I-AA Games = Watered Down Schedules?

[TexasTerror]

Not a thrilled fan of this remark, especially since he states that the I-AA games are the reason that the Pac-10 boosted their conference schedule from eight games to nine games. Pac-10 may be worried of more UC-Davis wins over Stanford! ;)

You can e-mail the writer of this story at [email protected] and give'em hell if you want!

------------
"I can understand we need to raise more money. We are all for that," Tuberville said. "It will add some pretty good nonconference games."

That last statement is up for debate. Concern has grown that schedules will become watered down with I-AA opponents. In the Pac-10, that concern led to boosting the conference schedule from eight to nine games. The Big 12 also has debated such a move.

In the SEC, seven programs have a I-AA opponent next season. That's a presumptive win and a financial windfall courtesy ticket sales, potential television money and concession revenue.

"The challenges are finding an attractive opponent that will meet the need of your coaches, your fans and your schedule," said Arthur Johnson, Georgia's associate athletic director for internal operations.

http://www.oxfordpress.com/sports/content/shared/sports/stories/FBC_FRESHMAN_0508_COX.html

[dbackjon]

Mississippi State learned that it is not a presumed win......

[blur2005]

I have a little trouble thinking the Pac-10 added a conference game because the teams were scared of watered down scheduling. It added the ninth conference game because the new 12-game schedule allowed teams to play every team year in, year out instead of missing out on one team every year, which makes for a more deserving champ and no chance of having two 8-0 or 7-1, or whatever, champions tying for first.

[TexasTerror]

I have a little trouble thinking the Pac-10 added a conference game because the teams were scared of watered down scheduling. It added the ninth conference game because the new 12-game schedule allowed teams to play every team year in, year out instead of missing out on one team every year, which makes for a more deserving champ and no chance of having two 8-0 or 7-1, or whatever, champions tying for first.

Agreed...

But, the columnist wanted to blame I-AA games. Playing everyone in the Pac-10 allows for the tiebreakers to be broken and for some more compelling Pac-10 football. I won't lie, the Pac-10 places a great product out there and there's always a fair share of upsets. No game is a 'sure bet' during Pac-10 season!

[Lehigh Football Nation]

The audacity to say this after Cal-Davis beat Stanford this past year is incredible.

[catamount man]

Agreed...

But, the columnist wanted to blame I-AA games. Playing everyone in the Pac-10 allows for the tiebreakers to be broken and for some more compelling Pac-10 football. I won't lie, the Pac-10 places a great product out there and there's always a fair share of upsets. No game is a 'sure bet' during Pac-10 season!

I think the Pac-10 going the round robin route is awesome and I agree with your assessment of that conference. Some good football, especially the Oregon Ducks.

GO CATAMOUNTS!!!

[*****]

I think the Pac-10 going the round robin route is awesome and I agree with your assessment of that conference. Some good football, especially the Oregon Ducks.What about the topic, I-AA watering down their schedules? Quack quack...

[DUPFLFan]

Looks like 1-a looks at 1-aa like 1-aa looks at 1-aa non scholarship...

[paytonlives]

The audacity to say this after Cal-Davis beat Stanford this past year is incredible.

They said the same thing when Montana beat Stanford by 20 in BBall.

[Pard4Life]

Well if the Pac10 is going ape about UC Davis beating Stanford, none of the Pac10 teams, including USC, should ever schedule ASU.

[henfan]

Looks like 1-a looks at 1-aa like 1-aa looks at 1-aa non scholarship...

:confused:

Really? Has any I-AA fan complained here that 'low equivalancy' (please, those schools are NOT non-scholarship) I-AA programs are watering down their schedules?

The situations in I-A and I-AA are completely different. In I-A schools compete for bowl games based almost entirely on SOS. Very little credit is awarded for defeating I-AA teams. In I-AA, wins against 'low equivalancy' I-AA programs count in the same manner as those against higher equivalancy programs. In our league, a D-I win is a D-I win is a D-I win. Yes, SOS plays a role in playoff selection but not the to same degree as it does with the I-A bowl system.

[jstate83]

Mississippi State learned that it is not a presumed win......

Jackie S downfall.

Losing to SEC teams was one thing............. players out of control another thing....................Losing to D1-AA Maine was the last straw.
They were ready to hang Jackie after that............the man that could do no wrong at MS. State according to them.xlolx

Man they still trying to live that down.xlolx

[catdaddy2402]

The PAC10 added the additional conference game because of simple economics. Unlike the rest of the country the available regional teams out west are limited, and it was hard enough for them to find 3 OOC games. They figured (and correctly I might add) that by adding an additional conference game they stood a better shot at getting that 12th game televised.

The addition of the 9th conference game wasn't because they were scared of 1-AA...or the WAC or MWC for that matter. By adding the 9th conference game it should give them leverage in future TV contract negotiations, as the conference matchups are more compelling than games vs any OOC team out west, be it 1-A or 1-AA.

[ucdtim17]

and it only makes sense to play every other pac-10 member as opposed to playing all but one

[Lehigh Football Nation]

OK, it's pretty clear that the writer is a moron then when he says this:


Concern has grown that schedules will become watered down with I-AA opponents. In the Pac-10, that concern led to boosting the conference schedule from eight to nine games. The Big 12 also has debated such a move.

The Big 12 also has the same problem: they can't play all the teams in their conference since it's so bloated. I agree that playing another conference team makes sense to them for reasons other than the fact that the schedule will be "watered down".

The title of the piece is:


Extra game means teams must play more freshman [sic]

So, ostensibly his point is that playing I-AA's mean that they will be playing more freshmen, and they need to be "ready to play". It also goes into having 12 vs. 11 games, and athletic budgets, but it basically calls the I-AA games "automatic wins". It's a muddled mess of an article, and unjustifiably says I-AA games are automatic wins.

Gee, a writer who didn't do his homework on I-AA or the reasoning behind the Pac 10/Big 12 expanding their schedules... who'da thunk it? :rolleyes:

[Retro]

The Big Name I-A's and their conferences have only themselves to blame for their scheduling because most refuse to play home and home with out of conference teams on a regular basis.. Be it BCS or non-BCS schools..

They have basically gotten such a big head about it as to say they won't do a home and home unless it's something like Alabama vs. Oklahoma or Notre Dame vs. USC...

Since they refuse to do this, the lower tier I-A's especially have to find teams willing to come to their house and play and the bigger names won't step out on a limb more than 1 game a year.. The rest they use for what they fill or easy rent-a-wins instead of say LSU traveling to play at UL-L or USF.

[jmuroller]

There is no such thing as I-A to them. It's simply Division I and Division I-AA.

[Tealblood]

I agree to an extent------to them it is Div. I and all those little schools(I-AA, D2, & NAIA)

[Tealblood]

Most hardcore fans--I mean people who really follow Div. I schools(BCS conferences) do not know the difference between a Middle Tenn., Army, or UL-L and a Coastal, Furman, or JMU. We are all those little schools.
BCS rules the land in many many ways.

And yes I remember App. St. beat us 30-3