FCS Level Expanding Playoffs to 24 teams. Scoffs at BCS 4 team idea

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • FirstTimer
    Freeman Error

    • Feb 2009
    • 18720

    FCS Level Expanding Playoffs to 24 teams. Scoffs at BCS 4 team idea

    It has taken college football's elite more than 100 years to be dragged toward a playoff system that likely will still only have a handful of teams.

    Smaller schools have been doing the playoffs for a long time -- and they're about to make them bigger.

    The Football Championship Subdivision is on the verge of expanding its playoff system from 20 to 24 teams by 2013. The proposal would give an automatic bid to all FCS leagues that want one, seeds the top eight teams and gives them first-round byes and home games in the following round.

    "The concern has been we haven't had a full tournament with automatic qualifiers for all the existing conferences. That's a big part of making sure everybody has an opportunity for their champion to participate," said Appalachian State athletic director Charlie Cobb, the new chairman of the Division I Football Championship Committee. "The sentiment is that by seeding the top eight, it keeps more to a truer sense of what a national tournament is about, and I think that's the beauty of what we have."



    The concern has been we haven't had a full tournament with automatic qualifiers for all the existing conferences. That's a big part of making sure everybody has an opportunity for their champion to participate.
    ” -- Appalachian State athletic director
    Charlie Cobb


    The proposal goes before an NCAA championships cabinet next month and will be subject to final approval by an executive committee on Aug. 2. It is expected to pass and be in place for the 2013 playoffs, which will include three more at-large bids and one more automatic qualifier in the Pioneer League.

    "It's the next logical step in our development of the FCS championship," said Kyle Kallender, the Big South commissioner and chairman of the FCS commissioner's committee.

    For Football Bowl Subdivision fans who've long thought the BCS was unfair, seeing the words logic and champion in the same sentence might be strange.

    But the FCS has been holding a playoff since 1978. It expanded to 20 teams with five seeds in 2010 and, according to Kallander, started considering further expansion even then as a way to more fairly accommodate a growing membership that will include 124 teams in 2012.

    There was also a desire to provide an automatic bid to the Pioneer League. The Ivy League and the Southwestern Athletic Conference don't send their champions to the FCS playoffs.

    With those tenets as a starting point, FCS officials brainstormed a number of possibilities that included:

    • A bracket model that seeded all 24 teams.

    • A regionalization model with six teams seeded in four regions based on geography.

    • A Final Four model where national semifinals and the title game would be played on sequential weekends on one site.

    For reasons ranging from attendance to money to competitive fairness, none of those ideas made the final cut.

    Cobb said the main problem with the bracket model was a lack of reliable data to seed more than eight teams fairly. FCS schools rarely play outside their region, making it difficult to accurately gauge strength of schedule.

    The regional model, based on Division II's playoffs, was scrapped because the FCS didn't want teams from the same league to meet in the first round of the playoffs. Some regions would also inevitably be stronger, too, and the Final Four idea was rejected because semifinal games on a neutral site wouldn't draw nearly as many fans as a campus game.

    The FCS instead decided on a system that may spur more juicy non-conference matchups in the regular season because there would be more at-large bids and an incentive to boost strength of schedule.

    Some coaches think the methodology needs to also change if the FCS selection committee is going to seed eight teams instead of just five. The committee weighs factors that include the Gridiron Power Index, or GPI, a compilation of computer and human polls similar to the BCS model.

    The GPI is a sore spot for Northern Iowa coach Mark Farley. The Panthers had to play at Montana in last year's playoffs even though they were ranked higher in The Sports Network Top 25. They lost 48-10.

    Farley also would like to see a win over an FBS school count more than a win over an FCS one. The Panthers will play at both Wisconsin and Iowa this season to help ease the blow of state budget cuts.

    "The weight of your schedule should play a lot more into it," Farley said. "We need to weigh the difference between playing a Wisconsin and playing an (FCS) team."

    There are concerns about schedules that could include up to 16 games. But any team playing a 16-game season would be finishing it in a national title game and it is unlikely anyone would complain about that.

    "It's tough," Cobb said. "But the playoffs are called the second season for a reason. Once you get to it, everybody's got a chance. And I think if you ask any coach or any player, they'd rather be in the playoffs than not in the playoffs."
    To the quote..

