Big Sky Limited to AQ for Playoffs?

[TexasTerror]

Seems this league is going to go into typical 'beat each other' up fashion and outside of having two teams that are far and away the tops in the league, it just does not seem to me that the Big Sky can get more than the AQ in. I was just looking at this for weekly playoff prognostications.

NOTE: Tossing out FBS games, sub Div I that have not taken place

Eastern Washington - 8 games to win 6
Idaho State - 7 games to win 7
Montana - 8 games to win 7
Montana State - 8 games to win 6
Northern Arizona - 9 games to win 7
Northern Colorado - 8 games to win 6
Portland State - 8 games to win 6
Sacramento State - 9 games to win 7 - leads Weber State currently
Weber State - 9 games to win 7 - trails Sac State right now

[Grizzaholic]

Sounds like a personal attempt to get under someone's skin.

[MR. CHICKEN]

Sounds like a personal attempt to get under someone's skin.

SOUNDS LIKE....IT MAY HAVE WORKED........:):D:)....BRAWK!

[whitey]

Since TT puts himself out there for criticism every week with his Playoff Prognostications I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. It's amazing that we're only 3 weeks in and someone could even pose a question like this which really makes you think. It just goes to show how important the regular season is in FCS. Anyway, at this point it does look a bit daunting for that conference.

[TexasTerror]

Sounds like a personal attempt to get under someone's skin.

I posted this last night after seeing what was happening in Weber St/Sac State and watching Montana lose a second consecutive regular season game - which was kind of shocking...

This was not as random as your post about SHSU, a team picked to be at the bottom of the SLC. You've personally attacked me numerous times on this forum and I'm strictly providing legitimate football conversation. Anyone that thought SHSU was doing anything special this year was out of their mind, especially in wake of Rollison's injury...


Since TT puts himself out there for criticism every week with his Playoff Prognostications I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. It's amazing that we're only 3 weeks in and someone could even pose a question like this which really makes you think. It just goes to show how important the regular season is in FCS. Anyway, at this point it does look a bit daunting for that conference.

Thanks for the remark...

The Big Sky should be excited about adding the two California teams. Even if the league just adds one more conference game, it will help them with scheduling. With the limited FCS selection that is west of the Mississippi and unwilling to travel to their schools, it'll help a lot in making the out of conference more tolerable and more able to get an at-large in with the wins needed.

[Grizzaholic]

I posted this last night after seeing what was happening in Weber St/Sac State and watching Montana lose a second consecutive regular season game - which was kind of shocking...

This was not as random as your post about SHSU, a team picked to be at the bottom of the SLC. You've personally attacked me numerous times on this forum and I'm strictly providing legitimate football conversation. Anyone that thought SHSU was doing anything special this year was out of their mind, especially in wake of Rollison's injury...



Thanks for the remark...

The Big Sky should be excited about adding the two California teams. Even if the league just adds one more conference game, it will help them with scheduling. With the limited FCS selection that is west of the Mississippi and unwilling to travel to their schools, it'll help a lot in making the out of conference more tolerable and more able to get an at-large in with the wins needed.


As you have to me. It was not a personal attack. It was just an observation that I have noticed this year. Get over yourself. You are not all that special...at least not anymore.

[Green26]

The premise of the thread is almost silly, in my view. There is almost no way that one of the top conferences gets only 1 team in the playoffs. Note that the playoffs are expanded to 20 this year, so there are extra slots to fill. Aren't there only 2 more auto qualifier slots? The committee will go out of its way to include Montana in the playoffs, in order to increase ncaa playoff revenue.

[SoCalAg]

The premise of the thread is almost silly, in my view. There is almost no way that one of the top conferences gets only 1 team in the playoffs. Note that the playoffs are expanded to 20 this year, so there are extra slots to fill. Aren't there only 2 more auto qualifier slots? The committee will go out of its way to include Montana in the playoffs, in order to increase ncaa playoff revenue.

