely excited about them.

It'll be interesting to see how long that excitement lasts. If we get our heads kicked in, that's one thing that is somewhat expected and also, I guess, acceptable. But getting our heads kicked in and completely demoralized so that it's more embarrassing than anything resembling 'good' would suck. Heads kicked in + demoralized + injured kids = utter disaster.

The glass 1/2 full approach on the other hand is that it will help energize and coalesce alums, add a nice paycheck and hopefully serve as a good recruiting tool. Add in the 'hey, you never know' and I'm glad that we're going to find out for sure instead of just wondering.

PS - is this all just a bs exercise to see who is going to call you out for using the term "I-A"?

[BEAR]

UCA has two FBS games next year..Hawaii and Western Kentucky..both winnable and both with paychecks...sounds good to me! xthumbsupx

[DTSpider]

I really like how Richmond has handled the BCS games. We have long term series with UVA, Duke & Vanderbilt. These games offer very good money and are against schools that have either local or academic profiles that are similar. Would love to add Wake Forest for the same reason if the schedules work out. Have played NC State, Temple & Rutgers in the recent past as well.

[Tribe4SF]

FBS games have been a regular feature for W&M. Since the NCAA went back to allowing an FCS game to count every year, we've locked into long term plans with Va Tech, UVA, Maryland, NC State and UNC. These are all within four hours, and we no longer have to go to places like Marshall, and Western Michigan. We routinely have 2,000 plus fans for the regional ACC games.

[Seawolf97]

Looking forward to our first FBS game in 2010 at South Florida. Then going forward it will be Buffalo and Army.

[igo4uni]

I like the fact that Iowa State is such a winnable game for UNI year in and year out.

[Hood]

I like them a lot. It's a measuring stick (pardon the cliche') to see how your guys match up against the bigger schools. Plus the money funds the program, which is always a good thing.

Also if it's within 8 hours of drive time, it makes for a trip to a town I probably wouldn't normally take a visit.

In fact as a by product of Nicholls playing Memphis last season, I fell in love with the city and am making a return visit over Memorial Day weekend and taking the Girlfriend to Graceland.

So yeah, I enjoy the FBS games.

[poly51]

I think they are great. Cal Poly has 2 coming this year. San Jose State and Ohio. The excitement created locally by the Wisconsin game last year was terrific. Cal Poly has a long history against Fresno State, San Jose State and San Diego State.

[MaroonDoom]

I like it unless the game is played later in the year. EKU plays UK very late in the season this year. The money games need to played early to make sure no injuries affect the league play.

[henfan]

Just another road game to me. If my team was an FBS team, I might get more into it, especially since the opposition would be returning dates to Newark.

[mcveyrl]

I went with the local/mid-level option even though it doesn't matter much for us. We don't play to win the game. Herm Edwards does not approve.

[89Hen]

We currently have I-A games scheduled with UCONN, Buffalo and Maryland.
Didn't know that. Maryland is trying to schedule every CAA team. Have already played or will play:

2006 - W&M
2007 - Villanova
2008 - Delaware
2009 - JMU
2011 - Towson
???? - URI

[I-AA Fan]

You cannot say mid-level OR local IA's. For some, BCS teams are local.

I say absolutely no games vs. any BCS conference teams, and a max payout cap. Furthermore, it needs to be at least a 1 and 1, with the IA club to pay a stiff penalty if they back out of their half. Furthermore, I would like to see a max of one per season and a time limitation of the first 2-weeks of the season. I would also like to see that game not count toward player eligibility.

[89Hen]

PS - is this all just a bs exercise to see who is going to call you out for using the term "I-A"?
xlolx Nah. It just seemed there are a lot of different feelings on I-A games and the results of the poll back that up.

For me, I would never want to see the Hens go play Nebraska or Texas or Iowa... teams that have no ties to UD and that UD probably would get killed. Navy, Army, Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers are probably the short list of who I'd like to see the Hens stick with if they're going to play a I-A. I'd rather them play Monmouth at home than go to Iowa. JMHO.

[89Hen]

You cannot say mid-level OR local IA's. For some, BCS teams are local.
xconfusedx That's what "OR" means. Either mid-level (travel to Ohio or ArkSt or Idaho) OR local for your team (SCSt vs USC, UMass vs BC....). xpeacex

[I-AA Fan]

xconfusedx That's what "OR" means. Either mid-level (travel to Ohio or ArkSt or Idaho) OR local for your team (SCSt vs USC, UMass vs BC....). xpeacex

It serves no purpose. Travel across the country to play a team of no interest? The poll should have those as two options. In other words, it has to have local flavor, or be against a team of reasonably close ability.

