Gothmog

No, it doesn't, but the point was that your record doesn't always say much about you. BTW - Sagarin is not about rewarding anyone for winning games. It's about finding an unbiased way of rating teams across varying schedules. IMO, people have a hard time with the idea that ratings are not really about "rewarding" teams.

Again, it depends on what teams you played. Nine wins in a row is always impressive. Nevertheless, one win over a ranked team isn't very impressive.

The relevancy is that simply comparing won-loss records will lead to lesser teams that ran up better records against weak opponents qualifying, or getting higher seeds, than better teams with lesser records against better opponents. It's not about counting "moral victories," it's about finding an unbiased way to compare records across widely varying schedules. BTW - I never said anything about UND's 2015 record.

Obviously you want teams that are good at playoff time. That's the point.

OK, let's say that a team had a incredible string of injuries to start the year and ran up an 0-6 record to start the year. But, when those players came back in week 7 they turned things around and finished 5-6, including wins against several ranked teams. What does their 5-6 record say about them?

The Sagarin ratings are predictive of actual outcomes.

They trailed by 3 points in the 4th quarter. Sometimes close games get out of hand at the end.

Are you suggesting that strength of schedule is not important? If so, why are you looking down your nose at WIU beating a 10-1 Dayton team in last year's playoffs?

And they acquitted themselves well against the #2 seed the next week. Again, it's hard to say they didn't belong.

Also, don't forget that the last 6-5 MVFC team to make the FCS playoffs actually won its first-round game. Hard to say they didn't belong.

And both of the playoff teams you beat also had weak schedules. There's a reason Sagarin rates that 6-5 team 22 spots above you, despite your 9-2 record.

I would think you want to stay in a league were you could get a #7 seed by playing only one ranked team.

Geography doesn't count? Travel costs are only a one part of why geography is important. Scheduling teams your fans and recruits actually give a damn about is even more important.

As I understand it, money and fan interest are the primary factors driving the review process. UND winning a couple conference championships doesn't make the Big Sky schools any closer to Grand Forks.

Hmm, I wasn't aware that UND was thinking of leaving the Big Sky because it thought its teams would be more successful on the field in a different conference, as your posts imply. To my knowledge, no one has even suggested that UND move to an "easier" conference. I would hope that merely qualifying for the playoffs would not be enough to affect your president and AD's decision-making process.

Yes, it is clear that NDSU's rivalry with SDSU is much better, much more constructive, more mutually beneficial than its rivalry with UND ever was. SDSU going to bat for NDSU when it needed it is a great example of that.

If you're referring to UND probably making the playoffs, your standards of "success" are very modest.

Now you're just giving possible reasons why UND thought it wasn't in its best interest to schedule NDSU back then. Which, of course, completely fails to even consider the state's best interests, whatever they may have been.

Again, that's probably hypocrisy on your part. If you're going to criticize NDSU for not putting the State's interests before its own now (an argument I personally think is ridiculous), what did you have to say when UND did the same thing 12-13 years ago?

Agreed, but that has nothing to do with NDSU scheduling UND.

So? Again, NDSU decides what is in its interest not SDSU, or you.

SDSU gets to decide what is, and is not, in its best interest same as NDSU and UND. It's silly to expect that SDSU and NDSU's interests would coincide

It doesn't really matter whether UND actually "needed" the game or not. It thought it needed the games and it was willing to accept a one-sided deal to get them. Again, that's the way life is. If you want something someone else has, you're going to have to pay their price. No bitterness is necessary. BTW - Don't forget that UND terminated the OOC series in the first place because it thought that it was not in its interest to schedule NDSU at all. IMO, it's hypocritical for UND to now say that NDSU was not entitled to act in its own best interest regarding renewing the series.

Are you suggesting that UND would not have negotiated a similarly one-sided deal with NDSU had it been in a position to do so? UND wanted and needed the games, NDSU didn't. Had the situation been reversed UND would certainly have used that advantage to negotiate a better deal for itself, as would any institution. That's life.

Relevance?