You're assuming Montana will qualify. It looks to me like they are going to have their hands full this season just becoming eligible

[TexasTerror]

You're assuming Montana will qualify. It looks to me like they are going to have their hands full this season just becoming eligible

Montana is going to have a rough time getting to seven wins... they have to win SEVEN games in their remaining EIGHT, which essentially means they need to win the Big Sky title. For them, it is BIG SKY or BUST. A loss already hurts them...

Weber State did themselves no favor with their loss to Sacramento State...

If Eastern Washington wins these next two games - at Weber, at Montana State - they'll be in the driver's seat by a mile and really put those two schools on the verge of elimination from a playoff berth.

[Syntax Error]

The premise of the thread is almost silly

I read this thread OP as saying that to be playoff eligible you have to clear certain hurdles except when you are the AQ. If no teams can clear the hurdles besides the AQ then no one else comes from that conference. Teams and conferences put themselves in this danger by scheduling FBS and non-D-I teams, then losing OOC FCS games.

[TexasTerror]

I read this thread OP as saying that to be playoff eligible you have to clear certain hurdles except when you are the AQ. If no teams can clear the hurdles besides the AQ then no one else comes from that conference. Teams and conferences put themselves in this danger by scheduling FBS and non-D-I teams, then losing OOC FCS games.

The Big Sky is at the most disadvantage of ANY conference in FCS too...

With finances getting tighter and the amount of flights involved - it's rough to travel. No one wants to travel to the Big Sky if they can avoid it. There are no leagues outside of the Big Sky with the exception of the GWFC that planes are not needed to get to the venues...

There's quite a few leagues in FCS where there are limited if no flights at all. How many games in the league does Montana have to take a charter to? What about Northern Arizona or Sacramento State?

[Syntax Error]

PFL has some plane trips too.

[TexasTerror]

PFL has some plane trips too.

They are not an AQ league and obviously, not legitimately in the playoff discussion...

[UNH Fanboi]

Montana is going to have a rough time getting to seven wins... they have to win SEVEN games in their remaining EIGHT, which essentially means they need to win the Big Sky title. For them, it is BIG SKY or BUST. A loss already hurts them...

Weber State did themselves no favor with their loss to Sacramento State...

If Eastern Washington wins these next two games - at Weber, at Montana State - they'll be in the driver's seat by a mile and really put those two schools on the verge of elimination from a playoff berth.

There's been chaos in nearly every conferences so far. I think we'll see a lot of 7-4 teams in the playoffs this year, and maybe even a team with only 6 D1 wins sneaking in. I don't see the Big Sky only getting one team in. The at-larges have to come from somewhere.

[Syntax Error]

They are not an AQ league and obviously, not legitimately in the playoff discussion...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! They have the bridge AQ this year and besides that, EVERY TEAM that has a legit FCS squad is in the playoff discussion (unless the teams opted out). Even SHSU is in the discussion. People that omit teams because of what you say are ELITISTS.

[CrazyCat]

I just look forward to TT analyzing every conference in the same manner and starting threads for each every week.

[TexasTerror]

I just look forward to TT analyzing every conference in the same manner and starting threads for each every week.

It is hard to do the same for other conferences. Most of the other conferences do not have the scheduling struggles that the Big Sky has because of finances and location. You guys are already more hard-pressed than others, despite how good your teams are to get an at-large. This year, with Montana's early stumbles and a few surprises (i.e. Sac St over Weber State), your top teams are already behind the eight-ball (sans EWU).


There's been chaos in nearly every conferences so far. I think we'll see a lot of 7-4 teams in the playoffs this year, and maybe even a team with only 6 D1 wins sneaking in. I don't see the Big Sky only getting one team in. The at-larges have to come from somewhere.

The CAA is having their share of chaos, but they also have more teams and more teams winning Div I OOC games (even if they are against NEC, Big South, etc. lightweights).


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! They have the bridge AQ this year and besides that, EVERY TEAM that has a legit FCS squad is in the playoff discussion (unless the teams opted out). Even SHSU is in the discussion. People that omit teams because of what you say are ELITISTS.

The Pioneer is not an AQ conference and until they are, we can't get too excited about their playoff prospects. Their GPI is going to be bottom of the barrel and unless there's a San Diego of yesteryear type team, it's going to be tough for them...

