FB: Empire 8

[Bombers798891]

You need the access to the tournament to be able to build up your programs.

For the unexpected teams. Look at UCF football last year. They snuck into the BCS based on some rules. In all honestly no one expected them to be a great team last year. They ended up beating Baylor. Had there been a 16 or 32 team playoff they probably win a couple games and get to the final 8 or final 4. They can then use that success to pitch recruits and become better.

They've got access. They win their conference and achieve a specific ranking, they're in.

As for UCF, aren't they the perfect example of how you can improve your team without automatic access to the championship? How did they go from 0-11 in 2004 to 8-5 the next year? The University of Buffalo went 12-79 from 1999 to 2006. They were one of the worst programs in all of Division-I, and a mid-major to boot. Two years later, they were 8-5 and beat the 12th-ranked team in the country.

Here's the reality faced by every program trying to turn itself around: You have to pitch those first recruits without success to back it up. Those teams did it. Fisher did it. Cortland did it. The ECFC teams can do it too, but it's going to take more than just a Pool A bid at the end of a stick.

[jackson5]

You need the access to the tournament to be able to build up your programs.

For the unexpected teams. Look at UCF football last year. They snuck into the BCS based on some rules. In all honestly no one expected them to be a great team last year. They ended up beating Baylor. Had there been a 16 or 32 team playoff they probably win a couple games and get to the final 8 or final 4. They can then use that success to pitch recruits and become better.

They've got access. They win their conference and achieve a specific ranking, they're in.

As for UCF, aren't they the perfect example of how you can improve your team without automatic access to the championship? How did they go from 0-11 in 2004 to 8-5 the next year? The University of Buffalo went 12-79 from 1999 to 2006. They were one of the worst programs in all of Division-I, and a mid-major to boot. Two years later, they were 8-5 and beat the 12th-ranked team in the country.

Here's the reality faced by every program trying to turn itself around: You have to pitch those first recruits without success to back it up. Those teams did it. Fisher did it. Cortland did it. The ECFC teams can do it too, but it's going to take more than just a Pool A bid at the end of a stick.

You don't think the St. Petersburg, Liberty or Beef O'Brady's bowls had any impact on recruiting? Tell the kids that they can't play in a bowl game or compete for the title if they go to UCF and tell me how many recruits they get.

Tell Cortland and Fisher that they need a perfect season just to be in the discussion of being in the tournament and tell me how many recruits they get. Or should they just decide to try and become a top 25 team overnight like you say magically happens.

And you still haven't said what the schools can pitch. "Hey come here and play for a meaningless conference title, it'll be way better than going to a school that plays in the NCAA's."  Just say it, what you really want is just a break off of the bottom of Division 3. That's what you're pitching here. You want 6 or 7 conferences to be in the tournament and everyone else to stay home.

[lewdogg11]

I get both sides of this argument. I think each qualifying conference champion deserves a reserved seat. But with so many teams in d3 and so many auto bids, it really leaves a very slim chance for error. Without expanding the field or making the conference qualifications more difficult, this is a tough one to find the 'right' answer for, while still rewarding the little guys. March Madness is the best because you get to see a Harvard or Vermont play UNC or Syracuse. They have no chance at winning the tournament but they deserve to be there.

There should be some stipulation to remove an autobid based on winning percentage though. St Lawrence should have never been in the tournament a few years back.  I think Christopher Newport had a few of those too.

[jknezek]

Funny how much of a rehash this is of a series of posts in the NCAC thread about a month ago. There is a serious problem developing with the ratio right now. We can all admit this. Something must be done because the only reason the 7 team minimum works right now is because we have so many conferences above the threshold already. There are 230+ D3 teams that are playoff eligible (throwing out the Ivy-Wannabes). 230/7 = 32.8.

So the only reason we have full AQ, some Pool B, and some Pool C is because the schools have organized themselves above the minimum. Everyone step back and thank those 9 and 10 team conferences for putting off the problem! Now, take a look at the on-going growth of D3 football. I think it worked out to about 2 teams a year, on average, joining D3 since the beginning of the AQ era. While we currently have 8 spots to play with, thanks to the over sized conferences, how long will that last if we keep adding 2 teams a year?

For those of us advocating the Pool A process must stay the same, we better be praying the rate of growth slows down. For those of us looking for other ideas, you better come up with a good one quick, because Pool C is going to keep shrinking.

So what are the options? 1) Expand the tournament (unlikely, especially with the recent emphasis on balancing the D3 budget), 2) raise the minimum number of teams for AQ conferences. I looked into this on the NCAC thread. Going to 8 minimum will do you almost no good. Going to 9 or 10 will set off a massive musical chairs re-alignment that I'm not sure anyone wants to see. Plus it would almost kill OOC games, making figuring out who deserves a Pool C bid almost impossible. 3) Find a way to eliminate some of the AQs. This is the most likely and least painless. I expect it to happen in the next 10 or so years.