For example. Ohio State plays Toledo this year. Now UT is a very good football program, with a nice fan base, and a IA program. Under normal circumstances, that would be a very good game. Not this year, as UT is one year from a coaching change. At the time this game was scheduled, UT agreed to play OSU, but wanted a 1-2 deal, they deserve it. Now, OSU agreed to travel, but not to a stadium with seating of less than 60k. So the game is now going to be played at Cleveland Stadium. The issue is that Cleveland is not very close to Toledo, even though this is supposed to be a home game for UT. With the poor teams UT has had in recent years ...the only people going to this game are going to be Cleveland area Buckeye fans ...which have already sold out the game. In other words, OSU is becoming a traveling sideshow. OSU schedules I-AA teams because they will not ask for a return game. Force them to do so & they will not schedule these games. At the same time ...what do you expect OSU to do. They sell out every home game, 105k, with this being Cleveland area fans only chance to see them without traveling 3 to 4 hours to Columbus. The NCAA needs to step in, but they have no authority anymore ...thank you BCS.

[jimbo65]

Fordham has not played a "1A" team since the 50's when fball was dropped. However, with our return to schollies at the "1AA" level, we have scheduled UConn in 2010 & Army in 2011 & 2012 (at least I think those are the years). Both locations are relatively close and I plan to attend. Going to a game at West Pt. is a nice experience and there are some good spots for tailgating. Plus, we have a reasonable chance of success. Have never attended a UConn fball game so this will be a first. Not much chance of a win here, as a matter of fact, at today's talent levels, we will get shellacked, but "you gotta be in it to win it".

Overall, I believe a 1A game per year is a plus.

[89Eagle]

I'm not a huge fan of the 1-a games unless of fairly local. If you have a big time trip your generally not going to make the money you need to make. Travel is a huge expense. We play uga every four years and will play UNC this year. Both are good money makers becasue the travel isn't killing us. Playing in a playoff system that we do you can be hurt by that loss. You must take care of your own business in your conference, and the SOCON isn't a cake walk. I guess in the middle of the road on this.

[89Hen]

In other words, it has to have local flavor, or be against a team of reasonably close ability.
That was the option (and the option I chose). I wouldn't mind seeing Delaware play a local I-A, no matter how good they are OR travel to a I-A they had a good shot at beating. In the case of Navy, it's both! Anything other than that, no thanks.


BTW, if you don't like the options, make your own poll. :p

[Gil Dobie]

You cannot say mid-level OR local IA's. For some, BCS teams are local.

I say absolutely no games vs. any BCS conference teams, and a max payout cap. Furthermore, it needs to be at least a 1 and 1, with the IA club to pay a stiff penalty if they back out of their half. Furthermore, I would like to see a max of one per season and a time limitation of the first 2-weeks of the season. I would also like to see that game not count toward player eligibility.

As a fan, I loved going to the NDSU vs Minnesota games in mid-season. Had a chance to win both, and got paid. Not sure if the coaches feel the same.

[Husky Alum]

At NU, we've actually had some "success" in our I-A games over the course of time.

1999 - Boston College (L, 33-22)
2000 - UConn (W, 35-27)
2002 - Ohio U (W, 20-0)
2004 - Navy (L, 28-24)
2006 - Va Tech (L, 38-0)
2007 - Northwestern (L, 27-0)
2008 - Syracuse (L, 30-21)
Ball State (L, 48-14)

We have BC this year and I think UConn in 2010 (I know Fordham said they may be playing UConn in 2010, but I know I saw in some publication from NU that we're supposed to play them).

We've only had 2 AWFUL losses - VaTech and Ball State. Northwestern was closer than the final score.

BC, Navy and Syracyse we had the ball late in the 4th quarter and could have taken the lead, but failed to execute.

For the most part, they're fun games in places that have good atmospheres.

We played Navy on 9-11-04, and that was quite an experience.

[RichH2]

Not abig fan ofmy team getting its a** kicked even for big $$$. have enjoyed games with Army which were competitive. Temple, Army, other MAC, Duke ,Vandy would be interesting

[Mountaineer#96]

Only if played on Sept. 1st!!!!!! :)

[catdaddy2402]

Being a fan of a FBS school (Clemson) I don't like games against FCS teams because they are a no win situation for us.

Win big and all you hear is "So what? You were supposed to beat them"

Win close and all you hear is "You suck. You should have killed them."

Lose and all you hear is......well, I can't say as we've never lost to a I-AA/FCS team.


That said, if we have to play a FCS team at least we are doing it right and only playing the in-state FCS schools. A few years back a couple of SC legislators strongly suggested to both Clemson and South Carolina that we should be keeping some of the payout money in state, and since then both schools have had at least one on their schedule yearly. Being that I'm someone who wants all of the football playing schools in SC (except the Shamecocks ;) ) to do well the fact that these payday games help the in-state FCS schools makes them a little easier to accept. Looking at past and future schedules Clemson will play all of the FCS teams in-state at least once in the next 10 years except Charleston Southern. Why the Bucs aren't lined up yet is beyond me.

I'd be highly upset if Clemson were to be like UNC and refused to play in state FCS teams.

[ur2k]

I really like how Richmond has handled the BCS games. We have long term series with UVA, Duke & Vanderbilt. These games offer very good money and are against schools that have either local or academic profiles that are similar. Would love to add Wake Forest for the same reason if the schedules work out. Have played NC State, Temple & Rutgers in the recent past as well.

Completely agree.

I think we'll have a great turnout at Duke this year, just like a few years back. We had a great turnout at UVA this past year too.

