What changes would improve I-AA playoffs?

[GSU Eagle]

I can think of several changes that would be good:

1. Seed the top 8 teams. Not to sound like a sour sport but 2 years in a row we (GSU) were playing teams in the 1st round we shouldn't. Last year #4 GSU vs. #5 UNH and this year #4 Texas St. vs. #6 GSU. We weren't good enough to win either game but seeding the top 8 would at least not allow for those types of matchups in Round 1

2. Please move the championship game to Saturday at around 3 or 4 instead of Friday night. I know this year was a sell out or right at it, but I have to believe it would be much easier for fans to get there for a Saturday afternoon game.

3. Increase the number of people on the selection committee from 8 to 16. That may not solve every problem but it would dilute the input of any 1 who may be tied to a school who gets in.

4. I have called for a published committee ranking for several years now. Starting in early or maybe mid October the committee should put out their top 25. At least as we went down the stretch we would get some idea of who the committee felt the playoff teams were.

Other ideas?

[Hansel]

I would start by calling it I-AA :)

I do like 3 and 4

[PantherMan]

3 and 4 are legitimate ideas; not that the other 2 aren't, but I particularily like those 2. If you're going to seed 8, we might as well seed em all. In this regard I am with you, seed more teams. The Friday night game atmosphere was electric. I don't know about an afternoon championship. There's just something about playing under the lights! If possible, a Saturday night Championship would be an excellent idea though! :hurray:

[blukeys]

I have no problem with seeding 8. Although in my view is that GSU was not going to win the NC this year anyway.

Keep in mind the current situation dates only to 2001 and the 9-11 attacks when air travel became an issue. Before that teams were seeded 1-16. Delaware traveled to Montana as a 15th seed and won the game in the 90's.

I have looked at the seedings argument and to be honest I really don't think that the lack of a 1-16 seeding arrangement has delivered a less than deserving NC. For those years they were Montana, Western Kentucky, Delaware, JMU, and App State. Anyone who has paid serious attention to the playoffs should agree that all of these teams were deserving of a NC. By the way under an 8 Seed arrangement I see GSU traveling to Texas anyway. (Just my opinion)

I like the idea that certain regional matchup can occur in the first round so that fans don't have to travel 3000 miles to see their teams play as visitors.

My view is that there is tremendous parity in I-AA and every game in the playoffs will be a struggle.

From a standpoint of promoting I-AA this was a great year. Here's hoping we can do even better in the future. :cool:

[*****]

1. Seed the top 8 teams. --- will probably happen

2. Please move the championship game to Saturday --- put it in the middle of NFL coverage?

3/4. Increase the number of people on the selection committee/published committee ranking --- the GPI already indicates who should get in and the committee isn't off by much, what's the problem?

[rokamortis]

It may be a good indicator but the GPI isn't the official word - it isn't necessarily what the committee is thinking.

[GSU Eagle]

I agree that we were not good enough to win the NC this year-- obviously Texas St. showed that.

I don't know that it is necessary to go back to seeding all 16, but seeding 1-8 would be a definite improvement. It would also reward teams 1-8 with first round home games provided they met the minimum bid. I just don't believe it is fair for a top 4 seed to be playing a team that may be a #5 or a #6.

You may be right that we would have been going to Texas St. this year anyway. Under a 1-8 seeding we would have had to be below #8 to go there and that is possible. Last year is another story however. We were a #4 last year and I am sure UNH was somewhere between 5-8. That matchup should not have occured in Round 1. Keep in mind I am not saying UNH was not the better team in that game (which they were), but seeding 1-8 would IMO make a fairer tourney.

[GSU Eagle]

Ralph,

My push for the game to be on Saturday is not based on watching it on TV. It is based on fans getting to Chatty more easily. Remember the game used to be on Saturday until a few years ago. It would give fans more time to get to the game, which would increase the time spent in Chatty for some.