Not elitists, realists. I'd say there's a lot of Div II teams and a few from Div III that could win the Pioneer League... their talent is not comparable to the upper level of full-scholarship FCS. You may sneak a win from time to time, but the Pioneer had a 50-7 loss by Valpo to St. Joseph's (Ind), a 41-7 by Lenoir-Rhyne over Davidson and a 42-14 Asuza Pacific win over San Diego. Embarassing...

[Squealofthepig]

It's a legitimate question, though, mathematically. I was kicking this around in my head last night too. Consider what most considered to be the top of the Big Sky coming into the year:

Montana - 8 games, need 7 wins
EWU - 8 games, need 6 wins
NAU - 8 games, need 6
WSU - 9 games, need 7

I'm limiting it to four just to keep it simple - and honestly, at the moment it is ANYONE's guess how the Big Sky will ultimately shake out. You can substitute MSU or Sac State (!) or anyone else into the above four, using this for illustrations.

Four these four teams, they all need to play each other still (other than EWU/UM). If they split the games with each other and win the rest:

Montana - 8 games, win 6 vs. the rest, split with NAU/WSU, would sit at 7 division one wins and barely be available

EWU - 8 games, win 6 vs. the rest and also split with NAU/WSU: would sit at 7 wins and have a loss to NAU/WSU.

NAU: win 5 games, split the other 3 (yeah yeah, I know) - sit at 6.5 wins.

WSU: Win 6 games, split the above 3, sit at 7.5 wins.

That's best case scenario for all of the above. How the Big Sky would get more than two playoffs teams in this scenario would be difficult to guess.

You could create some other scenarios to get multiple teams to seven wins, but the math will work similarly. And given the surprising upsets we've seen between conferences, you could see more at-large bids going to non-qualifying conferences than ever before. I wouldn't say the Big Sky conference is definitely a one-bid league (WAY too much football to be played!) but I think the back-of-the-envelope math makes it at least a possible scenario.

[Syntax Error]

Not elitists, realists.

Until a team opts out of the playoffs in FCS, they are in the discussion. I like the way AGS has a thread about teams not getting 7 D-I wins therefore being hindered from getting a playoff spot. That is reality rather than elitism.

[UNH Fanboi]

The CAA is having their share of chaos, but they also have more teams and more teams winning Div I OOC games (even if they are against NEC, Big South, etc. lightweights).

The CAA will have no problem getting 3 at larges. I was thinking more about the SoCon, MVC, Southland, etc. Many of the usual suspects in those conferences have struggled so far. The Big South was looking like it might get an at-large, but had an absolutely terrible week.

[TexasTerror]

The CAA will have no problem getting 3 at larges. I was thinking more about the SoCon, MVC, Southland, etc. Many of the usual suspects in those conferences have struggled so far. The Big South was looking like it might get an at-large, but had an absolutely terrible week.

CAA could get as many as five teams, if there are enough teams that get to seven wins...

OVC may be poised to get a second team in as could the SLC, which has struggled to get multiple teams in during recent years...

[Green26]

You're assuming Montana will qualify. It looks to me like they are going to have their hands full this season just becoming eligible

How's your reading comprehension, SoCalAg? Please tell us you concluded that this statement of mine assumed UM will qualify?

"The committee will go out of its way to include Montana in the playoffs, in order to increase ncaa playoff revenue."



TT, I assume you're aware that the 7 D-I win language is not written so that it is mandatory? Here are the important criteria. Note the wording in no. 3.

"The following principles shall apply when selecting at-large teams:

1. The committee shall select the best teams available on a national at-large basis to
complete the bracket;
2. There is no limit to the number of teams the committee may select from one
conference;
3. 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;
4. The committee may give more consideration to those teams that have played all
Division I opponents;"

[TexasTerror]

TT, I assume you're aware that the 7 D-I win language is not written so that it is mandatory? Here are the important criteria. Note the wording in no. 3.

This gets brought up every year...

