Conference Champs: Remaining Games

[ordigger]

I wish someone, preferably with a Psychology PhD, would explain to me why every f***[*] FCS fanbase comes here looking for validation? They can't all have small dick syndrome can they?

Probably for the same reason that Griz fans start numerous NDSU, MSU and EWU threads on eGriz. Lets face it, the majority of those threads are started by us, not them.

 

[ordigger]

... I am not saying whether a team is worthy or not. What I am saying is the BSC if flawed because a team does not play everyone, so there is inherent imbalance in the method of deciding the champion. Not only from the perspective of UM but from everyone.

As the saying goes ... "It is what it is" (referring to the BSC scheduling situation). We (most of us anyway) are not dumping on North Dakota. If they win the conference on their record ... then they win the conference and (by the rules) they absolutely deserve it. They can't play a schedule they're not given.

I got to wondering just how the problem looked ... in hindsight. Here's how, with some explanation. I added up the final conference records of the opponents of the top teams at the end of the year-- the teams each actually played. Then, for comparison, I compiled the records of the teams they did not play.



For Southern Utah in 2015, the eight teams they played had a combined conference record of 28-36. The teams they did not play went 21-11 for that season. By comparison, Portland State and the Griz faced -- on average -- opponents that were 4-5 games stronger than SUU. But the "Did Not Play" (DNP) category is the real imbalance. The schedule allowed SUU to avoid teams that were 7-8 games stronger than what PSU and UM played.

2015
SUU 7-1 Opponents combined records: 28-36 … DNP: 21-11
PSU 6-2 Opponents: 33-31 … DNP: 13-19
UM 6-2 Opponents: 32-32 … DNP: 14-18

The previous year was much more balanced in terms of these numbers. EWU's opponents were only 1-2 games weaker than those for the second-place teams. And the DNP category was a wash.
2014
EWU 7-1 Opponents: 28-36 … DNP: 17-15
UM 6-2 Opponents: 31-33 … DNP: 15-17
MSU 6-2 Opponents: 29-35 … DNP: 17-15
ISU 6-2 Opponents: 31-33 … DNP: 15-17

I was shocked, truly, by the numbers for 2013. The opponent-strength margin between EWU and NAU was razor thin. But you have to ask: How the Hell did the Griz finish as high as third? Their opponent strength was 10 games higher than the two top teams, and the teams they did not get to play were the real wimps that year. Based on these numbers, that 2013 teams was way better than we perhaps gave it credit for.
2013
EWU 8-0 Opponents: 28-36 … DNP: 16-16
NAU 7-1 Opponents: 28-36 … DNP: 17-15
UM 6-2 Opponents: 38-26 … DNP: 8-24

This is hindsight, of course. There's no way the scheduling committee could reliably project (based on the records for the previous year, or maybe 2 or 3 years) what would be a "balanced" schedule for every single team.

But the numbers confirm that the system is fundamentally flawed. Given the current size of the conference, and the prohibition on a divisional setup with a final championship game ... I see no reasonable solution. Other than the obvious fact that playoff seeds and at-large bids depend upon other factors than a (now) somewhat-artificial conference championship.

Good stuff....thanks for posting.

 

[AZDoc]

Oh, and there's a very good chance Weber only wins one more game this year. So it'll be a moot point.

Thank you...thank you for using correct English and not saying mute...
also, look back at the preseason predications on here...there were many that said UND would win the conference because of their schedule. Seems like we are arguing for argument's sake. What many said would happen, is looking good at this point. Many also said Weber would be better than what preseason ranking held.
Yes scheduling is a joke, but UND is playing their schedule as it reads. I watched the Bowling Green game on TV and they should've won that game. I loved the go for 2 at the end to win, but felt that they should've won before that was needed. They're solid club. Not flashy, and dare I say, trying to be workmanlike like the Bi-zun.
The frustration is SUU, UND, then who's next years schedule beaters? I like the rivalry idea...but have 1 set (MSU for the Griz). Then, have a second that rotates every other year. So EWU and Idaho for the Griz every other year. This allows for more possible schedule variety. I'm a nobody, just simple idea.
Excited how the Griz are playing recently. Hope they continue the roll until January!