The GPI is a good indicator but it is not exactly what the committee is thinking. Lafayette would not have been in the tourney this year if the GPI was the defining measure. I would just like to see who the committee felt the top teams were from at least mid October on.

[*****]

... It is based on fans getting to Chatty more easily...The GPI is a good indicator but it is not exactly what the committee is thinking...If Chatty can increase it's capacity then we may need to move it to another day but what we really need is like this year, a motivated fan base.

You may say the GPI is not exactly what the committee is thinking but the committee has never been off from it by more than one team. I talked with committee members about this and they sort of like that the GPI is out there and they can keep the rest among themselves. They seem to feel that as long as they are not off by more than one team they are okay. We'll see how the official status goes for the GPI in the near future but right now I don't see a huge problem with how they select teams. 7 of 8 at-large is not that bad is it?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Before this year I'd have clamored to get the game off of Friday night, but after seeing a packed Chatty with no sporting events in its way, I've had a change of heart. Prime-time works for the I-AA championship, and I don't want NFL/NBA/NHL/anything in its way. I think it works.

[GSU Eagle]

Ralph,

From being in Chatty, where does it stand on seeding 8 instead of 4 next year? Is that a done deal or when will that be decided? Does the committee support going to seeding 8 teams?

[*****]

...where does it stand on seeding 8 instead of 4 next year? Is that a done deal or when will that be decided? Does the committee support going to seeding 8 teams?There is strong support on the committee to seed eight teams. The Winter meetings will call for it I believe.

[BisBison]

There is strong support on the committee to seed eight teams. The Winter meetings will call for it I believe.
Saturday is the day for college football. Seed 8 teams and give us a Saturday game. this year the teams were close enough to make a Friday nite kickoff, but a lot of years you need that extra travel day for the fans to get there.

[*****]

Saturday is the day for college football. Seed 8 teams and give us a Saturday game. this year the teams were close enough to make a Friday nite kickoff, but a lot of years you need that extra travel day for the fans to get there.Problem is in mid/late December there isn't a college football Saturday. Playoff champ time has to be when it gets the most attention. I agree that giving the fans the most time to get there is great but also giving the most folks nationwide the best chance to see it/experience it is also a factor. We are the highest football champ and cost-containment so we should work with that. Let's continue to make it work. UNI was not "close" at all.

[SuperEagle]

I don't like the seeding process either. Yes, we didn't have the team to win it all this year, but I really can't see a valid argument why we had to travel to Texas State. If I'm not mistaken, weren't we number 6-7 in the GPI and polls, winners of 7 of our last 8 (including a win over #1), and what did that get us? A road game against the 4th best team in America. Where's the logic behind that? And I hated the fact that the committee now decides to tell us that they don't think 3 teams from the same conference deserve to be hosting home games in the first round. What a joke!!! Basically they're telling us that it doesn't matter what you do in the regular season, if there are 2 other really solid teams in your conference, somebody is getting sent on the road. Yeah, that makes sense. :confused:
The committee need to find a way to keep us posted on what's going on and what their rationale is for doing what they're doing. It's a hard pill for me to swallow that they make up the rules as they go along. I would have no problem with them adopting the GPI and making it stick. If they told us they were giving the top 8 teams home games (if their bid was good enough), then everyone would know what they had to do. Seems like it would make it fair.
Oh and btw, I'm not trying to be a whiner. There were several years where we had home games that I didn't think we deserved. Heck, we had a 3 loss team in 1990 and never had to leave our stadium including the National Championship. However, there needs to be a better way to do seedings.
It's not like it's rocket science or anything!!!

[*****]

Yeah seeding needs to be more clear. Go with one per region or something... this uncertainty is funky. I thought it was weird that a SLC team that lost to the autobid team in their conference was named a seed over the autobid and the autobid team was sent on the road.