Still, the precedent is out there. When was the last time a six Div I win team enjoy a piece of the playoffs? Even with the expansion to 20, seems like we had a few solid bubble teams last year that would have gotten in last year to round out the 20...

Have a hard time believing a six-win Big Sky team gets in over a seven-win team from most of the AQ conferences.

[Green26]

This gets brought up every year...

Still, the precedent is out there. When was the last time a six Div I win team enjoy a piece of the playoffs? Even with the expansion to 20, seems like we had a few solid bubble teams last year that would have gotten in last year to round out the 20...

Have a hard time believing a six-win Big Sky team gets in over a seven-win team from most of the AQ conferences.

When was the last time there were 20 teams in the playoffs? Jeez, someone has to be in the playoffs. The first criteria says the "best available" teams are to be selected. Are you going to select the no. 2 Patriot League team over a team from a top conference just because the top-conference team has several close losses early in the season, and the Patriot no. 2 has seven D-I wins? If the no. 2 Patriot team is better than the other teams being considered, they should be selected, but I don't see why the committee would get hung up on 7 D-I wins.

[TexasTerror]

When was the last time there were 20 teams in the playoffs? Jeez, someone has to be in the playoffs. The first criteria says the "best available" teams are to be selected. Are you going to select the no. 2 Patriot League team over a team from a top conference just because the top-conference team has several close losses early in the season, and the Patriot no. 2 has seven D-I wins? If the no. 2 Patriot team is better than the other teams being considered, they should be selected, but I don't see why the committee would get hung up on 7 D-I wins.

Remember - there are just TWO additional at-large teams...

There were a handful of teams last year that had seven Div I wins that would have more than met the precedent of requirements needed to make the playoffs... IMO, the committee is going to do what they can to avoid putting a team less than seven Div I win in...

Sorry Grizwalds... Cal Poly's loss to TXST yesterday probably did you no favors either. Just win the Big Sky! Only assured way as is...

[SoCalAg]

[QUOTE=Green26;1556116]How's your reading comprehension, SoCalAg? Please tell us you concluded that this statement of mine assumed UM will qualify?

"The committee will go out of its way to include Montana in the playoffs, in order to increase ncaa playoff revenue."


Somebody is a little sensitive. Hang in there buddy. You've lost two in a row, it will get better.

[4th and What?]

Montana fans need to worry about getting 1 division 1 win before they worry about the playoffs.....they should be there though. Need to bounce back and win the next six though, because they may lose one of the last 2, though both are at home.

As for the BSC in general, yeah, they are going to knock themselves out of the playoffs a lot, but with the math above, there should be a second team with 7 D1 wins to get an at large.

And quit bashing the PFL. If Dayton or Jacksonville can run the rest of their schedule, I wouldn't be surprised to see them thrown a slot.

[Green26]

Okay, who wants to bet me $100 on either whether the Big Sky gets 2 or more teams in the playoffs or UM gets into the playoffs? Let's see who wants to put their money where their big mouths are.

SoCalAg, let me know if you want me to fund a reading comprehension class for you.

[blukeys]

How's your reading comprehension, SoCalAg? Please tell us you concluded that this statement of mine assumed UM will qualify?

"The committee will go out of its way to include Montana in the playoffs, in order to increase ncaa playoff revenue."



Glad to see a Griz fan admit what many have speculated and that is Montana gets way too favorable treatment by the NCAA selection committee. xscanx In fact this statement is not made just once but twice with emphasis. Good job Green, You have made the case much better than most that the selection committee will pick Montana over a deserving team and why.

I never thought I would see such honesty from a Griz fan. Most of the time they state that the teams selection, high seeds, and home games were due to the quality of the team.xlolx

[blukeys]

Montana fans need to worry about getting 1 division 1 win before they worry about the playoffs

Or as Jim Mora would say.

"Playoffs !!!?????!! Don't talk to me about Playoffs!!!!!!!!

[SalukiJim]

Agree 100% with Syntax error. Another reason I don't like the "blood donor" games, whether we're stepping up or stepping down. Hard enough to get 7 wins against FCS teams when you play 11, not just 9 vs. them...

