FCS Playoffs

[SIOUXFAN97]

[The Sicatoka]

@Gothmog, prima facie the NCAA screwed UND ... again. 

Before: Lower bid (by one slot) but actual safe for student athlete facilities (versus dressing in tents). So it's the bid, right? 
Now: Better bid but "performance" criteria wins the decision.

If I'm wrong, please explain it. 

[CMSioux]

Well they are consistently inconsistent. SOS ignored when it comes to helping UND or hurting Montana. Youngstown State had a better resume than Montana.

[Nodak78]

22 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

I apologize to Bill Chaves. 
 

We were screwed by the NCAA and NDSU athletic director Matt Larsen.

Go figure.

well, control what we can control. go beat Weber State on Saturday … then beat the $hit out of NDSU whenever we play them again (this postseason or next year in Alerus)…

This year would be Frisco.

[tnt]

3 minutes ago, CMSioux said:

Well they are consistently inconsistent. SOS ignored when it comes to helping UND or hurting Montana. Youngstown State had a better resume than Montana.

Yeah, at least we're in, can you imagine how Youngstown State feels today seeing Montana hosting a playoff game?

[UND08]

55 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

Because Charles E. Kupchella dared stand up to them once. Bureaucracies have long (and vindictive) memories. 

This is the perfect stab.

Change your name or else.
You can't mandate that.
Yes we can, and if you don't, no home playoffs.
We'll change but begrudgingly. 
Oh, by the way, the playoff criteria changed; no home playoffs for you. 

This right here!

Our chests puffed up when we sued an organization that we voluntarily belonged to...whether we were right or not, that kind of stuff tends to piss off the other party.

Seems to me like they're holding a grudge here, and the best part (for them), they've got us by the stones!  Not like we can do anything about it...

[The Sicatoka]

14 minutes ago, tnt said:

Yeah, at least we're in, can you imagine how Youngstown State feels today seeing Montana hosting a playoff game?

There be some hot Penguins in Ohio. 

[wheelsup]

1 hour ago, jdub27 said:

Someone tell Dom there is no 9 seed. It is in the manual that the committee was supposed to follow. There are only 8.

And I'd be curious what "close enough" means in his book. 

And I dont think its even a 9 seed.. the committee basically gave Weber St the 13th seed.. so dont try to tell me its a close 9th seed.. total garbage.

[Sioux>Bison]

46 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

I wonder if we were the last team in?

Matt Larsen said UND and Montana were the last two teams in. 10 teams for 5 spots 

[Sioux>Bison]

SoS was the main factor in how those last 5 teams got in.

[nodakvindy]

1 hour ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

SEMO went 9-2 and won thier conference.  They have to go on the road against a 7-4 Montana team that finished 6th in their conference.  So in that matchup, they went with the highest bid not game performance.  So why use one citeria in one scenario, and a differenct criteria in the other?!  That's the fustrating part.

Because 15 years ago Montana was still the Grizzlies, and not the Fighting Kootenai. That and it appears Montana actually had representation in the room.

[The Sicatoka]

1 minute ago, nodakvindy said:

Because 15 years ago Montana was still the Grizzlies, and not the Fighting Kootenai. That and it appears Montana actually had representation in the room.

Narrator: For those unaware, the Kootenai were a tribe indigenous to the area today known as Montana. 

[Nodak78]

16 minutes ago, UND08 said:

This right here!

Our chests puffed up when we sued an organization that we voluntarily belonged to...whether we were right or not, that kind of stuff tends to piss off the other party.

Seems to me like they're holding a grudge here, and the best part (for them), they've got us by the stones!  Not like we can do anything about it...

We need an Atty to take this up to clean the system.  Playoffs need to be on SOS, records.  If your 10-0 win a conference and your SOS is 75.  FU play someone tough.

You need to take everything subjective out of the system.  So transparent you can vote by zoom for everyone to watch and know, well they didn't cheat.

[Gothmog]

50 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

@Gothmog, prima facie the NCAA screwed UND ... again. 

Before: Lower bid (by one slot) but actual safe for student athlete facilities (versus dressing in tents). So it's the bid, right? 
Now: Better bid but "performance" criteria wins the decision.

If I'm wrong, please explain it. 

I doubt that there's any conspiracy against UND. In any case, UND can only control 2 things ... its W-L record and its bid. I don't know what your bid, or other school's bids actually were, but I do know that 7 wins is considered the bare minimum for an at-large bid. UND can, and should, do better than that. It's up to UND to prove the selection commitee wrong...with a win in Ogden on Saturday. That's how you kick the door in.