[89Hen]

I am somewhat opposed to seeding 1-8 on a national level. IMO the first round games where teams close to each other can play is great. Hampton against W&M or Richmond, Colgate against UMass or UNH, etc... Remember, that "seeding" 1-8 or even 1-16 doesn't mean that the Committee can't screw around with the pairings. If a Montana, Delaware, GSU, ASU... are even close to the top 8, the Committee will put them in the top 8 so they get a home game. Ask Lehigh fans about 2000 when they went 11-0 and received the #9 or 10 seed sending them to WIU and then to Delaware.

I agree with LFN and a couple others that while it would seem on the surface that moving the game to Saturday would be great, this year proved that it is unnecessary and it would be really tough going up against the NFL. There is no way they're going to move their games.

As for putting out some type of poll or ranking, I'm not sure that's a good idea either. Every year we hear about problems with the BCS rankings and every year they have to redo the whole thing. I still like a room of people who know I-AA deciding who is in. No matter what method you choose, the first team left out is going to feel slighted. And it doesn't matter if there were 16, 24, 32... teams in the field. #17, 25, 33... will not be happy. Even if you came up with a comprehensive ranking system, there will still be flaws and things the team left out could point to.

I guess I'm saying, it aint broke and I'm fine with it exactly as it is.

[MR. CHICKEN]

WHIFF ALL DUH TALK...'BOUT DA FRIDAY NIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP.....AN' HOW TOUGH IT IS FO' FANS.............CAUSED ME TA WANDERIN'..........WHAT DO ALL YER FANS DO....FO' I-AA THURSDAY NITERS...DURIN' REGUALAR SEASON?...:confused:....AWK!

[Go...gate]

Champions of Ivy, SWAC, Pioneer and NEC should be in playoffs. :coach:

[Mr. C]

I don't like the seeding process either. Yes, we didn't have the team to win it all this year, but I really can't see a valid argument why we had to travel to Texas State. If I'm not mistaken, weren't we number 6-7 in the GPI and polls, winners of 7 of our last 8 (including a win over #1), and what did that get us? A road game against the 4th best team in America. Where's the logic behind that? And I hated the fact that the committee now decides to tell us that they don't think 3 teams from the same conference deserve to be hosting home games in the first round. What a joke!!! Basically they're telling us that it doesn't matter what you do in the regular season, if there are 2 other really solid teams in your conference, somebody is getting sent on the road. Yeah, that makes sense. :confused:
The committee need to find a way to keep us posted on what's going on and what their rationale is for doing what they're doing. It's a hard pill for me to swallow that they make up the rules as they go along. I would have no problem with them adopting the GPI and making it stick. If they told us they were giving the top 8 teams home games (if their bid was good enough), then everyone would know what they had to do. Seems like it would make it fair.
Oh and btw, I'm not trying to be a whiner. There were several years where we had home games that I didn't think we deserved. Heck, we had a 3 loss team in 1990 and never had to leave our stadium including the National Championship. However, there needs to be a better way to do seedings.
It's not like it's rocket science or anything!!!
My conversations with committee members led me to believe that they felt like Georgia Southern was right around 13th among the teams in the field. And, if the Eagles had been among the top eight teams in the committee's mind, they would have received a home game. The committee has allowed three teams from the same conference to be home in the first round in the past and would do it again. The only other team in the top eight that traveled was Southern Illinois and the Salukis were out-bid by Eastern Illinois. This tournament was "seeded" more than you think. They may have announced only the top four seeds and there may have been some obvious matchups for travel, but they structured it the way they did for competitive reasons too.

[Hansel]

eliminate the autobid :read:

[Mr. C]

On the subject of when the game is played. That is the call of ESPN and I think you will continue to see the semifinals stgaggered on Friday and Saturday (sure beats the years that they played them at the exact same time in 2002 and 2003). I think ESPN is also very happy with the championship game on Friday night. As a writer, the Friday game makes my life miserable. But it does allow more people to watch it on TV and I don't think it has hurt the crowds in the past two years.