[WestCoastAggie]

Looking at the computer rankings for the past few seasons, It would be safe to hypotheize that the Big Sky will be perceived to have a tough Strength of Schedule and because of that, Big Sky teams will still be rated fairly high in these computer ratings. Those high ratings will balance out their teams slide in the coaches poll and the teams in contention for an At-Large bid will finish within the top 17-18 of the modified version of the GPI that the selection committee will use when selecting At-Large teams.

Therefore, the Big Sky getting more than one team in the dance is still very likely baring a complete collapse by their top teams.

[TokyoGriz]

Theres a good chance Montana will not be jockeying for a spot in the playoffs this year so dont sweat it if your a griz fan. Look on the bright side a few loses will get us ready to have some during our transition to FBS till we start tuning the WAC.

[TexasTerror]

Things are looking better...

Montana State is now 4-1 (3-1 against Div I) with Northern Arizona at 3-1 (2-1 against Div I). Eastern Washington and Montana at 3-2, though 2-2 against FCS competition.

Montana State has to win four games in their final six. Northern Arizona needs five wins in final seven. EWU and Montana have to win five of six.

[Screamin_Eagle174]

EWU is not 2-2 against FCS competition, we're 2-1. Our first loss was to Nevada.

[TexasTerror]

EWU is not 2-2 against FCS competition, we're 2-1. Our first loss was to Nevada.

Meant 2-2 against Division I competition. You knew what I meant - same situation...

[Green26]

The Colonial is beating itself up. You could make a similar argument for them reducing the number of plahoff slots for their conference.

While there will be upsets and unexpected events, MSU, EWU and UM are currently on pace to make the playoffs.

[TexasTerror]

While there will be upsets and unexpected events, MSU, EWU and UM are currently on pace to make the playoffs.

Montana State is on track... Northern Arizona is not in the worst position, but have a tougher schedule.

EWU and Montana have to win 5 of 6. EWU needs to get past Northern Arizona and could be in very good position. Montana has NAU and Montana State - very vulnerable to get two losses.

[Green26]

If EWU and UM win 5 of 6, they are virtually assured of being in the playoffs. As previously discussed, 7 D-I wins is not a requirement for playoff consideration, although certainly very helpful. Good point on NAU. They are very good. They could get there too, or knock off the top teams. Sagarin has the top 4 Big Sky schools at 10, 11, 13 and 17, with the order being UM, MSU, EWU and NAU. As I have said, given UM's big attendance, as well as schools like ASU and Delaware, I believe the playoff selection committee will go out of their way to get them in the playoff field (and they will surely have a first round home game, which could lead to a win and another game).

[TexasTerror]

If EWU and UM win 5 of 6, they are virtually assured of being in the playoffs. As previously discussed, 7 D-I wins is not a requirement for playoff consideration, although certainly very helpful.

Do you feel the committee would still try to keep the seven win plateau as the margin of success need to earn an at-large?


Good point on NAU. They are very good. They could get there too, or knock off the top teams.

They most certainly play the teams they need to defeat in order to earn themselves the AQ or an at-large.


Sagarin has the top 4 Big Sky schools at 10, 11, 13 and 17, with the order being UM, MSU, EWU and NAU. As I have said, given UM's big attendance, as well as schools like ASU and Delaware, I believe the playoff selection committee will go out of their way to get them in the playoff field (and they will surely have a first round home game, which could lead to a win and another game).

If the playoff committe goes out of their way to put a six win team into the NCAAs, I think it will be greatly frowned upon by many, especially if there's more deserving seven (and even eight win) schools left. I can see the Pioneer League throwing a real big fit! :)

[GrizNzonecrazy]

Montana State is on track... Northern Arizona is not in the worst position, but have a tougher schedule.

EWU and Montana have to win 5 of 6. EWU needs to get past Northern Arizona and could be in very good position. Montana has NAU and Montana State - very vulnerable to get two losses.

