FB: Liberty League

[Yanks 99]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

[Jonny Utah]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

[Yanks 99]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

Hahaha...understood...

[Yanks 99]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

Hahaha...understood...

99.99% of the time, I don't even follow/care about the -k factor...but I was curious in this instance because I thought the idea actually took care of several fronts.  Keeping "League Titles" and Pool A bids for respective leagues, without shutting out great one-loss and two-loss teams who play in tougher leagues and schedule tough non-league games.

With Pool A bids about to close out almost all Pool C and Pool B bids, I thought that expansion of the overall field to 48 teams would actually strengthen the tournament, instead of watering it down (as expansion of tournament sizes often do).

[dlippiel]

Everything mentioned is difficult, because in the Alfred case mentioned above(losing to a good Union, Hobart, and RPI) but going 7-0 in their conference, this discourages teams from scheduling tough opponents.  They shouldn't be screwed out of a playoff spot with 3 OOC losses to good teams if they swept their division. 

Let's just make it easy and eliminate 2 auto-bids, 1 for the NEFC and 1 for the ECFC.  They COULD get in with an at-large bid of course.  An undefeated team should never miss the playoffs.

Oddly enough, with all of this talk, it's kind of geared at St. Lawrence having no right to make the playoffs last year, but seriously, who would've made it that would have even done anything?  Probably no one.  So giving St. Lawrence a chance to play in the playoffs is something special for that program and I think they did what was needed.

dlip thinks Lew makes a good point here. This is an interesting discussion and one that many of us seem to see differently. What some of us want, or think should happen seems to be in contrast with what realistically can happen. Yet, Utah makes a valid point regarding if enough colleges get behind an idea they most likely can make it happen. All in all it wil be interesting to see if any changes come down the pike.

dlip disagrees with some here who say that a 5-5 team should "never" make the NCAA's. To dlip, this possibility, the possibility of any team having an opportunity to make the tourney is what makes D3 so great. Every team from every auto-bid conference starts out with the same possibility at the beginning of the season. **** if you look at SLU who went into LL play last year at 0-3, they still had something "real" to play for. The only problem dlip had with SLU going to play MUC, UMU, or whatever the **** they are called, is that the record, and their OOC results, made the LL look piss ****ing poor (which as Lew points out in a round about way was true anyway). Honestly, dlip was very happy for the program and the players at SLU. It was a great accomplishment, one they earned. They defeated the teams they had to defeat to win the conference, hence they deerved the bid. Once you take out the auto-bid you leave all tourney selection decisions up to commitees and numbers. Needless to say to dlip, we have seen how these commitees can **** up (look at the BCS system) and how numbers can take away the "heart" aspect of the game. To dlip SLU showed heart last year, they fought, against an 0-3 start, against a very poor recent program history, against many challenges when it comes to recruiting, and so on. They fought and they won and to dlip, that is what makes D3 football beautiful. Once we start to take away the automatic conference champion's bid to the NCAAs we start to take away heart, faith, and hope from all 230 some teams...minus U Dub and MUC (dlip kids, he kids  ).

[dlippiel]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

Hahaha...understood...

99.99% of the time, I don't even follow/care about the -k factor...but I was curious in this instance because I thought the idea actually took care of several fronts.  Keeping "League Titles" and Pool A bids for respective leagues, without shutting out great one-loss and two-loss teams who play in tougher leagues and schedule tough non-league games.

With Pool A bids about to close out almost all Pool C and Pool B bids, I thought that expansion of the overall field to 48 teams would actually strengthen the tournament, instead of watering it down (as expansion of tournament sizes often do).

dlip will +k you Yanks

[AUKaz00]

The biggest detriment to expanding the playoffs, even if we solve the scheduling issue as Yanks suggested, is the cost.  Travelling entire football teams is cost-prohibitive and if the NCAA is willing to create regional sub-groups in a 32 team field, what makes us believe they'd pay for another 6 teams to travel and create an additional layer of uncertainty when it comes to calculating the least number of flight tabs they need to pick up?

Surely we'd all love an expanded playoff field, but unless we start packing out those games it seems unlikely D3 will get to syphon more money from DI basketball and football to fund it.

[Doid23]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

Hahaha...understood...

I'll +K you BECAUSE you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

[Doid23]

[2)  You won't know which conference will have a 5-5 record, but common sense can take you a long way.  Lets say Hobart ends up 10-0, and Union ends up 9-1 with a loss to Hobart.

This made me very sad that it was only theoretical.

Although, the Dutchmen could shock the world (the very small world of the LL, but you get the point) this weekend, and erase my sadness.

[Yanks 99]

The biggest detriment to expanding the playoffs, even if we solve the scheduling issue as Yanks suggested, is the cost.  Travelling entire football teams is cost-prohibitive and if the NCAA is willing to create regional sub-groups in a 32 team field, what makes us believe they'd pay for another 6 teams to travel and create an additional layer of uncertainty when it comes to calculating the least number of flight tabs they need to pick up?

Surely we'd all love an expanded playoff field, but unless we start packing out those games it seems unlikely D3 will get to syphon more money from DI basketball and football to fund it.

You are probably right Kaz regarding the money thing with the NCAA.

That being said, last year I would rather a Rowan (9-1) vs. Springfield (8-2) match-up be an NCAA first round playoff game then a meaningless ECAC game.  I wonder if cancelling the ECAC's in the East Region would help with the costs, as now the "deserving" teams who just missed the playoffs would actually be in the NCAA playoffs.