[Hansel]

On the subject of when the game is played. That is the call of ESPN and I think you will continue to see the semifinals stgaggered on Friday and Saturday (sure beats the years that they played them at the exact same time in 2002 and 2003). I think ESPN is also very happy with the championship game on Friday night. As a writer, the Friday game makes my life miserable. But it does allow more people to watch it on TV and I don't think it has hurt the crowds in the past two years.
Any idea what the TV rating for the championship game was?

[jwfgeol]

From what I have heard, the city of Chattanooga likes having the game on Friday night as well. They feel if the game were on Saturday, because of the close proximity of some of the I-AA schools, that fans would tend to just drive in Saturday for the game, and not stay overnight resulting in lost dollars for the city.

[*****]

From what I have heard, the city of Chattanooga likes having the game on Friday night as well. They feel if the game were on Saturday, because of the close proximity of some of the I-AA schools, that fans would tend to just drive in Saturday for the game, and not stay overnight resulting in lost dollars for the city.Heard from whom? Sources please...

[Bub]

Champions of Ivy, SWAC, Pioneer and NEC should be in playoffs. :coach:


Yea, you da man Go...gate! :hyped:

[henfan]

Originally Posted by Go...gate
Champions of Ivy, SWAC, Pioneer and NEC should be in playoffs.

I'd imagine there would be support to have SWAC and Ivy teams participate, but that decision is theirs entirely. Can't make them do what they don't want to do.

The Pioneer, NEC and MAAC are already eligible for the playoffs but their strength of schedule prevents them from landing slots. They could increase their chances at gaining at-large births by scheduling & winning noncon games against regular I-AA powers, increasing their financial support for football to bring beyond D-II levels and making it more in line with the majority of I-AA, and by applying for auto-bids. So far, those three conferences don't appear to be all that interested in doing any of that. It's unfortunate too because their participation could enhance the playoffs.

The I-AA playoffs are fine in Chattanooga on Friday night. :hurray: I don't have a huge bone to pick with the selection process, though a little more transparency and accountability by the Regional and Selection Committees could go a long towards eliminating unexpected surprises some at-large candidates have gotten in recent years.

[McNeese72]

The main change I would like to see would be for them to back to seeding all 16 teams. And the higher seed getting the home game if they made the minimum bid for that round of the playoffs.

Seems like I remember the NCAA using 911 as the excuse to get rid of the seeding and having teams not travel as much. Well it's been awhile since 911 and it's time to get back to seeding all the teams.

[McNeese72]

I'd imagine there would be support to have SWAC and Ivy teams participate, but that decision is theirs entirely. Can't make them do what they don't want to do.



I definitely wouldn't move the playoffs back a week to accomodate the SWAC. Doing so would run the playoffs into Christmas and the start of the I-A Bowl games.

[GSUBass]

WHIFF ALL DUH TALK...'BOUT DA FRIDAY NIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP.....AN' HOW TOUGH IT IS FO' FANS.............CAUSED ME TA WANDERIN'..........WHAT DO ALL YER FANS DO....FO' I-AA THURSDAY NITERS...DURIN' REGUALAR SEASON?...:confused:....AWK!


I would think it's because those Thursday night games...fans have more than a week to prepare for them. They are known as soon as the schedule is released.

[Appdad]

WHIFF ALL DUH TALK...'BOUT DA FRIDAY NIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP.....AN' HOW TOUGH IT IS FO' FANS.............CAUSED ME TA WANDERIN'..........WHAT DO ALL YER FANS DO....FO' I-AA THURSDAY NITERS...DURIN' REGUALAR SEASON?...:confused:....AWK!

Kids miss too much school. As it is with the tournament now there is no down time for the semi-finalists/finalists to study for finals!

[Appdad]

I don't think seeding 16 will happen as then the NCAA is spending more money on travel. That should not be a problem but it appears to be reality.

[jwfgeol]

Heard from whom? Sources please...

