Playoff Elimination & Eligibility - Week 4

[SumItUp]

107 FCS Teams - 96 remain - 14 are on the ropes xlolx and can not lose another D1 game.

Elimination Bubble (14) – Austin Peay, Charleston Southern, Georgetown, Idaho State, Murray State, Northeastern, Northwestern State, Portland State, Robert Morris, Sacred Heart, Southeast Missouri State, Southeastern Louisiana, Southern Utah, Western Carolina
Eliminated (2) – Indiana State, Savannah State
Ineligible (9) – Bryant, Central Arkansas, Chattanooga, Eastern Washington, Jacksonville State, North Carolina Central, North Dakota, Presbyterian, South Dakota, Winston-Salem

OK, I know that it is too early to be focusing on this, but I was curious and wanted to track it week by week. The idea was inspired by FargoBison's work last year. There is a list of wins/losses, D1 wins, and D1 games remaining at http://bit.ly/2m2Mfk for each of the FCS teams.

[seattlespider]

Nice work. This will be interesting to follow from just a pure numbers standpoint (no arguments about SOS and the like).

[GOKATS]

I assume you're basing your numbers on the 'recommended' (not required) seven DI wins. I can't speak for the other teams, but PSU and ISU are not eliminated if they win the Big Sky autobid even if they lose another DI game. I don't see either team in a situation to do so, but it's too early in the season to be writing teams off.

[SumItUp]

I assume you're basing your numbers on the 'recommended' (not required) seven DI wins. I can't speak for the other teams, but PSU and ISU are not eliminated if they win the Big Sky autobid even if they lose another DI game. I don't see either team in a situation to do so, but it's too early in the season to be writing teams off.

This is based strictly on the eligibility for at-large bids. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought 7 D-1 wins for an at-large bid is a 'requirement' and not a 'recommendation'.

[GannonFan]

This is based strictly on the eligibility for at-large bids. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought 7 D-1 wins for an at-large bid is a 'requirement' and not a 'recommendation'.

It's not a requirement, per se, but I don't think you'll find many, if any, examples that go against that.

[Schfourteenteen]

I doubt there has been one.

[WrenFGun]

Yeah..the 7 DI rule might as well be a requirement..

The problem I'd watch out for is if a team could still win their conferences autobid..

[danefan]

The official language:



The won-lost record of a team will be scrutinized to determine a team’s strength of
schedule; however, less than seven Division I wins may place a team in jeopardy of
not being selected;

http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/champ_handbooks/football/2008/1_football_handbook.pdf

Take it as you will, but that's as much of a requirement as you'll get.

[GannonFan]

The official language:
[/SIZE]
http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/champ_handbooks/football/2008/1_football_handbook.pdf

Take it as you will, but that's as much of a requirement as you'll get.

Well, change the wording from "may" to "will" and that would be much more ironclad. Certainly room in that wording as it is to allow someone with less than 7 wins. But like I said, history is a good indicator that without 7 wins you don't get in. xthumbsupx

[GaSouthern]

Go ahead an add Georgia Southern to the "no chance this season" list of schools :D

[EKU05]

7 wins is not a requirement, and if you're going to go with the "might as well be" argument then I'd make it 8 DI wins because I don't believe an at large team has ever gotten in with exactly seven either...correct me if I'm wrong because I could be. I didn't look it up.

Also, there is no Southeastern Missouri State...it's just Southeast.

Edit: Wouldn't you know that the next thread I read reminds me of the Montana State team that got in at 7-4. Oops. That was a really strange season for them.

[danefan]

7 wins is not a requirement, and if you're going to go with the "might as well be" argument then I'd make it 8 DI wins because I don't believe an at large team has ever gotten in with exactly seven either...correct me if I'm wrong because I could be. I didn't look it up.

Also, there is no Southeastern Missouri State...it's just Southeast.

In recent history alone:

2007 - Montana State 7-4
2008 - New Hampshire 7-4

[EKU05]

I had already edited my post before you even responded, but you're absolutely right.

[JayJ79]

Well, change the wording from "may" to "will" and that would be much more ironclad. Certainly room in that wording as it is to allow someone with less than 7 wins. But like I said, history is a good indicator that without 7 wins you don't get in. xthumbsupx

I don't think they need to change the wording.
Everyone knows that you're probably not going to get in with less than 7 D-I wins. But there could be some scenario where one of the 8 best (non-AQ) teams does not have 7 D-I wins due to something like having games cancelled due to weather (hurricanes) or world events (games where cancelled due to the attacks of 9/11/01) or something like that.
So leaving room for some possible (if not probable) flexibility works better than making it ironclad.