[DFW HOYA]

I think we'll have a great turnout at Duke this year, just like a few years back. We had a great turnout at UVA this past year too.

Any idea of a turnout for Washington in November?

[ur2k]

We have a ton of DC alumni and DC's only 90 miles up the road. I'd imagine we'd have a good turnout.

[Reign of Terrier]

Not abig fan ofmy team getting its a** kicked even for big $$$. have enjoyed games with Army which were competitive. Temple, Army, other MAC, Duke ,Vandy would be interesting

Duke and Vandy are starting to lose that losing spirit.

[Reign of Terrier]

Being a fan of a FBS school (Clemson) I don't like games against FCS teams because they are a no win situation for us.

Win big and all you hear is "So what? You were supposed to beat them"

Win close and all you hear is "You suck. You should have killed them."

Lose and all you hear is......well, I can't say as we've never lost to a I-AA/FCS team.


That said, if we have to play a FCS team at least we are doing it right and only playing the in-state FCS schools. A few years back a couple of SC legislators strongly suggested to both Clemson and South Carolina that we should be keeping some of the payout money in state, and since then both schools have had at least one on their schedule yearly. Being that I'm someone who wants all of the football playing schools in SC (except the Shamecocks ;) ) to do well the fact that these payday games help the in-state FCS schools makes them a little easier to accept. Looking at past and future schedules Clemson will play all of the FCS teams in-state at least once in the next 10 years except Charleston Southern. Why the Bucs aren't lined up yet is beyond me.

I'd be highly upset if Clemson were to be like UNC and refused to play in state FCS teams.

So how does it feel to have a subpar Socon team put 300 yards of offense on you?

[I-AA Fan]

I think "catdaddy" has a great post. It really is a no-win situation for the IA/BCS schools. In fact, the MAC knows this and will not allow their teams to travel to I-AA/FCS schools. I hear the WAC will be doing the same. However, this fear of losing will make other conference members (IA/FBS teams) more likely to play a I-AA/FCS school over IA/FBS mid-major (where there is more risk).

I am a Penguin fan, no question about it. I would say that historically, YSU has played the most games against IA/FBS/university division teams, or is at least near the top. YSU has never been IA, FBS, NCAA University-level, or NCAA large institution status. The Penguins have lost their last 6 IA games and is now below .500 overall for the first time (with a record of 47-54-5) vs. these teams. YSU's two largest historical rivals are Akron and Kent State, neither of which can play YSU anymore because the MAC will not allow a member to travel to a sub-FBS opponent. The YSU administration will not travel to these schools without a reciprocal game; after all, both of these teams are 20-50 minutes away. Our location is in the middle of MAC country (we pass every MAC school, but 1, on the way to the closest scholarship I-AA/FCS school to us. Youngstown is only an hour from Pittsburgh [home of Duquesne & RMU]).

Clearly, the best solution for YSU is to move up, but the finances are not there for such a move, and the Horizon League (which we are in now) is a better basketball conference than the MAC. So I do not see any move in the near future (at least in division) for YSU. Although (and don't take this personal mplBison) I, like most YSU fans, could care less about teams from the Dakota's being in our conference. So what to do?

I would love to see YSU play Kent and Akron ever single year ...no exception. The last time we played Kent, we lost the Schwebel's challenge trophy, with no change to get it back. We do still have the "Steel Tire", which fans of Akron might not mind having a chance to reclaim. I have driven no less than than 8-hours to an away game ...with the exception of Pitt and Ohio State ...since YSU joined the the Gateway conference. I will boycott YSU football (as will most Penguin fans) if they ever schedule a 0-1 game against a "back-yard" rival. So, we take what we can get, and head for a bleacher on fall Saturdays.

Is it August yet?

[ncbears]

In our case we need the money. Last season we played BC. We currently have I-A games scheduled with UCONN, Buffalo and Maryland. Without I-A games in our future, our program may not have a future.

I think the majority of 1AA schools can say this.

[FargoBison]

If the game is against....Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Iowa State, Wyoming or Nebraska I am all for them but otherwise I could really careless.

Luckily NDSU is in a situation where the program can survive without them as long as our AD can find home games.

[89Hen]

I think "catdaddy" has a great post. It really is a no-win situation for the IA/BCS schools. In fact, the MAC knows this and will not allow their teams to travel to I-AA/FCS schools. I hear the WAC will be doing the same.
First off, NO I-A will play at a I-AA. It's been several years and I think Idaho at Montana was the last one. But the "no-win" in a vacuum is true, but you have to think that the same could be said of a BCS vs let's say a Sun Belt. They get no perc for beating them and they get hurt temporarily if the game is even close. The flip side is for them to schedule only better I-A's but then they run an even greater risk of losing.

Close wins over I-AA's or Sun Belt teams are forgotten by the end of the season. Losses are never forgotten. xpeacex

[I-AA Fan]

First off, NO I-A will play at a I-AA. It's been several years and I think Idaho at Montana was the last one. But the "no-win" in a vacuum is true, but you have to think that the same could be said of a BCS vs let's say a Sun Belt. They get no perc for beating them and they get hurt temporarily if the game is even close. The flip side is for them to schedule only better I-A's but then they run an even greater risk of losing.