Just what I've heard from living around here...sports talk and whatever. I know the idea for moving the game to Friday was soley an ESPN idea (if you want sources I can give you the article from the Chattanooga Times-Free Press). Dennis Poppe said there were few conflicts on a Friday night, and he thought Chattanooga and the game would benefit from the additional exposure. The game doesn't directly conflict with an SEC basketball game, NBA, NFL, etc. on Friday. At first many people were against a Friday night game, but I think the city has since enjoyed the spotlight. I personally couldn't care one way or the other, but it certainly seemed to work out this year.

[jwfgeol]

These were the recommendations made last February by the Division I-AA Football Committee, in consultation with the Division I-AA representatives of the Collegiate Commissioners Association (from ncaa.org (http://www2.ncaa.org/media_and_events/association_news/ncaa_news_online/2005/02_28_05/division_i/4205n21.html)). Not sure which of these were implemented, if any.

Seeding eight teams. Currently, only four teams in the 16-team championship bracket are seeded. Increasing the number of seeds is a consistent request from the I-AA membership regarding the championship. The committee felt the increase would ensure more integrity of the championship bracket through a more even distribution of the most talented teams.

Increase the travel party size to 150 (200 for the championship game). Committee members noted that the championship is a time for celebration for participating institutions and their greater campus communities. The committee felt that current limits of 100 and 115 for the championship game should be expanded to include more people, particularly student-athletes, in the celebration. Laney said at least half of the travel party increase should be composed of student-athletes.

Institutional support group transportation for 100 people. Committee members believe that institutional bands, cheerleaders and mascots support the football team throughout the season and should be rewarded with the opportunity to perform at the Division I-AA Football Championship game.

Local ground transportation and increased honorarium. To reduce the financial burden of advancing through the I-AA football championship, the committee believes funds should be provided to cover the cost of all local ground transportation associated with the championship. Committee members also recommend increasing the honorarium for institutions hosting games during the preliminary rounds of the championship, which will help participating institutions focus more on the excitement of participating in the championship than on accumulating debt for that participation.

NCAA marketing and promotions budget. Currently, only $20,000 of Association funds are devoted specifically to promoting the Division I-AA championship. The committee believes that figure should be increased to $200,000. In addition, committee members recommend that the local organizing committee promotions budget be increased to $50,000.

Labeling for Division I football classifications. Many people maintain that the subdivision references of I-A and I-AA are particularly debilitating for I-AA football teams and the rest of their institution's athletics programs. Accordingly, the committee believes that subdivision references should be changed to more accurately reflect and celebrate the differences between the two groups. The committee suggests that the groups be referred to as the "Division I Football Bowl Division" and "Division I Football Championship Division."

Committee composition. Because there are several I-AA football conferences that are not represented on the committee, members believe the committee composition should include an additional individual to represent those conferences.

Television exposure. The committee recommends that television exposure remain a top priority, and that the current amount of television exposure should be maintained or enhanced in future years.


I like the naming convention...Division I Football Championship Division.

[UNI MadCat]

These were the recommendations made last February by the Division I-AA Football Committee, in consultation with the Division I-AA representatives of the Collegiate Commissioners Association (from ncaa.org (http://www2.ncaa.org/media_and_events/association_news/ncaa_news_online/2005/02_28_05/division_i/4205n21.html)). Not sure which of these were implemented, if any.

Seeding eight teams. Currently, only four teams in the 16-team championship bracket are seeded. Increasing the number of seeds is a consistent request from the I-AA membership regarding the championship. The committee felt the increase would ensure more integrity of the championship bracket through a more even distribution of the most talented teams.

Increase the travel party size to 150 (200 for the championship game). Committee members noted that the championship is a time for celebration for participating institutions and their greater campus communities. The committee felt that current limits of 100 and 115 for the championship game should be expanded to include more people, particularly student-athletes, in the celebration. Laney said at least half of the travel party increase should be composed of student-athletes.