My favorite way is to share the pain regionally. Each region gets 6 AQs. The highest ranked 6 champions by the RR get AQs. The other champions and traditional Pool B teams are all relegated to the remaining 8 spots, which are not regionally allocated (as they aren't now). This gives those lowest ranked champions a way to get in, but only if they compare favorably to everyone else nationally who is still waiting for a bid. If the champions don't, they need to schedule and improve in their OOC games until they do.

Will it give a weak region an advantage? I don't think so. Sure every region gets six teams, but the really strong regions will get more of the 8 remaining spots. But it does keep most of the AQ system alive while maintaining a steady number of second chance slots.

[jackson5]

I think the best solution would be to move conferences from 8 teams and instead of them go to 10 or 12. Unfortunately that causes a bunch of logistical issues. Mainly that we'd have massive conference realignment which I don't know would be a positive or negative thing. But the issue is that for the size of the field, there's too many AQ's handed out. I've already explained why I don't think the right move is to take away AQ's. And for the record, saying you get an AQ if you are ranked high enough isn't an AQ. That's just called at-larges.

I still think the best solution is to open the field up to 40 teams. Start the season one week earlier. Most schools are already 2 weeks into classes when the season starts. Have the D-3 start the same weekend as D-1. Then have the extra round of playoffs. Overall the costs won't be raised drastically for most schools since a majority still won't be in the playoff. You'll get 8 more at-larges which will allow almost every top 20 team to be in the tournament.  That's the best move for D-3, not going the opposite way where we take away autobids and just make the gap between haves and have nots bigger.

[jknezek]

I think the best solution would be to move conferences from 8 teams and instead of them go to 10 or 12. Unfortunately that causes a bunch of logistical issues. Mainly that we'd have massive conference realignment which I don't know would be a positive or negative thing. But the issue is that for the size of the field, there's too many AQ's handed out. I've already explained why I don't think the right move is to take away AQ's. And for the record, saying you get an AQ if you are ranked high enough isn't an AQ. That's just called at-larges.

I still think the best solution is to open the field up to 40 teams. Start the season one week earlier. Most schools are already 2 weeks into classes when the season starts. Have the D-3 start the same weekend as D-1. Then have the extra round of playoffs. Overall the costs won't be raised drastically for most schools since a majority still won't be in the playoff. You'll get 8 more at-larges which will allow almost every top 20 team to be in the tournament.  That's the best move for D-3, not going the opposite way where we take away autobids and just make the gap between haves and have nots bigger.

I don't disagree that a slightly larger tournament would be the best way forward. I just don't think you are going to get it. Money rules, and the tournament is paid for by the NCAA. DIII is, admittedly, a very small portion of the NCAA outlays, but I don't think you are going to get a bigger percentage. That means the D3 members as a whole would have to cough up the cash. I don't think the people that vote on that will be willing to up their membership dues for the slight advantage that matters so much to you and me.

You really don't want to push the AQ to 9 or 10. As it currently stands, going to 9 would affect 14 conferences. It would earn you 2-3 extra Pool B/C bids. So it is massive musical chairs for very little gain. If you are going to 9, you might as well go to 10. You'd pick up another 2 or so at-larges and only affect another 4-6 conferences. Of course that means something like 20 of the existing conferences would all be in flux. Very, very ugly.

[Bombers798891]

You don't think the St. Petersburg, Liberty or Beef O'Brady's bowls had any impact on recruiting?
Tell Cortland and Fisher that they need a perfect season just to be in the discussion of being in the tournament and tell me how many recruits they get. Tell the kids that they can't play in a bowl game or compete for the title if they go to UCF and tell me how many recruits they get.
. Or should they just decide to try and become a top 25 team overnight like you say magically happens.

And you still haven't said what the schools can pitch. "Hey come here and play for a meaningless conference title, it'll be way better than going to a school that plays in the NCAA's."  Just say it, what you really want is just a break off of the bottom of Division 3. That's what you're pitching here. You want 6 or 7 conferences to be in the tournament and everyone else to stay home.

You fundamentally misunderstand my proposal. To recap:

My proposal was that, in addition to being the conference winner, to get the auto-bid, you had to be in the Top 25 of the national polls at the end of the year. And then, even if you weren't in the top 25, you could still earn an at-large bid

So my questions for you:

1. How does this stop the ECFC winner from making the playoffs or competing for a title?

2. Since there were 17 teams with at least one loss ranked in the final regular-season poll, why would anyone need to have a perfect season to make the NCAAs? In fact, since I'm keeping the field at 32, how would that even be possible?