    What a novel idea...every team walks into the start of the season with a shot at the championship.
  • Hasselbeck
    Jus' bout dat action boss
    • Feb 2009
    • 6175

    #2
    BUT THE REGULAR SEASON WOULD BE MEANINGLESS!

    RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
    Originally posted by ram29jackson
    I already said months ago that Seattle wasn't winning any SB

    Comment

    • NAHSTE
      Probably owns the site
      • Feb 2009
      • 22233

      #3
      Originally posted by Hasselbeck
      BUT THE REGULAR SEASON WOULD BE MEANINGLESS!

      RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
      Well, the regular season is meaningless in FCS.

      Comment

      • JeremyHight
        I wish I was Scrubs
        • Feb 2009
        • 4063

        #4
        Originally posted by NAHSTE
        Well, the regular season is meaningless in FCS.
        Like any of us are going to forget the Mount Union/Grand Valley State game any time soon.

        Comment

        • NAHSTE
          Probably owns the site
          • Feb 2009
          • 22233

          #5
          Originally posted by JeremyHight
          Like any of us are going to forget the Mount Union/Grand Valley State game any time soon.
          Neither of those teams is in FCS, nor could they play each other.

          Comment

          • Warner2BruceTD
            2011 Poster Of The Year
            • Mar 2009
            • 26141

            #6
            Originally posted by FirstTimer
            To the quote..

            What a novel idea...every team walks into the start of the season with a shot at the championship.
            Fuck that noise. Some teams don't deserve a shot at the championship because...well...they just don't!

            Comment

            • JeremyHight
              I wish I was Scrubs
              • Feb 2009
              • 4063

              #7
              Originally posted by NAHSTE
              Neither of those teams is in FCS, nor could they play each other.
              I think you missed my intention. I was making a joke about the importance of any division of football outside of FBS.

              Comment

              • Hasselbeck
                Jus' bout dat action boss
                • Feb 2009
                • 6175

                #8
                I will say 24 is over the top for D-1 football.. but 8 would be perfect.
                Originally posted by ram29jackson
                I already said months ago that Seattle wasn't winning any SB

                Comment

                • Hasselbeck
                  Jus' bout dat action boss
                  • Feb 2009
                  • 6175

                  #9
                  Originally posted by NAHSTE
                  Well, the regular season is meaningless in FCS.
                  So is 98% of the FBS/D-1/whatever the fuck you want to call it season.
                  Originally posted by ram29jackson
                  I already said months ago that Seattle wasn't winning any SB

                  Comment

                  • Warner2BruceTD
                    2011 Poster Of The Year
                    • Mar 2009
                    • 26141

                    #10
                    The more you expand the playoff fields, the more importance you place on the entire schedule, make more games have real meaning. On the flip side, some individual games take on a lesser meaning, reducing the meaning of your occasional "game of the century!". It's like a sliding scale. The more games that become meaningful, the less meaningful some individual games become. The key is finding a balance, and I believe 8 would provide a healthy balance. Four is not enough, it still renders most (if not all) of the season meaningless for a majority of the teams.

                    And if you want to argue in favor of keeping the sanctity of GIGANTIC MEANINGFUL GAMES that occur once or twice per season, allow me to point to the last "GAME OF THE CENTURY" last season, which ultimately ended up meaning absolutely nothing!

                    College football can't even get the big games to mean anything anymore, yet people still argue about devaluing the precious regular season that has no fucking meaning anyway. It's the biggest myth in sports. If you want the regular season to mean something, join us in the 21st century and give us a real, legit, playoff. Fuck this four team nonsense.

                    Comment

                    • G-men
                      Posts too much
                      • Nov 2011
                      • 7579

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Hasselbeck
                      I will say 24 is over the top for D-1 football.. but 8 would be perfect.
                      Agreed. 4 best conference winners and 4 at large bids is the best way to go IMO.

                      Comment

                      • NAHSTE
                        Probably owns the site
                        • Feb 2009
                        • 22233

                        #12
                        Originally posted by JeremyHight
                        I think you missed my intention. I was making a joke about the importance of any division of football outside of FBS.
                        Yeah I'm just a dork who follows the lower division so I'm a stickler.

                        Comment

                        Working...