Institutional support group transportation for 100 people. Committee members believe that institutional bands, cheerleaders and mascots support the football team throughout the season and should be rewarded with the opportunity to perform at the Division I-AA Football Championship game.

Local ground transportation and increased honorarium. To reduce the financial burden of advancing through the I-AA football championship, the committee believes funds should be provided to cover the cost of all local ground transportation associated with the championship. Committee members also recommend increasing the honorarium for institutions hosting games during the preliminary rounds of the championship, which will help participating institutions focus more on the excitement of participating in the championship than on accumulating debt for that participation.

NCAA marketing and promotions budget. Currently, only $20,000 of Association funds are devoted specifically to promoting the Division I-AA championship. The committee believes that figure should be increased to $200,000. In addition, committee members recommend that the local organizing committee promotions budget be increased to $50,000.

Labeling for Division I football classifications. Many people maintain that the subdivision references of I-A and I-AA are particularly debilitating for I-AA football teams and the rest of their institution's athletics programs. Accordingly, the committee believes that subdivision references should be changed to more accurately reflect and celebrate the differences between the two groups. The committee suggests that the groups be referred to as the "Division I Football Bowl Division" and "Division I Football Championship Division."

Committee composition. Because there are several I-AA football conferences that are not represented on the committee, members believe the committee composition should include an additional individual to represent those conferences.

Television exposure. The committee recommends that television exposure remain a top priority, and that the current amount of television exposure should be maintained or enhanced in future years.


I like the naming convention...Division I Football Championship Division.

So, will these things be on the docket again next year??

[UNI MadCat]

Having now been to the game, I'm all for the Friday night set up. I was able to leave Thursday after work, drive down from Minneapolis and was there early on Friday morning. We were able to leisurely get up and leave on Saturday and take two days to get back and still be back in Minny comfortably on Sunday to rest up for work the next day. Whereas for a Saturday game I would have probably ended up getting in very late Sunday night (or early Monday morning) and been a wreck for the work week.

In general, I think bosses would rather have an employee skip a Friday as opposed to a Monday so that is a plus as well.

I enjoyed the national exposure and I'd much prefer a night game as opposed to a day game. The casual football fan is already at the bar after work and takes interest in the game. Whereas a Saturday afternoon game, there aren't nearly as many casual fans in front of the TV for it, IMO. Something about the night just makes it all the more magical.

[WYOBISONMAN]

I think NDSU elgibility will improve the playoffs.... :smiley_wi

[McTailGator]

3 and 4 are legitimate ideas; not that the other 2 aren't, but I particularily like those 2. If you're going to seed 8, we might as well seed em all. In this regard I am with you, seed more teams. The Friday night game atmosphere was electric. I don't know about an afternoon championship. There's just something about playing under the lights! If possible, a Saturday night Championship would be an excellent idea though! :hurray:


I agree with the Saturday night game time. I'd start the TV coverage at 5:PM and have the game kick of around 5:35 PM. And then do a half hour post game show with interviews, and analysis.

More fans could make a staurday night game. We could soon see the endxone hill full of people on blankets. That would be cool.

[Tod]

I like the naming convention...Division I Football Championship Division.

I really don't, to be honest. I think it's better the way it is, although there is still confusion out there that we aren't D-I football. I think the average college football fan who follows I-A will see it as more of a "loser bracket" than a seperate division (sub-division).

[eaglesrthe1]

The selection process needs to be more transparent. Putting out a ranking as the season progresses is a good way to do it. It would help to do away with the politics. Ask the first team left out if getting seven of eight at large bids right is good enough.

The seeding process and the selection of home sites is a farce. What was originally brought out as a temporary measure for "security", has now been entrenched as the way it's done. It's about money, nothing more. Seeding should be 1-16.

[89Hen]

Guys, I'll say it again. Don't think that 'seeding' 1-8 or 1-16 will put the best 8 teams at home in the first round. The Committee can and has put lower ranked teams in the top 8 to assure them a home playoff game. If a Montana, Delaware, GSU... is the tenth best playoff team in the country, they will get a 7 or 8 seed just to get them at home.