Close wins over I-AA's or Sun Belt teams are forgotten by the end of the season. Losses are never forgotten. xpeacex


Agreed, but that was my point. BCS teams (not in title contention) are more likely to schedule I-AA, than they are to schedule mid-major IA/FBS teams. The risk of losing is less, and no adverse effects. Now, with the advent of the extra game, the NCAA "threw us a bone" for income. We cannot be stuck on ourselves either. Most mid-major IA teams would have little issue with the vast majority of I-AA teams. The elite BCS teams should never have even the slightest issue with any I-AA/FBS team. If they do, people have a right and an obligation to question the BCS team's validity. To the best of my knowledge, the BCS component for schedule strength does not even count I-AA/FCS games, but it does count all IA/FBS teams. This is the main reason there was a mad-rush to schedule I-AA/FCS teams in the first place. This will end soon, when the new BCS rules go into effect. As I understand it, there will be a maximum points factor, which assumes the extra game. For example, if it is a 12-week season, and the max points for each game is 100, there will be a factor of 1200-points. Then, for teams that schedule a FCS/I-AA team, that factor will only be 1100. Also, BCS teams would stop scheduling us (which is what I want) if they were required to reciprocate.

[DX Man]

Getting a shot at an in-state FBS program is GREAT!

[WMTribe90]

I really like WM's current arrangements with ACC schools within driving distance of Williamsburg. It allows for more WM fans to attend and maximizes the financial benefit. Obviously, it's preferable the game be winnable and when WM has a playoff caliber team they usually are winnable (WM has a chance to upset).

I will say that the money aspect of these games is too often seen as the only consideration or driving force. However, there are many benefits to playing one IA game a year beyond the pay day.

1) Great measuring stick. WM typically plays their IA game to start the season. This instantly exposes any weakness in the team that needs to be worked on before we enter league play. These weakness don't necessarily get exposed when you lead off with a weak OOC slate. Additionally, a good showing (even in a loss) can be a great confidence booster heading into the FCS portion of the schedule.

2) Players relish these opportunities and these games are great recruiting tools. If the big boys overlooked you of course you want an opportunity to compete against them and prove you can play against the highest level of opponent. Plus, players like playing in front of large crowds in big time atmospheres.

3) Fans enjoy these games. Win or lose, most fans enjoy seeing their team measure up against "superior" competition. A handful of signature wins over BCS conferences are not soon forgotten and far outweigh the numerous loses in between. Every true FCS fan know by heart the year and score of the last IA match-up his/her squad won.

4) The IA games provide exposure in places and media where FCS programs rarely get mentioned. Another benefit to recruiting.

I agree with most that two IA games a year are excessive, unless they are both winnable. Putting you team in an 0-2 hole to start the year for strictly financial reasons is far from ideal. I also think FCS programs should avoid playing IA programs perennially in the top 25. Realistically, IAA programs have little hope of winning these matchups and lopsided blowouts do nothing for the image of our subdivision.

[catdaddy2402]

So how does it feel to have a subpar Socon team put 300 yards of offense on you?

Better than losing by 24 points I'm sure.

[GAD]

I don't care much for FBS games, unless they are rivals. Which is why I am glad we can earn our paydays by playing in Classics like the Circle City, Chicago, or Las Vegas Classic etc etc. Nothing like playing in front of 50K+ that are there to see your school do there thing and walk away with a fat paycheck.xthumbsupx

[Reign of Terrier]

Better than losing by 24 points I'm sure.

The last FBS team we played we lost by 10...and the last time we played Clemson was 2001

[4th and What?]

So where's the disagreement? I see people that like them for different reasons, but no real discussion of what people don't like about them? I see one argument that basically circles around I-A not having respect for I-AA, so I-AA shouldn't play them, but that is just silly and not a real argument.

As a fan, I loved the JMU games vs in-area I-A teams I went to see. Some people like it for the money it brings their program, some people like it for the rivalry, some people like it for the coverage/recruiting. But it seems like most people like some amount of I-A/I-AA games.

Is there any strong argument out there for why I-AA teams shouldn't play I-A teams?

[apaladin]

Being a fan of a FBS school (Clemson) I don't like games against FCS teams because they are a no win situation for us.

Win big and all you hear is "So what? You were supposed to beat them"

Win close and all you hear is "You suck. You should have killed them."

Lose and all you hear is......well, I can't say as we've never lost to a I-AA/FCS team.


That said, if we have to play a FCS team at least we are doing it right and only playing the in-state FCS schools. A few years back a couple of SC legislators strongly suggested to both Clemson and South Carolina that we should be keeping some of the payout money in state, and since then both schools have had at least one on their schedule yearly. Being that I'm someone who wants all of the football playing schools in SC (except the Shamecocks ;) ) to do well the fact that these payday games help the in-state FCS schools makes them a little easier to accept. Looking at past and future schedules Clemson will play all of the FCS teams in-state at least once in the next 10 years except Charleston Southern. Why the Bucs aren't lined up yet is beyond me.

I'd be highly upset if Clemson were to be like UNC and refused to play in state FCS teams.

