Parity in the Big Sky and playoffs

[WILDCATFAN]

The P12 bills itself as "The Conference of Champions".

Perhaps the bsc should use the slogan, "The Conference Where We Don't Determine A Champion".



#bsc.

So neither Weber nor Southern Utah hoisted trophies last year with the words CHAMPIONS on them?


:roll:


#BAW

I haven't the foggiest idea. With 312 conference members, it's difficult to keep track of what all of them are doing at any given time.

#bsc.


Most judicious solution to the problem: Montana moves to a real conference. :lol:

Viable but obviously far less palatable solution: the bsc jettisons a whole shit ton of dead weight. :roll:


And since each of those solutions make perfect sense, your likely to see the bsc do the exact opposite. Prepare to welcome the University of Alaska Fairbanks (go Nanooks!!) to the bsc!!

You're right, neither of those things are going to happen any time soon, so maybe it's time to get over it and move on with your life.

 

[BozAngelesGriz]

My thoughts are that we will continue to see four or five teams finish 8-3 or 7-4 every season because of the unbalanced scheduling in this conference. The Big Sky is too big.

Agreed. If we have 4-5 8-3 and 7-4 teams but only get 2 or three in playoffs it is unfair to the other teams. Something needs to change. It is simply bad for competition to have crappy 9-2 teams that played fluff get in over teams that went 8-3 in tough conference. then the conference schedule needs to be balanced as well. The Big Sky needs to shed some of the fat or split into multiple divisions.

I agree with you. Conference strength of schedule shouldn't impact the postseason as much as it currently does. Ideally, IMO, we'd show UC-Davis and Cal Poly the door, but if that's not feasible I like the multiple divisions idea, like the SEC's or Big 10's East and West divisions. Each of those conferences has 14 teams, so the 13-team Big Sky should be able to make it work even if another team came knocking and wanted to join.

Two divisions do nothing for you without a conf. championship game, which collides with FCS playoffs. So what is your idea to make it work?

I think the Colonial has a North/South divisional championship game the same weekend as cat/griz

 

[kemajic]

Agreed. If we have 4-5 8-3 and 7-4 teams but only get 2 or three in playoffs it is unfair to the other teams. Something needs to change. It is simply bad for competition to have crappy 9-2 teams that played fluff get in over teams that went 8-3 in tough conference. then the conference schedule needs to be balanced as well. The Big Sky needs to shed some of the fat or split into multiple divisions.

I agree with you. Conference strength of schedule shouldn't impact the postseason as much as it currently does. Ideally, IMO, we'd show UC-Davis and Cal Poly the door, but if that's not feasible I like the multiple divisions idea, like the SEC's or Big 10's East and West divisions. Each of those conferences has 14 teams, so the 13-team Big Sky should be able to make it work even if another team came knocking and wanted to join.

Two divisions do nothing for you without a conf. championship game, which collides with FCS playoffs. So what is your idea to make it work?

I think the Colonial has a North/South divisional championship game the same weekend as cat/griz

You must have posted what you think without checking the facts. There is no CAA conf. championship game. Last year as the Griz and Cats concluded their regular season on 11/18, so did JMU, beating Elon to go 11-0. Seeded JMU did play CAA runner-up Stony Brook in the 2nd round playoff game 12/2. Undefeated JMU was the CAA champ without any championship game. 12 teams vs. 13 in the BSC, not much difference.