HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
I am fine with the number of playoff teams. Even though the reality is only a handful have a chance to win the Championship, I don't have an issue with the others being rewarded.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Should a 7-5 team make the playoff field in 2025
- Thread starter Griz in Texas
- Start date
The original poster's point was that because of money we have received favorable treatment and gotten bids when we didn't deserve them and cited the post I quoted as proof. My point is addressing what he said and is very relevant to it.
HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
So a DEI approach?
HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
That is because he is a clueless moron and doesn't even realize that is not the method any longer.
You're not wrong there lol
5280Griz
Well-known member
This is absurd. The only Bob Stitt team to make the playoffs was 2015 which beat 4 time defending national champion NDSU and top 10 at the time Eastern Washington and then beat top 10 ranked SDSU in the playoffs. If anything the 2016 and 2017 should have made the playoffs but the bubs were so pathetic that losing to them sunk the Griz whole season.
Really should depend on how many of those 5 losses are FCS and whether a school chose to limit its chances to win enough FCS games to qualify for the playoffs. We've seen some decent to good EWU teams with 2 FBS losses that didn't have a strong number of FCS wins.
Teams should be prioritized for FCS wins. The committee doesn't count FBS losses specifically because it's assumed you're going to lose, same reason they discount D-II wins.
FBS games cut into the number of times a team has to prove it's worth against FCS teams that actually count. If you're short on FCS wins because you chose to fill your schedule with games that don't qualify, FBS or DII, that should be a negative. That's on you.
Did SDSU have a chance through scheduling to increase the likelihood of picking up 8 FCS wins? (it did).
Teams should be prioritized for FCS wins. The committee doesn't count FBS losses specifically because it's assumed you're going to lose, same reason they discount D-II wins.
FBS games cut into the number of times a team has to prove it's worth against FCS teams that actually count. If you're short on FCS wins because you chose to fill your schedule with games that don't qualify, FBS or DII, that should be a negative. That's on you.
Did SDSU have a chance through scheduling to increase the likelihood of picking up 8 FCS wins? (it did).
5280Griz
Well-known member
It should be the top 24 teams and not arbitrarily based on how many games are won because there are a lot of things that can go into that. Take UND for example, if Mason returns and beats UND they could have 5 losses. 1) 3 point loss to FBS Kansas State 2) 1 point loss on the road to #2 Montana 3) 5 point loss in a rivalry game last weekend to South Dakota 4 and 5) would be losses to top 10 ranked at the end of the season NDSU and SDSU. You really think this 7-5 UND team wouldn’t be one of the top 24 and deserving to make it because of 5 losses? They would boatrace a 9 win team from any other conference besides the Big Sky and would have a chance to actually go on a run.
Last edited:
It'll come down to the Q word - quality. A 7 win team for sure can get in but they'll need some quality wins.
Some examples:
North Dakota, currently 6-3, say they beat one of the xDSU's and lose to one, they'll finish 7-4 (they only had an 11 game season) and they're firmly in.
South Dakota, currently 6-4 and just have SDSU and SIU to play. Say they go 1-1 on that stretch they'll finish 7-5 and I'd think will be in being that both final games are ranked.
Idaho, currently 4-5, they play Davis, Sac, and ISU. Beating Davis would be a quality win and put Davis in big trouble, next week beating Sac would push Sac off the bubble. I think if they go 7-5 they get in as well - however if they stack up against UND and USD they're probably 3rd in line
Some examples:
North Dakota, currently 6-3, say they beat one of the xDSU's and lose to one, they'll finish 7-4 (they only had an 11 game season) and they're firmly in.
South Dakota, currently 6-4 and just have SDSU and SIU to play. Say they go 1-1 on that stretch they'll finish 7-5 and I'd think will be in being that both final games are ranked.
Idaho, currently 4-5, they play Davis, Sac, and ISU. Beating Davis would be a quality win and put Davis in big trouble, next week beating Sac would push Sac off the bubble. I think if they go 7-5 they get in as well - however if they stack up against UND and USD they're probably 3rd in line
I should add - a team that's maybe going to be pretty nervous is NAU now. Their best win is Incarnate Word who was ranked then but is 3-6 now. Only other ranked teams they lost to, badly, Cats and Davis. Their last 3 are UNC, Poly, Weber - so they should go 8-4 but have just nothing to show for it in terms of "good" wins. Best win is over 4-5 SUU
Thanks for admitting you can find no incidences in which the GRIZ received an undeserved playoff spot.I found an article about the FCS Playoffs and MVFC/Big Sky which I found interesting.
FCS playoffs are a financial drain for most of the 24 teams. Could private equity change that?
Commissioners of Football Championship Subdivision conferences are exploring the possibility of bringing private equity investment into the FCS playoffs.apnews.com
“I’m very open to the suggestion because it’s a new day and we have to figure out new ways to generate revenue,” Wistrcill told The Associated Press. “We’re sharing revenue with our student-athletes now, so that leads us to a place where we’ve got to find new revenue streams.
Money. It is all about money.
Glad we cleared that
5280Griz
Well-known member
UND has 3 games left for a 12 game season. They play Murray State in between NDSU and SDSU. I think UND should beat Murray easily but you never know what could happen I also thought they would easily beat South Dakota.
Agreed. And I think if Sac wins the Causeway, they're in with an 8-4 record including two (close) fbs losses.
Whoops - my error!
I think it's down to Idaho or Sac could/should get in if one of them wins out. NAU will get in they win out and Idaho or Sac lose 2 down the stretch.
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
OP's original point is not correct.
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
MSU didn't have a "loss" for the playoffs. They made money and then spent extra money to take many extra people to Frisco. UM does the same thing. They take more than the allowed amount, because they take the band, spouses, a goodly number of people in the department, every kid on the roster including redshirts. That's not a "loss". That's what a good program does to rewards all of its hard-working people.
"Montana State’s bottom line for the playoffs was a $40,000 loss.
The Bobcats hosted three playoff games and were required to guarantee the NCAA 85% of the revenue, according to figures provided by the school. MSU, which ranked second in FCS attendance last year, averaged just under 19,000 fans for the three games and was able to keep $190,000.
The NCAA paid MSU $130,700 to help cover costs for the trip to Frisco, Texas, for the championship game. MSU ended up spending $360,000." From the linked article.
"Montana State’s bottom line for the playoffs was a $40,000 loss.
The Bobcats hosted three playoff games and were required to guarantee the NCAA 85% of the revenue, according to figures provided by the school. MSU, which ranked second in FCS attendance last year, averaged just under 19,000 fans for the three games and was able to keep $190,000.
The NCAA paid MSU $130,700 to help cover costs for the trip to Frisco, Texas, for the championship game. MSU ended up spending $360,000." From the linked article.
mthoopsfan
Well-known member
If they are in the top 24, yes, of course. Why are you so hung up on records, as opposed to quality of the team and how they rank compared to other teams. Your "concern" seems silly to me.