3. According to the most recent ATN, there are 27 conferences in D-III. If, as you say, I only want 6-7 conferences to make the NCAAs, please find the instances where I listed 20-21 conferences that I didn't want represented in the playoffs.

To answer your question, here's what they can pitch: "Come play for us, because we're going to be good enough to qualify for the NCAAs." The elimination of the autobid doesn't change that.

Alternatively, you could pitch: "Hey, come to this campus because we've got great coaches, fantastic academics, a great location, and we'll help you out with financial aid."

This is Division III. If the entirety of your recruiting pitch is, "We've got a chance to go to the NCAAs when we win our conference" you're probably a lousy coach

[jackson5]

You don't think the St. Petersburg, Liberty or Beef O'Brady's bowls had any impact on recruiting?
Tell Cortland and Fisher that they need a perfect season just to be in the discussion of being in the tournament and tell me how many recruits they get. Tell the kids that they can't play in a bowl game or compete for the title if they go to UCF and tell me how many recruits they get.
. Or should they just decide to try and become a top 25 team overnight like you say magically happens.

And you still haven't said what the schools can pitch. "Hey come here and play for a meaningless conference title, it'll be way better than going to a school that plays in the NCAA's."  Just say it, what you really want is just a break off of the bottom of Division 3. That's what you're pitching here. You want 6 or 7 conferences to be in the tournament and everyone else to stay home.

You fundamentally misunderstand my proposal. To recap:

My proposal was that, in addition to being the conference winner, to get the auto-bid, you had to be in the Top 25 of the national polls at the end of the year. And then, even if you weren't in the top 25, you would still earn an at-large bid

So my questions for you:

1. How does this stop the ECFC winner from making the playoffs or competing for a title?

2. Since there were 17 teams with at least one loss ranked in the final regular-season poll, why would anyone need to have a perfect season to make the NCAAs? In fact, since I'm keeping the field at 32, how would that even be possible?

3. According to the most recent ATN, there are 27 conferences in D-III. If, as you say, I only want 6-7 conferences to make the NCAAs, please find the instances where I listed 20-21 conferences that I didn't want represented in the playoffs.

To answer your question, here's what they can pitch: "Come play for us, because we're going to be good enough to qualify for the NCAAs." The elimination of the autobid doesn't change that.

Alternatively, you could pitch: "Hey, come to this campus because we've got great coaches, fantastic academics, a great location, and we'll help you out with financial aid."

This is Division III. If the entirety of your recruiting pitch is, "We've got a chance to go to the NCAAs when we win our conference" you're probably a lousy coach

Is your proposal win your conference AND be in the top 25, or win your conference OR be in the top 25?  I read it as and because thats what you've said the whole time. If it's not and but instead or that's just impossible because there's not enough bids.

If you're going with you have to win your conference and be in the top 25, then I can't help you as you are too slow to make the connection as to why that'll end up with only 6-7 conferences being in the tournament.

[jknezek]

[

Is your proposal win your conference AND be in the top 25, or win your conference OR be in the top 25?  I read it as and because thats what you've said the whole time. If it's not and but instead or that's just impossible because there's not enough bids.

If you're going with you have to win your conference and be in the top 25, then I can't help you as you are too slow to make the connection as to why that'll end up with only 6-7 conferences being in the tournament.

Enlighten me on this. Week 11 last year there were 15 different conferences, and one independent, in the top D3 Top 25. All of those 14 were winning their conference. How do you get 6-7? Less than 10 teams in the top 25 were not winning their conference.

If you are going to protest so strongly, at least get your figures correct.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Alternatively, you could pitch: "Hey, come to this campus because we've got great coaches, fantastic academics, a great location, and we'll help you out with financial aid."

This is Division III. If the entirety of your recruiting pitch is, "We've got a chance to go to the NCAAs when we win our conference" you're probably a lousy coach

This is also 100% true.  Most Division III players do not choose a school based on their playoff chances.  Heck, I played on a team that went to the playoffs one year and as late as 8 or 9 games into the season, most of the guys didn't even know how the playoff system worked.

[jackson5]

[

Is your proposal win your conference AND be in the top 25, or win your conference OR be in the top 25?  I read it as and because thats what you've said the whole time. If it's not and but instead or that's just impossible because there's not enough bids.

If you're going with you have to win your conference and be in the top 25, then I can't help you as you are too slow to make the connection as to why that'll end up with only 6-7 conferences being in the tournament.

Enlighten me on this. Week 11 last year there were 15 different conferences, and one independent, in the top D3 Top 25. All of those 14 were winning their conference. How do you get 6-7? Less than 10 teams in the top 25 were not winning their conference.

