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

http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/governa ... 25_FCS.htm

This is getting serious. It looks like two proposals. Each would expand the bracket to 24 teams. The second proposal uses two "play in" games. The key to both is that the PFL and NEC are both included!!!!! Wow!!!!

I sure hope that one of these comes to pass!!!!!

Can you say "watered down"

good grief. why stop at 24? why not 48? Or how about include everyone who gets a vote for the Top 25 throughout the season?

I would have liked to see San Diego in the playoffs last year.. mostly out of amusement.

As more leagues become eligible for autobids, our choices become:
1. Expand the playoff field
2. Reduce the number of at-large bids.
3. Deny autobids to leagues who meet all the requirements.

#1 looks like the only reasonable option to me.

24 Team Field Ehhh???
Great that means we could possibly see 5 Gateway Teams in the Playoffs next year, esp. with the addition of SDSU and NDSU!

Go Gateway!

MrTitleist wrote:I would have liked to see San Diego in the playoffs last year.. mostly out of amusement.

I can agree with that!

I'd rather see 32. I don't like play-in games. Make the #1s take that chance on getting embarrassed by a #8. The flip-side works, too: there's no chance of the #1s getting rusty and losing the next week for that reason.

All this does is make the first round or 2 of the playoffs less competitive, not something I'm positive about seeing

It'll turn into an argument for never ending the BCS, look at the mess that 1-AA created for themselves....

bluehenbillk wrote:It'll turn into an argument for never ending the BCS, look at the mess that 1-AA created for themselves....

I doubt that.

Division II already has a 24 team playoff & it seems to work fine.
Division III also doesn't seem to have any problems with a 32 team bracket.

I'm not speaking in favor of an expanded field (I'm more neutral on the matter), but I don't think it would cause any real problems.

D2 & D3 also limit their regular seasons to 10 games, start their seasons a week before the rest of us and have 200+ schools each...that's why theres no problems.

There are only 150 teams in Division II (compared to 121 in FCS) and many of them play eleven game seasons not including the playoffs.

32/150= best 21.3% make playoffs

16/121= best 13.2% make playoffs

using the same percentage as DII, you would have approximately 26 teams in the playoffs. I can't think of 26 worthy teams for the playoffs. You will have teams that are .500 making the playoff field. Is this not what we all hate about FBS football, that if you finish .500 you get rewarded with a bowl game

AppGuy04 wrote:Is this not what we all hate about FBS football, that if you finish .500 you get rewarded with a bowl game

No, what we hate about FBS is 1) they don't have a champion decided on the field; and 2) not every conference has an equal shot at the BIG prize - or is that FCS?

UAalum72 wrote:

AppGuy04 wrote:Is this not what we all hate about FBS football, that if you finish .500 you get rewarded with a bowl game

No, what we hate about FBS is 1) they don't have a champion decided on the field; and 2) not every conference has an equal shot at the BIG prize - or is that FCS?

and you want the playoffs to be expanded so you can get your whoopin and them come back and tell us you don't belong? no thanks

its fine the way it is and no cry baby conferences should be able to change it

UAalum72 wrote:There are only 150 teams in Division II (compared to 121 in FCS) and many of them play eleven game seasons not including the playoffs.

that really doesn't help your argument...

BigApp wrote:

UAalum72 wrote:There are only 150 teams in Division II (compared to 121 in FCS) and many of them play eleven game seasons not including the playoffs.

that really doesn't help your argument...

i laughed at that too, thats an argument for keeping it the same

less teams = less playoff participants

less games = accounts for that extra round of playoff games

AppGuy04 wrote:

BigApp wrote: that really doesn't help your argument...

i laughed at that too, thats an argument for keeping it the same

less teams = less playoff participants

less games = accounts for that extra round of playoff games

I think UAalum72's point was that Division II has only sightly more teams than FCS, compared to Big App's earlier claim that DII has 200+ teams.

Also, what do you mean "less games"? Most DII teams play 11 regular season games, the same as FCS.

Mvemjsunpx wrote:

AppGuy04 wrote: i laughed at that too, thats an argument for keeping it the same

less teams = less playoff participants

less games = accounts for that extra round of playoff games

I think UAalum72's point was that Division II has only sightly more teams than FCS, compared to Big App's earlier claim that DII has 200+ teams.
Also, what do you mean "less games"? Most DII teams play 11 regular season games, the same as FCS.

Thank you, that's what I meant.

"using the same percentage as DII, you would have approximately 26 teams in the playoffs" - and we're only talking about possibly 20 or 24.

I know Big App's argument : "Screw you, I got mine, Jack"

no, my argument is:

Beat Montana, then we'll talk.

If you'd have won 2 outta 3 from Colgate, Hofstra and Montana then we could have a rational discussion.

Want to be in the playoffs? Then schedule and beat playoff teams when you get the opportunity.

That goes for all PFL and NEC teams.