[dirtbag]

Guys, I'll say it again. Don't think that 'seeding' 1-8 or 1-16 will put the best 8 teams at home in the first round. The Committee can and has put lower ranked teams in the top 8 to assure them a home playoff game. If a Montana, Delaware, GSU... is the tenth best playoff team in the country, they will get a 7 or 8 seed just to get them at home.

Like they did with GSU this year?

[dirtbag]

Just what I've heard from living around here...sports talk and whatever. I know the idea for moving the game to Friday was soley an ESPN idea (if you want sources I can give you the article from the Chattanooga Times-Free Press). Dennis Poppe said there were few conflicts on a Friday night, and he thought Chattanooga and the game would benefit from the additional exposure. The game doesn't directly conflict with an SEC basketball game, NBA, NFL, etc. on Friday. At first many people were against a Friday night game, but I think the city has since enjoyed the spotlight. I personally couldn't care one way or the other, but it certainly seemed to work out this year.

I've heard several playoff sites (ie, chamber of commerces) say they prefer night games because that makes it more likely that people will spend the night. A quick Google turned up this article from San Marcos TX:

http://www.sanmarcosrecord.com/articles/2005/12/08/news/news1.txt (http://)

"The Friday night game is particularly beneficial to hotels since most out-of-town travelers will not be able to return home after the game, said Convention and Visitors Bureau Director Rebecca Ramirez."

[89Hen]

Like they did with GSU this year?
They have done it in the past when they seeded the whole field. The fact that GSU travelled this year has nothing to do with it.

[GGASU]

I like the naming convention...Division I Football Championship Division.


How about Division One Lite ......maybe we could attract some lite beer sponsers.

Miller Lite brings you the Division I Lite Championship. All the excitement of regular Division I football without the added extra weight.

[TXST_CAT]

In case no one mentioned it Instant replay for all playoff games. There were some moments that I would have liked the replay option during the playoffs. Especially for a roughing the kicker call and a facemask call that was considered a personal foul that was clearly incidental. :twocents:

[MR. CHICKEN]

AH'D LIKE TA SEE DEM....BROADCAST DUH PLAY-OFFS IN COLOR........MAH '59 PHILCO...DIDN'T COME WHIFF UH REMOTE EITHER!......:xmas:.........AWK!

[eaglesrthe1]

They have done it in the past when they seeded the whole field. The fact that GSU travelled this year has nothing to do with it.

Div I-AA is about cost containment, so money will come into play at some point. In that light, I don't see much wrong with taking a 9th ranked Montana or GSU and giving them an 8 seed. In that scenario, it would only assist in gaining them a first round game. It's always been done that way. No different than taking the #3 and #4 teams and swapping them to put them in a more regional bracket to help with travel costs. It makes money a factor, not the factor.

However, treating the 5th ranked team as an equal to the 16th ranked team is a farce. On the field performance becomes moot, and money is the point.

Let Montana win the Big Sky auto with a 6-5 record, then host 3 home games because of their attendance and it will become apparent.

[eaglesrthe1]

In case no one mentioned it Instant replay for all playoff games. There were some moments that I would have liked the replay option during the playoffs. Especially for a roughing the kicker call and a facemask call that was considered a personal foul that was clearly incidental. :twocents:

Replays are never used in penalty situations. Only for ball spots, completions, fumbles, in bounds/out of bounds calls and similar things.

[skinny_uncle]

How about Division One Lite ......maybe we could attract some lite beer sponsers.

Miller Lite brings you the Division I Lite Championship. All the excitement of regular Division I football without the added extra weight.
Would/could this involve free beer at the game?
:beerchug:

[dirtbag]

Would/could this involve free beer at the game?
:beerchug:

Miller Lite is NOT beer.

[skinny_uncle]

Miller Lite is NOT beer.
Good point.