How Playoffs Influence Scheduling

[IdaGriz01]

STATS.com has interesting article how schedule strength impacts bids for the FCS playoffs. Here's just part of it:

... The NCAA committee delivered a message last November that it's willing to reward playoff-level teams that face playoff-worthy schedules. After facing what was deemed the toughest schedule in the FCS, Western Illinois became the first six-win team (at 6-5) to receive an at-large selection to the 24-team field.

Teams hiding behind soft schedules may want to think twice about what some of the Big Sky and Missouri Valley programs are doing this week. The two power conferences have three big matchups between nationally ranked teams - No. 8 Eastern Washington at No. 1 North Dakota State, No. 14 Montana at No. 3 Northern Iowa, and No. 19 Northern Arizona at No. 18 Western Illinois.

The Southern and Southland conferences also check in with a key intersectional game: Samford at Central Arkansas. The winner will get a long look from Top 25 voters.
...

The article is also a springboard to talk about a 12-game schedule in the regular season. I understand the rationale (more OOC opportunities), but do not like the idea. Sorry, but that's just too many for college students to play every year, IMO. And, of course, teams that then do have some success in the playoffs would end up playing 14-16 games.

Aside from that, I have also been amazed, and pleased, at how a puny 4-team playoff has improved scheduling for the big boys of FBS. Before that, you would have never seen powers like Alabama and USC, or Notre Dame and Texas, or [lot's more] play each other this early in the season. Of course, the winner gets a good boost in the polls, but -- with their little playoff setup -- the loser is at least not totally eliminated from a shot at the national championship ... which mostly used to be the case.

 

[poiuyter]

Idaho was 6-4 in 1995 and received an at-large bid.

 

[Diesel]

Good post. To add: NCAA with four team playoff and superconfrences at FBS level discourage FBS/FCS play. Also from FCS level no reward for playoff seeding for victories over FBS teams.This week prime example, NDSU and UM have FCS wins under their belts that will minimize a loss this week. Teams like EWU and UNI if they lose this week they are two games into season with no FCS wins. This also impacks FCS vs DivII match ups each powder puff game reduces length of season. I am thankfull for the UM staff that realize this and would like to see them continue to stick to FCS level matchups as long as NCAA is in this mode. The money grab for playing FBS reams is nice, but the physical punishment to the FCS players and the playoff seeding punishment to the teams can negatively impack a teams quest for post season play.

 

[kemajic]

I am thankfull for the UM staff that realize this and would like to see them continue to stick to FCS level matchups as long as NCAA is in this mode. The money grab for playing FBS reams is nice, but the physical punishment to the FCS players and the playoff seeding punishment to the teams can negatively impack a teams quest for post season play.

Actually UM has two Udub and one Oregon games coming up so they must not realize that side of your theory. Regarding your statement regarding "physical punishment to the FCS players" in FBS games, where is the non-anecdotal evidence that supports that theory?

 

[Diesel]

UW and Oregon will be good money games, scheduling one non FCS game is worth the money, unlike Bozo's schedule with Idaho this year puts more pressure on reduced FCS schedule (If you had playoff hopes, which Is more like a wish for Bozo this year). Even though UM football program has a great revenue producing program, they aren't going leave money on the table and pass up opportunities for greater exposure to national coverage and greater exposue for recruiting playing pack 12 programs. However it does carry greater risk to player injuries, bigger and stronger competition against UM traveling team with short bench requiring more minutes of play for visiting team adding additional risk of injury(not my theory just the facts). UM does on purpose schedules FCS non-conference games with with realistic playoff expectation every year. FCS wins are the ones that count for playoffs. Problem with most FCS programs out west is distance between FCS schools and the cost of travel for teams with not enough payoff with ticket sales. Washington Griz crowd and stadium are UM's blue chip to make us desirable for other FCS programs who want to schedule us, home and home gives them a good payday in Missoula. Small crowds=budget deficits. UM gains greater chance of home playoff games that = more money for entire university. Weak programs like Bozo want what we got in our football program. They keep playing second fiddle they have to play turds like Idaho who can't sellout their potato silo/barn.

 

[kemajic]

However it does carry greater risk to player injuries, bigger and stronger competition against UM traveling team with short bench requiring more minutes of play for visiting team adding additional risk of injury(not my theory just the facts).

If these are facts as you claim, rather than just your theory, it should not be difficult to substantiate with evidence. I have never seen any data to support your claims; if you have, please share. They aren't facts just because you say they are.

 

[grizpsych]

However it does carry greater risk to player injuries, bigger and stronger competition against UM traveling team with short bench requiring more minutes of play for visiting team adding additional risk of injury(not my theory just the facts).

If these are facts as you claim, rather than just your theory, it should not be difficult to substantiate with evidence. I have never seen any data to support your claims; if you have, please share. They aren't facts just because you say they are.

Diesel should run for political office.