[Knightstalker]

The biggest detriment to expanding the playoffs, even if we solve the scheduling issue as Yanks suggested, is the cost.  Travelling entire football teams is cost-prohibitive and if the NCAA is willing to create regional sub-groups in a 32 team field, what makes us believe they'd pay for another 6 teams to travel and create an additional layer of uncertainty when it comes to calculating the least number of flight tabs they need to pick up?

Surely we'd all love an expanded playoff field, but unless we start packing out those games it seems unlikely D3 will get to syphon more money from DI basketball and football to fund it.

You are probably right Kaz regarding the money thing with the NCAA.

That being said, last year I would rather a Rowan (9-1) vs. Springfield (8-2) match-up be an NCAA first round playoff game then a meaningless ECAC game.  I wonder if cancelling the ECAC's in the East Region would help with the costs, as now the "deserving" teams who just missed the playoffs would actually be in the NCAA playoffs.

I don't think the ECAC's rely on NCAA money for their tournaments.  I believe they are funded by the member institutions but I could be wrong.

[Yanks 99]

The biggest detriment to expanding the playoffs, even if we solve the scheduling issue as Yanks suggested, is the cost.  Travelling entire football teams is cost-prohibitive and if the NCAA is willing to create regional sub-groups in a 32 team field, what makes us believe they'd pay for another 6 teams to travel and create an additional layer of uncertainty when it comes to calculating the least number of flight tabs they need to pick up?

Surely we'd all love an expanded playoff field, but unless we start packing out those games it seems unlikely D3 will get to syphon more money from DI basketball and football to fund it.

You are probably right Kaz regarding the money thing with the NCAA.

That being said, last year I would rather a Rowan (9-1) vs. Springfield (8-2) match-up be an NCAA first round playoff game then a meaningless ECAC game.  I wonder if cancelling the ECAC's in the East Region would help with the costs, as now the "deserving" teams who just missed the playoffs would actually be in the NCAA playoffs.

I don't think the ECAC's rely on NCAA money for their tournaments.  I believe they are funded by the member institutions but I could be wrong.

You are probably right...

At the end of the day, does anyone have any idea how much it would cost for 8 additional playoff games (by adding 16 teams to the tournament)?

[Jonny Utah]

Everything mentioned is difficult, because in the Alfred case mentioned above(losing to a good Union, Hobart, and RPI) but going 7-0 in their conference, this discourages teams from scheduling tough opponents.  They shouldn't be screwed out of a playoff spot with 3 OOC losses to good teams if they swept their division. 

Let's just make it easy and eliminate 2 auto-bids, 1 for the NEFC and 1 for the ECFC.  They COULD get in with an at-large bid of course.  An undefeated team should never miss the playoffs.

Oddly enough, with all of this talk, it's kind of geared at St. Lawrence having no right to make the playoffs last year, but seriously, who would've made it that would have even done anything?  Probably no one.  So giving St. Lawrence a chance to play in the playoffs is something special for that program and I think they did what was needed.

dlip thinks Lew makes a good point here. This is an interesting discussion and one that many of us seem to see differently. What some of us want, or think should happen seems to be in contrast with what realistically can happen. Yet, Utah makes a valid point regarding if enough colleges get behind an idea they most likely can make it happen. All in all it wil be interesting to see if any changes come down the pike.

dlip disagrees with some here who say that a 5-5 team should "never" make the NCAA's. To dlip, this possibility, the possibility of any team having an opportunity to make the tourney is what makes D3 so great. Every team from every auto-bid conference starts out with the same possibility at the beginning of the season. **** if you look at SLU who went into LL play last year at 0-3, they still had something "real" to play for. The only problem dlip had with SLU going to play MUC, UMU, or whatever the **** they are called, is that the record, and their OOC results, made the LL look piss ****ing poor (which as Lew points out in a round about way was true anyway). Honestly, dlip was very happy for the program and the players at SLU. It was a great accomplishment, one they earned. They defeated the teams they had to defeat to win the conference, hence they deerved the bid. Once you take out the auto-bid you leave all tourney selection decisions up to commitees and numbers. Needless to say to dlip, we have seen how these commitees can **** up (look at the BCS system) and how numbers can take away the "heart" aspect of the game. To dlip SLU showed heart last year, they fought, against an 0-3 start, against a very poor recent program history, against many challenges when it comes to recruiting, and so on. They fought and they won and to dlip, that is what makes D3 football beautiful. Once we start to take away the automatic conference champion's bid to the NCAAs we start to take away heart, faith, and hope from all 230 some teams...minus U Dub and MUC (dlip kids, he kids  ).

Would you feel the same if a 5-5 Mt. Ida made it to the playoffs over a 8-2 Union though?

[maxpower]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

Hahaha...understood...

I'll +K you BECAUSE you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

+k to Yanks and Doid.... I think the stats tell the whole story for tonight:

Fister: 0-1, 11.57.
Nova: 1-0, 2.84

[Knightstalker]

Out of sheer curiousity...why did I get hit with -k for my suggestion to expand the NCAA field from 32 teams to 48 teams???

You probably got a hit because you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

Just sayin

Hahaha...understood...

I'll +K you BECAUSE you have the word "Yanks" in your name.

+k to Yanks and Doid.... I think the stats tell the whole story for tonight:

Fister: 0-1, 11.57.
Nova: 1-0, 2.84

huhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuhuh you said Fister.