[Kab]

Attendance is usually really poor the first weekend of playoffs

thanksgiving, students have gone home, many fans traveling

i doubt the ac  would draw 12000 on the first weekend 

doubt Montana will be a sell out 

some places are cold now

wouldn't be nice if an indoor stadium would be one of the criteria for a home game 

[The Sicatoka]

6 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

I doubt that there's any conspiracy against UND. 

Prima facie it is suspicious. Nichols. Now. 

[Siouxperman8]

12 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

I doubt that there's any conspiracy against UND. In any case, UND can only control 2 things ... its W-L record and its bid. I don't know what your bid, or other school's bids actually were, but I do know that 7 wins is considered the bare minimum for an at-large bid. UND can, and should, do better than that. It's up to UND to prove the selection commitee wrong...with a win in Ogden on Saturday. That's how you kick the door in.

The point is- based on historical criteria for hosting first round games Weber should be the team trying to prove something by winning in GF. 

[tnt]

14 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

I doubt that there's any conspiracy against UND. In any case, UND can only control 2 things ... its W-L record and its bid. I don't know what your bid, or other school's bids actually were, but I do know that 7 wins is considered the bare minimum for an at-large bid. UND can, and should, do better than that. It's up to UND to prove the selection commitee wrong...with a win in Ogden on Saturday. That's how you kick the door in.

Seems to me I remember a 6-5 Western Illinois team getting in ahead of us when we had 7-4 record and a win over an FBS team.   Is that the year they threw a quality loss into the equation as reasoning?  It's hard to remember because the reasoning is ever changing. 

[wheelsup]

9 minutes ago, Gothmog said:

I doubt that there's any conspiracy against UND. In any case, UND can only control 2 things ... its W-L record and its bid. I don't know what your bid, or other school's bids actually were, but I do know that 7 wins is considered the bare minimum for an at-large bid. UND can, and should, do better than that. It's up to UND to prove the selection commitee wrong...with a win in Ogden on Saturday. That's how you kick the door in.

7 wins is considered bare minimum.. until its not.. (we have a little experience on that one)

I agree that we can and should do better.. I also generally agree that there is likely not a conspiracy against UND.. the issue here is the changing of the rules or at a minimum.. deciding which rules are important this year versus last year.. versus the prior year.

In this case I would say the Big Sky rep was a lot stronger advocate than the MVFC rep.. The Big Sky rep was able to get 5 teams in with 4 having the ability to have a home game.. apparently ours could barely get 3 MVFC teams and was unable to defend the long-standing precedent of the higher bid prevailing when deciding who gets the home game..  one can argue why that was.. at a minimum he sucks and is terrible at his job.. a conspiracy theorist would argue that he had an ulterior motive and tried to suck at his job as it should have been an easy base hit.  You guys decide.

[wheelsup]

2 minutes ago, tnt said:

Seems to me I remember a 6-5 Western Illinois team getting in ahead of us when we had 7-4 record and a win over an FBS team.   Is that the year they threw a quality loss into the equation as reasoning?  It's hard to remember because the reasoning is ever changing. 

thats back when the MVFC was a dominant football conference.. Since UND got in and started winning it is no longer a dominant football conference .. by the way.. I think pretty much every year one 6-5 team gets in.. this year was no different.

[Shawn-O]

Maybe Larsen expended the political capital he had just to get UND in, I have no idea.  Just trying to see things objectively.  Saturday was ugly.  Same can be said for Montana as well.  Davis at 6-5 belongs.  Conference standings and non-conference scheduling should matter.    

[the green team]

When non-conference scheduling in college football is scheduled 5-7 years out or more, how can anyone predict how to effectively schedule teams to aid  your strength of schedule?

[Siouxperfan7]

When you really break it down, it's better to be on the road in the playoffs than sitting at home not playing at all.

[UND08]

4 minutes ago, the green team said:

When non-conference scheduling in college football is scheduled 5-7 years out or more, how can anyone predict how to effectively schedule teams to aid  your strength of schedule?

I was just going to say this exact same thing!  Also we had two ranked wins that turned into unranked wins by year end.  I get you need to play a great schedule, and I think just by being in the MVFC we can accomplish that, but schedule strength is awfully tough to figure out before the games are played.

[UNDColorado]

2 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

When you really break it down, it's better to be on the road in the playoffs than sitting at home not playing at all.

True. However, people are justifiably outraged by the inconsistency of the selection committee.