Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

With the growth of the division, this was inevitable - and something I support.

Big South getting an auto-bid is a good thing - I still would like to see the Big South add more members - the minimum should be seven, IMHO.

NEC will likely get the other new Auto-bid.

Seems logical personally. Perhaps YSU and others won't be get snubbed anymore with an 8-3 record.

guinzone wrote:Seems logical personally. Perhaps YSU and others won't be get snubbed anymore with an 8-3 record.

It opens two more at-large spots, which will help the borderline cases. 8 D-I wins should be a lock now for the playoffs.


I would still like to see the "suggestion" on wins changed from 7 D-I wins to 7 wins over teams with at least 20 schollies.

dbackjon wrote:

guinzone wrote:Seems logical personally. Perhaps YSU and others won't be get snubbed anymore with an 8-3 record.

It opens two more at-large spots, which will help the borderline cases. 8 D-I wins should be a lock now for the playoffs.


I would still like to see the "suggestion" on wins changed from 7 D-I wins to 7 wins over teams with at least 20 schollies.

Because then you get into that whole mess of whether we count just scholarships, or equivalencies, or whatever. Not to mention that there are only about 12 truly non-scholarship programs left (the Pioneer League and the former MAAC'ers; there may be more that I'm unaware of in scholarship conferences).

The committee looks at specific strength-of-schedule in addition to having 7 DI wins anyway, so I'm not sure why that change would be necessary. The 7 DI win rule is just designed to thin the field & eliminate some teams from even being discussed so the process doesn't take forever.

Other than Youngstown and Liberty, what schools snubbed last year would likely have made it with the 20-team proposal?

BTW, I would have preferred 24 or 32. IMO, play-in games are cr@p.

Mvemjsunpx wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
It opens two more at-large spots, which will help the borderline cases. 8 D-I wins should be a lock now for the playoffs.


I would still like to see the "suggestion" on wins changed from 7 D-I wins to 7 wins over teams with at least 20 schollies.

Because then you get into that whole mess of whether we count just scholarships, or equivalencies, or whatever. Not to mention that there are only about 12 truly non-scholarship programs left (the Pioneer League and the former MAAC'ers; there may be more that I'm unaware of in scholarship conferences).

The committee looks at specific strength-of-schedule in addition to having 7 DI wins anyway, so I'm not sure why that change would be necessary. The 7 DI win rule is just designed to thin the field & eliminate some teams from even being discussed so the process doesn't take forever.

The thing is, since we don't have the non-schollie patsies out here to schedule like they do out east, we schedule 24-36 schollie D-II teams to play. And I can guarantee that most all of the RMAC and GNAC teams would easily beat any Pioneer or MAAC team. So getting penalized for playing tougher competition sucks, and defies logic.

dbackjon wrote:

Mvemjsunpx wrote:
Because then you get into that whole mess of whether we count just scholarships, or equivalencies, or whatever. Not to mention that there are only about 12 truly non-scholarship programs left (the Pioneer League and the former MAAC'ers; there may be more that I'm unaware of in scholarship conferences).

The committee looks at specific strength-of-schedule in addition to having 7 DI wins anyway, so I'm not sure why that change would be necessary. The 7 DI win rule is just designed to thin the field & eliminate some teams from even being discussed so the process doesn't take forever.

The thing is, since we don't have the non-schollie patsies out here to schedule like they do out east, we schedule 24-36 schollie D-II teams to play. And I can guarantee that most all of the RMAC and GNAC teams would easily beat any Pioneer or MAAC team. So getting penalized for playing tougher competition sucks, and defies logic.

Yes, but my point was that the amount of true non-scholarship teams left is so small that it's not worth designating anymore. And the Big Sky can try to schedule them: Montana played Albany in '02 & '07. I'm sure NAU could get a relatively close patsy like Butler or Valpo to come to Flagstaff if they really wanted (or a closer & better mid-major like Drake or even San Diego).

A decent RMAC team would easily beat a team like Butler or Marist, but if you think Ft. Lewis or even Chadron State would have a chance against San Diego or Dayton, you're dreaming. Also, the GNAC hasn't sponsored football since '05.

SuperHornet wrote:Other than Youngstown and Liberty, what schools snubbed last year would likely have made it with the 20-team proposal?

BTW, I would have preferred 24 or 32. IMO, play-in games are cr@p.

With the 2010 format, Liberty & Albany would have got the extra 2 auto-bids. One of the extra at-large spots would have almost certainly gone to Villanova. The other should have probably gone to Norfolk.

Youngstown didn't have 7 DI wins, so they wouldn't have been in the discussion.