 

[oGriz]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

 

[get'em_griz]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

This. This right here makes the most sense. I really hope this is what is in the works!

 

[Bscwatcher]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

Who gets the autobid?

More complaining on not earning it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

IMO a 9 game schedule is no better than an 8 game schedule when the league has 14 teams. It still does not crown a true Conference champion. And BSClurker is correct, what would be your process to determine the Auto Qualifier for the conference.

 

[get'em_griz]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

IMO a 9 game schedule is no better than an 8 game schedule when the league has 14 teams. It still does not crown a true Conference champion. And BSClurker is correct, what would be your process to determine the Auto Qualifier for the conference.

Isn't there an extra autobid lying around after the MEAC surrendered their autobid a couple years ago?

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

IMO a 9 game schedule is no better than an 8 game schedule when the league has 14 teams. It still does not crown a true Conference champion. And BSClurker is correct, what would be your process to determine the Auto Qualifier for the conference.

Isn't there an extra autobid lying around after the MEAC surrendered their autobid a couple years ago?

No, and even if there was, no way they would let any Conference have 2.

 

[Bear Axed]

Who gets the autobid?

More complaining on not earning it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[get'em_griz]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

IMO a 9 game schedule is no better than an 8 game schedule when the league has 14 teams. It still does not crown a true Conference champion. And BSClurker is correct, what would be your process to determine the Auto Qualifier for the conference.

Isn't there an extra autobid lying around after the MEAC surrendered their autobid a couple years ago?

No, and even if there was, no way they would let any Conference have 2.

Then I'm guessing there will be some sort of tie breaker rule similar to what the CAA does.

 

[IdaGriz01]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

Montana was sole champion of the Big Sky in 1998 thru 2001. In the fourteen years since, the conference has had tri-champions four times and co-champions four times. In other words, in less than half of those years did we have a solo champion.

So what’s the big deal of having balanced divisions, declaring co-champions, and using the normal tie-breakers to figure out who gets the auto-bid? (Especially since both division champions are likely to get that or an at-large bid.)

So there's a ton of precedents for co-championships. It’s not rocket science.

 

[floridagriz15]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

IMO a 9 game schedule is no better than an 8 game schedule when the league has 14 teams. It still does not crown a true Conference champion. And BSClurker is correct, what would be your process to determine the Auto Qualifier for the conference.

Isn't there an extra autobid lying around after the MEAC surrendered their autobid a couple years ago?

No, and even if there was, no way they would let any Conference have 2.

I believe they moved it over to an open bid, I see no reason why they couldn't revert it back. We're the biggest conference why couldn't we get two. Maybe the NCAA would be willing to work with the conference to make this possible.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

IMO a 9 game schedule is no better than an 8 game schedule when the league has 14 teams. It still does not crown a true Conference champion. And BSClurker is correct, what would be your process to determine the Auto Qualifier for the conference.

Isn't there an extra autobid lying around after the MEAC surrendered their autobid a couple years ago?

No, and even if there was, no way they would let any Conference have 2.

I believe they moved it over to an open bid, I see no reason why they couldn't revert it back. We're the biggest conference why couldn't we get two. Maybe the NCAA would be willing to work with the conference to make this possible.

The hang up would not be with the NCAA, it would be with the other Conferences. They don't care that Foolerton made the BSC into a 14 team league, they would all want there second AQ as well.

 

['68griz]

You think things are bad now, we'll have Idaho joining the conference in 2018. We'll be moving to a 9-game conference schedule in 2020. A 9-game schedule is better for determining a champion, but a school like Montana that balances its athletic budget with its football team, home games are essential. The recent Missoulian article talked about various scenarios, including splitting into two divisions like what the conference already does with volleyball. With the FCS playoff system, a championship game between divisions isn't possible.

Some other conferences have issues also: Missouri Valley 10 teams, Colonial 12 teams, Southland 11 (currently). The Colonial used to have two divisions, but lost some teams. With two divisions, you have two conference divisional champions every year. Yeah, a shared championship. Better to have at least two champions every year with so many teams?