If you are going to protest so strongly, at least get your figures correct.

What's going to happen is that there's going to be a rise of the top conferences, and a falling of the bottom ones. What's going to happen is that the WIAC, MIAC, Empire 8, and OAC's are going to get 2-3 bids each year. Their midpack teams are going to get better and eventually you'll have those conferences moving up to take top 25 spots.

If you think that the ECFC teams are ****ty now, just wait until this genius idea is put into place. They'll fall lower and the top conferences will rise up. When the Framingham State schools sneak into the top 25 they'll be dismissed as they are now as not playing anyone.  Then they won't get the chance to take the Cortlands to the final drives and won't get the chance to earn respect.  It's not going to stay as it is, or Norwich is going to decide to instantly try. They are only going to get worse.

[Bombers798891]

Is your proposal win your conference AND be in the top 25, or win your conference OR be in the top 25?  I read it as and because thats what you've said the whole time. If it's not and but instead or that's just impossible because there's not enough bids.

If you're going with you have to win your conference and be in the top 25, then I can't help you as you are too slow to make the connection as to why that'll end up with only 6-7 conferences being in the tournament.

Jackson, there's no need for insults. There are more than 6-7 conference champions in the final regular season Top 25 every year, and you know that. 

My proposal has nothing to do with putting any specific conferences in or out of the playoffs. I'd be totally fine if the Top 25 were teams from 25 separate conferences, and we had all 27 conferences represented. I've long called  for more parity in the sport. I simply don't think conference champs should automatically get in.

It's not about any conference, even if the ECFC is a focal point. I didn't like that a 5-5 St. Lawrence team got in the playoffs in 2010. You can substitute any conference you want in there. Heck, if IC loses to Fisher, Buff State, and Cortland, but manages to win their conference, I would advocate them being left out.

[Bombers798891]

When the Framingham State schools sneak into the top 25 they'll be dismissed as they are now as not playing anyone.  Then they won't get the chance to take the Cortlands to the final drives and won't get the chance to earn respect.  It's not going to stay as it is, or Norwich is going to decide to instantly try. They are only going to get worse.

Why can't they schedule those teams in the regular season then? I mean, I understand the concern, but if you don't want people to say you haven't played anyone, play someone. Have you seen Wesley's schedule? They're playing an online-only religious school. You're telling me they wouldn't rather play Framingham or Norwich?

[ExTartanPlayer]

What's going to happen is that there's going to be a rise of the top conferences, and a falling of the bottom ones. What's going to happen is that the WIAC, MIAC, Empire 8, and OAC's are going to get 2-3 bids each year. Their midpack teams are going to get better and eventually you'll have those conferences moving up to take top 25 spots.

If you think that the ECFC teams are ****ty now, just wait until this genius idea is put into place. They'll fall lower and the top conferences will rise up. When the Framingham State schools sneak into the top 25 they'll be dismissed as they are now as not playing anyone.  Then they won't get the chance to take the Cortlands to the final drives and won't get the chance to earn respect.  It's not going to stay as it is, or Norwich is going to decide to instantly try. They are only going to get worse.

I've been a pretty staunch advocate of protecting AQs for all conferences, but even I think this is a really unlikely scenario.  Everyone already thinks the WIAC, MIAC, Empire 8, etc are the best conferences and accordingly puts a couple of those teams in their top 25, and we still had 14 different conferences represented in the top 25.

Furthermore...you're making a very shortsighted assumption that all of these schools are competing for the same recruiting pool, and that kids are choosing schools based on their football prowess and little else.  They're not.  Especially not schools like Gallaudet, Coast Guard, etc.  Kids aren't choosing Hobart or Rochester over Norwich and Plymouth State because the LL football teams are better.  They're doing it because they want to go to school at that institution, and the football team is one part of that.

I also think Bombers' last point is a good one.  If a school in the ECFC/NEFC/MASCAC wants to establish that they're a legit...they can always just play someone.  Several have already started moving in that direction.  Framingham played Rowan the last two years.  Salve Regina has made a point to play Liberty League and NJAC opposition.  Gallaudet has played Liberty League, ODAC, and OAC teams in the past few seasons.  Castleton played RPI this year.  If you play an impressive OOC game or two (and win it) and run the table in your league, you'll probably still get ranked.

Now, from the other side: I've seen certain East fans complain when certain East teams agree to play teams from the perceived lightweight conferences, so my warning there is that you can't have it both ways.  Don't complain that the ECFC/NEFC/MASCAC teams won't play anybody, then complain when your team (or another team from your conference) schedules one of them.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Have you seen Wesley's schedule? They're playing an online-only religious school.

This game is going to be hideous when it happens.