Mvemjsunpx wrote:

dbackjon wrote: The thing is, since we don't have the non-schollie patsies out here to schedule like they do out east, we schedule 24-36 schollie D-II teams to play. And I can guarantee that most all of the RMAC and GNAC teams would easily beat any Pioneer or MAAC team. So getting penalized for playing tougher competition sucks, and defies logic.

Yes, but my point was that the amount of true non-scholarship teams left is so small that it's not worth designating anymore. And the Big Sky can try to schedule them: Montana played Albany in '02 & '07. I'm sure NAU could get a relatively close patsy like Butler or Valpo to come to Flagstaff if they really wanted (or a closer & better mid-major like Drake or even San Diego).

A decent RMAC team would easily beat a team like Butler or Marist, but if you think Ft. Lewis or even Chadron State would have a chance against San Diego or Dayton, you're dreaming. Also, the GNAC hasn't sponsored football since '05.

we don't have the luxury of paying for a team to come over 1500 miles (like Butler or Valpo). I would have liked to see San Diego, but they wouldn't play us.

Chadron State would definately have had a chance the past few years - very, very good team.

There may not be many non-schollies left, but teams like UNH play one every year.

GNAC is sponsoring football again, with the demise of the NCC. 5 teams - CWU, EWU, wOU, Humboldt State and Dixie State

dbackjon wrote: we don't have the luxury of paying for a team to come over 1500 miles (like Butler or Valpo). I would have liked to see San Diego, but they wouldn't play us.

There may not be many non-schollies left, but teams like UNH play one every year.

Oh yes, as a Montana fan, I understand the difficulties of scheduling in the west. However, I still don't see why that rule would be necessary given that there are so few truly non-scholarship teams left. The committee will know whether UNH or whoever played a patsy or not even if it wasn't a DII. UNH is not playing a non-scholarship school this year (since Albany doesn't really count as one anymore).

Chadron State would definately have had a chance the past few years - very, very good team.

Yes, they would have had a chance, but Chadron would have most likely lost. You said that any RMAC team would easily beat any Pioneer team.

GNAC is sponsoring football again, with the demise of the NCC. 5 teams - CWU, EWU, wOU, Humboldt State and Dixie State

OK, I wasn't aware of that (& I assume you meant WWU, not EWU). For some reason, I never knew that the North Central was dissolving.

Mvemjsunpx wrote:
OK, I wasn't aware of that (& I assume you meant WWU, not EWU). For some reason, I never knew that the North Central was dissolving.

We will have to agree to disagree on the non-schollie/D-II issue.

Yes, I meant WWU. With UND and USD going Division I, the NorthCentral is in it's last year. UNO is going to the MIAA, the remaining schools to the DAC.

The more the merrier.

Well, Hopefully CCU continues to improve and is a better team in 2010. It'd be exciting to see them get into the playoffs regularly.

this will be great! more wonderful first round games like Del. Del State to look froward to!

Mvemjsunpx wrote:A decent RMAC team would easily beat a team like Butler or Marist, but if you think Ft. Lewis or even Chadron State would have a chance against San Diego or Dayton, you're dreaming. Also, the GNAC hasn't sponsored football since '05.

I suppose that NMHU doesn't qualify as "decent" in your book, Mr. Griz?

I'll bet that the Cowboys are wishing to heck that they hadn't let the immortal John Fassel get away to Baltimore.

LOL.

(I'm STILL pi$$ed that he was canned with the rest of the Billick staff....)

SuperHornet wrote:

Mvemjsunpx wrote:A decent RMAC team would easily beat a team like Butler or Marist, but if you think Ft. Lewis or even Chadron State would have a chance against San Diego or Dayton, you're dreaming. Also, the GNAC hasn't sponsored football since '05.

I suppose that NMHU doesn't qualify as "decent" in your book, Mr. Griz?

I'll bet that the Cowboys are wishing to heck that they hadn't let the immortal John Fassel get away to Baltimore.

LOL.

(I'm STILL pi$$ed that he was canned with the rest of the Billick staff....)

No, why would they? NMHU was 4-6 last year. I don't know if I would count on Jim Fassel saving the program (though I don't really know whether they actually need saving or not), since his only college head coaching experience was a losing stint with Utah in the '80s.

I was just throwing out some RMAC teams as examples, not naming every one.

His name is JOHN. Jim is his dad.

John was the NMHU head coach for two years after playing at UOP and Weber in the '90s. John stopped NMHU's record losing streak before Billick snatched him up over Dad's objections. John was an offensive and special teams assistant with the Ravens while Dad was OC.

It'll be 24 teams by 2015.

bluehenbillk wrote:It'll be 24 teams by 2015.

good to see you bill, need you over here full-time!!