The Griz do indeed have NAU and MSU left on the schedule but both games are at home in front of our 25,000 plus fans. And after the last 2 games the Griz seem to be getting things on track finally. And the MSU defense got badly exposed yesterday against Sac St. I'd almost bet the Griz win out and if Cal Poly/EWU continue to win and a few top teams stumble i dont see it out of the question to snag the 4 seed and get two home games in the playoffs. After footing the bill for the playoff party last year i'm sure the committee will be looking for a way to keep us at home for a couple rounds. Unfair.....maybe.....but so is life

[EdubAlum]

Do you feel the committee would still try to keep the seven win plateau as the margin of success need to earn an at-large?



They most certainly play the teams they need to defeat in order to earn themselves the AQ or an at-large.



If the playoff committe goes out of their way to put a six win team into the NCAAs, I think it will be greatly frowned upon by many, especially if there's more deserving seven (and even eight win) schools left. I can see the Pioneer League throwing a real big fit! :)

I think they'll go out of their way to include them in the playoffs simply because of their pretty historic streak of trips to the playoffs. You'll see this happen in march madness too. Plus, they do make money for the NCAA. I hate to say it, but i honestly do think Montana would, and will get an invite before other teams that might be a better choice.

[TexasTerror]

Update with EWU game to be played...

Montana has to win both of their final two games.
EWU has to win two of the three games remaining.
Montana State needs a split of their final two games.
Weber State needs to win two of three games.
NAU has to win all four games.

I think EWU and Montana State have the best situations... Weber State has it rough with three road games (NAU, Tx Tech and Montana State) and NAU is against the wall... two teams likely if you asked me today.

[wapiti]

Update with EWU game to be played...

Montana has to win both of their final two games.
EWU has to win two of the three games remaining.
Montana State needs a split of their final two games.
Weber State needs to win two of three games.
NAU has to win all four games.

I think EWU and Montana State have the best situations... Weber State has it rough with three road games (NAU, Tx Tech and Montana State) and NAU is against the wall... two teams likely if you asked me today.

I think the BSC gets at least 3 in and a fair chance of four. EWU, MSU, NAU, and UM.

[I Bleed Purple]

I think the BSC gets at least 3 in and a fair chance of four. EWU, MSU, NAU, and UM.

No Weber if we beat MSU and NAU?

[UNH Fanboi]

I think the BSC gets at least 3 in and a fair chance of four. EWU, MSU, NAU, and UM.

I suggest you check the score for the NAU game...

[TexasTerror]

I think the BSC gets at least 3 in and a fair chance of four. EWU, MSU, NAU, and UM.

You really think NAU is going to 'sweep' their remaining games? And you think Montana wins both remaining contests as well? Seems like a stretch...

[I Bleed Purple]

I suggest you check the score for the NAU game...

NAU on their typical last half of the season swoon.

Must be the altitude. They get too tired right at the halfway point of the season. I'm glad we play them last.

[Squealofthepig]

It is hard to argue for either. For Montana, the games left are possible - home games vs. North Dakota and Montana State. However, you also have to look at it like this: Montana hasn't beaten anyone that is getting top 25 votes, other than NAU.

I don't think the BSC is a one-bid league, but it definitely will be interesting!

[wapiti]

I think the BSC gets at least 3 in and a fair chance of four. EWU, MSU, NAU, and UM.

If NAU loses against Sac St. today that will greatly hurt their chances of a playoff invite I still see at least 3 teams from the BSC in the playoffs.

MSU only needs to win one more. UM needs to win out, but a split may still get them in ($$$$$ ticket sales$$$), and EWU probably only needs one more win.

Now if BBQ Grills win out, they may get an invite, but that may eliminate MSU or UM, but still 3 teams from the BSC.

[I Bleed Purple]

If NAU loses against Sac St. today that will greatly hurt their chances of a playoff invite I still see at least 3 teams from the BSC in the playoffs.

MSU only needs to win one more. UM needs to win out, but a split may still get them in ($$$$$ ticket sales$$$), and EWU probably only needs one more win.

Now if BBQ Grills win out, they may get an invite, but that may eliminate MSU or UM, but still 3 teams from the BSC.

