Sodacker
-
Posts
196 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sodacker
-
-
Neither Michaels nor Schlossman asked. Disappointing.
Honestly would it have mattered? I was all jazzed for some answers initially but now I'm apathetic to what they have to say. It's gonna be some bull butter about quality losses and body and work.
-
Rhetorical question alert: How big is it going into next year with little to no question at starting QB? It's been a while.
I don't think there was much question who the starting quarterback would be going into this year. At least to Bubba and the team.
-
1
-
-
The more they talk the less sense it makes. The the only tenuous logic that could possibly be followed is the Idaho state loss was so inexcusable and that is what left us out. It seems to be equal with number of wins and schedule strength as a factor, which is baffling.
Q. Do you take into account factors such as teams having their starting quarterback injured?
A. Yes, we do. People would be amazed -- or scared -- if they knew how much info we knew. We try to put the best 24 teams in… or the best 14 teams after the AQs (automatic qualifiers) are in the field.
Something scares me about the committee but I know it's not how much info they have.
-
Yah but he's not going to come on and say they screwed up - he drank the kool-aid he has to justify their decisions.
Still, they have to have some rationale for it. No matter how diluted or twisted the reasoning is they should be prepared to answer why one was chosen over the other, giving generic non-answers just makes them seem more out of touch than ever.
-
If NDSU really does "get screwed" out a playoff spot, I certainly won't be on here saying otherwise. The point is, at 7-4, UND can't really say that they got screwed. You didn't win enough games.
A team got in with 6 wins. Seems number of games won wasn't the issue.
-
4
-
-
I give the guy credit for coming on at all. He certainly didn't have to, and if i were in his position i definitely wouldn't take calls.
He clearly has some bureaucratic BS process to follow, then he's in the unenviable position of being asked to explain why other's on the committee voted the way they did. He's one vote. He can only speculate as to why others voted the way they did based on the stated criteria.
At the end of the day all he really knows is UND didn't have enough votes.
I said this before-I don't think the committee respected the body of work of the BSC much this year. I don't know why, but in the end the voting and seeding reflected it.
He better know why they decided to select who they selected. It's a committee not a awards vote or coaches poll. The point is that criteria is laid out and there is a discussion to determine how to best follow the criteria. If they can't explain why they did what they did either the committee failed or the criteria failed. Either way he has to answer for it.
Look at the ncaa basketball tournament, after the selection there are some pretty hard and fast answers to why a team got in or didn't. I think they do an excellent job of being transparent and open about the selection and the reason for their selections. Fcs football needs to get to that level.
-
It also bothers me that he would come on a North Dakota radio station to talk about this and be so utterly unprepared with his answers. Just giving generic "we look at wins and losses and they didn't have the votes" answer is completely unacceptable. Say und didn't get in because their SRS wasn't as high.
It makes them seem so incompetent coming on and having zero answers.
-
Here's the thing, aren't quality wins and bad losses inherently built into the SRS? The more I think about it, set the threshold at 7, go down the list, open it up to the top 6 W teams if necessary, and call it a day.
Kind of. Srs really takes two things into account. How many points you win or lose by and how many points your opponents win or lose by. It's not a good tool to retroactively look back and analyze a season with. And the only thing that matters is how much you win by.
-
The fact that fcs uses srs just shows how clueless they are. Using such a basic model in the fcs where many different levels of opponents are played and to try and use it to look back and analyze a season means they just do not understand it. I know it shouldn't surprise me they don't understand the metrics they use for these decisions but it does.
-
1
-
-
This year's team was basically 2 quarters away from the BSC title and being seeded in the playoffs.
10-1 is achievable for next season. Big Sky title, autobid, Top 4 seed are all realistic goals for next year in my mind. Leave no doubt the next time around.
A loss to bowling Green will be such a resume booster next year. Hell if we get 6 wins but have that golden loss to bowling Green I like our chances.
-
1
-
-
I haven't followed fcs until these last few years but the whole level seems just at rinky dink and small time as dII. We have conferences not even wanting their champions participate in the playoffs, others that don't want any post season play, others that have no scholarships, first round matchups being decided to save a few bucks on travel, and still having a mysterious back room meeting on Saturday night to decide who gets in with no objective criteria. I know we were excited to move "up" but it doesn't feel like an upgrade at all.
-
1
-
-
Shows who you lose to is more important than who you beat.
Really weird precedent to set
-
1
-
-
Well this is some bull
-
Dang. I'm nervous.
-
John grass rambling
-
And your favorite team managed 61 total yards against that same team with a healthy #1 QB. Crazy what happens when you face an actual defense huh?
That sure tracked well.
A look inside the scattered mind of an ag school fan.
-
It really looks bad when your conference champ loses 55-10 to a third place team in the MVFC.
And your conference champs lost to the third place team in the big sky. Crazy world huh
-
Reyes says a bad word (assumption) and get the penalty but our qb gets shoved in the chest after the play but that's cool
-
It's time to get a little more creative here on offense. Plunging into the line on first and second down isn't working
-
I almost wanna pass on an early down here.
-
Not even a measurement?
-
This isn't good. We need a turnover because I'm not confident we stop them otherwise.
We've been very close to stopping them a few times. But secondary mistakes have killed us both drives
-
My god our line got blown up.
-
Who where's a tank top and brings a blanket for over there lap. Those Nutty Californians
FCS Playoff Selection Show Thread
in Football
Posted
Wil be interesting to see if NDSU will win that first round game though, be thing getting in the way of that potential matchup