Catdaddy, I have always appreciated Clemson playing in-state teams especially Furman. In the past you pretty much kept it to FU or Citadel every 3-4 years. Now CU like you said is playing everyone. Do you have a problem with the PC's, SCSt and Coastal's now showing up on your schedule? Would you rather them keep it to at least the SoCon schools(FU,Wof,Cit) the more traditonal games? The Gamecocks so far, thru 2014 have limited there games to FU, Wof, Cit and SCS. I have always enjoyed Furman's visit to the Valley and even though our closest loss was 28-17 we have been somewhat competitive, unlike SCS last year. I guess the best I can say is that CU has never scored 40 points on the Paladins since the early 60's. I guess that's something, maybe not. :)

[catdaddy2402]

Catdaddy, I have always appreciated Clemson playing in-state teams especially Furman. In the past you pretty much kept it to FU or Citadel every 3-4 years. Now CU like you said is playing everyone. Do you have a problem with the PC's, SCSt and Coastal's now showing up on your schedule? Would you rather them keep it to at least the SoCon schools(FU,Wof,Cit) the more traditonal games? The Gamecocks so far, thru 2014 have limited there games to FU, Wof, Cit and SCS. I have always enjoyed Furman's visit to the Valley and even though our closest loss was 28-17 we have been somewhat competitive, unlike SCS last year. I guess the best I can say is that CU has never scored 40 points on the Paladins since the early 60's. I guess that's something, maybe not. :)

Like I said before, I'd rather not play the games at all but since we are we need to play them all.

[catdaddy2402]

The last FBS team we played we lost by 10...and the last time we played Clemson was 2001

And you had over 300 yards total offense. The final score was 38-14.

I was at the South Carolina game last season, and had y'all not tried to get cute at times on offense, been able to get a 3rd down stop, and had a punter worth a darn winning you the field position game you would have probably beat South Carolina and their punchless offense.

[Reign of Terrier]

And you had over 300 yards total offense. The final score was 38-14.


xlolxxlolxxlolx I was talking about the Citadel (they might have had 400--notice my keyword was "subpar"), had we gone for it on a certain 4th down which we kicked a field goal we might have beaten SC

[skinny_uncle]

Having won a couple in recent years, I like 'em.

[89Hen]

I really like WM's current arrangements with ACC schools within driving distance of Williamsburg. It allows for more WM fans to attend and maximizes the financial benefit. Obviously, it's preferable the game be winnable and when WM has a playoff caliber team they usually are winnable (WM has a chance to upset).
Then why would you vote for "One no matter who"? You should have voted for the close or winnable since that's what you really like. xpeacex

[89Hen]

So where's the disagreement? I see people that like them for different reasons, but no real discussion of what people don't like about them?...

Is there any strong argument out there for why I-AA teams shouldn't play I-A teams?
76GRIZ, AppinBlack, cougarpines, FCS Now, Grizalltheway, I-AA Fan, Jimbo, penguinfan and/or RationalGriz... got a response?

[89Hen]

So how does it feel to have a subpar Socon team put 300 yards of offense on you?

CU has never scored 40 points on the Paladins since the early 60's.
FWIW, there are some I-A's that just don't seem to run up the score on I-AA's. I don't know if it's they can't or just don't. I remember a year when El Cid played Clemson in week one and Delaware in week two. Both games were 38-0. Not that 38-0 isn't a pretty big win, but I recall El Cid fans and even players commenting that they actually felt they got beat worse in Newark than Clemson. Maryland struggles to put away I-AA's too. Even VT doesn't put up track like numbers on them. Could be the kind of offenses they run, could be coaching. Then you have other teams that really love to pile it on... Florida, Miami...

Clemson 38 - Furman 17
Clemson 28 - Furman 17
Clemson 38 - Wofford 14
Maryland 14 - Delaware 7
Maryland 31 - Villanova 14
Maryland 27 - W&M 14
VT 24 - Furman 7

Miami 52 - ChuckSo 7
Miami 51 - FAMU 10
Florida 70 - El Cid 19
Florida 62 - WCU 0

[vettert49]

I wouldn't mind the Griz playing some PAC 10, WAC, or MWC games. We could hold our own against most of them. We don't need the money I just think it would be fun to watch.

[WMTribe90]

Then why would you vote for "One no matter who"? You should have voted for the close or winnable since that's what you really like.

While I apprciate you sharing my vote and telling me how I should have voted Hen, I picked the option that best described my preference.

I want a IA game every year (period) Expressing an additional preference that the IA game be winnable does not negate my primary preference, nor are the two mutually exclusive. Scheduling a winnable game is merely icing on the cake so to speak. Plus, its impossible to know what match-up will be winnable three or four years out, unless you're scheduling a traditional powerhouse program. WM hasn't done that in recent memory with the exception of playing VT once.

And, while we're critiqueing posts, I think you missed some obvious choices in your poll. No mention of recruiting benefits or testing your team.

[BobcatTXST04]

I-A FBS games are usually exciting to watch.

I picked the 'upset' one because our most exciting FBS games were near upsets of Texas A & M and SMU (despite turning over the ball 7 times).