If we win out, we're in, guaranteed. 8-3 with a win over an FBS? No way a Big Sky team is left out with that resume. Now a 7-4 team with two losses to FBS teams is dicier. We should get in because UM and MSU still have to play each other. The loser of that game would have three conference losses. If it's Montana, that's four FCS losses. How do you take them over Weber in good conscious. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ I know, but it would be terribly egregious.

[tribefan40]

I say EWU gets the autobid and MSU gets in with an at-large. There will be lots of competition at 7-4 this year.

[Squealofthepig]

I say EWU gets the autobid and MSU gets in with an at-large. There will be lots of competition at 7-4 this year.

Very true. Even teams from outside of the general power conferences have good resumes this year - see the OVC for a perfect example. Outside of winning the auto-qualifier, it's hard to say any teams are guaranteed, outside of the second place CAA team.

Heck, head-to-head games against Ball State, of all things, could help decide the field this year. How's that for wacky? :)

[UNH Fanboi]

UM needs to win out, but a split may still get them in ($$$$$ ticket sales$$$).

I'm pretty cynical about the objectivity of the selection committee when money is involved, but I would be absolutely shocked if a 6 FCS win Montana made the playoffs.

[Squealofthepig]

I'm pretty cynical about the objectivity of the selection committee when money is involved, but I would be absolutely shocked if a 6 FCS win Montana made the playoffs.

I absolutely agree; but you have to admit: No team has proven it's more capable of beating Montana week in and week out than Montana. Indeed, no team can beat Montana like Montana can! :)

A split should not get Montana in; win out and they're in the conversation. At some point you gotta actually win the close games and not turn the ball over a half dozen times a game.

[Walkon79]

I absolutely agree; but you have to admit: No team has proven it's more capable of beating Montana week in and week out than Montana. Indeed, no team can beat Montana like Montana can! :)

A split should not get Montana in; win out and they're in the conversation. At some point you gotta actually win the close games and not turn the ball over a half dozen times a game.

By my calculations the Griz are about .500 in close games. The ball did bounce your way a couple of times.

[kcatz]

2 corrections:

1. MSU has one conference loss, if we lose to the griz it will only be our 2nd conference loss.

2. Eastern cannot win the AQ if we win out, we hold the tie breaker by the head to head win.

[I Bleed Purple]

2 corrections:

1. MSU has one conference loss, if we lose to the griz it will only be our 2nd conference loss.

2. Eastern cannot win the AQ if we win out, we hold the tie breaker by the head to head win.

In my scenario I laid out, Weber wins out, which would mean MSU would have two conference losses going into the UM-MSU game.

[srgrizizen]

I'm pretty cynical about the objectivity of the selection committee when money is involved, but I would be absolutely shocked if a 6 FCS win Montana made the playoffs.

I don't think the Griz get in if they don't win the last two and finish 8-3. If they go 7-4 and lose to MSU, they should turn down the invitation, if it's forthcoming. It would be the honorable thing to do. xnodxxlolx

[srgrizizen]

Very true. Even teams from outside of the general power conferences have good resumes this year - see the OVC for a perfect example. Outside of winning the auto-qualifier, it's hard to say any teams are guaranteed, outside of the second place CAA team.

Heck, head-to-head games against Ball State, of all things, could help decide the field this year. How's that for wacky? :)

Maybe this should be a new thread, but I'd like to hear from some of the long-time posters who have frequently argued that the BSC conference basically consists of one decent team and 8 creampuffs. Now that UM has shown itself to be readily beatable by conference opponents, does the credibility of the conference improve, or is it now 9 creampuffs? What do the CAA fans say?xconfusedx

[CopperCat]

Maybe this should be a new thread, but I'd like to hear from some of the long-time posters who have frequently argued that the BSC conference basically consists of one decent team and 8 creampuffs. Now that UM has shown itself to be readily beatable by conference opponents, does the credibility of the conference improve, or is it now 9 creampuffs? What do the CAA fans say?xconfusedx

Who cares what they say. The BSC is better as a conference, and the griz aren't their normal selves this year, that's the facts.