Wow, all the traditional power would definitely be in the East.
And no one is ever going to give the conference two AQ's.

 

[IdaGriz01]

... I believe they moved it over to an open bid, I see no reason why they couldn't revert it back. We're the biggest conference why couldn't we get two. Maybe the NCAA would be willing to work with the conference to make this possible.

I'm pretty sure you're right about the "extra" auto-bid becoming an at-large. When the BSC gets to 14 members for football, it's practically a double conference anyway.

For me, one of the attractions of having two seven-team divisions is ... you don't need to go to 9 conference games. Every team plays every other team in its division (6 games) and two in the other division. So the division championships would be based on everyone going head-to-head, and you'd end up with enough cross-division games to work out a tie-breaker (if you needed it). And, as noted in my previous post, we already had co- or tri-champions for more than half of the past 14 years.

Anyway, this would leave three spots (in a normal 11-game schedule) for OOC games, whether for body-bag money, a balanced home schedule, or whatever.

As for the playoffs: The reality is, as I said before, that the division champs are going to get bids, whether auto or at-large -- unless you've totally f****d up by creating badly balanced divisions. So why not talk the NCAA into two bids, period. Maybe the Big Sky could be a leader (what a concept!) in fixing a problematic situation for the other over-sized conferences.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

... I believe they moved it over to an open bid, I see no reason why they couldn't revert it back. We're the biggest conference why couldn't we get two. Maybe the NCAA would be willing to work with the conference to make this possible.

I'm pretty sure you're right about the "extra" auto-bid becoming an at-large. When the BSC gets to 14 members for football, it's practically a double conference anyway.

For me, one of the attractions of having two seven-team divisions is ... you don't need to go to 9 conference games. Every team plays every other team in its division (6 games) and two in the other division. So the division championships would be based on everyone going head-to-head, and you'd end up with enough cross-division games to work out a tie-breaker (if you needed it). And, as noted in my previous post, we already had co- or tri-champions for more than half of the past 14 years.

Anyway, this would leave three spots (in a normal 11-game schedule) for OOC games, whether for body-bag money, a balanced home schedule, or whatever.

As for the playoffs: The reality is, as I said before, that the division champs are going to get bids, whether auto or at-large -- unless you've totally f****d up by creating badly balanced divisions. So why not talk the NCAA into two bids, period. Maybe the Big Sky could be a leader (what a concept!) in fixing a problematic situation for the other over-sized conferences.

Once again, it is not the NCAA you would have to convince, it would be the other FCS Conferences.

 

[IdaGriz01]

...

Wow, all the traditional power would definitely be in the East.
And no one is ever going to give the conference two AQ's.

Traditional power: Swap EWU for WSU and you take care of a lot of that.

As for two AQ's ... have to agree. Seems like the politics would pretty much make that impossible. But does that matter? Auto or at-large, the division champs are most likely going to get bids. And the situation with seeds, home playoff games, etc. probably would not change all that much.

Alternative I just thought of: Both division champs get bids, but they're always scheduled to play each other in the first round. Weird, I know, but could kill two birds with one stone -- winner is declared sole conference champion. Crazy, maybe ... but the system has problems that are about to get worse. Time for a cliche: "Think outside the box."

 

[horribilisfan8184]

...

Wow, all the traditional power would definitely be in the East.
And no one is ever going to give the conference two AQ's.

Traditional power: Swap EWU for WSU and you take care of a lot of that.

As for two AQ's ... have to agree. Seems like the politics would pretty much make that impossible. But does that matter? Auto or at-large, the division champs are most likely going to get bids. And the situation with seeds, home playoff games, etc. probably would not change all that much.

Alternative I just thought of: Both division champs get bids, but they're always scheduled to play each other in the first round. Weird, I know, but could kill two birds with one stone -- winner is declared sole conference champion. Crazy, maybe ... but the system has problems that are about to get worse. Time for a cliche: "Think outside the box."

Except one team might be ranked in top 4 and get a bye..

 

['68griz]

I rather like the idea of the division champs playing one another in the first round of the playoffs.