Most of our FBS games create a lot of excitement to watch (if it's close) or at the very least, some good money for the program (like our throttling in Kentucky).

Personally, I'd like to play SBC, C-USA, and WAC teams more becuase it would give us a better idea of how we would stand if we make the jump to FCS.

[bpcats]

I think that if most coaches had their wish, that they wouldn't want to play FBS teams due to the likely increase in injuries/time to recover to the current team. I know Montana gets more money from playing a home game than they can going on the road to play an FBS school.

Most other schools need the money and have to schedule up. Montana State takes the approach of not scheduling a Florida, or Oklahoma and tries to schedule a "winnable" 1A game. Schools that are changing coaches or lost their all american qb/rb are good bets.

The Coaches that do schedule FBS schools usually use them as a recruiting tool. The player gets a chance to show off what the FBS school missed out on. And it is a great prep game to get the team ready for conference play.

[WMTribe90]

I think that if most coaches had their wish, that they wouldn't want to play FBS teams due to the likely increase in injuries/time to recover to the current team.

This claim gets thrown out a lot, but I have seen no real evidence to support the claim that IAA teams sustain more injuries against IA teams than against fellow IAA teams. In WM's case, the inverse is true. Over the past decade plus that I have followed the program we sustained far fewer injuries against IA opponents on average. The IA teams may have better talent and are certainly deeper, however, my experience is that in terms of strength and conditioning there is little difference and therefore little to no increased risk of injury. The one exception could be the QB position if your OL is unable to provide adequate pass protection resulting in more hits to the QB.

A lot of injuries occur when players/teams use poor technique or employ questionable blocking schemes. As a general rule, IA programs and players are less likely to play sloppy or use questionable tactics.

[89Hen]

While I apprciate you sharing my vote and telling me how I should have voted Hen, I picked the option that best described my preference.

I want a IA game every year (period) Expressing an additional preference that the IA game be winnable does not negate my primary preference, nor are the two mutually exclusive. Scheduling a winnable game is merely icing on the cake so to speak. Plus, its impossible to know what match-up will be winnable three or four years out, unless you're scheduling a traditional powerhouse program. WM hasn't done that in recent memory with the exception of playing VT once.

And, while we're critiqueing posts, I think you missed some obvious choices in your poll. No mention of recruiting benefits or testing your team.
xconfusedx Wouldn't it be up to the poster to explain why they chose one of the answers. Recruiting benefits could be the reason somebody chose almost any of them: only local because that's where we recruit, as many as we can get so we can recruit more areas, never because I don't think a lopsided loss is a good way to recruit....

As for exposing your vote, it's a public vote. Click on the numbers and you can see who voted which way. Every one of my polls is public. Anonymous polls are pointless IMO. xpeacex


Do you like I-A games for your team?

I really like WM's current arrangements with ACC schools within driving distance of Williamsburg.

xpeacex xpeacex

[WMTribe90]

Wouldn't it be up to the poster to explain why they chose one of the answers. Recruiting benefits could be the reason somebody chose almost any of them: only local because that's where we recruit, as many as we can get so we can recruit more areas, never because I don't think a lopsided loss is a good way to recruit....


Fair enough, but you included benefits with your other poll options, including the money or the excitement associated with playing htese games. Why single out those benefits in your options, but not recruiting or testing your squad?

The poll may be public, just find it odd, that you found it neccessary to publicly scrutinize my vote, especially when there was no contradiction. Oh well, no biggie. I'm glad you did the poll. I enjoy this topic.

[89Hen]

The poll may be public, just find it odd, that you found it neccessary to publicly scrutinize my vote, especially when there was no contradiction. Oh well, no biggie. I'm glad you did the poll. I enjoy this topic.
Nothing personal. Your description of playing close ACC teams and an added bene of many of them being being reasonable games caught my eye because it sounds closest to my desire for the Hens. xpeacex

[skinny_uncle]

It's always fun when you win and get a big payday to boot.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

xnodx
It's always fun when you win and get a big payday to boot.

Truexnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxxnodxx nodxxnodxxnodx

[WMTribe90]

Nothing personal. Your description of playing close ACC teams and an added bene of many of them being being reasonable games caught my eye because it sounds closest to my desire for the Hens.

As an FCS fan I would like to see UD drop West Chester in favor of a IA game. I believe I heard that UD is not renewing the contract with WC. From a playoffs perspective. better to lose to a IA then beat a DII. At least with the IA game you can earn some style points in a close loss.

[89Hen]

As an FCS fan I would like to see UD drop West Chester in favor of a IA game. I believe I heard that UD is not renewing the contract with WC. From a playoffs perspective. better to lose to a IA then beat a DII. At least with the IA game you can earn some style points in a close loss.
The Hens regularly play both. While I'm not a huge fan of the WCUPA game, I never had as much problem as others with it. This is really not meant as smack, but for so many years people chided the Hens for playing WCUPA and not playing DSU, but in reality there were many years when the Rams were a better team than the Hornets. That said, having WCUPA never really hurt the Hens. If they went 8-3, they made the playoffs (I think there was one year that wasn't the case, but I think that was when the playoff field was less than 16). However, with the addition of some better teams (CalPoly, NDSU, SDSU, Coastal....) AND the CAA growing to 12 and having so many more good teams, I don't think I can confidently say that the Hens are a lock at 8-3 with WCUPA on the slate.

