FCS Playoff Selection Show Thread

[lawkota]

Sure they could have but they still put themselves in position at the end of the year to be in.  

They did and I give the staff and players a helluva lot of credit for that.  They were playing fantastic football at the end. But with only 7 wins, that loss sticks out.  

[SWSiouxMN]

Maybe if ISU could kick a field goal......

[Matt]

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.

[fightingsioux4life]

The FCS will rue the day that this team was jobbed out of a hard-earned playoff spot this year. Judgement Day is coming.

[Gothmog]

Bottom line is UND could have ended this debate by holding on to a 16 point, 3rd quarter lead at home against the worst team in the Big Sky.

The bottom line is that no explanation need be given, other than, in the judgment of the committee, EIU and WIU are better teams than UND. Selection, with the exception of AQs, is ultimately subjective.

 

[Sodacker]

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. 

[jdub27]

Here are the teams that UND arguably has legitimate reasons to question on how they got in before them. Not saying UND absolutely deserved to get in before all of them, but these are the last few in where the questions should be fair game when compared to UND. I put them in the order that I thought represented most to least questionable:

UNH
For - 7 D-1 wins, win against #7 Richmond at home, "good loss" (W&M)
Against - No FBS win, losses to .500 teams or worse (Delaware, Stony Brook), lowest SRS, Massey and Sagarin ranking of the "at large's" (all behind UND), 2nd weakest SOS behind SHSU (#65 per Massey)

EIU
For - 7 D-1 wins, "good losses" (WIU, Northwestern, ISU, JSU)
Against - Zero wins against playoff teams or FBS

WIU
For - SOS, SRS, wins over 3 playoff teams (SDSU, EIU, UNI), "good losses" (Illinois, CCU, ISU, YSU, NDSU)
Against - 6 D-1 wins

SHSU
For - 7 D-1 wins, "good losses" (McNeese, Texas Tech)
Against - Weakest SOS of "at large's" (#68 per Massey), zero wins against playoff or FBS teams, loss to .500 teams or worse (Lamar),

 

 

UND
For - 7 D-1 wins, FBS win (Wyoming), win against #6 Portland State on the road, "good losses" (NDSU, Montana)
Against - Loss to .500 team or worse (Idaho State)

[Gothmog]

Here are the teams that UND arguably has a legitimate beef with getting in before them. Not saying UND is head and shoulders above any of these, but these are the ones where there are legitimate questions in order of most to least questionable:

UNH
For - 7 D-1 wins, win against #7 Richmond at home, "good loss" (W&M)
Against - No FBS win, losses to .500 teams or worse (Delaware, Stony Brook), lowest SRS, Massey and Sagarin ranking in the field (all behind UND), 2nd weakest SOS behind SHSU (#65 per Massey)

EIU
For - 7 D-1 wins, "good losses" (WIU, Northwestern, ISU, JSU)
Against - Zero wins against playoff teams or FBS

WIU
For - SOS, SRS, wins over 3 playoff teams (SDSU, EIU, UNI), "good losses" (Illinois, CCU, ISU, YSU, NDSU)
Against - 6 D-1 wins

SHSU
For - 7 D-1 wins, "good losses" (McNeese, Texas Tech)
Against - Weakest SOS (#68 per Massey), zero wins against playoff or FBS teams, loss to .500 teams or worse (Lamar),

 

 

UND
For - 7 D-1 wins, FBS win (Wyoming), win against #6 Portland State on the road, "good losses" (NDSU, Montana)
Against - Loss to .500 team or worse (Idaho State)

But it doesn't work that way. Things like SRS, SOS, "quality" wins and losses, etc. are just tools. The committee can interpret them as they see fit.

[UND1983]

But it doesn't work that way. Things like SRS, SOS, "quality" wins and losses, etc. are just tools. The committee can interpret them as they see fit.

Exactly.  They interpreted it in their own way and it wasn't right.  

[Shawn-O]

But it doesn't work that way. Things like SRS, SOS, "quality" wins and losses, etc. are just tools. The committee can interpret them as they see fit.

That's what they should come out and say, like the FBS committee does.  

[Gothmog]

Exactly.  They interpreted it in their own way and it wasn't right.  

In your opinion...not in theirs.

 

[fightingsioux4life]

The bottom line is that no explanation need be given, other than, in the judgment of the committee, EIU and WIU are better teams than UND. Selection, with the exception of AQs, is ultimately subjective.

