Home field playoff advantage....

[bulldog]

At least someone in Spokane knows the deal on home field advantage in the FCS playoffs. Problem is Mr. Blanchette thinks the CAA gets treated favorably with home games. Wrong!

JMU did not get a SINGLE home playoff game in 2004 enroute to the NC. They got ze-friggin-ro.

There are a few teams which historically enjoy home field games for the majority of or ALL of the playoffs (Montana, Ape State), but the CAA is such a bruising conference that it is practically impossible for any team to finish well enough to seed that high. But don't take my word for it. Read this....

http://www.spokesman.com/eagles/stories/2011/jan/05/john-blanchette-colonial-knows-football/

[cowboy91]

As I'm sure you know, it's not as if JMU was a weak sister that season. Villanova played on the road because they had 4 losses in 2010, JMU played the three home games because of the stadium renovations. They would have hosted throughout.

Only two CAA teams have won the title after hosting 3 playoff games: Delaware 03 and Villanova 09.

[bulldog]

As I'm sure you know, it's not as if JMU was a weak sister that season. Villanova played on the road because they had 4 losses in 2010, JMU played the three home games because of the stadium renovations. They would have hosted throughout.

Only two CAA teams have won the title after hosting 3 playoff games: Delaware 03 and Villanova 09.

Not so. JMU was the third-place CAA finisher in 2004. Richmond was the third-place CAA finisher in 2008. There is a history of FCS champions coming from at-large CAA teams.

[cowboy91]

No, in 2004 James Madison was the Atlantic 10 co-champion with Delaware.

[UD77]

If your record isn't as good you can't expect home field. One would expect that the team with the worse record (ie, on the road) then you would expect that they would more than likely loose an away game.

[Professor Chaos]

At least someone in Spokane knows the deal on home field advantage in the FCS playoffs. Problem is Mr. Blanchette thinks the CAA gets treated favorably with home games. Wrong!

JMU did not get a SINGLE home playoff game in 2004 enroute to the NC. They got ze-friggin-ro.

There are a few teams which historically enjoy home field games for the majority of or ALL of the playoffs (Montana, Ape State), but the CAA is such a bruising conference that it is practically impossible for any team to finish well enough to seed that high. But don't take my word for it. Read this....

http://www.spokesman.com/eagles/stories/2011/jan/05/john-blanchette-colonial-knows-football/

2010: W&M #2, Delaware #3
2009: Villanova #2, Richmond #4
2008: JMU #1

You sure about that?

[LEHIGH61]

In my opinion, ALL games should be on a neutral field. Matchups could certainly be arranged so that more fans(in most cases) could get to the games, no further than any other AWAY game. Some teams really have an unfair home field advantage. This would eliminate it. The FCS playoff arrangement is far better than the FBS Bowl setup Except in the area of home field advantage.

[Ud1Hens]

In my opinion, ALL games should be on a neutral field. Matchups could certainly be arranged so that more fans(in most cases) could get to the games, no further than any other AWAY game. Some teams really have an unfair home field advantage. This would eliminate it. The FCS playoff arrangement is far better than the FBS Bowl setup Except in the area of home field advantage.

NCAA is all about the $. No way they increase their travel expenses (two teams traveling/hotels/food) decrease guaranteed attendance #'s, and with the landscape of the FCS having spread out it would be nearly impossible to predict travel. With upsets and all you'd have to have hotels, game sites booked in very short notice for two teams rather than one.

Arranging matchups by distance would just make a whole bunch of conference games early on. There's no school closer to UD than Villanova. Montana St would play E. Washington, Wofford would play Ga. Southern, ND State and UNI....it wouldn't be good for the sport.

[GannonFan]

In my opinion, ALL games should be on a neutral field. Matchups could certainly be arranged so that more fans(in most cases) could get to the games, no further than any other AWAY game. Some teams really have an unfair home field advantage. This would eliminate it. The FCS playoff arrangement is far better than the FBS Bowl setup Except in the area of home field advantage.

Nothing unfair about it - it's earned through the regular season. If you go anything less than 9-2, you'll likely be on the road for much of the playoffs. Solution, don't lose as many games. The regular season does mean something.

[The Moody1]

In my opinion, ALL games should be on a neutral field. Matchups could certainly be arranged so that more fans(in most cases) could get to the games, no further than any other AWAY game. Some teams really have an unfair home field advantage. This would eliminate it. The FCS playoff arrangement is far better than the FBS Bowl setup Except in the area of home field advantage.

This is a great idea. To make sure it is completely fair each school should only be able to have an equal amount of fans at the game. If both schools can't bring their band then neither school can. Also, I think there should be weight limits so that some poor kid doesn't get crunched by some 300lb+ giant. xoopsx

[cowboy91]

In my opinion, ALL games should be on a neutral field. Matchups could certainly be arranged so that more fans(in most cases) could get to the games, no further than any other AWAY game. Some teams really have an unfair home field advantage. This would eliminate it. The FCS playoff arrangement is far better than the FBS Bowl setup Except in the area of home field advantage.

Why play the regular season and bother to have seeds?

Let me know a playoff system that plays all of their games on a neutral site. Track and Field? Swimming? Bocce?

[Mr. C]

No, in 2004 James Madison was the Atlantic 10 co-champion with Delaware.

For the record, JMU, Delaware and William & Mary all tied for first in the Atlantic 10 in 2004.