SO, I am now in favor of dropping WCUPA from the schedule. I've also changed my mind on DSU. I never wanted the Hens to schedule them because I didn't want them to cave to others. But since they met by chance in the playoffs, I see no reason to not play them now. Honestly, I hope the Hens play the Hornets every year for the next ten years and go 10-0 with a 40 point average margin. :p

As for I-A's... again, my list is short... Navy, Army, Maryland, Rugters, Penn State. That's probably it (I would say UVA, but I know that won't happen unless UVA decides to play non Virginia I-AA's). One other addition might be Pitt, but only in a year when the Hens can beat them. xsmiley_wix

[WMTribe90]

The Hens regularly play both. While I'm not a huge fan of the WCUPA game, I never had as much problem as others with it. This is really not meant as smack, but for so many years people chided the Hens for playing WCUPA and not playing DSU, but in reality there were many years when the Rams were a better team than the Hornets. That said, having WCUPA never really hurt the Hens. If they went 8-3, they made the playoffs (I think there was one year that wasn't the case, but I think that was when the playoff field was less than 16). However, with the addition of some better teams (CalPoly, NDSU, SDSU, Coastal....) AND the CAA growing to 12 and having so many more good teams, I don't think I can confidently say that the Hens are a lock at 8-3 with WCUPA on the slate.

SO, I am now in favor of dropping WCUPA from the schedule. I've also changed my mind on DSU. I never wanted the Hens to schedule them because I didn't want them to cave to others. But since they met by chance in the playoffs, I see no reason to not play them now. Honestly, I hope the Hens play the Hornets every year for the next ten years and go 10-0 with a 40 point average margin.

As for I-A's... again, my list is short... Navy, Army, Maryland, Rugters, Penn State. That's probably it (I would say UVA, but I know that won't happen unless UVA decides to play non Virginia I-AA's). One other addition might be Pitt, but only in a year when the Hens can beat them.

I agree with all the above. Little doubt in my mind that keeping WCUPA on the schedule would eventually cost UD a playoff spot, even though WCUPA is better than some IAA's UD could schedule in their place.

Like your list of IA's too. No Temple though?

[OSBF]

I don't care for them at all. The main reason is we don't seem to get the high payouts that most of you are talking about. We got 250K for a trip to Kansas st a couple years ago, and only 200K last year from Marshall. Then, due to some travel issues with the charter company, the team had to stay an extra night and rumor is that we actually lost money on the trip. That isn't good at all.

We play @ Illinois this year, then @ Northwestern next year, and that could be the end of the road. Our AD has talked about this extensively in different circles, and he says things like the pay date needs to be criticaly evaluated, we need to explore other options, and has even said we need to not take these games anymore and do something different.

I think we make more $$ by scheduling a home game, and paying travel. Rotate bringing in OVC or PFC teams or something. 15K fans at a home game has to generate as much revenue as taking 200K and then paying travel to go halfway across the country for what? Paid beatings are all these games are in reality, and I'm not really into the program whoring itself out to be beat like an army mule. We get enough of that for free once the MVFC conference season starts.

[jstclmet]

I still have BE dreams.....xbawlingx

[Appfan_in_CAAland]

I'd like Appalachian to play 11 FBS games each season.xwhistlex

[Bigmoneymike]

I don't care much for FBS games, unless they are rivals. Which is why I am glad we can earn our paydays by playing in Classics like the Circle City, Chicago, or Las Vegas Classic etc etc. Nothing like playing in front of 50K+ that are there to see your school do there thing and walk away with a fat paycheck.xthumbsupx

I wouldnt mind seeing the jags play LSU. Only if LSU was going to schedule a 1AA team. Why not Southern? I am glad they are playing ULL this season and I wouldnt mind seeing them play LA tech.

[89Hen]

Like your list of IA's too. No Temple though?
YES. Most DEFINTELY would add them to the list. I think I must have forgotten them because I know hell would have to freeze over for the Owls to put UD back on the schedule. :)

[elcid83]

I really like WM's current arrangements with ACC schools within driving distance of Williamsburg. It allows for more WM fans to attend and maximizes the financial benefit. Obviously, it's preferable the game be winnable and when WM has a playoff caliber team they usually are winnable (WM has a chance to upset).

I will say that the money aspect of these games is too often seen as the only consideration or driving force. However, there are many benefits to playing one IA game a year beyond the pay day.

1) Great measuring stick. WM typically plays their IA game to start the season. This instantly exposes any weakness in the team that needs to be worked on before we enter league play. These weakness don't necessarily get exposed when you lead off with a weak OOC slate. Additionally, a good showing (even in a loss) can be a great confidence booster heading into the FCS portion of the schedule.

2) Players relish these opportunities and these games are great recruiting tools. If the big boys overlooked you of course you want an opportunity to compete against them and prove you can play against the highest level of opponent. Plus, players like playing in front of large crowds in big time atmospheres.