When the Bison get screwed out of a playoff spot and/or a seeding decision, I look forward to you coming on here and saying the same thing.

[jdub27]

But it doesn't work that way. Things like SRS, SOS, "quality" wins and losses, etc. are just tools. The committee can interpret them as they see fit.

Doesn't work what way? That there doesn't have to be any justification? Seems to me I laid out the resumes and the "tools" used (like it was assumed the committee did) and then pointed out the mind-bending logic where they use one "tool" to justify a comparison and then completely ignore that "tool" for the next comparison, while using one that contradicts the previous selection. Seems like it should be fair game when the committee chair can't answer one question without completely contradicting a previous answer he has given.

[UND1983]

In your opinion...not in theirs.

 

In pretty much everyone's opinion who has actually looked at the resume's.  Wilson couldn't even defend EIU without saying "good losses".  That is all that needs to be said.

[Dagger]

Is the Herald have a live chat today?  They usually do on Tuesdays.     It would seem to be a good day to have one.

[Westside]

When the Bison get screwed out of a playoff spot and/or a seeding decision, I look forward to you coming on here and saying the same thing.

Just wait a few weeks when the bisen lose to a fellow Valley or Big Sky team...

 

[UNDBIZ]

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.

Nobody will admit it, but NAME RECOGNITION.  PSU was the #1 team in the conference (regardless of conference standings) and their losses were to a 7-4 team and a 6-5 team.  They had wins over PAC 12 North #2 Washington State and a record-setting absolute drubbing of FBS North Texas.  They also had wins over Montana State, Cal Poly, Montana, SUU, and EWU.  Probably about as tough a schedule as you could get in the BSC this year.  Give ndsu that exact resume (in fact, ndsu lost to a 7-4 BSC team and a 5-6 MVFC team and had 0 FBS wins) and they're still the #3 seed.  PSU is #6.  Having them (who everybody, right or wrong, still assumes to be an illusion) and paper tiger SUU as the leaders of our conference, nobody respected the BSC (even though we're still better than every other conference not named MVFC).

[Gothmog]

Nobody will admit it, but NAME RECOGNITION.  PSU was the #1 team in the conference (regardless of conference standings) and their losses were to a 7-4 team and a 6-5 team.  They had wins over PAC 12 North #2 Washington State and a record-setting absolute drubbing of FBS North Texas.  They also had wins over Montana State, Cal Poly, Montana, SUU, and EWU.  Probably about as tough a schedule as you could get in the BSC this year.  Give ndsu that exact resume (in fact, ndsu lost to a 7-4 BSC team and a 5-6 MVFC team) and they're still the #3 seed.  PSU is #6.  Having them (who everybody, right or wrong, still assumes to be an illusion) and paper tiger SUU as the leaders of our conference, nobody respected the BSC (even though we're still better than every other conference not named MVFC).

UND is still an unknown quantity at this level of football. It was always unlikely that UND would get a playoff bid with a 7-4 record.

 

 

[jdub27]

UND is still an unknown quantity at this level of football. It was always unlikely that UND would get a playoff bid with a 7-4 record.

Must be why pretty much every single projection had them in the playoffs and they were listed as the first team out. But other than that, pretty unlikely.

[UNDColorado]

UND is still an unknown quantity at this level of football. It was always unlikely that UND would get a playoff bid with a 7-4 record.

 

 

Pretty easy for you to say that now. hindsight is 20/20. Thanks for the in depth insight John Madden. 

[petey23]

UND is still an unknown quantity at this level of football. It was always unlikely that UND would get a playoff bid with a 7-4 record.

 

 

Which is why almost everybody had them in with a win when they kicked off on Saturday night.

 

Idiot.

[Gothmog]

When the Bison get screwed out of a playoff spot and/or a seeding decision, I look forward to you coming on here and saying the same thing.

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.

[Sodacker]

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. 

Edited November 24, 2015 by Sodacker

[UNDBIZ]

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.

We did win enough games.  WIU didn't.  That's the problem.

[Gothmog]

Pretty easy for you to say that now. hindsight is 20/20. Thanks for the in depth insight John Madden. 

It's also easy to dismiss what someone else says as hindsight. The reality is that you should have known, and you should still recognize, that it was not a done deal for UND at 7-4.