3) Fans enjoy these games. Win or lose, most fans enjoy seeing their team measure up against "superior" competition. A handful of signature wins over BCS conferences are not soon forgotten and far outweigh the numerous loses in between. Every true FCS fan know by heart the year and score of the last IA match-up his/her squad won.

4) The IA games provide exposure in places and media where FCS programs rarely get mentioned. Another benefit to recruiting.

I agree with most that two IA games a year are excessive, unless they are both winnable. Putting you team in an 0-2 hole to start the year for strictly financial reasons is far from ideal. I also think FCS programs should avoid playing IA programs perennially in the top 25. Realistically, IAA programs have little hope of winning these matchups and lopsided blowouts do nothing for the image of our subdivision.

I agree with WM's post and had a few thoughts to add. I believe that D I-AA players are very anxious to show DI coaches that they passed on the wrong kid. But for a couple of inches in height or .2 seconds on the 40 and many of these players would be a DI prospect. This doesn't mean they don't have a good nose for the football and don't "play quick." However, since they don't fit into the recruiter's "box" of what a particular position player should look like, they don't even get the chance to be considered by a DI school.

Second, DI-AA programs with less than 20,000 seat stadiums of poor fan attendance need all of the money they can get to finance not only their programs, but also the myriad of non-revenue sports that each school must field in order to comply with Title IX. The Citadel, when it went coed, was forced to cancel its mens' golf program and initiate a ladies' golf program in order to comply with Title IX and meet its athletic budget.

Third, it is fun for the underdogs to actually win these contests. When The Citadel beat Arkansas in the 90's, Arkansas fired their head coach the next day. When The Citadel beat the University of South Carolina, our alumni had something to talk about for the rest of our lives. Gardner Webb's 10-7 loss to Ga. Tech gave their coaches something to get their recruits excited about last year and I know their players are looking forward to playing NC State and Buffalo next season.

I think South Carolina does a good job of scheduling the in-state DI-AA programs to help out those schools' budgets. More DI schools should follow their lead.

Go Runnin' Bulldogs!

[813Jag]

I wouldnt mind seeing the jags play LSU. Only if LSU was going to schedule a 1AA team. Why not Southern? I am glad they are playing ULL this season and I wouldnt mind seeing them play LA tech.
xlolxxlolxxlolx Southern needs to stay away from LSU. The Houston game shows that they aren't ready to step up to that challenge. ULL, ULM, Tulane, and LaTech are manageable games. The two games with Tulane were competitive even though the first one got out of hand.

[813Jag]

I don't mind them if they are against local teams that you can be competitive against. As a Southern fan I don't mind playing ULL, ULM, LaTech, or Tulane. As a Florida State fan I don't really like games against FCS schools, I don't mind one game but two is overkill and it gives the team false promise. As evidenced by playing Wake Forest after games against Western Carolina and Chattanooga.

[paward]

With the exception to App State vs Michigan and a few other competitive games, these games are plain ole fashion pay days and nothing more.

[eagle1]

It is a way of life at EWU. EWU is so budget strapped and has to play at least 1 a year and 2 every other year. Go Eagles!!!

2002 Arizona State
2003 San Diego State & Idaho
2004 San Jose State
2005 Air Force
2006 Oregon State & West Virginia
2007 Brigham Young
2008 Texas Tech & Colorado
2009 California
2010 Oregon State & ?
2011 Washington State????

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

I have four obvious reasons to like the FBS games. ;) :p :p :p :p :p

Seriously though, when these games are against regional schools, they provide an opportunity for terrific alumni/fan gatherings (Rutgers, Army and in 2014 Boston College). When these games are near major metropolitan areas, they provide the opportunity to visit a big city and also most likely a strong alumni/fan gathering (Northwestern and next year Pitt). At a minimum they provide an opportunity to go to a game at a bigger stadium than we usually see (Marshall, Ball State).

As much as UNH could use the money, I'm glad we said no to Oklahoma and Florida. Yeah, it would be really cool to attend a game at one of those awesome venues, I prefer not playing any of the "factory" schools who probably have a five deep because so many kids walk on with the hope of playing at that high level. I like the games where we at least have a chance of winning.

The year I went out to Northwestern, I had to skip a home game and our game at Dartmouth for financial and work commitment reasons. Even before the game I considered it a fair trade off. After we beat Northwestern and I had those first hand experiences, the trade off was cemented. This year if I have to miss home games with St. Francis and Dartmouth for the same reasons, I consider it more than a fair trade off to go out to Ball State. I have a blast at games at Cowell, but doing the road trips and experiencing games at the FBS level is rarely matched during a regular season.

[JMU Newbill]

With the exception to App State vs Michigan and a few other competitive games, these games are plain ole fashion pay days and nothing more.


With all do respect.... the App State vs. Michigan game was probably intended to be nothing more than a payday for Michigan.

Duke beating JMU is just down right embarrassing, so I'd just assume watch JMU play top notch FCS competition like App St, Montana, Liberty, or anyone we don't get in our CAA lineup. But who knows... maybe if JMU shows up against Maryland this year, I will have a change of heart.